Interesting. An added 40 lbs. for lighting, stator, wiring and random acoutrements would still leave it plenty lightweight. I was out riding my mountainbike tonight, and trying to imagine having one of those machines on the kinds of trails I ride. I could see it being great fun....but probably not enough fun to trailer it around. If I could ride it on the street to access the endless networks of logging roads in our local foothills, that might be worth the price of admission.

My thinking as well.

Shouldn't need a trailer at that weight though. A hitch mounted rack would work just fine. You just lift it on there. No ramp necessary.

You mis-read it. I said there are people who enjoy the riding AS MUCH as the travelling. I get huge pleasure out of riding to places and villages that haven't been visited before. You twisted a post that was clearly stating that for some people the riding is as important as the travelling into "the travelling doesnt matter" just so you could make a point.

See above. I am not interested in riding off road in western europe. Its not why I buy a bike. Its not why I choose a particular model. Its not what floats my boat. I am quite capable of deciding what riding I want to do. Suggesting I shouldn't be RTWing is just an absurd suggestion.

Again, its more than a little bit patronising. I have been adventuring in the third world for 20 years. I know my limits, and I am perfectly capable of choosing my own risk reward balance when it comes to riding.

But its more than patronising, its totally contradictory to why people are here on this site at all. The idea that 'because medical services are worse than in the west we all should plod along on a slow old boat and just be happy with it, because anything else is somehow foolhardy', is the opinion of someone who has given up challenging himself. If that opinion had any validity, then why travel to the third world at all? Its inherently risky. Traffic is more dangerous, emergency services are still worse, even if you potter around on a C90. Better to travel in a Volvo 4WD if we dont like risk. Why take any risk at all? Lets all stay at home in the suburbs and forget this whole adventure concept altogether.

Again, thats fine for you, but not everyone subscribes to one level of risk. There are guys on the site who love going into danger zones. There are others who prefer sticking to main roads in developed countries. Its certainly not for you to proscribe an appropriate amount of risk for HUBB users.

Horizons Unlimited exists to help people find the right risk-reward balance for themselves. Thats what all the information is here for in the end. Its not about eliminating risk, or minimising risk. Its about choosing the level of risk that suits the individuals risk appetite.

A few years back we submitted an article to the BMF Journal (and others) about our travels in Africa which were probably very tame by Walters standards. We received a very strong letter from the editor telling us that it was extremely irresponsable of us to undertake such a trip and that he wouldn't consider publishing the article as it may encourage others to take on similar risky adventures.

However, I don't agree that "Horizons Unlimited exists to help people find the right risk-reward balance for themselves. Thats what all the information is here for in the end." Some people in here are just looking for information on travelling to foreign parts, equipment, bikes etc or just enjoy reading about other peoples experiences. Not many, I suspect, consider the risk factors before they set off on their first trip especially related to the type of terrain or the medical support. More people worry about not speaking the language than they do about exceeding their riding abilities.

While some of the questions on HUBB are regarding procedural questions, most of them seem to be in some way related to assessing risk or degree of difficulty. Road condition questions, language necessity questions, etc are all related to risk return evaluation. Most route planning discussion is either about how difficult a route is or what is worth seeing there - 100% a risk return discussion. Even bike selection is all about risk return. The return being the either tge Fun u have on a particular bike or maybe even the personal satisfaction someone gets for riding his super tenere across the Gobi when others said he is nuts to bother trying. The risk being either mechanical or the risk of not having fun.

Sure there are some questions like where is the best place to apply for visa x or what oil is best, but most questions do somehow come back to risk vs reward and trying to clarify how much risk and how much reward there is is in a particular choice.

I gotta say I REALLY don't consider my stuff particularly risky. I tend to research stuff pretty thoroughly. Thats a huge uncertainty mitigator. I think someone else unprepared and without language doing exactly the same trip could be taking on a very different level of risk. Level of risk is specific to each set of circumstances. Many aspects of recent trips I have done I would never do alone, as the risk would be too high for my tastes. Yet even with a single co-rider, I feel happy with the risk level. Even number of and riding skill levels of your companions is a big factor when it comes to assessing risk. I dont ride as aggressively when alone as when I have the back up factor of having companions with me. There are some routes I would not do alone, but would be comfortable even with an off road novice as back up (like the Old Summer Road).

There are some bikes I have been considering for years but have not pulled the trigger on getting one and building it up because I am concerned that the lesser reliability of a certain bike introduces a whole new layer of risk, which bearing in mind the remoteness of areas I like riding, becomes a risk factor too far.

So not only is the appropriate amount of risk an individual wants to take on very subjective, but even the objective measure of that risk is totally unique for each individual trip, and depends on such a diverse amount of factors including the number and riding skill of your companions, the reliability or perceived reliability of your and your companions bikes, as well as the more obvious ones such as the political stability and general security of the area you are travelling to, your riding skill level, your adventuring experience, your mechanical skill as it applies to your motorcycle, your ability to speak local languages, your preparedness for local road or trail surface, weather, food conditions etc.

Risk, and how you shape and manage that risk is very much an individual thing. There have been 3-4 trips on here (a couple of cycle trips, a car trip and a moto trip) in the last 6-12 months that have made me think ... Fu@k me thats a much ballsier risk appetite than I have - and that's in areas where I generally feel most comfortable - former soviet Eurasia. But thats just my outside view. Maybe on the inside it wasnt that risky. Maybe they did the research and found its actually pretty do-able and the risk is manageable. Or maybe they just have a mega risk appetite. Either way, I dont think my own risk appetite is particularly high. It might look that way from the outside, but on the inside I have a lot of risk mitigating factors working for me. There is method in the madness.

A bike journal lecturing on risks and safety. That's a good one.

What a load of BS to talk up risks overseas. Where is the boundary there? Before immigration or customs?

I think the G450X engine is the only light enduro/rally engine with high power and compliant with the tough Euro3 emissions legislation (which you need to get it licensed in Europe).
It has 40 HP in Euro3 mode and 50 HP in racing mode (different exhaust and power plug / switch - both used to come with the bike).
If I'm not mistaken KTM and Husaberg has 10-15 HP in Euro3 mode.

The G450X engine is also known to be pretty robust, if you compare it to other race-bikes. Personally I think it's a nice engine for racing, I'm not sure how it will work in the long term.

MCN video link below. Bottom line seems to be 'not finished yet but a lot better than expected'

CCM GP450 Adventure | Road Tests | Motorcyclenews.com - YouTube

Well the attempt at commentary in the vid does say that the CCM version of the engine is de-tuned, and it mentions the 40HP figure which is enough for a 450cc in a non-racing mode.

It's growing on me, but real world test rides, i.e. beta testers to put in some distance/time on the bike, are now needed.

Looks fragile..........

However, if they want to give me one (along with £20,000), I'll happily do a RTW 12 month test for them..

I reckon it looks great. Pity they couldn't find any decent off road to film it on.

On the other hand, the Lake District is just up the road from CCMs' place so they didn't spend a load of cash on shipping bikes, for journo trips, to Spain/Maroc and similar exotic locations.

Maybe there is only one GP450 available for testing at present??

In standard form I think the WR450F engine is more durable. At least the piston has 3 rings.

The max permissable oil consumption on a G450X is 100ml per hour of riding, which is a lot. The engine holds 1.15 litres. To put that in perspective, A KTM 2-stroke uses a fuel:oil mix of 50:1. So if the 2 stroke uses 5 L of fuel per hour, it will also use 100ml of oil. 100ml/hr is at the upper end for the BMW and means the engine is due for a rebuild, but it is still a lot.

The WR is pretty good, but isn't the euro3-version limited to 9kW?


On the other hand I can't see that the G450X engine is detuned, it used to be 40 hp in euro3-mode and 50 hp in racing-mode. The only difference is that now you have to pay for the parts to get 50 HP.

Hehe, my 400EXC burns 150 ml/hr and it's pretty hard to pass me in that fog :thumbup1: Time for a rebuild...

some nice pics and a review from a test ride of the prototype http://www.adventurebikerider.com/co...18-nathan.html