I agree, there's probably not much difference, but I believe that the 351 is going to, on average, have a shorter life than the stock 250. I've heard of a few catastrophic engine failures with the 351's. I've heard of a few with the 250's, but only when the owner didn't check the oil and ran low/out - whereas the 351 failures didn't seem (lack of) maintenance related. Just like I think my Husky will need more maintenance than the KLX, will need a rebuild sooner, and likely will have a lower resale value. Every time I ride it, though, I feel it's worth it. The Husky has a claimed dry weight of 234lbs. It has electric and kick start, fuel injection, dual ECU map switch (on the fly switch between dry/full power and wet/reduced power modes), 34HP. So, add fluids (oil capacity is 1L - so I change the oil VERY often), and 6.5L of fuel, and it's probably 50 lbs lighter than the KLX. You can certainly feel the 50lbs when riding, and when picking it up after falling down.

 

For engine longevity the thing you cannot account for is the mechanic that built the engine. I have a big bore on my 650 with 30,000+ miles at this point. Bored to proper clearance and well assembled, it has worn well. As said, it is simply swapping a piston. Kawasaki did it twice with that engine, upsizing the 96 KLX250R to a KLX300R for 97 and then down again when making the 2006 KLX250S dual sport. A change of bore and piston is all.

Valve maintenance will be no different since nothing changed there and unless there is a drastic change in compression, nothing should be an issue there. In fact there is a good chance that a knowledgeable rider will get better life with the 351, since the power is delivered lower they would have less desire to over rev the engine as so many riders do. A 10,000 rpm redline doesn't indicate true power capability, since that is delivered about 1400 rpm lower, at 8600 rpm. The 351 I believe may have a slightly lower power delivery point and is stronger through the entire range. The other thought is some riders who go big bore may also be the riders that will thrash the snot out of their bike and are looking for more power to thrash harder.

My bet is most failure will be due to assembly and unnecessary over revs. It takes some good knowledge for the machining and then some good practices in building, after which the new power delivery characteristics should be considered in using them.

If you believe the Husky is 10 lb lighter than KTM's claimed dry weight of 244 lb for their 450 I have a bridge in NY I'd like to sell you... just teasing, you know they're hedging to the low side - every company does. When it comes to tipping over - I'm with you, let us not say crash - weight distribution plays a big part in feel, picking it up as well. The lower the weight is carried the easier it is to lift - the tires on the ground are the fulcrum and the bars and seat the end of the lever. The weight distribution along the lever will dictate the feel of the weight.

But yes, there will be noticeable differences, but the way a bike works will affect that feel too. In numerous shoot out bike tests I've read where bikes that are heavier mask the weight through good handling and weight distribution and bikes that are light may have slower more cumbersome handling due to geometry. Happens with all makes and models from tourers and cruisers to sport bikes and dual sport/off road bikes. In the long run it depends on if and how a rider deals with any differences. To date, after riding a KLX650 I find the 250 to be refreshingly light and easy to deal with. Maybe I'd find the same with a KTM or Husky, maybe not if they're a few inches taller at the seat. I don't know. But that's physics under the bridge.

I just know I can afford what I have and can easily live with any faults. It all comes down to what the wallet and budget afford or the rider just plain wants. And I don't particularly like some riders lording their bikes over others as if they're second class citizens. Seems the Orange and Black attitude spread out further in the Orange color areas over the past several years... if you know what I mean.

 

The Amazing KLX351 | Adventure Rider

From that thread:

I know many people that chose to buy a KLX250 over a KTM350 do so because they can’t afford the KTM or perhaps they think it’s too much bike for them. That is not my particular case though. I chose the KLX because I ride as many as 40,000 miles a year, don’t have time to fiddle with it, and can’t afford it breaking down on me in say the middle of a war zone in Kachin province, Burma. It was important to me that Bill Blues mods didn't undo the most desirable trait of the KLX250 – its reliability.

I’m happy to say it didn’t! If it died on me tomorrow it has still lasted longer than many stock KLX250’s I’ve followed. My KTM 690 by comparison went thru 3 engines and 9 fuel pumps in just 30,000 miles; that would be 6 ½ engines and 21 fuel pumps in the life of the Bill Blue 351cc engine!

In approximately 115,000 KM/70K miles I've checked the valves twice and I change the oil/filter every 3-6,000 miles. I put in a new clutch when I did the big bore and it's gone thru 1 more as well. I also had to fix the starter motor a few months back; the 351cc is also higher compression ratio than stock so that could wear it out faster. (However that was at nearly 200,000KM into the bike total - about 1/2 of that on the 351. My personal opinion is the stock KLX wore the starter out more though as along with the big bore I did the pumper carb. Now it starts most everytime with 1 press of the button; with the 250 and stock carb it was hard to start and required about 15 seconds of cranking

 

Jetting solved that cranking issue for me with the stock 250. I'd love to do the 351, but I hate to take apart the bike when it is running good. My brother, has the 06 or 07 model, would like to do the 351 too, but has the same reservations I do... don't want to tear down a bike that runs out good.

 

I'm in the same boat. I want to do a BB but she runs just so good with my rejet and fmf exhaust. Then it's the 300 331 or 351..........decisions.... decisions.

 

I agree - the manufacturer's quotes weights are usually pretty optimistic. I found one thread where a guy weighed his TE250 on his bathroom scale and got 253Lbs wet, then apparently weighed on his 'work' scales and got 256Lbs wet (full tank of gas) - of course, you always have to take things with a grain of salt. The bike certainly feels 40+lbs lighter than the KLX. Maybe I'll weight the two on a bathroom scale - not as much to get the actual weight (since the scale is likely to be somewhat inaccurate), but to get a difference between the two (knowing it won't be totally accurate, but close.)

I, luckily, don't have any personal experience with longevity/reliability issues with either the KLX or the Husky, yet, but I agree, the KLX, unless I get really lucky on the Husky, will far outlive the Husky in reliability. I did a small hillclimb today - first on the Husky, then my friend was riding my KLX - he didn't make it up, so I rode it down the hill and then back up. The extra power from the Husky made the climb pretty easy, but I was close to not making it up on the KLX. The KLX definitely has a much stronger bottom end - it's more like a tractor, the Husky really needs to be revved and have the clutch slipped in the same low-speed situations. The idle speed on the Husky is 1950RPM - much below that and it just stalls/won't idle. Just two different bikes, with different personalities. I've really like the KLX's personality for the last 2 years, but I'm really liking the Husky personality now.

 

The Husky might surprise you. I think it's more to do with riders and conditions than engines, excepting radical extremes. After all, some riders run years racing hare scrambles without rebuilds, racers run 24 hr endurance races at extreme rpm too. Seems Sr class racers' bikes hold up longer than a lot of the much younger riders' bikes do, without major engine work. At least some that I've known.

I wish you the best with the Husky. I'd probably like one too. Unfortunately the loss of weight in my wallet is too much.

 

From what I've read on CafeHusky, changing the oil is #1 on the Huskies - they only hold 1L of oil - I change it every few 100KM... I'd rather be safe than sorry.

The thing with the Husky is that I paid the same for it as I did for my KLX. The Husky is a 2010 - I bought it from the original owner, with 388KM on it, 2 months ago for $4000. I bought the 2011 KLX 2 years ago, with 7,000KM on it, for $4000. The market for the KLX's is pretty good here - I'll probably get close to what I paid for the KLX when I sell it this spring. I don't know what the market for the Husky will be if/when I ever sell it. The KLX (along with the WR250R and CRF230/250L's) hold their values very well in most markets, it seems. The KTM's and Huskies etc. don't hold as well. I couldn't see spending $11,000 on a brand new bike and taking it out on the trails I do and thrashing it (not really thrashing, but not babying), and then selling is 2 years later for a lot less than I paid for it.

I'm glad to hear about how many KLX's have hit 50,000 miles, 100,000 miles - that one from ADVRider with 100,000KM on the stock engine and another 100,000KM+ on the 351 kit.

I agree - how it's maintained makes a lot of difference in how long they last.

 

Out of curiosity I weighed these 2 bikes

KTM... Has enduro engineering hand guards and the KTM radiator fan added....

Both bikes full of gas, mirrors, license plates ready to ride.

2009 KTM 530 EXC

272.6. Pounds


1987 TW 200

273.8 Pounds


It's amazing how much lighter the EXC feels !
I notice the swing arm pivot point is way up high almost to the top of the stator cover on the EXC, while the little TW is at the very bottom of the cover.

 

This is like a myth busters episode. Let's get the real picture on the weight claims:

• Claimed dry weight for that KTM 530 is 251 lb, but with fluids and all it ends up 20 lb heavier at 272 lb as listed by Beardoge, which makes sense compared to some media true wet weights.
• The so considering the 20 lb addition, that would make the KTM 350 EXC claimed 242 lb (Dirt Bike using KTM specs, as did Dirt Rider) more like 262 lb,
• same with the KTM 450 EXC claimed 244 lb more like 265 lb.
• The 2014 Kawasaki KLX 250S oddly enough claimed at 297 lb by Kawasaki themselves has consistently come in between 287 (Cycle World) and 298 (Dirt Rider) in the media. Kawasaki seems to be actually claiming a reasonable proximity what the bike actually will weigh, gas and all.

My guess with the Cycle World claim is a half tank of gas and maybe just a slightly lighter bike. Makes me wonder if Dirt Rider just used Kaw's value instead of weighing the bike.

Once there was an article about dry weights and how they were figured. Some were done simply using the weight of a part based on engineering or weighing the part, adding up all the components - usually ending up with a lighter number than reality. Also the fact that parts will not always weigh the same, tolerance ranges can end up with parts being lighter or heavier. So claimed weight may or may not be accurate.

So the reality is 20-30 lib more depending on a variety of variables, between the little Kaw and the KTMs. One rather funny comment from Dirt Rider was to the effect that in a few more years the KTM will weigh nothing, since they seem to keep shedding weight. But regardless, there is a 20-30 lb difference. The one thing is how high the weight is carried as to how it will feel. That shows in any comparisons of any bikes, weight carried lower frequently feels lighter, regardless of reality.

Seems the street bike media didn't care for the lack of EFI and the handlebar bend, but Dirt Rider seemed to find it to be a pretty good bike for money spent. Not on par with the big buck bikes, but not bad.

Either way, the myths:

• Kawasaki KLX250 weighs 50+ lb heavier than the KTMs BUSTED! Seems the pound must be devalued in Austria.
• Kawasaki KLX250 is heavier than the KTMs obviously CONFIRMED! They are definitely 20-30 lb heavier than the KTMs including the big bores, and oddly enough the pound must not be devalued in Japan or should we say Thailand.
• Kawasaki KLX250 is not a good off roader because they are inferior to the plated enduros BUSTED! Actual off road media and a hell of a lot of those who have ridden them finding them to be totally capable off road.
• KTMs are better off roaders for riders PLAUSIBLE. For some riders they will be better, for others it is overkill possibly to the point of being too hard to ride. But for many they are the obvious step up if/when the time comes. They do perform at a higher level with a capable rider who can manage the higher performance capabilities of the bike and whatever the trade offs (taller seat and power delivery).