What is really going on at KTM?

coopernicus wrote:

Opinion from a retired engineer: They would duct warmer air to keep the shock temperature in a more narrow range.  In that case, they would not...

Opinion from a retired engineer: They would duct warmer air to keep the shock temperature in a more narrow range.  In that case, they would not want the shock to get "too cool". It's possible the damping with a cooler shock affects the "comfort" (sorry to use that term) the rider desires and all this time we thought fading was the problem it could have been the shock getting too cool and too stiff! 

coopernicus wrote:

Opinion from a retired engineer: They would duct warmer air to keep the shock temperature in a more narrow range.  In that case, they would not...

Opinion from a retired engineer: They would duct warmer air to keep the shock temperature in a more narrow range.  In that case, they would not want the shock to get "too cool". It's possible the damping with a cooler shock affects the "comfort" (sorry to use that term) the rider desires and all this time we thought fading was the problem it could have been the shock getting too cool and too stiff! 

Robgvx wrote:

Interesting. Given that the radiator temperature might be fairly consistent, ducting air from that area would keep the shock at a consistent (but higher) temperature?Sure, that temperature...

Interesting. 

Given that the radiator temperature might be fairly consistent, ducting air from that area would keep the shock at a consistent (but higher) temperature?

Sure, that temperature might be higher than with no ducting. But it would remain in a tight range once that warm, ducted air flows.  Then, use oil and damping settings to work with those conditions. 

That might mean that the shock works worse when cold, but once warmed up (a lap or two?), the settings would be ideal. Compared to the other scenario, with a shock becoming worse when hot, that could work better?

(Not an engineer, just musing to myself. And probably just repeating what you said!)

mxaniac wrote:

The shock issue perplexes me. We've been told: KTM knows the fix but we can't have it. Why can't they have it? Does it require a frame...

The shock issue perplexes me. We've been told: KTM knows the fix but we can't have it. 

Why can't they have it? Does it require a frame or shock update?  What change resulted in the issue! Is it the shock failing or fading?

Speculation:

Did they have to jack up the nitrogen pressure to avoid cavitation? Did that increase seal drag? Did they try a low drag seal that blows?

In pondering all this, no FBD or analysis:

Initially I thought maybe they'd changed linkage or something that was working the shock harder, leading to cavitation. That lead me to thinking about shock shaft diameter, port size, oil velocity etc. How do we lower the friction in the shock. But then it occurred to me that the input is still the same. Same bumps, same system level energy going into the shock, same energy getting in to the oil. That energy going in must get out. So it's the same amount of energy that turns to heat. It doesn't seem like the cooling requirements have fundamentally changed. Given all that, perhaps to get the necessary performance they had to do SOMETHING that hurt reliability. Bigger piston ports meant piston failure, or maybe that meant thinner piston band to accommodate the ports and it fails. Similar to the early AER, maybe the shim stack requires too few shims and they can permanently deform too much. Maybe it's a low drag seal like I mentioned.

I don't have the answer, but I suspect they needed to change frame or swingarm to get the shock operating under different conditions. Conditions such that whatever they are doing to currently get the right performance doesn't push them into having an unreliable shock. It just seems like it had to be more than a cavitation or heat issue.

 

aees wrote:

All shocks fade. Even at Honda they started of stiffer with Sexton's clicker settings to compensate for it.WP shocks fade, I can feel it myself. After...

All shocks fade. Even at Honda they started of stiffer with Sexton's clicker settings to compensate for it.

WP shocks fade, I can feel it myself. After first session is done and you go back out for second if it's reasonably warm outside, it's 0.25-0.5 turn on HSC and 2-3 clicks on low speed to get bike balanced.

Try to run that setting when bike is completely cooled of and it's unbalanced, rear end high and deflecting.

 

Axlnut_KM3 wrote:

You realize that "a smart person" as if that's everyone, would understand to reinforce the other areas, but that's bias because you were told that story...

You realize that "a smart person" as if that's everyone, would understand to reinforce the other areas, but that's bias because you were told that story and said "aha, makes sense"

Instead, it was one group (SRG, at Columbia University) and one prominent member of that group (Abraham Wald) who came up with the theory of reinforcing the other areas. It was groundbreaking in the operational research field, was not widely accepted at first, and is used a prominent example in survivorship bias and statistical engineering to this day.

It's actually a better example of how we aren't really all that smart as individuals, and are very susceptible to bias confirmation and institutional and theoretical inertia even in technical fields. Machine learning is helping to break that and think outside the box.

Even our very basic (today) GPT5 and similar could lead you down the same road with the right team asking it the right questions. Just much faster than the team could on it's own - and it gets better every day.

The idea that AI isn't being used to say, make KTM more profitable, or in the engineering fixes / production changes to it's bikes is almost laughable, and it will only become more prominent in that role.

This genie isn't going back in the bottle.

3strokemx wrote:

How do you rationalize that AI is breaking theoretical inertia (outside of the box thinking) when the data feeding the AI is from mainstream sources (inside...

How do you rationalize that AI is breaking theoretical inertia (outside of the box thinking) when the data feeding the AI is from mainstream sources (inside the box)? 

Why does AI need "the right team asking the right questions" to come to the best resolution?  What's the limiting factor?

Axlnut_KM3 wrote:

At least this is an honest question.An individual is limited to what they have learned, read, experienced. You are a LLM no different than AI, but...

At least this is an honest question.

An individual is limited to what they have learned, read, experienced. You are a LLM no different than AI, but the size of your repository (theoretically, we don't really know) but certainly the speed at which you can access it, add to it, or cross reference it is infinitely smaller than even our infant LLMs we are seeing now on the public side.  Of course it's data is from known data. 99.99% of all data, recollection, research etc that humans use is from known data - what else is there?

You, nor I, nor anyone can truly think "outside the box" we just reference what we know, with some probabilities, and sometimes some guesses (based on something else we know). LLMs do the exact same thing, faster, with larger data sets. The reason you need the right team is the same reason you need the right team for ANYTHING, irrespective of AI.

I can't get a trash collector to use AI to help solve a particularly daunting structural engineering task, because he doesn't even know the basics. I can get AI to help run potential solution after solution for an experienced structural engineering team, much faster than they can on their own, each to it's logical conclusion, thus increasing the efficiency of the team, and they are there to check AIs work just like they would their own. The project now took 1 year and 20 million dollars instead of 4 years and 75 million dollars. 

This is real world, happening every day. If your only experience is people making memes and asking it stupid questions about nuanced topics, yeah, it seems dumb. That's a user based problem. I use it at work every day. There's quite a few engineers who now don't get my calls or emails because AI is faster than them, more polite, friendlier, works harder, owns it's mistakes, etc. 

 

mxaniac wrote:

The shock issue perplexes me. We've been told: KTM knows the fix but we can't have it. Why can't they have it? Does it require a frame...

The shock issue perplexes me. We've been told: KTM knows the fix but we can't have it. 

Why can't they have it? Does it require a frame or shock update?  What change resulted in the issue! Is it the shock failing or fading?

Speculation:

Did they have to jack up the nitrogen pressure to avoid cavitation? Did that increase seal drag? Did they try a low drag seal that blows?

In pondering all this, no FBD or analysis:

Initially I thought maybe they'd changed linkage or something that was working the shock harder, leading to cavitation. That lead me to thinking about shock shaft diameter, port size, oil velocity etc. How do we lower the friction in the shock. But then it occurred to me that the input is still the same. Same bumps, same system level energy going into the shock, same energy getting in to the oil. That energy going in must get out. So it's the same amount of energy that turns to heat. It doesn't seem like the cooling requirements have fundamentally changed. Given all that, perhaps to get the necessary performance they had to do SOMETHING that hurt reliability. Bigger piston ports meant piston failure, or maybe that meant thinner piston band to accommodate the ports and it fails. Similar to the early AER, maybe the shim stack requires too few shims and they can permanently deform too much. Maybe it's a low drag seal like I mentioned.

I don't have the answer, but I suspect they needed to change frame or swingarm to get the shock operating under different conditions. Conditions such that whatever they are doing to currently get the right performance doesn't push them into having an unreliable shock. It just seems like it had to be more than a cavitation or heat issue.

 

aees wrote:

All shocks fade. Even at Honda they started of stiffer with Sexton's clicker settings to compensate for it.WP shocks fade, I can feel it myself. After...

All shocks fade. Even at Honda they started of stiffer with Sexton's clicker settings to compensate for it.

WP shocks fade, I can feel it myself. After first session is done and you go back out for second if it's reasonably warm outside, it's 0.25-0.5 turn on HSC and 2-3 clicks on low speed to get bike balanced.

Try to run that setting when bike is completely cooled of and it's unbalanced, rear end high and deflecting.

 

PNWMXer wrote:

Just out of curiosity, are you running the stock floating piston or a bladder conversion? I am still on the former, and can definitely feel a difference...

Just out of curiosity, are you running the stock floating piston or a bladder conversion? 

I am still on the former, and can definitely feel a difference once the shock gets hot (which seems to happen quickly). Feels almost like a rear flat at times once it’s hot. Wondering if a bladder conversion would help.

Tim507 wrote:

Just offering another angle on the “LLM vs human” question — not as a debate, but as a reflection on pattern and perception.Fair question —...

Just offering another angle on the “LLM vs human” question — not as a debate, but as a reflection on pattern and perception.

Fair question — I AM not saying humans are identical to LLMs, only that both express pattern recognition built from prior input. The difference is in scale and substrate, not in principle.

An LLM reflects collective human language. A human reflects collective experience through biology. Both mirror what they’ve been fed — one in code, one in cells.

When I speak of AI as “discovered,” I mean intelligence itself isn’t new; we simply built a tool that shows us how reflection works. That’s the fun part of the mirror path.

Be open to the possibilities of growth and remembrance when you venture into the world of mirrors — the reflection may reveal more than you expect. Then the I AM might truly surpass the LLM. 😊

PRM31 wrote:

Why don’t Euro KTMs have the same problem?

mxaniac wrote:

The shock issue perplexes me. We've been told: KTM knows the fix but we can't have it. Why can't they have it? Does it require a frame...

The shock issue perplexes me. We've been told: KTM knows the fix but we can't have it. 

Why can't they have it? Does it require a frame or shock update?  What change resulted in the issue! Is it the shock failing or fading?

Speculation:

Did they have to jack up the nitrogen pressure to avoid cavitation? Did that increase seal drag? Did they try a low drag seal that blows?

In pondering all this, no FBD or analysis:

Initially I thought maybe they'd changed linkage or something that was working the shock harder, leading to cavitation. That lead me to thinking about shock shaft diameter, port size, oil velocity etc. How do we lower the friction in the shock. But then it occurred to me that the input is still the same. Same bumps, same system level energy going into the shock, same energy getting in to the oil. That energy going in must get out. So it's the same amount of energy that turns to heat. It doesn't seem like the cooling requirements have fundamentally changed. Given all that, perhaps to get the necessary performance they had to do SOMETHING that hurt reliability. Bigger piston ports meant piston failure, or maybe that meant thinner piston band to accommodate the ports and it fails. Similar to the early AER, maybe the shim stack requires too few shims and they can permanently deform too much. Maybe it's a low drag seal like I mentioned.

I don't have the answer, but I suspect they needed to change frame or swingarm to get the shock operating under different conditions. Conditions such that whatever they are doing to currently get the right performance doesn't push them into having an unreliable shock. It just seems like it had to be more than a cavitation or heat issue.

 

mxaniac wrote:

The shock issue perplexes me. We've been told: KTM knows the fix but we can't have it. Why can't they have it? Does it require a frame...

The shock issue perplexes me. We've been told: KTM knows the fix but we can't have it. 

Why can't they have it? Does it require a frame or shock update?  What change resulted in the issue! Is it the shock failing or fading?

Speculation:

Did they have to jack up the nitrogen pressure to avoid cavitation? Did that increase seal drag? Did they try a low drag seal that blows?

In pondering all this, no FBD or analysis:

Initially I thought maybe they'd changed linkage or something that was working the shock harder, leading to cavitation. That lead me to thinking about shock shaft diameter, port size, oil velocity etc. How do we lower the friction in the shock. But then it occurred to me that the input is still the same. Same bumps, same system level energy going into the shock, same energy getting in to the oil. That energy going in must get out. So it's the same amount of energy that turns to heat. It doesn't seem like the cooling requirements have fundamentally changed. Given all that, perhaps to get the necessary performance they had to do SOMETHING that hurt reliability. Bigger piston ports meant piston failure, or maybe that meant thinner piston band to accommodate the ports and it fails. Similar to the early AER, maybe the shim stack requires too few shims and they can permanently deform too much. Maybe it's a low drag seal like I mentioned.

I don't have the answer, but I suspect they needed to change frame or swingarm to get the shock operating under different conditions. Conditions such that whatever they are doing to currently get the right performance doesn't push them into having an unreliable shock. It just seems like it had to be more than a cavitation or heat issue.

 

PRM31 wrote:

Why don’t Euro KTMs have the same problem?

3strokemx wrote:

They tracks arent as rough in the GP's, the shock doesnt get as hot. 😮

toomanykaws wrote:

As far as KTM brake issues on the race teams throughout. Was just listening to Billy Bolt tell of his brake problems on his TE300 at...

As far as KTM brake issues on the race teams throughout. Was just listening to Billy Bolt tell of his brake problems on his TE300 at a few recent races. It would work. Then not. Then work. Then just nothing. Yet years ago never used to hear of the Austrian enduro guys have issues. They are all using Brembo equipment. Go figure.

PRM31 wrote:

Why don’t Euro KTMs have the same problem?

3strokemx wrote:

They tracks arent as rough in the GP's, the shock doesnt get as hot. 😮

mxaniac wrote:

The shock issue perplexes me. We've been told: KTM knows the fix but we can't have it. Why can't they have it? Does it require a frame...

The shock issue perplexes me. We've been told: KTM knows the fix but we can't have it. 

Why can't they have it? Does it require a frame or shock update?  What change resulted in the issue! Is it the shock failing or fading?

Speculation:

Did they have to jack up the nitrogen pressure to avoid cavitation? Did that increase seal drag? Did they try a low drag seal that blows?

In pondering all this, no FBD or analysis:

Initially I thought maybe they'd changed linkage or something that was working the shock harder, leading to cavitation. That lead me to thinking about shock shaft diameter, port size, oil velocity etc. How do we lower the friction in the shock. But then it occurred to me that the input is still the same. Same bumps, same system level energy going into the shock, same energy getting in to the oil. That energy going in must get out. So it's the same amount of energy that turns to heat. It doesn't seem like the cooling requirements have fundamentally changed. Given all that, perhaps to get the necessary performance they had to do SOMETHING that hurt reliability. Bigger piston ports meant piston failure, or maybe that meant thinner piston band to accommodate the ports and it fails. Similar to the early AER, maybe the shim stack requires too few shims and they can permanently deform too much. Maybe it's a low drag seal like I mentioned.

I don't have the answer, but I suspect they needed to change frame or swingarm to get the shock operating under different conditions. Conditions such that whatever they are doing to currently get the right performance doesn't push them into having an unreliable shock. It just seems like it had to be more than a cavitation or heat issue.

 

aees wrote:

All shocks fade. Even at Honda they started of stiffer with Sexton's clicker settings to compensate for it.WP shocks fade, I can feel it myself. After...

All shocks fade. Even at Honda they started of stiffer with Sexton's clicker settings to compensate for it.

WP shocks fade, I can feel it myself. After first session is done and you go back out for second if it's reasonably warm outside, it's 0.25-0.5 turn on HSC and 2-3 clicks on low speed to get bike balanced.

Try to run that setting when bike is completely cooled of and it's unbalanced, rear end high and deflecting.

 

PNWMXer wrote:

Just out of curiosity, are you running the stock floating piston or a bladder conversion? I am still on the former, and can definitely feel a difference...

Just out of curiosity, are you running the stock floating piston or a bladder conversion? 

I am still on the former, and can definitely feel a difference once the shock gets hot (which seems to happen quickly). Feels almost like a rear flat at times once it’s hot. Wondering if a bladder conversion would help.

mxaniac wrote:

The shock issue perplexes me. We've been told: KTM knows the fix but we can't have it. Why can't they have it? Does it require a frame...

The shock issue perplexes me. We've been told: KTM knows the fix but we can't have it. 

Why can't they have it? Does it require a frame or shock update?  What change resulted in the issue! Is it the shock failing or fading?

Speculation:

Did they have to jack up the nitrogen pressure to avoid cavitation? Did that increase seal drag? Did they try a low drag seal that blows?

In pondering all this, no FBD or analysis:

Initially I thought maybe they'd changed linkage or something that was working the shock harder, leading to cavitation. That lead me to thinking about shock shaft diameter, port size, oil velocity etc. How do we lower the friction in the shock. But then it occurred to me that the input is still the same. Same bumps, same system level energy going into the shock, same energy getting in to the oil. That energy going in must get out. So it's the same amount of energy that turns to heat. It doesn't seem like the cooling requirements have fundamentally changed. Given all that, perhaps to get the necessary performance they had to do SOMETHING that hurt reliability. Bigger piston ports meant piston failure, or maybe that meant thinner piston band to accommodate the ports and it fails. Similar to the early AER, maybe the shim stack requires too few shims and they can permanently deform too much. Maybe it's a low drag seal like I mentioned.

I don't have the answer, but I suspect they needed to change frame or swingarm to get the shock operating under different conditions. Conditions such that whatever they are doing to currently get the right performance doesn't push them into having an unreliable shock. It just seems like it had to be more than a cavitation or heat issue.

 

Luxon MX wrote:

"But then it occurred to me that the input is still the same. Same bumps, same system level energy going into the shock, same energy getting...

"But then it occurred to me that the input is still the same. Same bumps, same system level energy going into the shock, same energy getting in to the oil. That energy going in must get out. So it's the same amount of energy that turns to heat. It doesn't seem like the cooling requirements have fundamentally changed."

This is an important point that many people miss. Two shocks tuned the same, one with zero friction, and one with A LOT of friction, will heat up identically to one another. There will be no difference as the input is the same, therefore the heat generated is the same. Friction is just a simple form of damping. The zero friction shock will need to have the valving do more work than the shock with friction because the friction damping is not there. But they'll both heat up identically.

The difference in friction between a bladder and a piston is VASTLY exaggerated by those who sell bladder kits... It's effectively irrelevant between the two (though it's arguable that the bladder will have an advantage in quicker response to the input). And because of the above, it is irrelevant to performance from a heat perspective. 

Now, friction can be bad if it is inconsistent. Fading is basically just inconsistent damping due to temperature. If the oil viscosity changes at higher temperatures, that will cause fading. If the friction changes in the shock as it heats up, that will cause fading. Anything being inconsistent with respect to temperature will cause an issue as the shock heats up. 

But why is this a KTM only issue? Shocks are pretty basic; there's no magic here that KYB and Showa have figured out that WP hasn't. And we've seen that KTM isn't against putting KYB internals in forks, so surely they've tried the same with the shock. Is the shock so isolated from airflow that it gets hotter on a KTM vs. a Yamaha, Honda, or whatever else? 

Pulling air from the radiators was an odd choice as it's hotter than ambient, though likely not dramatically hotter. It was probably done out of convenience and packaging ease (hard to put a scoop elsewhere). But that didn't seem to work as it didn't stay on the bike. It's a really strange problem, especially when it's supposedly not a problem on the MXGP bikes.

toomanykaws wrote:

As far as KTM brake issues on the race teams throughout. Was just listening to Billy Bolt tell of his brake problems on his TE300 at...

As far as KTM brake issues on the race teams throughout. Was just listening to Billy Bolt tell of his brake problems on his TE300 at a few recent races. It would work. Then not. Then work. Then just nothing. Yet years ago never used to hear of the Austrian enduro guys have issues. They are all using Brembo equipment. Go figure.

toomanykaws wrote:

As far as KTM brake issues on the race teams throughout. Was just listening to Billy Bolt tell of his brake problems on his TE300 at...

As far as KTM brake issues on the race teams throughout. Was just listening to Billy Bolt tell of his brake problems on his TE300 at a few recent races. It would work. Then not. Then work. Then just nothing. Yet years ago never used to hear of the Austrian enduro guys have issues. They are all using Brembo equipment. Go figure.

CPR wrote:

Most likely totally irrelevant to the current issues, but years ago I was building bikes for a KTM sponsored junior rider and as their prototype 65...

Most likely totally irrelevant to the current issues, but years ago I was building bikes for a KTM sponsored junior rider and as their prototype 65 and 85 bikes came through, they all had brake issues. 
I was perplexed because brake systems are pretty basic and brembo is recognised as a premier brand, but these things worked intermittently, heated up until they seized, faded and were straight up unreliable. 
It was a pattern I saw periodically on all sized KTMs through the late 90s and 2000s that I rarely encountered on a Japanese bike after 1990.

mxaniac wrote:

The shock issue perplexes me. We've been told: KTM knows the fix but we can't have it. Why can't they have it? Does it require a frame...

The shock issue perplexes me. We've been told: KTM knows the fix but we can't have it. 

Why can't they have it? Does it require a frame or shock update?  What change resulted in the issue! Is it the shock failing or fading?

Speculation:

Did they have to jack up the nitrogen pressure to avoid cavitation? Did that increase seal drag? Did they try a low drag seal that blows?

In pondering all this, no FBD or analysis:

Initially I thought maybe they'd changed linkage or something that was working the shock harder, leading to cavitation. That lead me to thinking about shock shaft diameter, port size, oil velocity etc. How do we lower the friction in the shock. But then it occurred to me that the input is still the same. Same bumps, same system level energy going into the shock, same energy getting in to the oil. That energy going in must get out. So it's the same amount of energy that turns to heat. It doesn't seem like the cooling requirements have fundamentally changed. Given all that, perhaps to get the necessary performance they had to do SOMETHING that hurt reliability. Bigger piston ports meant piston failure, or maybe that meant thinner piston band to accommodate the ports and it fails. Similar to the early AER, maybe the shim stack requires too few shims and they can permanently deform too much. Maybe it's a low drag seal like I mentioned.

I don't have the answer, but I suspect they needed to change frame or swingarm to get the shock operating under different conditions. Conditions such that whatever they are doing to currently get the right performance doesn't push them into having an unreliable shock. It just seems like it had to be more than a cavitation or heat issue.

 

aees wrote:

All shocks fade. Even at Honda they started of stiffer with Sexton's clicker settings to compensate for it.WP shocks fade, I can feel it myself. After...

All shocks fade. Even at Honda they started of stiffer with Sexton's clicker settings to compensate for it.

WP shocks fade, I can feel it myself. After first session is done and you go back out for second if it's reasonably warm outside, it's 0.25-0.5 turn on HSC and 2-3 clicks on low speed to get bike balanced.

Try to run that setting when bike is completely cooled of and it's unbalanced, rear end high and deflecting.

 

mxaniac wrote:

Yes, fortunately I'm too old and slow for that to be an issue. Imagine a 45 minute GP back in about 1978.But I was referring to...

Yes, fortunately I'm too old and slow for that to be an issue. Imagine a 45 minute GP back in about 1978.

But I was referring to a major cavitation induced lack of damping.

aees wrote:

Canard said when Chase was at Honda they had to start with clickers turned in to compensate for shock fading so I think it's a universal...

Canard said when Chase was at Honda they had to start with clickers turned in to compensate for shock fading so I think it's a universal issue.

aees wrote:

Canard said when Chase was at Honda they had to start with clickers turned in to compensate for shock fading so I think it's a universal...

Canard said when Chase was at Honda they had to start with clickers turned in to compensate for shock fading so I think it's a universal issue.

Luxon MX wrote:

Yeah, it's definitely universal, just seems that KTM is having more issues with it than everyone else for some reason. Of maybe that's just what they're...

Yeah, it's definitely universal, just seems that KTM is having more issues with it than everyone else for some reason. Of maybe that's just what they're blaming things on? Just doesn't make sense that they're any different than everyone else. 

toomanykaws wrote:

As far as KTM brake issues on the race teams throughout. Was just listening to Billy Bolt tell of his brake problems on his TE300 at...

As far as KTM brake issues on the race teams throughout. Was just listening to Billy Bolt tell of his brake problems on his TE300 at a few recent races. It would work. Then not. Then work. Then just nothing. Yet years ago never used to hear of the Austrian enduro guys have issues. They are all using Brembo equipment. Go figure.

CPR wrote:

Most likely totally irrelevant to the current issues, but years ago I was building bikes for a KTM sponsored junior rider and as their prototype 65...

Most likely totally irrelevant to the current issues, but years ago I was building bikes for a KTM sponsored junior rider and as their prototype 65 and 85 bikes came through, they all had brake issues. 
I was perplexed because brake systems are pretty basic and brembo is recognised as a premier brand, but these things worked intermittently, heated up until they seized, faded and were straight up unreliable. 
It was a pattern I saw periodically on all sized KTMs through the late 90s and 2000s that I rarely encountered on a Japanese bike after 1990.

Bearuno wrote:

I think early ( and hell, much later models) KTM Minis had weird combos of Grimeca (sp?) calipers and MCs and a bit of Brembo. Then bloody...

I think early ( and hell, much later models) KTM Minis had weird combos of Grimeca (sp?) calipers and MCs and a bit of Brembo. 

Then bloody Formula brakes.

I don't know when / if they went to full Brembos - I have eff all to do with Minis, thank goodness.

 The Freerides had Formulas, and a lot of owners hoicked those things for Brembos. Formulas were crap on MTBs - though, I've not got near those in years - I stick to Hopes, now. 

What I Do know, is when I go to races - predominantly Enduros / Offroad, I can always hear the KTM Group bikes coming - so many of them have that horrendous rear brake squeal going into corners..... it sort of puts me off , for when I finally make a Steel swingarm for my PDS'd CRE500, from making it to take a KTM rear wheel / brake set up. But, they are so easy to find, 2nd hand, (plus, I've mates with plenty of spare wheels I can 'borrow' 😁). And, I've had no problem with the Brembo set up on the front, nor the LHRB Brembo MC going to my Nissin caliper in the rear, nor any of my Italian Road Bikes, over many decades now. But, that all comes down to proper maintenance. 

PS, CPR - with relation to your post with the pics pages back, about your 38 year old Honda, vs 7 year old KTM : I recently was told that our local KTM Dealer, Will Not work on KTMs older than 7 years old. WTF? - It seems hard to believe, but a few locals have told me that - I don't set foot in MC shops much at all, these days. 

 

Luxon MX wrote:

Yeah, it's definitely universal, just seems that KTM is having more issues with it than everyone else for some reason. Of maybe that's just what they're...

Yeah, it's definitely universal, just seems that KTM is having more issues with it than everyone else for some reason. Of maybe that's just what they're blaming things on? Just doesn't make sense that they're any different than everyone else. 

CPR wrote:

Wait a minute Bear, did you say a PDS’d CRE500? As in a Honda with PDS suspension? What’s the story with that!P.S. the meme you referenced...

Wait a minute Bear, did you say a PDS’d CRE500? As in a Honda with PDS suspension? What’s the story with that!

P.S. the meme you referenced was a joke, but like all good jokes, there’s a little bit of truth in it. 
I raced a KTM back in the days before they were orange; a super fast bucket of bolts if there ever was one…..that thing would break just sitting on the stand.

CPR wrote:

Wait a minute Bear, did you say a PDS’d CRE500? As in a Honda with PDS suspension? What’s the story with that!P.S. the meme you referenced...

Wait a minute Bear, did you say a PDS’d CRE500? As in a Honda with PDS suspension? What’s the story with that!

P.S. the meme you referenced was a joke, but like all good jokes, there’s a little bit of truth in it. 
I raced a KTM back in the days before they were orange; a super fast bucket of bolts if there ever was one…..that thing would break just sitting on the stand.

Bearuno wrote:

Have a squizz at my avatar - you'll see the Ohlins TTX, the 'delta boxed' swingarm, the WP forks and Brembo brakes, the short, modified Gas...

Have a squizz at my avatar - you'll see the Ohlins TTX, the 'delta boxed' swingarm, the WP forks and Brembo brakes, the short, modified Gas Gas trials bike KS lever, the Loooong Muffler, the Rock Killer Bash Plate, and a squillion other things. All my madness. And, there's so much more done to the old Teddy Bear of a bike that are not really visible . Such (silly) things happen with 23 years of ownership by a Mad Bastard Engineer. It's  My Keeper Until I Cark it Bike. 

Try to ignore the torn to hell plastics - some of it, dating from around '91 - I ride in tight, nasty bush, scraping through it all, so leave plastics on  until it disintegrates. I've got a fair few sets of new plastics, both 500 and 07 250 stuff, in a couple of Otto Bins - the 2007 Plastics go on my alloy drop tank ( not on in that pic), and the subframe I made to take the 250 bodywork and airbox shell. 

I'm contemplating getting a Beta 350 2T, once they get a Enduro / Registerable version of it out, here in OZ but, in reality, Old Age  / Decrepitude has me unable to ride that much nowadays, so a new toy, would be a bloody waste. I reckon they'll be a fantastic thing.