Sjoe,
That 2004 Dakar you posted is a beautiful bike, the KLR is like new for a low price, whats the catch with the KLR's?
Which one would be the more forgiving bike?
The KLR has been around so long that kawasaki don't really have to spend too much money marketing the bike, changing manufacturing molds etc. I think they only did one major cosmetic upgrade in about 20 years or something. In business therms this means that their unit cost is far lower than the other companies who keep changing things every 2 years or so. With the KLR, the thing works, so why mess with it.
Some people will tell you about soft suspension, so what....most DS bikes out there need to have the suspension done any way, the difference is that on a KLR you can have the front and back done for R5000.00. Then you hear all about the "doo-hickey"... so f...ing what... get the Eagle Mike Doo, costs R1500.00 if you get somebody to do it for you, half that if you do it yourself. Then of course you will hear that the "absolutely drink oil".........there was a problem with some of the models, but I think that Kawasaki seems to have sorted that out. Most "old" scool bikes use oil if you ride them to hard, the KLR was designed to run at it's sweet spot of 5000 - 5500rpm. This is +/- 110 - 120km/hr, I cruise on tar very comfortably at 130km / hr, and at 80 - 90km / hr on gravel, she can go faster on gravel, but I'm either too shit scared ...or sensible... to go faster than 80 or 90 km/hr. Remember it's not how fast you can go, its how fast you can stop when there is an emergency situation....or how fast and hard you want to fall.
I know of quite a few people who own KLR's, and very few of them have the oil problem, but those guys ride the bikes the way they were intended to be used......FFS, it's not a crotch rocket designed to be ridden at a 100 and splatter km/hr... it's a general purpose, all round bike designed for commuting, legal speed limit freeway riding and plonking around on country back roads........it's a very affordable, jack of all trades, master of none, type of bike.
Personally, I think the biggest problem with the KLR, is that it is not a "cool", ego boosting, pull your arms out of their sockets, impress the shit out of everybody type of bike. It is a perfect bike if you are not into, gizmo's, gadgets and bling. I am willing to bet that the majority of riders out there who have the really fancy "macho machines" can't actually ride those bikes to their full potential

, but there are quite a few who really know what they are doing and watching them tame those beasts is absolute poetry in motion. It's a bit like buying a Ferrari or a Porsche...WTF...you can't ride them to their full potential on our roads anyway.........too many f..ing potholes! Why spend all that money if you cannot really get the benefit.
Honestly, I don't think you can go very far wrong with any of the smaller bikes, the BMW 650, Honda Transalp, Honda 650 xrl, Suzuki DR 650 or the KLR, buy what speaks to your soul, you are the one who has to ride the bike and be comfortable that you can handle the power, height, weight etc...............me, I'm biased, the KLR ticked all the boxes for me, once I have more experience on the dirt, I will buy another slightly bigger bike for the longer tours, the Yamaha 660 Tenere or the Triumph 800 XC really tick the boxes for me, but I'm way too inexperienced with dirt riding to jump on one of these yet. I've been riding the tar roads for 33 years, but I am very new to dirt and its very different to tar.
Good luck with you decision on what to buy and welcome to the wonderful world of biking.
