Welcome to the WRR/X Forum

A place to share your passion for the WR250R/X!
 
HomeHome  CalendarCalendar  FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  MemberlistMemberlist  UsergroupsUsergroups  RegisterRegister  Log inLog in  
WR250R/X Forum

Share | 
 

 WR250R Aftermarket Development

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
rsteiger

avatar


PostSubject: WR250R Aftermarket Development   Sun Feb 05, 2017 11:02 am

Been following this over on ADVRider:

thankyou for all your input!

we spent all night researching this project and just got back from the dealership with some preliminary measurements.

let me address my previous specs and your comments:

low seat height is important for this build because i know many people with small inseams that have been limited in their choice of dual sports.
however looks like i wont be able to go too crazy low on the seat height. 32" is just too low if you want any kind of usable suspension travel. my friend made a good point, high quality suspension does not need to have extreme travel. thus 10" of suspension travel with a 35" seat height would probably be more appropriate, not to mention more comfortable but more expensive....... perhaps i could offer two different seat styles. a "low rider" seat at 34" or a more comfortable seat at 35".

50+ state legality is very important to me. so i need to find a bike with a frame that has a removable lower sub frame, thus i can modify the lower sub frame but leave the upper main frame untouched. this would allow me to have a street legal bike with a new engine! ive already talked to a frame shop and they said as long as the main frame is not modified in any way you could slap a V8 in there if u really wanted too and it would be legal......

EPA certification is not as hard as people make it out to be, the frame shop i went too said as long the engine you put in has all the emission junk on it that came with the engine then you will be fine. ( catalytic converter, quiet muffler, exhaust air induction system, O2 sensor, etc, etc)

build specs (new estimated):

-aluminum/steel frame
-300 to 700cc twin
-around 320lb wet, or 300lb's wet assume all emissions junk removed. or 320lb wet (340lb wet with emissions for a bike with a 700cc)
-around 34-35" seat height
-21/18" wheels
-10" suspension travel
-11" ground clearance
-luggage capable sub-frame
-fuel injected
-87 octane
-12 to 16L tank
-10,000km+ service intervals
-front fairing would be an option, enduro look or rally look. rally /front faring would add about 20lbs to the bike

we have made our choice for the bike /engine.

the donor bike will be a wr250r, due to its light weight, street legality, good suspension travel, huge after market support, and most important of all steel subframe that can be removed and modified to accommodate a larger motor.
as for engine, R3 321cc twin. after making preliminary measurements it looks like the r3 engine being so compact would easily fit into the wr250r frame, in fact might even be able to use the existing sub frame as its that small of an engine.
as for serviceability, yamaha has a 42,000km valve servive interval.

300-320lb bike is totally possible. of course add 20lb's if people want a front fairing

the other option is the fz-07 engine. this however would be a very tight fit but still possible dimension wise. not to mention weight would increase to 320-340lb wet

please let me know what you think.
Back to top Go down
johnkol




PostSubject: Re: WR250R Aftermarket Development   Sun Feb 05, 2017 7:40 pm

rsteiger wrote:
-aluminum/steel frame
-300 to 700cc twin
-around 320lb wet, or 300lb's wet assume all emissions junk removed. or 320lb wet (340lb wet with emissions for a bike with a 700cc)
-around 34-35" seat height
-21/18" wheels
-10" suspension travel
-11" ground clearance
-luggage capable sub-frame
-fuel injected
-87 octane
-12 to 16L tank
-10,000km+ service intervals
-front fairing would be an option, enduro look or rally look. rally /front faring would add about 20lbs to the bike

They seem to have listed the specs for the KTM 690 R.

rsteiger wrote:
as for engine, R3 321cc twin

I don't see how a twin-cylinder engine will fit between the main aluminum spars of the WRR.

Not to mention that the twin engine will weigh quite a bit more than the WRR motor.
Back to top Go down
rsteiger

avatar


PostSubject: Re: WR250R Aftermarket Development   Wed Feb 08, 2017 12:22 pm

I don't think the weight difference in the motors is all that significant but the R3 will weigh more. The thing is it is only the incremental weight of the extra cylinder since all the supporting stuff (transmission, camshaft chain, etc) is present in both bikes. The R3 has a smaller bore and shorter stroke which should reduce the height of the motor which means it may be able to sit under the spars.

My concern would be if they could package a proper size airbox for the R3 on the WRR frame.

While they may have identified the specs that are close to what a 690 would be at the one thing that the 690 isn't is smooth running on long stretches of pavement which is something these guys are interested in.

I will keep checking in on their progress from time to time.

Back to top Go down
WRXer




PostSubject: Re: WR250R Aftermarket Development   Thu Feb 09, 2017 12:30 am

FTW...

Back to top Go down
johnkol




PostSubject: Re: WR250R Aftermarket Development   Thu Feb 09, 2017 5:48 pm

rsteiger wrote:
The thing is it is only the incremental weight of the extra cylinder since all the supporting stuff (transmission, camshaft chain, etc) is present in both bikes.

The R3 is about 60 lbs heavier than the WRR, so incremental weight adds a lot of pounds; it seems that the power-to-weight ratio may end up being worse for the franken-bike.

rsteiger wrote:
While they may have identified the specs that are close to what a 690 would be at the one thing that the 690 isn't is smooth running on long stretches of pavement which is something these guys are interested in.

The 690 is not the paint-shaker the 640 used to be; it didn't seem worse to me than the vibes from my old DR650. Comfort on high-speed pavement sections depends heavily on tyres and whether the wheels have been balanced; the 690 comes standard with MT21s, so highway riding is not going to be very smooth, but that can't be held against the bike.
Back to top Go down
edteamslr

avatar


PostSubject: Re: WR250R Aftermarket Development   Fri Feb 10, 2017 6:02 am

Where ever I see 690 I now replace that with the 2017 Husqvarna 701.
I loved my WR, I loved the 2016 701 I rode for a day and people are saying the 2017 is very smooth. I will hopefully be finding out soon..
Back to top Go down
rarepartbuilder

avatar


PostSubject: Re: WR250R Aftermarket Development   Mon Feb 13, 2017 10:29 am

didn't see the ADV  LINK from your original post on the subject,, ...



be a cool ride with the twin.. especially making half day jaunts just to get "to" the trail head....
Back to top Go down
rsteiger

avatar


PostSubject: Re: WR250R Aftermarket Development   Tue Feb 14, 2017 5:45 pm

johnkol wrote:
rsteiger wrote:
The thing is it is only the incremental weight of the extra cylinder since all the supporting stuff (transmission, camshaft chain, etc) is present in both bikes.

The R3 is about 60 lbs heavier than the WRR, so incremental weight adds a lot of pounds; it seems that the power-to-weight ratio may end up being worse for the franken-bike.

rsteiger wrote:
While they may have identified the specs that are close to what a 690 would be at the one thing that the 690 isn't is smooth running on long stretches of pavement which is something these guys are interested in.

The 690 is not the paint-shaker the 640 used to be; it didn't seem worse to me than the vibes from my old DR650. Comfort on high-speed pavement sections depends heavily on tyres and whether the wheels have been balanced; the 690 comes standard with MT21s, so highway riding is not going to be very smooth, but that can't be held against the bike.

I've ridden the 690 on the highway and street - definitely not as smooth as my CB500X, WRR, or the R3 I rode. The thing I can't figure out with the 690 is why they used such a narrow range transmission - I mean that bike would be so much nicer if they space the cogs out a bit.

Loved riding the 690 off pavement though but when things got tight it was not as nimble as my WRR... but that motor does bring a smile to your face at times.

I will bet you a beer that when they do the final build that the Frankenbike won't weigh 60lbs more than the WR250R.  dutch
Back to top Go down
johnkol




PostSubject: Re: WR250R Aftermarket Development   Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:41 am

Won't bet you for 60 lbs, but I will bet you for 30 lbs -- which would bring the WRR/R3 hybrid to the KTM 690 territory weight-wise, but considerably down in power.

Also, if you note the two-stroke engine in the franken-bike above, they had to modify the front steel frame to fit the engine. Imagine how much more modification will be needed for a four stroke engine that is significantly taller.

I agree with you, the 690 had a lot more vibrations than the WRR, and I'm sure more vibrations than the CB and R3 (although I've never ridden these bikes); but I didn't think it vibrated more than a DR650, which makes it very acceptable in my book. Having said that, I didn't have the chance to take the 690 to the highway.

The close-ratio 6-gear box of the 690 (as wide as the 5-gear box of the DR650) is a constant complaint in the KTM 690 forums, and the general consensus is that KTM simply used the 690 motor from the Duke, where the close-ratio box works fine. It does not work well in a dual-sport bike though, where you want very low gears for off-road, and tall gears for cruising on the freeways.
Back to top Go down
rsteiger

avatar


PostSubject: Re: WR250R Aftermarket Development   Thu Feb 16, 2017 10:32 am

johnkol wrote:
Won't bet you for 60 lbs, but I will bet you for 30 lbs -- which would bring the WRR/R3 hybrid to the KTM 690 territory weight-wise, but considerably down in power.

Also, if you note the two-stroke engine in the franken-bike above, they had to modify the front steel frame to fit the engine. Imagine how much more modification will be needed for a four stroke engine that is significantly taller.

I agree with you, the 690 had a lot more vibrations than the WRR, and I'm sure more vibrations than the CB and R3 (although I've never ridden these bikes); but I didn't think it vibrated more than a DR650, which makes it very acceptable in my book. Having said that, I didn't have the chance to take the 690 to the highway.

The close-ratio 6-gear box of the 690 (as wide as the 5-gear box of the DR650) is a constant complaint in the KTM 690 forums, and the general consensus is that KTM simply used the 690 motor from the Duke, where the close-ratio box works fine. It does not work well in a dual-sport bike though, where you want very low gears for off-road, and tall gears for cruising on the freeways.

Agreed! I can see 20 to 30lbs increase with the R3 motor. That should put it close to the same weight as a CRF250L. I also think, depending on how they do the mounting the weight should be carried lower on the bike which would move the CG down.

I've always wondered about the decision to use the close ratio gearbox from the Duke. I mean given all the years the 690 has been out I would think that they would have looked at different gearing in the transmission to give it a wider ratio. The only thing I can come up with is either it didn't package in the space that is there or they are having issues getting it to pass durability testing.

Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: WR250R Aftermarket Development   

Back to top Go down
 
WR250R Aftermarket Development
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» What aftermarket seat for 300+ mile days...
» Aftermarket Signal Lights
» Lynx Fairing install, WR250X
» WR250R seat mods
» Aftermarket Tach/Gauges

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Welcome to the WRR/X Forum :: General :: WRR/X General Discussion-
Jump to: