So does the 2017 CRF450 prove that the current production aluminium frame 450's are as light as they will get?

Superdave19
Posts
1101
Joined
10/10/2012
Location
Spring, TX, USA
12/16/2016 4:35pm
+1!
brimx153
Posts
3344
Joined
5/3/2012
Location
IE
12/16/2016 5:06pm
KTM gearboxes have been shitting themselves left, right and centre the last few years. The gears pretty much just crack in half. They do this because...
KTM gearboxes have been shitting themselves left, right and centre the last few years. The gears pretty much just crack in half.

They do this because they've drilled/milled so many holes out of the gears that the strength is lost.
When you order the replacement gear, it's a superceeded part number and guess what.... Yes, it's solid, no holes!
THIS . and they are losing alot of weight by them gear s being lighter . People must have money to burn .I know one guy who has been through 4 gearboxes this year . I d much rather have a 4 lb heavier bike with a gearbox that lasts forever please
BobPA
Posts
8339
Joined
10/31/2013
Location
USA
12/16/2016 6:01pm Edited Date/Time 12/16/2016 6:01pm
KTM gearboxes have been shitting themselves left, right and centre the last few years. The gears pretty much just crack in half. They do this because...
KTM gearboxes have been shitting themselves left, right and centre the last few years. The gears pretty much just crack in half.

They do this because they've drilled/milled so many holes out of the gears that the strength is lost.
When you order the replacement gear, it's a superceeded part number and guess what.... Yes, it's solid, no holes!
brimx153 wrote:
THIS . and they are losing alot of weight by them gear s being lighter . People must have money to burn .I know one guy...
THIS . and they are losing alot of weight by them gear s being lighter . People must have money to burn .I know one guy who has been through 4 gearboxes this year . I d much rather have a 4 lb heavier bike with a gearbox that lasts forever please
4 gearboxes in a year....sounds like hearsay to me...or user error
BobPA
Posts
8339
Joined
10/31/2013
Location
USA
12/16/2016 6:07pm
kiwifan wrote:
I will get flack from the KTM guys here, but I choose to ride 450 Japanese (mainly Kawasaki and Honda but interested in what the 2018...
I will get flack from the KTM guys here, but I choose to ride 450 Japanese (mainly Kawasaki and Honda but interested in what the 2018 Suzuki and Yamaha will be like) because :

a) even though the weight are slightly heavier its in the right place, you dont feel it while riding and I can buy lighter/good quality aftermarket bits that bring it to the same weight and make it feel even more lighter if I want to without compromising reliability
b) reliability (enough said)
c) price of bikes and parts
d) availability of parts

Its kind of that simple for me.

I have said if MANY time before, KTM/Husky make great bikes....they simply arent for me, I dont hate them they just dont suit me. And yes I have ridden many KTMs/Huskys... I even raced KTMs back in early 2015 believe it or not, ok ok only half a season ...but still.

Grinning Grinning Grinning

You say "they are great bikes", but yet you shit on the in every single KTM thread....

All bikes have issues, they are machines...shit happens

The Shop

Crush
Posts
21141
Joined
4/26/2009
Location
Sydney, AU
12/16/2016 8:55pm
KTM gearboxes have been shitting themselves left, right and centre the last few years. The gears pretty much just crack in half. They do this because...
KTM gearboxes have been shitting themselves left, right and centre the last few years. The gears pretty much just crack in half.

They do this because they've drilled/milled so many holes out of the gears that the strength is lost.
When you order the replacement gear, it's a superceeded part number and guess what.... Yes, it's solid, no holes!
brimx153 wrote:
THIS . and they are losing alot of weight by them gear s being lighter . People must have money to burn .I know one guy...
THIS . and they are losing alot of weight by them gear s being lighter . People must have money to burn .I know one guy who has been through 4 gearboxes this year . I d much rather have a 4 lb heavier bike with a gearbox that lasts forever please
BobPA wrote:
4 gearboxes in a year....sounds like hearsay to me...or user error
And there is a certain Chap on here who has been munching 3rd gears on a YZ250 like crazy. Shit happens, they're dirtbikes, it seems odd to judge any by a few anomalies.
kiwifan
Posts
9854
Joined
10/31/2009
Location
USA
12/16/2016 9:28pm Edited Date/Time 12/16/2016 9:31pm
BobPA wrote:
:lol: :lol: :lol: You say "they are great bikes", but yet you shit on the in every single KTM thread.... All bikes have issues, they are...
Grinning Grinning Grinning

You say "they are great bikes", but yet you shit on the in every single KTM thread....

All bikes have issues, they are machines...shit happens
see you read it as shitting on them , never ONCE have I said they are crap....read my posts to check for yourself if you care that much, there is a damn sight more on this forum to do with Japanese bike shitting than KTM/Husky...go figure
12/16/2016 11:16pm Edited Date/Time 12/16/2016 11:17pm
ML512 wrote:
Okay, now I'm definitely doing a weight comparison to shut people up.
TeamGreen wrote:
A frame includes the sub-frame
Shoot, I wish I would have known this when I had to order a new frame for my 150sx last year because I definitely would have pushed a lot harder to get a new subframe thrown in.
tek14
Posts
4972
Joined
1/26/2014
Location
Vantaa, FI
12/17/2016 12:48am
ML512 wrote:
Okay, now I'm definitely doing a weight comparison to shut people up.
You will bolt 6 water bottles to Husky and see if it wears you out like heavy Honda or laptimes getting slower over 20min?
Fearo
Posts
1383
Joined
12/17/2009
Location
BE
12/17/2016 1:31am Edited Date/Time 12/17/2016 1:33am
Part of KTM's strength is also their weakness. (and I have been a KTM owner for 10+ years)

KTM's constant push to advance the bikes has also made them use components that were not extensively tested for durability. The part may be great and light, but how can you test it for wear at the 120 hour mark if you're already looking at new parts for the newest bike you're going to release in 6 months time?

When a company puts out a BNG bike, I wonder how many people believe there was actually NOTHING changed on the bike. The manufacturers are constantly updating/changing parts on bikes without any fanfare on every new model year for a host of different reasons, but mainly because there is no substitute for 'time' in the development of a motorcycle, or anything really.

When was the last time KTM put out a BNG bike though? Exactly. I applaud them for pushing the envelope on the development on their bikes but they need to slow it down. You don't want to end up in a state where people expect a brand new motorcycle every year. There is nothing wrong with building a platform over time and changing it up every few years. At least then you have the chance to evaluate your bikes and components for long term durability.
12/17/2016 1:55am
Out of interest what does a Honda weigh with e-start fitted compared to the KTM.?
RickA
Posts
244
Joined
12/10/2016
Location
Duluth, MN, USA
12/17/2016 4:26am
I laughing reading these posts.. Weight doesn't matter?

Ktm has set the bar high by being the most innovative manufacturer in recent years. THEY are the reason Honda was forced to make the 2017 Honda have an electric start option, and aftermarket Yosh pipe option.

Anyone that thinks 5 lbs can't be felt on a bike has been huffing too much race gas. Honda will spend 50,000$ to shed 5lbs on Roczens bike.

By the way, as a loyal 30 year Honda person, I have broken or cracked many aluminum framed Cr250s, and had plenty of failures.

Personally, I wouldn't buy anything but KTM right now. Once you have one and take them apart, like the clutch for example, you will see what quality looks like as opposed to mass production. You can't even buy an aftermarket clutch basket for a KTM can you? Stock is billet.
Tom711
Posts
202
Joined
2/20/2015
Location
GB
12/17/2016 5:23am
I think a bike you're comfortable on is far more important than one that is slightly lighter. I've been on KTM for the past few years (450f then a 250 smoker), I rode a crf 450 of a friends and traded my bike in for one within the week. Everything about the bike felt good (his had spring forks in though, damn them air forks were bad lol) especially the handling.
Might come as a surprise to some of you horse power junkies but I also like the power of the Honda. Let's face it these are 450's, the majority of us will not perform any better with them being lighter or more powerful.
brimx153
Posts
3344
Joined
5/3/2012
Location
IE
12/17/2016 5:27am
KTM gearboxes have been shitting themselves left, right and centre the last few years. The gears pretty much just crack in half. They do this because...
KTM gearboxes have been shitting themselves left, right and centre the last few years. The gears pretty much just crack in half.

They do this because they've drilled/milled so many holes out of the gears that the strength is lost.
When you order the replacement gear, it's a superceeded part number and guess what.... Yes, it's solid, no holes!
brimx153 wrote:
THIS . and they are losing alot of weight by them gear s being lighter . People must have money to burn .I know one guy...
THIS . and they are losing alot of weight by them gear s being lighter . People must have money to burn .I know one guy who has been through 4 gearboxes this year . I d much rather have a 4 lb heavier bike with a gearbox that lasts forever please
BobPA wrote:
4 gearboxes in a year....sounds like hearsay to me...or user error
i ve seen it myself , it is a 250f , not a 450. he is a very quick rider,
BobPA
Posts
8339
Joined
10/31/2013
Location
USA
12/17/2016 5:42am
kiwifan wrote:
see you read it as shitting on them , never ONCE have I said they are crap....read my posts to check for yourself if you care...
see you read it as shitting on them , never ONCE have I said they are crap....read my posts to check for yourself if you care that much, there is a damn sight more on this forum to do with Japanese bike shitting than KTM/Husky...go figure
Bro, I do not have to go back and read your every post. I see them in real time....If a thread even mentions KTM you will be there, more of the then not, with a passive aggressive jab......kinda like in this thread.

I get a kick out these guys saying weight does not matter, if it is a non issue why do the factories spend many thousands to get their bikes down to the minimum? Do they just like spending money?
ML512
Posts
17077
Joined
12/28/2008
Location
Wildomar, CA, USA
Fantasy
12/17/2016 6:51am
RickA wrote:
I laughing reading these posts.. Weight doesn't matter? Ktm has set the bar high by being the most innovative manufacturer in recent years. THEY are the...
I laughing reading these posts.. Weight doesn't matter?

Ktm has set the bar high by being the most innovative manufacturer in recent years. THEY are the reason Honda was forced to make the 2017 Honda have an electric start option, and aftermarket Yosh pipe option.

Anyone that thinks 5 lbs can't be felt on a bike has been huffing too much race gas. Honda will spend 50,000$ to shed 5lbs on Roczens bike.

By the way, as a loyal 30 year Honda person, I have broken or cracked many aluminum framed Cr250s, and had plenty of failures.

Personally, I wouldn't buy anything but KTM right now. Once you have one and take them apart, like the clutch for example, you will see what quality looks like as opposed to mass production. You can't even buy an aftermarket clutch basket for a KTM can you? Stock is billet.
Technically, Honda will remove five pounds from the bike for much, much cheaper than that.
RickA
Posts
244
Joined
12/10/2016
Location
Duluth, MN, USA
12/17/2016 7:23am
RickA wrote:
I laughing reading these posts.. Weight doesn't matter? Ktm has set the bar high by being the most innovative manufacturer in recent years. THEY are the...
I laughing reading these posts.. Weight doesn't matter?

Ktm has set the bar high by being the most innovative manufacturer in recent years. THEY are the reason Honda was forced to make the 2017 Honda have an electric start option, and aftermarket Yosh pipe option.

Anyone that thinks 5 lbs can't be felt on a bike has been huffing too much race gas. Honda will spend 50,000$ to shed 5lbs on Roczens bike.

By the way, as a loyal 30 year Honda person, I have broken or cracked many aluminum framed Cr250s, and had plenty of failures.

Personally, I wouldn't buy anything but KTM right now. Once you have one and take them apart, like the clutch for example, you will see what quality looks like as opposed to mass production. You can't even buy an aftermarket clutch basket for a KTM can you? Stock is billet.
ML512 wrote:
Technically, Honda will remove five pounds from the bike for much, much cheaper than that.
I think you would be surprised using exotic material how quickly it adds up. A factory Honda crank is probably the most exotic part, I can't imagine the price tag. You get the point I was trying to make.. Weight is a big thing.

In the car drag racing world, every 100lbs added requires something like 10hp to overcome.
TF212
Posts
73
Joined
2/26/2013
Location
Sun Prairie, WI, USA
12/17/2016 9:30am
From a manufacturing standpoint, What are the positives or negatives of each material? I'm not talking on how they perform on the track. It seems to...
From a manufacturing standpoint, What are the positives or negatives of each material? I'm not talking on how they perform on the track. It seems to me aluminum would be more expensive to buy and work with. Maybe it's the opposite? Does one stand the test of time better? I know going from a '94 CR250 to a '97 I could certainly tell them apart!
Using aluminum over steel does give you some pretty big manufacturing advantages that can help bring the costs down.

With steel you are more or less stuck using tubing that must be cut to length, bent, and welded to produce the final frame design. With that you have fairly consistent wall thicknesses which means that you must design the thickness and diameter of the tubing to be strong enough for the weakest area, which means some areas can be over built unless you spend more time and money performing further processes to compensate.

With aluminum, you gain the ability to produce frame sections by extruding and casting. By using extruded sections, you can have basically whatever cross section profile is needed and the wall thicknesses can change throughout that profile as well, so areas that don't need to be as strong can be made thinner and vise versa. Using cast sections lets you produce complex geometries very cheap.

Think about the rear cast sections of a frame. Once you cast the part, you have a large section with more or less all the needed features ready to go, such as mounting tabs, peg holes, shock mounts. Just a quick clean up to face surfaces and tap holes and its ready to go. To do the same section out of steel, you have to cut, bend, and weld all the pieces, plus position and weld all the mounting tabs too.

Aluminum frames generally consist of less, but larger sections, thus reducing the number of welds and welding operations compared to a steel frame. Plus steel frames also will require further processes to ensure protection against corrosion.

Steel material may be cheaper but in the end the costs of processing the parts is probably in aluminum's favor.

Anonymous (not verified)
12/17/2016 9:44am Edited Date/Time 9/1/2026 6:11pm
Ktm is definately pushing the limit for a regular consumer (race bike). But these are race bikes and you need to treat it as such, maintaining fastener torque etc. Same way I need to constantly check bolts on my lotus, but you can drive your Camry forever and not touch it. I don't think anybody will argue that KTMs get better with every new generation. What's the next one going to be like? I'm just glad they always warranty the weird problems that they sometimes miss in development. Is the new Honda lighter that the one it replaced? Just wondering because I still can't believe how heavy the new one is.
colintrax
Posts
4695
Joined
8/25/2015
Location
Taylorsville, GA, USA
12/17/2016 9:47am
TF212 wrote:
Using aluminum over steel does give you some pretty big manufacturing advantages that can help bring the costs down. With steel you are more or less...
Using aluminum over steel does give you some pretty big manufacturing advantages that can help bring the costs down.

With steel you are more or less stuck using tubing that must be cut to length, bent, and welded to produce the final frame design. With that you have fairly consistent wall thicknesses which means that you must design the thickness and diameter of the tubing to be strong enough for the weakest area, which means some areas can be over built unless you spend more time and money performing further processes to compensate.

With aluminum, you gain the ability to produce frame sections by extruding and casting. By using extruded sections, you can have basically whatever cross section profile is needed and the wall thicknesses can change throughout that profile as well, so areas that don't need to be as strong can be made thinner and vise versa. Using cast sections lets you produce complex geometries very cheap.

Think about the rear cast sections of a frame. Once you cast the part, you have a large section with more or less all the needed features ready to go, such as mounting tabs, peg holes, shock mounts. Just a quick clean up to face surfaces and tap holes and its ready to go. To do the same section out of steel, you have to cut, bend, and weld all the pieces, plus position and weld all the mounting tabs too.

Aluminum frames generally consist of less, but larger sections, thus reducing the number of welds and welding operations compared to a steel frame. Plus steel frames also will require further processes to ensure protection against corrosion.

Steel material may be cheaper but in the end the costs of processing the parts is probably in aluminum's favor.

I wrote a paper about this for a manufactoring class. I came to the conclusion that the Japanese switched to aluminum for cost savings and marketing material. Not for weight savings.

IMO the biggest cost savings is in the machining. Aluminum is much softer, allowing for higher cutting speeds and deeper depth of cut. You also get longer tool life, and coolant less machining is easier. Not using coolant can qualify for tax credits because it's "green" and I've even heard of saving on insurance because coolant makes a slippery mess on the floor.
Anonymous (not verified)
12/17/2016 9:48am Edited Date/Time 9/1/2026 6:11pm
From a manufacturing standpoint, What are the positives or negatives of each material? I'm not talking on how they perform on the track. It seems to...
From a manufacturing standpoint, What are the positives or negatives of each material? I'm not talking on how they perform on the track. It seems to me aluminum would be more expensive to buy and work with. Maybe it's the opposite? Does one stand the test of time better? I know going from a '94 CR250 to a '97 I could certainly tell them apart!
TF212 wrote:
Using aluminum over steel does give you some pretty big manufacturing advantages that can help bring the costs down. With steel you are more or less...
Using aluminum over steel does give you some pretty big manufacturing advantages that can help bring the costs down.

With steel you are more or less stuck using tubing that must be cut to length, bent, and welded to produce the final frame design. With that you have fairly consistent wall thicknesses which means that you must design the thickness and diameter of the tubing to be strong enough for the weakest area, which means some areas can be over built unless you spend more time and money performing further processes to compensate.

With aluminum, you gain the ability to produce frame sections by extruding and casting. By using extruded sections, you can have basically whatever cross section profile is needed and the wall thicknesses can change throughout that profile as well, so areas that don't need to be as strong can be made thinner and vise versa. Using cast sections lets you produce complex geometries very cheap.

Think about the rear cast sections of a frame. Once you cast the part, you have a large section with more or less all the needed features ready to go, such as mounting tabs, peg holes, shock mounts. Just a quick clean up to face surfaces and tap holes and its ready to go. To do the same section out of steel, you have to cut, bend, and weld all the pieces, plus position and weld all the mounting tabs too.

Aluminum frames generally consist of less, but larger sections, thus reducing the number of welds and welding operations compared to a steel frame. Plus steel frames also will require further processes to ensure protection against corrosion.

Steel material may be cheaper but in the end the costs of processing the parts is probably in aluminum's favor.

I think the cromoly steel KTM uses is more expensive that the aluminum all the other manufacturers are using. But I don't think that's proven maybe just a rumor. Maybe Fake News
TF212
Posts
73
Joined
2/26/2013
Location
Sun Prairie, WI, USA
12/17/2016 10:01am
colintrax wrote:
I wrote a paper about this for a manufactoring class. I came to the conclusion that the Japanese switched to aluminum for cost savings and marketing...
I wrote a paper about this for a manufactoring class. I came to the conclusion that the Japanese switched to aluminum for cost savings and marketing material. Not for weight savings.

IMO the biggest cost savings is in the machining. Aluminum is much softer, allowing for higher cutting speeds and deeper depth of cut. You also get longer tool life, and coolant less machining is easier. Not using coolant can qualify for tax credits because it's "green" and I've even heard of saving on insurance because coolant makes a slippery mess on the floor.
I agree 100%.

For comparison sake, 6150 steel has a ultimate yield strength of 940 MPa and 6061-T6 aluminum is 300 MPa.

6150 density is 0.28lb/cu in and 6061 density is 0.0975 lb/cu in.

So the aluminum is roughly a third as strong (ultimate yeild) and about a third as dense. Once you use enough aluminum to get the strength to match the steel, you're going to be at about the same weight.


Kenny Lingus
Posts
1088
Joined
9/9/2016
Location
Watkins Glen, NY, USA
12/17/2016 10:09am
TF212 wrote:
Using aluminum over steel does give you some pretty big manufacturing advantages that can help bring the costs down. With steel you are more or less...
Using aluminum over steel does give you some pretty big manufacturing advantages that can help bring the costs down.

With steel you are more or less stuck using tubing that must be cut to length, bent, and welded to produce the final frame design. With that you have fairly consistent wall thicknesses which means that you must design the thickness and diameter of the tubing to be strong enough for the weakest area, which means some areas can be over built unless you spend more time and money performing further processes to compensate.

With aluminum, you gain the ability to produce frame sections by extruding and casting. By using extruded sections, you can have basically whatever cross section profile is needed and the wall thicknesses can change throughout that profile as well, so areas that don't need to be as strong can be made thinner and vise versa. Using cast sections lets you produce complex geometries very cheap.

Think about the rear cast sections of a frame. Once you cast the part, you have a large section with more or less all the needed features ready to go, such as mounting tabs, peg holes, shock mounts. Just a quick clean up to face surfaces and tap holes and its ready to go. To do the same section out of steel, you have to cut, bend, and weld all the pieces, plus position and weld all the mounting tabs too.

Aluminum frames generally consist of less, but larger sections, thus reducing the number of welds and welding operations compared to a steel frame. Plus steel frames also will require further processes to ensure protection against corrosion.

Steel material may be cheaper but in the end the costs of processing the parts is probably in aluminum's favor.

Thanks for the info. Never thought too much on the extra time it takes to produce a steel frame in finished form.
12/17/2016 11:03am
RussB wrote:
KTM pay far more attention to the detail of their parts when compared to other brands, by chibbling grams of every part they have managed to...
KTM pay far more attention to the detail of their parts when compared to other brands, by chibbling grams of every part they have managed to build a seriously light stock bike.
Basic stuff like a lack of caliper and rear disc guards (less metal, no bolts, no plastic) save a surprising amount of weight, unsprung as well.
I've saved a ton of weight on my RMZ just by switching a load of bolts to aluminum, simplifying the crank breather hosing, removing caliper/disc guards and adding a Ti Yoshimura exhaust.

The Japanese brands could get their bikes to the low 230's but they need to re design everything in order to do so, which is a big/expensive task.
kaptkaos wrote:
KTM pay far more attention to the detail of their parts when compared to other brands, by chibbling grams of every part they have managed to...
KTM pay far more attention to the detail of their parts when compared to other brands, by chibbling grams of every part they have managed to build a seriously light stock bike.

I would say KTM makes a light bike that is not as reliable or longlasting as a Honda. Albeit race bikes are not supposed to be as reliable as a consumer bike. I think Honda provides the best compromise and will outlast any other brand over the long term of ownership. Yeah, I can buy a CRF and change the exhaust, footpegs, wheels and a few parts and get it close. Is that going to make the average local pro any faster? I can drop 5 lbs off my body and be done with it. Save some money and fit in my clothes better and get a better weight/ratio. The new bikes are all coming down in weight and the manufacturers are making them more flickable and improving the ergos. As long as you are moving in the right direction which is true for all except for Suzuki, then all is good.

I will say that Honda missed the boat by not putting the button on the CRF stock. That would have surely put it as the winner of the shootout. I can see the Austrian bikes getting a big nudge in points for that and rightfully so. If you dont have a button on the bike today, you are BEHIND the curve. Honda needs to put the button on and be within 5 lbs of KTM somehow and still keep the quality and reliability for the average consumer.

Thats why KTM is winning the wallets of the serious racers. They have a bike that is geared more towards the racer.

If you get a new bike every year, a KTM is a great bike if it doesnt get you killed by an exploding rim, cracked subframe or failed electronics. If you keep your bikes for a long time, the Honda might be cheaper to own and better for your health.

I am not trying to offend any KTM owners, I pointed out the fact that they are the best race bike for many, and it has its flaws, and I did the same for my favorite brand as well. I admit I drink the Red Koolaid.

Not even bro I've owned all manufactures KTMs are for superior build quality out of any of the Japanese bikes. Yamaha's would be far better quality then Honda if we are talking Japanese. Yamahas are built by people that are building the same product for a very long time whereas Hondas a international conglomerate half the bikes are built in Thailand. Do know what you're talking about, Have you ever owned a KTM?
kiwifan
Posts
9854
Joined
10/31/2009
Location
USA
12/17/2016 1:34pm
BobPA wrote:
Bro, I do not have to go back and read your every post. I see them in real time....If a thread even mentions KTM you will...
Bro, I do not have to go back and read your every post. I see them in real time....If a thread even mentions KTM you will be there, more of the then not, with a passive aggressive jab......kinda like in this thread.

I get a kick out these guys saying weight does not matter, if it is a non issue why do the factories spend many thousands to get their bikes down to the minimum? Do they just like spending money?
We agree to disagree ok? Smile
kiwifan
Posts
9854
Joined
10/31/2009
Location
USA
12/17/2016 1:39pm
Not even bro I've owned all manufactures KTMs are for superior build quality out of any of the Japanese bikes. Yamaha's would be far better quality...
Not even bro I've owned all manufactures KTMs are for superior build quality out of any of the Japanese bikes. Yamaha's would be far better quality then Honda if we are talking Japanese. Yamahas are built by people that are building the same product for a very long time whereas Hondas a international conglomerate half the bikes are built in Thailand. Do know what you're talking about, Have you ever owned a KTM?
Do you know what you are talking about? All CRF's are made in Japan, Thailand has nothing to do with MX reliability.
Tom711
Posts
202
Joined
2/20/2015
Location
GB
12/17/2016 3:10pm Edited Date/Time 12/17/2016 3:11pm
Not even bro I've owned all manufactures KTMs are for superior build quality out of any of the Japanese bikes. Yamaha's would be far better quality...
Not even bro I've owned all manufactures KTMs are for superior build quality out of any of the Japanese bikes. Yamaha's would be far better quality then Honda if we are talking Japanese. Yamahas are built by people that are building the same product for a very long time whereas Hondas a international conglomerate half the bikes are built in Thailand. Do know what you're talking about, Have you ever owned a KTM?
I disagree. I've owned KTM's for the last 3 years, switched to Honda around June this year and while I never had any serious problem with any of them (wish I could say the same about the 50's and 65 my son has owned Angry ) the build quality isn't as good as that of the Honda.
BobPA
Posts
8339
Joined
10/31/2013
Location
USA
12/17/2016 4:10pm
Tom711 wrote:
I disagree. I've owned KTM's for the last 3 years, switched to Honda around June this year and while I never had any serious problem with...
I disagree. I've owned KTM's for the last 3 years, switched to Honda around June this year and while I never had any serious problem with any of them (wish I could say the same about the 50's and 65 my son has owned Angry ) the build quality isn't as good as that of the Honda.
I agree, the hardware on Hondas is second to none. The only nice thing about KTM hardware is the two options for removal. If you round off or screw up the hex side, there is always the Torx backup.

@kiwifan you know I just like ruffling feathers, it's all good Cool
tempura
Posts
2075
Joined
5/18/2015
Location
JP
12/17/2016 4:25pm
BobPA wrote:
Bro, I do not have to go back and read your every post. I see them in real time....If a thread even mentions KTM you will...
Bro, I do not have to go back and read your every post. I see them in real time....If a thread even mentions KTM you will be there, more of the then not, with a passive aggressive jab......kinda like in this thread.

I get a kick out these guys saying weight does not matter, if it is a non issue why do the factories spend many thousands to get their bikes down to the minimum? Do they just like spending money?
kiwifan wrote:
We agree to disagree ok? Smile
Yep, all of Honda's MX line up are made in the Kumamoto plant in Japan. That's a fact.
mx317
Posts
5406
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
USA
12/17/2016 5:33pm
tempura wrote:
Yep, all of Honda's MX line up are made in the Kumamoto plant in Japan. That's a fact.
Is very single component built there? I'm sure they are not.
mx317
Posts
5406
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
USA
12/17/2016 5:37pm
All brands have had problems and recalls. I applaud a company for doing this instead of leaving the customer holding the bag. Anyone that has been around awhile can remember Honda having a fork tube recall on their CR250 in the 90s and shortly after that the "tin can" cranks were recalled for coming apart.

Post a reply to: So does the 2017 CRF450 prove that the current production aluminium frame 450's are as light as they will get?

The Latest