Why so many KTM 690's for Sale?

[Dwerg]

i also noticed very few are above 20 000km, not just here but other forums internationally as well.

Same thing with most SE's and HP2's. The riding they do tends to be a bit more technical so it's harder to rack up the miles. Also, as ETS rightly also said, most prefer to have those kind of bikes as 2nd and 3rd bikes. It makes sense that the mileage is lower

[DikZol]

I am always curious why these 690's are sold with such low mileage and short ownership. I would like to own one but I am worried about reliability and maintenance cost. Add the fact that it takes a bit to farkle it to where I want it I am wondering whether those have have done it came out slightly disappointed? Or is this tool just too sharp for most riders?

I am still dreaming of owning a real good all round single rider DS bike since I already have the 1150GSA that can go most places with a pillion.

I don't know where this question of reliability and service cost come from. Our two bikes ran the Amageza with nothing more than a air filter clean on day two. There was one bike that suffered fuel pump issues, for the rest they ran like stick. The seat is not the most comfortable but for the rest the bike works well.

I just never hear of any high mileage 690's.

From my own experience with KTM is that they are very expensive to maintain.

Good subsequent posts also. Still think the 990 is the ultimate all rounder though.

That is a perception and maintain means different things to people. Tyres, YES, caused by direct and massive torque curve. In the past service and parts have been poor, but that has changed significantly and the parts are priced at average I believe.  There is not a ACME for KTM, nobody knows where crashed KTM's go, but that said from what we are hearing of late from BMW owners their experience with the Motorad people and price of parts is making it a similarly expensive product to own.

All things being equal, KTM just puts a huge smile on your face, once you have ridden a 990 with open pipes it is "good night nurse".

Ja ek weet. Begeer 'n 990R!

[cocky]

i also noticed very few are above 20 000km, not just here but other forums internationally as well.

Same thing with most SE's and HP2's. The riding they do tends to be a bit more technical so it's harder to rack up the miles. Also, as ETS rightly also said, most prefer to have those kind of bikes as 2nd and 3rd bikes. It makes sense that the mileage is lower

What Dwerg says is very true, few of the 690's are used as adventure bikes in the way that 990's and GS's are used, they tend to lead a hard life and get used as big plastic bikes. My 990 has over a 100 000km's on it, but in no way are those km's as hard as the 2000km's the 690's did on the Amageza.

[Omninorm]

i also noticed very few are above 20 000km, not just here but other forums internationally as well.

Same thing with most SE's and HP2's. The riding they do tends to be a bit more technical so it's harder to rack up the miles. Also, as ETS rightly also said, most prefer to have those kind of bikes as 2nd and 3rd bikes. It makes sense that the mileage is lower

Makes a lot of sense actually.

[Rough Rider]

Enjoy!!!

Awesome photo 

[Buff]

Having gone from a 660 Tenere, up to a Super Tenere and back down to a 690, I can tell you all you need to know 

The 690 is a purpose built bike and that purpose aint open road cruising. It's got stuff all wind protection and although the new models have a better seat, it's still not great. It's also got a pathetically small tank, good for 200km's only. The result is that riding to the play areas is not the most pleasant experience.
It is however awesome on trails and general gravel road, unmatched really and with so much power you can lift the front over most things rather effortlessly. It's also great around town because it's narrow and weighs nothing so very easy to throw around.

As an adventure bike, the 660 Tenere is the better option. It doesn't have the power or suspension of the 690 but it's got enough to get the job done and it's got a very respectable fuel range.

As a Trails & play bike, the 690 can't be beat... neither can it be beat for the Grin factor, your teeth get cold riding it 

[Rough Rider]

Having gone from a 660 Tenere, up to a Super Tenere and back down to a 690, I can tell you all you need to know 

The 690 is a purpose built bike and that purpose aint open road cruising. It's got stuff all wind protection and although the new models have a better seat, it's still not great. It's also got a pathetically small tank, good for 200km's only. The result is that riding to the play areas is not the most pleasant experience.
It is however awesome on trails and general gravel road, unmatched really and with so much power you can lift the front over most things rather effortlessly. It's also great around town because it's narrow and weighs nothing so very easy to throw around.

As an adventure bike, the 660 Tenere is the better option. It doesn't have the power or suspension of the 690 but it's got enough to get the job done and it's got a very respectable fuel range.

As a Trails & play bike, the 690 can't be beat... neither can it be beat for the Grin factor, your teeth get cold riding it 

There is more than one way to skin a cat.
Take my 610 for example, it is more stable, has a better spread of gears, better ground clearance, better suspension and better fuel economy than a 690. The only area where is the 690 has it beat is overall power. Of course the 610 is no longer in production so the 690 has it beat in this regard.

[Buff]

True but it still has a poor fuel range for an adventure bike and I still wouldn't want to spend a full day in the saddle on it touring.

[Rough Rider]

True but it still has a poor fuel range for an adventure bike and I still wouldn't want to spend a full day in the saddle on it touring.

Agreed

[sidetrack]

I highly doubt a 610 has better ground clearance than a 690 and the seat on the 610 is terrible. Still a great bike  

[Rough Rider]

I highly doubt a 610 has better ground clearance than a 690 and the seat on the 610 is terrible. Still a great bike  

Go read the stats.

[badseed]

690 , 640 , 610 , DR650 , DR400 . XR650R and XT600 are the last of the real adventure bikes ,with sadly only the 690 still available . Their compromise is that you have to chill a bit on the big road sections , but they can still do them and force one to ride a bit slower with the benefit of seeing more of the ride. The big bikes smoke the big roads and with a bit of skill can do some rough but try 'the road to hell ' for eg and it can't be done. So lets call them adventure light . The reason the SE , HP2 and 690 seldom have high mileage is that very few guys and girls have the stomach for adventure and tend to follow safe regular routes for which their big bikes are ok . We've all gone soft and don't have the bottle to suffer a bit to get the big rewards. Nothing wrong with  the bikes.   

[meteldog]

I've also noticed many for sale with low kilos. I have ridden a couple of the 690's guys bring on my tours, great bike, I love the power and handling, BUT the 690 is an Enduro bike, not a DS bike.

On all the 690's I have ridden the owners have fitted expensive "Adventure" kits to compensate for lack wind protection and limited fuel capacity and most of the guys have also changed the seat. Some of them have also had their suspension modified as they say the stock suspension setup does not work on normal gravel for them. No sub frame also needs modification for carrying luggage.

I guess KTM must have done some market research when they discontinued the 640 Adventure :-(  With the end of the importation DR, XR and KLR we left with very little affordable choice on 650 DS bikes ,now At 100k plus for a XT660Z or BMW650, what else is there out there?

[ClimbingTurtle]

If I had to choose one bike for touring, playing, Ama-whatsit, and commuting, I would have to seriously look at the 690 Rally - ala Dwerg's bike....... 

It can do everything you need, better at some than at others, but competent all round. 

If I could afford 2 bikes though, it wouldn't make the list! 

[jaybiker]

The general opinion is absolutely right. There are numerous valid reasons why the 690 is not the ideal bike for the majority. In my case the reasons are obvious.

One. I can't afford one.
Two. At 70 years old, I can no longer ride dirt worth shit.

But. Gimme the means and the opportunity, and I'll take one in a second, no matter how far it's potential is beyond my ability.

I still have that old British rider's masochistic streak for enduring discomfort and windblast for hundreds of Km's, those are just  trifling considerations.  

[Whethefakawe]

 I own a "modified" Honda XR 650R, and several KTM 250 to 950 dirtbikes......NOT a 690. I've always thought the KTM 690 was a slightly-higher-tech KLR......but just read the latest Dirtbike magazine (or was it DirtRider? Forget.....I get every dirtbike mag on the market every month, they pile up quick  )

Regardless of yer opinion of the yanks......the boys at these magazines know their shite. They spend lots of time flogging these bikes.....so you can, for the most part, rely on their findings and opinions.

Read the newest test of the KTM 690......quite enligtening. Yes, it has endurance issues....that can be fixed. But other than that, not many negatives. Or ANY.

Read it. I did, and I was impressed.

Oh...btw....Enduro360.com agreed almost verbatim......an independent, non-corporate source.

[wolf skaap]

There is more than one way to skin a cat.
Take my 610 for example, it is more stable, has a better spread of gears, better ground clearance, better suspension and better fuel economy than a 690. The only area where is the 690 has it beat is overall power. Of course the 610 is no longer in production so the 690 has it beat in this regard.

There are also many ways to interpret stats.

610 has better suspension for riding to church maybe.
It's "better" ground clearance makes for a more top heavy feel.
Gear spacing of the Husky is awesome and useless on the 690

I own a "modified" Honda XR 650R, and several KTM 250 to 950 dirtbikes......NOT a 690. I've always thought the KTM 690 was a slightly-higher-tech KLR......but just read the latest Dirtbike magazine (or was it DirtRider? Forget.....I get every dirtbike mag on the market every month, they pile up quick  )

Regardless of yer opinion of the yanks......the boys at these magazines know their shite. They spend lots of time flogging these bikes.....so you can, for the most part, rely on their findings and opinions.

Read the newest test of the KTM 690......quite enligtening. Yes, it has endurance issues....that can be fixed. But other than that, not many negatives. Or ANY.

Read it. I did, and I was impressed.

Oh...btw....Enduro360.com agreed almost verbatim......an independent, non-corporate source.

Dirtbike magazine: "with the stock gearing, the motor was loping along at 4000rpm at an indicated 55 mph in sixth.." <- this means it's revving 4K and not even reaching 90Km/h
I read that as negative.
It is also the only reason why I don't have a 690.

[Dwerg]

I don't understand why that is a negative?

[wolf skaap]

I don't understand why that is a negative?

Because a 610 would be doing 107 @ 4000 rpm

[Dwerg]

I don't understand why that is a negative?

Because a 610 would be doing 107 @ 4000 rpm

What revs would a 610 be doing at 185? I can tell you that the 690 hits the limiter 

Still don't understand why that is an issue