XR600R vs XR650L vs XR650R motors

[HighwayChile]

-wow, pegs, heat and seat bolts ( seat bolts.. havent heard of that). thats stuff that can be addressed easy. show me a bike made that doesnt have issues. please, I want to know.

-"dated tech", you must mean the Alu frame? if it had FI, many would whine that its too tech

"the design is dated". here is a shocker.....check out all other jap 650's, KTM's big bore, and they aren't? husky has a decent big bore but for longevity I'd put $ on the 650R

its in fashion to whine about 600-650 being older tech, honda, ktm, husky make a very good engine, the later two are old designs that have much evolution. sure the 450's make nearly as much hp, but at much higher rpm, and with much more stressed motors.

So, it looks like if you want a new tech 650 bike, head on down and buy a new HP bmw, quite nice bike but for a different purpose.

Originally Posted by rmhrc628

The XR650R has some well known flaws. Pegs, thermo, seat bolts stripping. It was realeased in 2000 with 1995 technology. It is fast, it has mucho torque. It is far less versatiles than the 600R.

It is far from a modern motorcycle. Its design is dated. Its demise (in most markets last year, probbaly NA this year) is a sign of its lack of appeal.

Hell the 650R caused scott summer's demise. It just about killed him when he first started racing it.

Honda have lost tons of market share and sales because of the 650R.

Very disappointing if you're a Honda big bore fan

[Garthe]

I don't think that "628" has ever heard of the "low tech" HP 2. He's still worried about the "WHEEL" being "round".

[rmhrc628]

Originally Posted by BIG RED

What rock have YOU crawled out from rmhrc628, I think you have your Honda's mixed up, are you sure you're not talking about your CRF 450X. Now theirs a " 2001" bike with issues, valves, transmission blowing up, Jap's work tons of overtime "JUST" to make in win Baja. You could NEVER do that with a "stock" 450.

Pissed off OLD people LOVE to talk about "the old days-when it was soooo much better. Bull shit, bring that "628" you got, out to where I ride and I'll show you which is a OLD TECH. bike.

The year is 2007. Stop living in the past.

Love, Jim "the glass is HALF FULL"

For someone who likes rocks that's a weird comment.

Some of you really need to put aside your bias and plain ignorance of basic facts.

The 650R was a disappointment no if buts or maybes. It replaced a 15 year old design bike - the XR600 so are you really serious when you compare apples and apples?

The 650R cannot be used in as many situations as well as the XR600 could be.

The funny thing is with ignorance comes avoidance of plain obvious fact:

1. How many GNCCs did SS win on the 650R?
2. What was the product life cycle of the 650R?
3. Is the 650 as versatile as the 600R?
4. What fresh idea did Honda bring out that made the 650R light years ahead of it's competitors that we actually value?

If you're honest you'll realise it is a disappointment from what could have been:

1. It could have weighed less than its predecessor
2. It could have turned better than its predecessor
3. It could have come with electric start
4. It could have come with mor modern ergos
5. It could have come with modern suspension - USDs etc
6. It could have come with decent diameter brakes!!
7. It could have come with either EFI or an FCR.
8. It could have been made as versatile.

This is year 2000 remember not 1985.

Did it need outrangeous power? Did that contribute to it's real only use - desert?

Has any other Honda bike released since 2000 relied so heavilily on one race to justify its existence?

If you're honest and you know Honda (and know how good they were) you'll ask yourself why we dont have more.

I'm happy to sit in the more demanding side - with demands we get progress to what's better so save your antiquated ideas for some other hillbilly.

Finally why are Honda stopping producting on the 650R? Something better?

All i hear from hillbillies is "we dont want EFI, USDs rah rah rah" cos then it will be unreliable. Well well well let's have some progress.

[JRiott]

Originally Posted by rmhrc628

The XR650R has some well known flaws. Pegs, thermo, seat bolts stripping. It was realeased in 2000 with 1995 technology. It is fast, it has mucho torque. It is far less versatiles than the 600R.

It is far from a modern motorcycle. Its design is dated. Its demise (in most markets last year, probbaly NA this year) is a sign of its lack of appeal.

Hell the 650R caused scott summer's demise. It just about killed him when he first started racing it.

Honda have lost tons of market share and sales because of the 650R.

Very disappointing if you're a Honda big bore fan

You may be disappointed but I'm sure as hell not. I love this bike and IMO it can't compare the XR600R. What I meant by modern was watercooling, aluminum frame, fully adjustable suspension, etc. Sure it could have been lighter but that was never an issue with the XR600R and people bought them anyway.

What market share have they lost because of this bike? The XR600R was in a class by itself with no real competitors anyway other than the TT600. They lost market share because they sat on their ass and took years to develop a 450 race thumper like Yamaha and KTM. The XR650R doesn't compete with these bikes and was never meant to.

Scott Summers demise was probably more due to the fact that he was getting older than the bike he was riding.

I bought this for a dual sport/supermoto conversion and long distance high speed riding. For that purpose, it's a fantastic bike. If I want to rail the trees and trails, I ride my 2004 KTM 300 EXC.

[Garthe]

Man rmhrc628, Have you got issues. You seem like a very disgruntled person. Most of your statements are so stupid, I see no reason to even respond.

I can say this, I've had my 650R for seven years. Single track, two track, nasty trials like terrain and desert. It does it all. Dual sport or hard core dirt bike it doesn't matter.

No matter what Honda comes out with, you will find fault with it. You can't help it, it's who you are.

Good luck, Jim

[switchback]

Originally Posted by JRiott

They lost market share because they sat on their ass and took years to develop a 450 race thumper like Yamaha and KTM.

I'm not disputing your post but KTM did not develop the engine they refined the Husabergs engine which dates back to the Swedish Husqvarna 510s (similar vintage to the XR engine). And Honda failed to put out a modern bike in the age of 400s and 426s not 450s.

[JRiott]

Originally Posted by tigerowner_ut

I'm not disputing your post but KTM did not develop the engine they refined the Husabergs engine which dates back to the Swedish Husqvarna 510s (similar vintage to the XR engine). And Honda failed to put out a modern bike in the age of 400s and 426s not 450s.

From what I understand, KTM just studied the Husaberg design to improve their own engines. I know they bought them out in 1995.

I know Honda didn't produce a modern thumper when Yamaha was making the 400/426 however KTM had the 450/520 as far back as 2000. Wasn't the maximum displacment 450cc from the beginning?

[rmhrc628]

Originally Posted by BIG RED

No matter what Honda comes out with, you will find fault with it. You can't help it, it's who you are.

Good luck, Jim

Talk about silly comments.

Why would I own a heavily modifed XR628? Or an slighlty less modified CRF450R if a find faults as bad as you imply?

Blinkers are not good. You have a bad case of them

[rmhrc628]

Originally Posted by BIG RED

Single track, two track, nasty trials like terrain and desert. It does it all. Dual sport or hard core dirt bike it doesn't matter.

Not the point.

Read my post.

How many GNCCs? ZERO The 600? 8
How much versatility? LESS

Electric start? NO.

Lifespan? LESS than the bike it replaced.

Simple. It's been a dissappoinment. Maybe the XR600 was too good and we were all spoilt?

[El Toad Man]

The XR650L we get here in oz uses the dominator engine. I've owned a dominator, and an XR650R, and rode an XR600R once.

Originally Posted by Terez

How about the DR650 when dialed in ( Airbox mod/DJ jetting)?
Is it significantly more powerful?

I currently have a DR with jetting/airbox mods, and it is not a significant upgrade from an XR600R. The only worthwhile power increase is the XR650R. I really liked it, sometimes regret selling it.

[wickedsprint]

Originally Posted by rmhrc628

Not the point.

Read my post.

How many GNCCs? ZERO The 600? 8
How much versatility? LESS

Electric start? NO.

Lifespan? LESS than the bike it replaced.

Simple. It's been a dissappoinment. Maybe the XR600 was too good and we were all spoilt?

This is a silly argument, the XR600 was competing in the GNCC races when there was not much in the way of serious dirtbikes, how many GNCCs is the 600R winning now?

Electric start...don't want it, I know how to tune and start a bike, been kicking them since I was 12.

Lifespan, you mean production run or projected longevity of the bike before it dies?, my money would be on the 650R motor, it is more heavily built and water cooled, water cooling = durability long term.

[JRiott]

Originally Posted by rmhrc628

Not the point.

Read my post.

How many GNCCs? ZERO The 600? 8
How much versatility? LESS

Electric start? NO.

Lifespan? LESS than the bike it replaced.

Simple. It's been a dissappoinment. Maybe the XR600 was too good and we were all spoilt?

You don't attribute the GNCC wins to Summers being young at the time?

Why isn't it as versatile? That is your opinion only and really has no factual data to support it.

Technology is changing way too fast these days and Honda's old plan of making a model and selling it for a decade or more doesn't fly today. People aren't going to keep buying the same product without upgrades. Honda easily could have upgraded the XR650R but have chosen not to.

[Sniper X]

Originally Posted by BIG RED

What rock have YOU crawled out from rmhrc628, I think you have your Honda's mixed up, are you sure you're not talking about your CRF 450X. Now theirs a " 2001" bike with issues, valves, transmission blowing up, Jap's work tons of overtime "JUST" to make in win Baja. You could NEVER do that with a "stock" 450.

Pissed off OLD people LOVE to talk about "the old days-when it was soooo much better. Bull shit, bring that "628" you got, out to where I ride and I'll show you which is a OLD TECH. bike.

The year is 2007. Stop living in the past.

Love, Jim "the glass is HALF FULL"

Well, he is semi right about a few "issues" on the XR650R as opposed to the older tech XR600R. But, there are issues with every bike. And, those mentioned didn't keep XR600Rs or XR650Rs from winning Baja every year until Honda decided to drop them in favor of trying to make people think a CRF was reliable enough to win. It wasn't, until vast work. But, I can say if you try to win Baja with ANY almost stock bike against a totally stock XR650R you would loose badly. They were designed as was the XR600R to race in the desert and the XR650R was king of the desert.............so was the XR600R....long live the KING!

My old ass low tech supermoto, a 96 XR600R that will spank most modern sportbikes in the twisties...

[JRiott]

Not sure who was saying you couldn't find clean XR600R's in the Southwest but here's a really clean one in Denver.

http://denver.craigslist.org/mcy/281992271.html

[Flyin Phil]

Originally Posted by rmhrc628

The 650R cannot be used in as many situations as well as the XR600 could be...
3. Is the 650 as versatile as the 600R?
...
8. It could have been made as versatile.

Originally Posted by rmhrc628

How much versatility? LESS

Lifespan? LESS than the bike it replaced.

Simple. It's been a dissappoinment. Maybe the XR600 was too good and we were all spoilt?

I don't mean to more than has already been done, I'm just genuinely curious about this. As someone who has owned 2 xr600s, one near stock, and one highly modified, (though admittedly, not to the extent of yours) and is now in the market for another bike, and stuck on the fence between a plated xr6 and 650r, your comments on versatility make me wonder.
Versatility is important to me, as I intend to use this bike for a wide variety of uses, from single track to adv riding. I realise both will require mods, but both have many things going for them. The 600r, proven design (to me) and reliability. I like the simplicity of air cooling, too. I know what I'm getting into with this one. The 650 though, has appeal in upgraded suspension, stability and power. Plus, there's the possibility of getting a brand new one, which would be a novelty.

So, that said, in what sense do you consider the 650 less versatile? I've heard countless rave reviews for uses ranging from desert, fire roads, dual sport, motard, and a more limited number for adventuring setups.

Do you have any seat time on a 650 for comparison? Again, not trying to argue, there just doesn't seem to be terribly many people who have ridden both and still swear by the 600, and am curious about your reasoning.

Thanks in advance, and as many others have said, jaw dropping bike.