gv550
Well-Known Member
Interesting to note the 790 comes equipped with heated grips, quick shifter and cruise control but none of those features work unless you pay an optional $300 each to have the dealer activate them.
I just found out that my new GE refrigerator has a water filter with an RFID tag in it! I've had it for six months, and it flagged a code.Really? Someone will break that code.
Similar story: top load, basic GE washer, with a circuit board. 6 months past the warranty....circuit board goes bad....possibly from being "overloaded". Circuit board is 75% of a new washer. I had been a fan of all GE products for decades; no longer after reading more stories like blitz's and mine. Sign of the times.….Electronics good. Electronics bad.
Looks great, really impressive. I'm sure it'll be a cracking bike.
Go treat yourself and enjoy it.
The KTM 790 makes 6hp more at peak but it's only cranking out 64.9 ft.lbs of torque at 6600 rpm, while the Triumph is churning out 81.1 ft.lbs at just 3900 rpm. The Triumph's high torque means effortless power at any RPM, just twist the wrist and GO. No need to keep the engine on the boil.The Triumph is a nice looking bike, but I like the styling of the 790 better - each to his own.
I get a bit confused when you claim the Triumph has better specs - the 790 Adventure R is lighter, has more horse power, bigger fuel tank, better standard crash protection, 18" vs 17" rear wheel and it seems better suited for carrying luggage.
Suspension travel, ground clearance and wheel base is about the same on the two bikes.
Well, KTM spec control is notoriously unreliable and there have been multiple instances of KTM saying one thing and doing another. And what the heck does "tubeless ready" mean?I spoke to the KTM people at EICMA and they confirmed that both the versions of the 790 Adventure comes standard with tubeless ready rims. This has since been confirmed from other trust worthy sources.
This is KTM's solution to tubeless spoked rims:Well, KTM spec control is notoriously unreliable and there have been multiple instances of KTM saying one thing and doing another. And what the heck does "tubeless ready" mean?
We'll see.
- Mark
Yeah - especially when coming form a dead reliable and trouble free bike like the S10, it can feel a bit daunting to consider a European bike, but as mentioned before, I get the impression that reliability have improved on the latest KTM models.I went on the KTM TALK site. There is so many problems with KTMs its mind boggling.
Either way both bikes will have more than enough power for my intended use.The KTM 790 makes 6hp more at peak but it's only cranking out 64.9 ft.lbs of torque at 6600 rpm, while the Triumph is churning out 81.1 ft.lbs at just 3900 rpm. The Triumph's high torque means effortless power at any RPM, just twist the wrist and GO. No need to keep the engine on the boil.
Jury's out on the weight of the two bikes till a third party mag weighs them. KTM is notorious for fudging its weights.
I can't see any crash protection on the KTM, but it has a lot more plastic to damage. Put some engine guards on the Triumph and it'll be bulletproof.
18" vs 17" rear wheel, plenty of tires available for both these days.
If you like the KTM great. But I'd be testing that Triumph before I plunked my money down. ;-)
http://instagr.am/p/BtlTvBxFNtv/
Anybody else freaked out about this? Using a plastic fuel tank as crash protection, especially sliding it down a road, sounds optimistic at best and downright dangerous at worst. Plastic may work for impact strength but I wouldn't like to risk it for serious abrasion scenarios. The chances of a spark occurring are just too great.The lower part of the fuel tank (with a protective shield) doubles as crash protection on the 790 which eliminates the need of adding crash bars.
That was my thought initially. But, back when Pintos were blowing up, the fix was a very thick piece of plastic between the fuel tank, and car body to eliminate the spark(s). Plastic doesn't spark; so as long as the tank/crash bar is thick enough.... But, IF, KTM has as many issues as y'all say....I would think twice, and research the heck out of it.Anybody else freaked out about this? Using a plastic fuel tank as crash protection,.... The chances of a spark occurring are just too great....
I have no concerns regarding the fuel tank doubling as crash protection. For 5 years I was riding a WR² with a Safari tank, where the tank doubled as radiator/crash protection. I used the little Yamaha for hardcore off road only (participated in EnduRomania 5 times on the bike) I crashed countless times where the tank received serious hits/abrasions without ever leaving more than superficial scratches. They can make seriously tough plastic nowadays.Anybody else freaked out about this? Using a plastic fuel tank as crash protection, especially sliding it down a road, sounds optimistic at best and downright dangerous at worst. Plastic may work for impact strength but I wouldn't like to risk it for serious abrasion scenarios. The chances of a spark occurring are just too great.
Edit: my apologies, I misread. You did mention the factory protective shield.
I felt the same way regarding looks until I saw both bikes in the flesh.I think that's a formidable bike, and if the engine is tuned similarly to the Duke 790 it will be a gem -- certainly more powerful than the Tenere 700. I like the tank/crashbar concept too. Seems to make lots of sense in terms of COG.
Having said that, to my eye the Yamaha looks better -- less busy. And not sure I'd trust a first year model KTM/engine.
It’s not the first year.I think that's a formidable bike, and if the engine is tuned similarly to the Duke 790 it will be a gem -- certainly more powerful than the Tenere 700. I like the tank/crashbar concept too. Seems to make lots of sense in terms of COG.
Having said that, to my eye the Yamaha looks better -- less busy. And not sure I'd trust a first year model KTM/engine.
It's not within one year? I didn't realize. When was it introduced then?It’s not the first year.