don't worry about wringing the engine out with so few miles, the engine is already broken in and bore glaze has already set within the first 20 miles or so, likely even sooner than that as the engine was test run by Kawi anyway after assembly and the dealer who assembled the bike for sale likely test ran it too.

i wouldn't over think it. Change oil and filter here soon and go ride the heck out of it.

 

Agreed on break-in. That old method of babying a new engine went out a long time ago when manufacturing tolerances, methods, and materials improved dramatically. It just doesnt apply anymore, at least generally. Now, I'm not suggesting constant, immediate, and continuous redline shifts every time you drive it, but putting around like granny grunt can usually cause more issues than not. I think it can vary a bit from engine to engine based on components and assembly methods, but I thought I remember the Mototune break-in method indicated that if an engine wasn't decently broken-in by about 100 miles, it wasn't going to improve with more miles.

 

After being around many new engines I don't believe in babying them after the initial break in. Once the engine has been initially broke in and tuned, the oil changed and its running good, I say run it. I'm not one to beat on my equipment but I don't baby it either. Some of the best running engines I can remember were raced almost immediately after being built, those engines ran great for many years.


Read this link, great info on engine Engine Break-In

Enjoy your bike, I am enjoying mine (new to me, 09 1400mi) KLX.

 

Run her hard, and if you're worried about break in(even though as others have said its already done), just engine break heavy

 

Awesome, yall are great! I appreciate the advice. Now, the only question that remains is jet sizes for different altitudes. I started a new thread on it as I couldn't find any info on specific sizes for stock engines. If anyone can help, I'd REALLY appreciate it! Thanks!!

 

Interesting, considering peak horsepower is somewhere around 8200 rpm...



Seems it makes more sense to shift around the peak horsepower for maximum acceleration.

 

I used to think the same thing as you, but shifting right at peak power would put you back at the beginning of your power band, where the power output is less than past the peak power point. Instead of shifting right at peak power, you shift after so that you are then right BEFORE the peak power point and ride through peak power. Sorry if my explanation is unclear... I actually learned this only a few years ago when tuning a drag car. Ha! I was sitting on the dyno wondering the exact same thing. After one pull watching MPH, it became clear.

 

But theoretically you want to minimize the time spend out of the powerband, so either way can seem like a crap shoot. If you shift too early (perhaps at peak hp) you spend more time under the powerband since, as you said, you'd have to climb again. And if you shoot too late (trying to run through the powerband on the next gear) you spend too much time above the powerband. But I suppose this could be considered assumed knowledge regarding the argument

 

If you shift at peak horsepower you'll have more torque in the next gear than if you shift after peak HP.

 

First, shifting at the peak horsepower will NOT put you back at the beginning of your power range, it will drop about 1000 rpm in first and progressively less until about 500 rpm in sixth (guessing based on what I've seen on all vehicles). So after looking at the dyno chart any shifting would put the engine right in the "fat" of the torque curve, which brings up another point...

You need to rethink power delivery. Horsepower is a "synthetic number" based on torque, which you may notice will peak at a lower rpm around 7100 rpm - pretty much where the bike ends up if shifted around the horsepower peak of 8200 rpm in lower gears.

Torque is the true ability do do work - the real power. Shifting up around the true peak horsepower will put the engine rpm just beyond the peak torque, which is where the bike will accelerate strongest since it is that point where the ability to do work is greatest.

Your drag racing experience had considerations at true peak horsepower, not over reving by around 2000 rpm like reving a KLX250 to 10,500 when the peak horsepower is at 8200! Your drag racing experience dealt with a real true red line, found with the dyno, not a number that indicates the ability to over rev, which is what most Japanese bikes have. No idea why they do this, but they do.

Every Japanese bike I've seen for decades has had the red line on the tach at least 500 rpm past their own listed peak horsepower rpm and sometimes more. The 1975 Kawasaki 400 triple and my KLX650 both had the redline 500 rpm above peak and both definitely ran stronger when shifted at peak horsepower versus 500 rpm higher. My 1986 Honda Nighthawk S had a red line about 1000 rpm above the claimed horsepower peak, same deal, better shifted at 9500 than at 10,500. Fact is the old Honda Sabre V4 had peak power around 9500 with the tach red line at 10,000 or 10,500. Guys, a friend included, would rev them out to "red line" and miss a shift - 8 bent intake valves. Had they shifted at 9500 they would have had another 500 rpm cushion before damage. It didn't help that Honda didn't have a rev limiter in the ignition, but had the true red line been observed things might not have been so bad.

That is why I look for a true dyno of my machines rather than the tach face. The chart shows where the power is, where the torque is strongest (hardest pull) and where the horsepower peaks, after which the pull falls off. You can tell how the power delivery works. My 550 Zephyr has 80% of its torque from about 3500 rpm to the 7500 peak, horsepower would allow for strong pull up to around 9000-9500.

A look at the torque curve on the 250 would indicate the strongest area of power to run from about 6000-9000 after which it starts to drop off sharper (the reason the bike won't pull red line in top gear easily). It pretty much supports the point I said - shifting at 8200 would likely have the best results since it is at the peak horsepower (which if you notice in the chart is where the torque curve starts to drop significantly) and the shift will drop the engine into its power wheel house.

Consider it taking information at hand to make a good performance decision. Since I can't afford to put the bike on a dyno I will use the on-line chart. How high would you have reved your KLX if they would have put an 8500 rpm red line on it? The high red line is there to give caution, but allow over rev without concern.