Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register

Author Topic: wr450f versus 690 performance  (Read 3343 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Altie7deLaan

  • Race Dog
  • ***
  • Bike: Husqvarna (all models)
    Location: Western Cape
  • Posts: 1,355
  • Thanked: 104 times
  • Vroom vroom vroom blah blah blah
wr450f versus 690 performance
« on: June 01, 2017, 01:22:00 pm »
Anybody here ridden a wr450f and a 690 and can compare performance?
I am thinking towards a road legal wr450f with a larger tank.
Not interested in cruising at 160kmph.
I can sit all day at 110 to 120.


I miss my drz400, but i need more power than the little suz churns out.
And off course FI is a plus.
specific year wr models to go for or avoid?
xl185  cb750f  gsx600f  fz750  gsxr750  cbr600f2  cbr900rr cbr929rr  cbr954rr  vtr1000f  fzr1000exup  650dakkie gsxr1000k4  lc4 supermoto  bandit1200s   project fartblood (fireblade streetfighter)  f800gs 690 kaboem


"Choose a bike that will be the most fun in the challenging spots, not one that will be the most comfortable in the easy spots." Walter Colebatch
 

Offline spankme

Re: wr450f versus 690 performance
« Reply #1 on: June 01, 2017, 02:06:23 pm »
if you sit all day at 120 then you will need to service the 450 the next day.
Depends what you want it for
 

Offline Scalpel

Re: wr450f versus 690 performance
« Reply #2 on: June 01, 2017, 02:11:44 pm »
WR with efi only in SA from late 2012 I think.
BMW R80G/S PD is the original DS bike!!
 

Offline Altie7deLaan

  • Race Dog
  • ***
  • Bike: Husqvarna (all models)
    Location: Western Cape
  • Posts: 1,355
  • Thanked: 104 times
  • Vroom vroom vroom blah blah blah
Re: wr450f versus 690 performance
« Reply #3 on: June 01, 2017, 02:18:35 pm »
Mostly short rides around ct every weekend. 100 to 200 km.
perhaps a ride here or there in the week for business into town.
Two or three trips in the year when i do a long weekend into the cederberg and tankwa or swartberg.
Also considering doing most of the far trips on the back of a bakkie as far as the tar sections go.
I want a street legal bike with the grin factor of a 690.
701 enduro out of my reach.
xl185  cb750f  gsx600f  fz750  gsxr750  cbr600f2  cbr900rr cbr929rr  cbr954rr  vtr1000f  fzr1000exup  650dakkie gsxr1000k4  lc4 supermoto  bandit1200s   project fartblood (fireblade streetfighter)  f800gs 690 kaboem


"Choose a bike that will be the most fun in the challenging spots, not one that will be the most comfortable in the easy spots." Walter Colebatch
 

Offline Omninorm

Re: wr450f versus 690 performance
« Reply #4 on: June 01, 2017, 02:24:18 pm »
Mostly short rides around ct every weekend. 100 to 200 km.
perhaps a ride here or there in the week for business into town.
Two or three trips in the year when i do a long weekend into the cederberg and tankwa or swartberg.
Also considering doing most of the far trips on the back of a bakkie as far as the tar sections go.
I want a street legal bike with the grin factor of a 690.
701 enduro out of my reach.

Then get a 690 :)
Just keep up on maintenance - do the rockers maybe every valve check? Dunno...my thoughts when I was thinking about the 690's


« Last Edit: June 01, 2017, 02:25:34 pm by Omninorm »
Current: :
Previous:  KTM 690 Enduro R , BMW G310GS, BMW 1200GS LC, BMW F800GS, Suzuki Vstrom 650, Honda Transalp XLV700, BMW Xchallenge, BMW Xcountry, Yamaha WR250F, Honda NC750X, Honda XR150, Kawasaki KLX450R, Yamaha YZ250, Kawasaki KX450, Yamaha YZ250F,  KTM 250 XCW, Yamaha DT125, Yamaha DT50, Honda NSR250, Yamaha RZ 50.
 

Offline 2StrokeDan

  • a Man of Character
  • Worshond
  • ***
  • Bike: KTM 690 Adventure
    Location: Western Cape
  • Posts: 25,252
  • Thanked: 2030 times
  • Slim like Bill, straight like Steve
Re: wr450f versus 690 performance
« Reply #5 on: June 01, 2017, 04:13:28 pm »
When I was making the sums, the WR came up very close to the 690 in performance.
Remember, these bikes will not have to pull a pillion and 3 hangkaste, so they always travel quite light.

Why I got the 701 is the extra stability. The WR is very light, very lean and this will make it feel quite nervous on-road.

Service wise, at 120 constant cruising speed will be about every 3500-5000kms.

WR reliability unquestionable of course. KTM/Husky not so much.
 

Offline Omninorm

Re: wr450f versus 690 performance
« Reply #6 on: June 01, 2017, 04:15:35 pm »
WR would need a cush hub/ gearbox mod for street use if you want to flog it.

« Last Edit: June 01, 2017, 04:16:16 pm by Omninorm »
Current: :
Previous:  KTM 690 Enduro R , BMW G310GS, BMW 1200GS LC, BMW F800GS, Suzuki Vstrom 650, Honda Transalp XLV700, BMW Xchallenge, BMW Xcountry, Yamaha WR250F, Honda NC750X, Honda XR150, Kawasaki KLX450R, Yamaha YZ250, Kawasaki KX450, Yamaha YZ250F,  KTM 250 XCW, Yamaha DT125, Yamaha DT50, Honda NSR250, Yamaha RZ 50.
 

Offline blauth

Re: wr450f versus 690 performance
« Reply #7 on: June 01, 2017, 08:07:11 pm »
WR simply not built for that kind of riding. KTM or Husky definitely.

Or, get what you know, another DRZ400. I've tuned mine up and with S gearing (15/44), she pulls to 160 on a straight (in Jhb) no problem but you can hear comfortable rpm for cruising is about 105-110km/h. Want to gear it up a bit (15/40) which will make technical riding in first a bit of a challenge but I think it's got plenty enough power for it in top gear.

Problem is trying to find a nice one......

Offline Bill the Bong

  • Coffee Monster
  • Race Dog
  • ***
  • Bike: Cagiva Elefant 900
    Location: Northern Cape
  • Posts: 4,504
  • Thanked: 148 times
Re: wr450f versus 690 performance
« Reply #8 on: June 01, 2017, 09:02:31 pm »
When I was making the sums, the WR came up very close to the 690 in performance.
Remember, these bikes will not have to pull a pillion and 3 hangkaste, so they always travel quite light.

Why I got the 701 is the extra stability. The WR is very light, very lean and this will make it feel quite nervous on-road.

Service wise, at 120 constant cruising speed will be about every 3500-5000kms.

WR reliability unquestionable of course. KTM/Husky not so much.

5 valve Yamaha reliability is in fact atrocious.  However, all things considered a 690's combined issues will approach the amount of pain a failed valve on the Yamaha will bring.  Between those 2, I'd take a 2nd hand KTM 500 and have none of the issues.
 

Offline 2StrokeDan

  • a Man of Character
  • Worshond
  • ***
  • Bike: KTM 690 Adventure
    Location: Western Cape
  • Posts: 25,252
  • Thanked: 2030 times
  • Slim like Bill, straight like Steve
Re: wr450f versus 690 performance
« Reply #9 on: June 01, 2017, 09:34:45 pm »
When I was making the sums, the WR came up very close to the 690 in performance.
Remember, these bikes will not have to pull a pillion and 3 hangkaste, so they always travel quite light.

Why I got the 701 is the extra stability. The WR is very light, very lean and this will make it feel quite nervous on-road.

Service wise, at 120 constant cruising speed will be about every 3500-5000kms.

WR reliability unquestionable of course. KTM/Husky not so much.

5 valve Yamaha reliability is in fact atrocious.  However, all things considered a 690's combined issues will approach the amount of pain a failed valve on the Yamaha will bring.  Between those 2, I'd take a 2nd hand KTM 500 and have none of the issues.

5-valve tech has been employed by Yamaha since their 1985 FZ750, and the WR is being regarded, especially in the states, as the most reliable of them all.
Why would a KTM500 be more reliable than a 690/640?
 

Offline Bill the Bong

  • Coffee Monster
  • Race Dog
  • ***
  • Bike: Cagiva Elefant 900
    Location: Northern Cape
  • Posts: 4,504
  • Thanked: 148 times
Re: wr450f versus 690 performance
« Reply #10 on: June 01, 2017, 09:52:13 pm »
Gedog jy sou byt.
 

Offline 2StrokeDan

  • a Man of Character
  • Worshond
  • ***
  • Bike: KTM 690 Adventure
    Location: Western Cape
  • Posts: 25,252
  • Thanked: 2030 times
  • Slim like Bill, straight like Steve
Re: wr450f versus 690 performance
« Reply #11 on: June 01, 2017, 10:06:14 pm »
 

Offline IanTheTooth

  • Race Dog
  • ***
  • Bike: Kawasaki Versys
    Location: Australia
  • Posts: 1,335
  • Thanked: 87 times
  • The past is a foreign country
Re: wr450f versus 690 performance
« Reply #12 on: June 01, 2017, 10:51:33 pm »
 I have to agree with 2SD. Even though I have a street legal WR I wouldn't use it for anything other than getting to where the real ride starts. An adventure bike is a different animal. In Oz the WR is sold street legal only so you can get legally to where you want to start your ride. It is not their adventure bike option. And yes. All KTM riders I have ridden with finish up with a dead bike on the ride at some point. Especially 450cc plus.
« Last Edit: June 01, 2017, 10:54:34 pm by IanTheTooth »
The dog that caught the car. What now?
 

Offline 2wdrift

Re: wr450f versus 690 performance
« Reply #13 on: June 01, 2017, 11:04:26 pm »
I use my XR650R in the way you described, and for me it suits the purpose perfectly. But you have to be fine with kicking it, and servicing it every 1000-1600km.

I would take the 690 for longer distances and a bit less maintenance. But you should probably ride a few bikes and choose the one that made you smile the most.
XR650R the one and only
Calling upon my years of experience, I froze at the controls.  ~Stirling Moss

Don't worry my stutter is also bilingual...
 

Offline Bill the Bong

  • Coffee Monster
  • Race Dog
  • ***
  • Bike: Cagiva Elefant 900
    Location: Northern Cape
  • Posts: 4,504
  • Thanked: 148 times
Re: wr450f versus 690 performance
« Reply #14 on: June 02, 2017, 08:32:20 am »
Forgetting reliability for a moment; during one Amageza I was sitting at full taps on a long straight with my 690, doing maybe 165.  Tanks were full, tyres soft and I was sitting upright.  I was also carrying 2l of coffee and 3 l of water with a fair bit of kit (before somebody comes along and tell me his 690 is much faster than that).  Rolling Stone slowly caught me and gently pulled away from me on a 450 Yamaha.  Now, his gearing could have been long, I might be 1.9m tall, etc, but that remains rather impressive.
 

Offline blauth

Re: wr450f versus 690 performance
« Reply #15 on: June 02, 2017, 09:39:26 am »
When I was making the sums, the WR came up very close to the 690 in performance.
Remember, these bikes will not have to pull a pillion and 3 hangkaste, so they always travel quite light.

Why I got the 701 is the extra stability. The WR is very light, very lean and this will make it feel quite nervous on-road.

Service wise, at 120 constant cruising speed will be about every 3500-5000kms.

WR reliability unquestionable of course. KTM/Husky not so much.

5 valve Yamaha reliability is in fact atrocious.  However, all things considered a 690's combined issues will approach the amount of pain a failed valve on the Yamaha will bring.  Between those 2, I'd take a 2nd hand KTM 500 and have none of the issues.

5-valve tech has been employed by Yamaha since their 1985 FZ750, and the WR is being regarded, especially in the states, as the most reliable of them all.
Why would a KTM500 be more reliable than a 690/640?

Funny, I thought Honda was considered the most reliable of them all in the US of A. They are the Baja kings after all.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2017, 09:40:08 am by blauth »
 

Offline Kortbroek

Re: wr450f versus 690 performance
« Reply #16 on: June 02, 2017, 10:20:50 am »
When I was making the sums, the WR came up very close to the 690 in performance.
Remember, these bikes will not have to pull a pillion and 3 hangkaste, so they always travel quite light.

Why I got the 701 is the extra stability. The WR is very light, very lean and this will make it feel quite nervous on-road.

Service wise, at 120 constant cruising speed will be about every 3500-5000kms.

WR reliability unquestionable of course. KTM/Husky not so much.

5 valve Yamaha reliability is in fact atrocious.  However, all things considered a 690's combined issues will approach the amount of pain a failed valve on the Yamaha will bring.  Between those 2, I'd take a 2nd hand KTM 500 and have none of the issues.

5-valve tech has been employed by Yamaha since their 1985 FZ750, and the WR is being regarded, especially in the states, as the most reliable of them all.
Why would a KTM500 be more reliable than a 690/640?

Funny, I thought Honda was considered the most reliable of them all in the US of A. They are the Baja kings after all.

I always think that is why they struggle in Dakar. Slightly less stressed bike than the KTM so just that bit less performance and Dakar, unlike the BAJA1000, has become partially a test of who has the best support team.
- you reckon that thing will pop a wheelie? We're about to find out, SLAP that pig!
 

Offline blauth

Re: wr450f versus 690 performance
« Reply #17 on: June 02, 2017, 05:01:33 pm »
When I was making the sums, the WR came up very close to the 690 in performance.
Remember, these bikes will not have to pull a pillion and 3 hangkaste, so they always travel quite light.

Why I got the 701 is the extra stability. The WR is very light, very lean and this will make it feel quite nervous on-road.

Service wise, at 120 constant cruising speed will be about every 3500-5000kms.

WR reliability unquestionable of course. KTM/Husky not so much.

5 valve Yamaha reliability is in fact atrocious.  However, all things considered a 690's combined issues will approach the amount of pain a failed valve on the Yamaha will bring.  Between those 2, I'd take a 2nd hand KTM 500 and have none of the issues.

5-valve tech has been employed by Yamaha since their 1985 FZ750, and the WR is being regarded, especially in the states, as the most reliable of them all.
Why would a KTM500 be more reliable than a 690/640?

Funny, I thought Honda was considered the most reliable of them all in the US of A. They are the Baja kings after all.

I always think that is why they struggle in Dakar. Slightly less stressed bike than the KTM so just that bit less performance and Dakar, unlike the BAJA1000, has become partially a test of who has the best support team.

The Honda's have been pretty reliable at the Dakar with exception to the fiasco with the Salt pan and I think it's a brilliantly engineered bike, on par with the KTM however I think the Honda Team and Team Management have a long way to go to gain the required experience to run a well oiled team and not to make silly decisions like the fueling decision in this last Dakar. The Yamaha's that were running were ok but the factory support as you suggest was ummmmm, sort of there....maybe.



Offline Jaakmh

  • Race Dog
  • ***
  • Bike: Honda XRV 750 Africa Twin
    Location: Western Cape
  • Posts: 709
  • Thanked: 24 times
Re: wr450f versus 690 performance
« Reply #18 on: June 02, 2017, 08:38:32 pm »
Altie. Elke soort bike het sy eie kak. Kry die bike waarvan jy hou en maak hom werk vir jou en wat jy wil doen 
 

Offline wolf skaap

Re: wr450f versus 690 performance
« Reply #19 on: June 03, 2017, 03:12:44 am »
Forgetting reliability for a moment; during one Amageza I was sitting at full taps on a long straight with my 690, doing maybe 165.  Tanks were full, tyres soft and I was sitting upright.  I was also carrying 2l of coffee and 3 l of water with a fair bit of kit (before somebody comes along and tell me his 690 is much faster than that).  Rolling Stone slowly caught me and gently pulled away from me on a 450 Yamaha.  Now, his gearing could have been long, I might be 1.9m tall, etc, but that remains rather impressive.
Haha cool!

Sent from my SM-N900 using Tapatalk

Let the good times roll!