I havent said that there is a right or a wrong way to ride or to do things.
All I have said is that a lighter bike is easier and lighter to handle - and especially when and if going offroad.

And using statistics for what? Justin Beaver sells a lot of records and concert tickets - so he must be a fantastic artist??? McDonalds sells more food than any other restaurant chain - thus using your way of "proving" things it must be the best restaurant with the best and healthiest food around...

About your examples - that guy you claim did 279 countries. Quite strange that there arent more than some approx - 190 countries in the world. You must not belive in all exaggeration you hear....
And without checking facts - I do belive a 1200 GS is lighter than a 1150 GS.
Anyhow - you can also run a marathon in army boots - its possible and might even have some advantages. But I would prefer doing it in something more suitable. And then we are back to the question of the TS of which bike is best suited for his needs. You can go around the world in anything you like of small and big bikes, 50 cc Vespas or 1800 cc Goldwings. But what are the best suited from an objective - or as objective as possible perspective?

Taking a big bike will actually limit one from going on some real off the beaten track. So why take a bike that limit your choices of where to go?
If youre only doing paved roads and a relatively smooth gravel road now and then - you can take any bike, big or small. But if youre heading where most people dont go - youre much better of with a lighter bike. These are facts wheter you like it or not. If youre a hell of a skilled rider you can get quite far with a big bike too - but most people are not. And especially thinking about persons who ask for advice and are uncertain about what bike to take.

There are as you say no right or no wrong way or wrong bike. But there are choices that makes it easier for an unexperienced rider.

Heres some reading from Walter Colbatch of the choiche of an adventure bike. He has been riding The Road of Bones and BAM in Siberia several times and is a quite experienced guy. I think the classic observation is in there somewhere where they met different guys doing those very hardcore offroad roads in Siberia. They met guys with Superteneres and GS/GSAs and they came through these roads with their bikes in the back of a truck. They just couldnt get through those roads on those huge bikes. Then they met some guys on single cylindered 650s - and those guys said that it was freaking hard but they were able ro get through after a lot of hard work. And at last they met some guys on 250s and they told that it was just awesome and completely fun....

http://www.sibirskyextreme.com/2013/...selection-101/

__________________
In the end everything will be fine. If its not fine its not the end....

Don't know what he classed as a country. Maybe he widened his definition of country and included micronations and governments in exile as well. Maybe he visited the same geographic location twice, but the country name changed? But his book is record and his journals are available for review. I found them very entertaining.




Completely agree- depending on the application, a small bike can be the best way to go. Remember the section where the camera man road around Charlie and Ewen on the little single cylinder and they had the beamers stuck upto the axles?

Personally, I just find smaller bikes too limiting for long distance travel. (vibration, lack of power, cramped and uncomfortable riding position, lack of decent wind protection etc.) That's just me. I'm bigger than the standard 70kg "Japanese model rider" and prefer the middle class big machines (e.g. 750-1000cc multi-cylinder). The 1% of the time I'm 'stuck in the mud' wishing for a smaller machine is nothing compared to the 60+% of frustration for me on a small bike.

__________________
Squily

Hmm, I'm not experiencing those downsides at all on my 250 (WRR). It's actually less viby than my BMW Dakar (which was a pig in comparison). Prefer to not have a screen on it too.

It's all about frame of reference and choice of terrain. If you only have to deal with being in mud 1% of time you're probably not on demanding terrain much. So a size matters little. That does mean you're limited though. But that also depends on how much of something you can put up with.

__________________
Tacos Tyring Travels.com

I didn't say I have to deal with mud 1%: I meant the 1% its so bad I wish I had a smaller bike

I don't know if the riding I do can be called challenging by other people. I post some pics and you can decide for yourself.

But- my message throughout has been (and still remains) - big bikes are just as capable as small bikes.

I accept they may be more of a handful, but just as a $1million sportscar don't make you a race driver (or even a good driver), neither does a bike. Best advise I can offer- buy the bike you love/like and learn to ride it properly. And if that is a small bike, great. If you prefer a big bike, great. I certainly do not let the size of a bike dictate where I go- it simply means less/more work and time depending on the application (i.e. to me, 1000km/day on a small bike is as much a pain as 50km of mud running on a big bike). To me an all-rounder needs to do everything I want 'reasonably' and I find for my riding/application big bikes are better.

My last Africa trip I used an XR650L for the 1st two weeks and a 1200GS for the last two weeks (think it was around 9kkm, but its a bit hazy now). I preferred the GS to the XR. With limited luggage, the XR struggled to reach 120km/h with 'my bulk' on it. It was OK in the ruff-stuff, but the I've done some of these tracks before on various bikes and I know the GS would have been more than capable of surviving the river crossings and other techy bits. And the single cylinders loose power quickly at altitude.

__________________
Squily

I have to disagree to what you say about vibration, incomfortable riding position and lack of wind protection etc. Big singles are said to vibrate the most and I have now owned 3 different of those, a Dr 650, a Dominator 650 and a Tenere 660. Although they do vibrate a little - it has never bothered me to an extent its a real problem. A 250 of which I have experience with the Crf250L and a Klx 250 do not vibrate at all compared to 650s singles. Actually the bike I have owned that vibrated most was the Transalp 600 which was a heavy bike of 195 kilos dry and with V-twin engine. So to say that small bikes vibrate more doesnt make sence at all to me.

Most smaller bikes that I have experience with are taller and have wheels of 21 and 18 and actually many of the biggest so called adventure bikes are lower and comes with 19/17 wheels. Thus I cant find much compliance in what you say about this subject and reality.
Wind protection and such - well its what you put on your bike and what equipement you fit. There might be more choises for wind protection for bigger bikes - thats a point but personally I often prefers less protection. High windscreens twnd to give buffeting issues and are thus uncomfortable. Often better results if you cut off 10 cm on the windscreen.

I see that in a later post you complane about a bike that had problems reaching 120 km/h. Well - if your ideas about adventure riding is to ride on roads that one can ride in + 120 km/h and on bikes that can easily pass that speed when loaded up - we might have a totally different idea about adventure riding. I recently rode from northern Europe to Australia with many detours and approx. 80 k kms and I can count one hand the times I rode in 120 km/h or more and I can probably count in two hands the roads and stretches this were possible. In most of the world roads riding in 120 km an hour is not possible. And certainly not interesting....its the winding back roads, gravel roads, mountain roads etc that are interesting. Not a boring straight forward highway/freeway/motorway.

And when you say dont let the size of a bike dictate where you go I cannot do anything else that smile - because the size of the bike WILL dictate where you are able to go. Thats a fact....

__________________
In the end everything will be fine. If its not fine its not the end....

I was being very general of machines and did not list specific machines. There are always exceptions in every class of machine- e.g. An 640 LC4 KTM vibrates to buggery, but has lots of power/performance. An XT is pretty gutless in comparison, but has a smoother engine. But it is interesting you mention the CRF250L and XL600, because my wife has them to and she complains of needle-an-pins in her fingers when she rides the CRF long distance, but not the XL600. Same bikes, but different experiences. Could it be tyre related?




I agree on 19" front wheels- don't like them either, but some people prefer the better road-holding they provide for bitumen dominated riding. In fact, some people are already talking about converting the new AT's 21" front to a 19" because of this- each to his own. And part of this debate is the tube vs tubeless conundrum. A lot of people prefer the tubeless tyres and not many manufacturers offer tubeless unless you go to these sizes (19/17). But there are plenty of larger machines with 21" front wheels, e.g. 800GS, 800 Tiger, AT, KTM 950/990, XRV750 etc.

As for the rear wheel- Many of the big-singles come with a 17" rear (KLR650, DR650) and opinion differ on whether 17" or 18" tyres are better for touring- I find 18" better and easier to find in Australia and prefer the selection. So much so that I paid a lot of money to build an 18" rear wheel for my XRV750. Other parts of the world people claim the opposite (17" being easier to find).

So I reject your reality and substitute my own


My apologies for complaining. It was meant as an empirical observation, not a complaint.

I don't like freeway riding much thank you, but every so often its required. I prefer to be on a machine that is capable of staying with the traffic. In the Australian heat, tyres delaminate easy and you have to look after them. Riding a loaded bike at speed tends seriously reduce tyre life and I prefer not to.

And I agree we have some different ideas of adventure riding. Mine seems to be much broader and accepts all forms, whereas yours appear to me as restrictive and narrow-minded. In my recent trip, I got caught in a Porsche train running through the mountains. I had just as much fun chasing them through the twisties on the bitumen than I did running up the beach or through the 4x4 tracks in the Flinders Mountain ranges. For my application, the best adventure bike is the one that offers me the most options. Just as I feel a certain loss at being on a road bike and not being able to go down a dirt track to see a waterfall, so I feel a loss when I want to 'push' things a bit and the throttle is against the stopper, there's a lot of noise, but not enough forward motion.

And when I have the time, I also prefer slower riding because: less fuel, see more, less fatigue (wind/concentration/etc.). But I also have to be practical - we live rural and I travel for sport. A weekend is 3-4 days 1800-3000km of mixed bitumen/dirt riding with your gear. You can't realistically do this at 80km/h.



Maybe it does to you. But hey, I accept the challenge - only way to prove you wrong is for us to go riding together...

__________________
Squily

First of all I think you should be very very careful judging others and calling me narrow minded and restrictive. If you really need to lie and talk shit about others and lube your own ego I suggest that you find somewhere else to do it. This is not the place for it.

I have said several times in this thread that one can travel long distance or go around the world on anything you like from a 50 cc Vespa to a 1800 cc Goldwing or even bigger. You on the other hand have said that small bikes vibrate (more than big bikes) have less wind protection, a 650 struggles to do 120 with luggage etc etc. I wonder who is the more narrow minded here? Well - I let it be up to others to decide.....

My main point is as I have said several times - if youre going really off road and where the going gets though - a lighter bike is a much better option. If the stretch is tough enough a heavy bike wont even get through and if one gets through with a big bike it wont be much fun.

Im observe you dont get much support in your point of view here. But its no surprise as most people in here have a certain experience.

Then again - on a long distance travel you will need to cole down to a compromise when choosing a bike model. As I also have mentioned several times before.

Youre mention that riding in 80 km/h wont be a realistic alternative for your weekend trip. Oh my gosh - well I quite sure you could if you planned according to it. Maybe do a little longer trip than a weekend trip?
And by the way - where and why did you get the 80 km/h thing in your head? I had a 100 cc when I was 16 years old and it did 130 km/h (it was a two stroker) and most 250 cc bikes have a top speed 130-140. Tmotten rides his WR 250 in 110 km/h all day.

I have absolutely not challenged you in any sense of the word. And just by having such thoughts it seems obvious that you either are not able to understand or are not willing to see my main point. The only way to understand this is for one person to take a big bike and go for a real hardcore off road ride and then do same thing with a lighter bike. And then compare which was the best bike for such a ride and which bike was the most fun to ride such a stretch with. Its not a man versus man thing - its a bike versus bike thing.

__________________
In the end everything will be fine. If its not fine its not the end....

I was trying to lighten the mood by 'accepting your challenge' and never meant any disrespect. In fact I meant it as an invitation and hope for us to meet and extend in further friendly banter/discussion.

Reading my comments again, I can see how you think I called you narrow-minded. That was certainly not meant as an insult and I am sorry.

If you feel I misinterpreted your statements, sorry. But calling me a liar... like you said, maybe this is not the place. Have a nice life

__________________
Squily

Well Squilly - said is said and written is written. When you use harsh words and expressions you must to a certain extend expect something similar back. And you did call me narrowminded ++. If that isnt disrespectful I might have misunderstood some of the english language....

I much rather keep a debate and a thread on a factual level than answering someone calling me narrowminded. I can assure you of that. So any discussion and debate that that stick to facts and of course to personal meanings as long as they are clearly separated - I think are great. I hope if we cross paths later on on the forum we can stick to facts and personal views about the issue that is discussed and not negative personal comments about eachother.

__________________
In the end everything will be fine. If its not fine its not the end....