who has the lightest xt660z?
 

I wonder what is the minimum weight you can get changing or removing some
factory stuff. I read big reduce is the factory double pipes, anything else can be
done? I'd like to get below 200kg wet.

You can move to single break rotor but I would recommend to upgrade to 320 mm if decide to go in this direction. AIS (if you haven't removed it yet) is worth considering - around 400 grams altogether, battery - change to LiPo aka lithium and will save something like 2 kilos.

Hope this helps ;)

Under 200Kg wet is reasonably easily attainable, much less than that will get very expensive! Here are some weight loss ideas…

Battery: A suitable size lithium battery weighs 1.6Kg and the OE Yuasa weighs 3.4Kg, so 1.8Kg can be saved here.

Exhaust: The lightest titanium single cans (like an Exan or Akrapovic) weigh in at around 1.6Kg including the link pipe and fittings, whereas the OE system weighs 7.2Kg, a saving of 5.6Kg.

AIS: The total weight of all the AIS plumbing and valve is about 0.5Kg and could be removed.

Tail tidy: Aftermarket aluminium ones weight about 0.5Kg; the OE one weighs 1.2Kg. That’s a saving of 0.7Kg

Wheels/hubs: The stock hubs are heavy (less so the rims), my rear wheel with 525 sprocket, disc, spacers and Metzler Enduro3 tyre weighs 18.5Kg, a Talon Excel rim, sprocket disc and tyre as supplied by OTR weighs apparently weighs 14.5Kg, so that’s a 4Kg saving. For argument’s sake, let’s assume another 4Kg can be saved up front too making a total on wheels and hubs of 8Kg (maybe a bit more with a single disc/caliper). However, that 8 or so Kg could cost you anywhere between �900 and �1800 depending on where you source the parts and whether you build the wheels yourself or not.

Doing all of the above will save you a grand total of 17Kg. Now the snag; it could cost you anywhere between �1500 and �3000 to achieve!

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again… Don’t forget, by far the cheapest, easiest, best and most effective way to shed weight is off your own body (if you've got room to of course). There's little point in scrabbling round for the odd kilogram here and there on the bike (at great expense) if you could potentially lose 10-20Kg yourself! Even emptying your bladder and bowels before a ride will save nearly as much weight than a lithium battery would, and it’s free!

Power/weight ratio is the biggest beneficiary of a trim rider. Let's assume a baseline of a stock bike, with no rider with 43.5 rear wheel hp (rwhp) and 206Kg (wet). This gives a power to weight ratio of 211rwhp/tonne.

Stock bike with 70Kg rider on board = 158rwhp/tonne

Stock bike with 80Kg rider on board = 152rwhp/tonne

Stock bike with 90Kg rider on board = 147rwhp/tonne

Stock bike with 100Kg rider on board = 142rwhp/tonne

The difference between the 70Kg and 100Kg rider is about the equivalent of fitting a PCV, DNA stage 2 and a set of cans, which would easily set you back �600 or more if you factor in dyno time!

Also don’t forget petrol has a mass of 737g/L, so your bike will have the same power to weight ratio advantage as losing 10Kg of hardware if you run it with no more than 10 litres in the tank.

I know the above theory doesn't help with un-sprung mass, but the rider's mass sits almost entirely above the bike's centre of gravity, so has a very significant effect on handling, not just power to weight ratio.

I see where folk are coming from when they quest for weight loss from their bike; I too have tried to minimise the bike's unnecessary additional mass as much as possible. However, other than junking the standard exhaust, it's all small on the grand scale of things… or phenomenally expensive.

Less pies = More power!

Who cares about the lightest. I'm going for the heaviest!!!!!!!!!:039:

Those are very poor pictures Steve.

I'm sure there must be ones with your bike at about 1.3 tonnes....

My bike weighed in at about 190kg last winter when i had it on the scale. The tank wasnt completely full, so you can add some kilo's to it.

Weight savings:
- don't get the ABS model :)
- Talon hub & Excel wheels with 1 brake rotor
- KTM 690 front fork with aluminum triple tree and yoke
- S-moto rear tail tidy
- motobatt battery
- Exan exhaust
- AIS removed
- supersprox sprocket

But some new crud has been added to the bike adding weight:
- pannier racks
- navigation
- LED spot lights
- PCV, speedo healer, fuse block
- CLS chain oiler
etc.

it still is a heavy bike for the technical stuff


see my topic:
http://www.xt660.com/showthread.php?t=23457

For me personally, weight is no issue as I use my Tenere for short rides and short and long travels. If I�d use the Ten for more offroad ridin� I would reduce the weight where possible, but I don�t, so....

The suggestion about losing weight on your own body leaves me wondering whether it wouldn't be a lot easier to handle the heavy bikes like our ten in the technical stuff if you were to be a bit heavier yourself.

I think if you're a taller, heavier person, the ratio own weight / bike weight would be far more ideal and you would have far less trouble keeping the overall balance than a typical small, light guy would have.

Even more so, I do not think anyone uses the tenere in such a way that 20 kgs of rider weight would affect the performance of the bike in a negative way. No-one will ever use the Ten for SX.. Shaving 20 kgs off the bike's weight however, would greatly improve performance on general offroad / trail riding. Lowering it's centre of gravity would help, too.

Any weight loss ANYWHERE, bike or rider, is going to improve power/weight ratio and performance to some degree. You might not notice it; you might not be bothered by it; but it'll nonetheless be there. After all, 20Kg is 20Kg whatever it is attached to and more effort will be needed to move it! ;)

Only if the reduction in weight comes from the wheels, where losing unsprung weight is beneficial to suspension control; the effect on power/weight ratio would be exactly the same wheels or not. Once you (the rider) are mounted on the bike, you are effectively part of the bike's sprung weight. Losing weight from the bike would achieve exactly the same effect on overall unsprung weight as losing weight from the rider.

You've kind of contradicted yourself...

...which would raise the overall centre of gravity.

Yes, if your bike is over-sprung for the rider's weight, then a heavier rider will make balance and control easier, and the suspension work better. However, as long as your spring rates are chosen to match your body's weight (and the bike's weight) and the active/rider sag is correct, everything will be fine.

That's phone cameras for you and ......................it was dark on the ferry over to Loch Fyne!:eusa_whistle:

The heaviest parts of this bike are the engine and the frame. You can't take anything out from there. My Tenere is 180kg. It is still heavy, specially when you have to lift it, but it is a good RTW machine.
Have a look here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZ4luuOVvX4

Pictures before and now, you can find here: http://rtw-adventures.com/bike-1.html

I cannot agree completely here. Handling ~200kg bike by person much below 100kg may not be easy or even possible when riding alone offroad. Tenere is tall bike, most of riders are taller then regular so adding some muscles to will get you willy-nilly near 100kg range.

Not sure I agree with you on that. The late, great Gaston Rahier managed to win the Paris Dakar twice on a 230Kg (wet) BMW and he was 1.6m tall and weighed in at 65Kg; the bike was three and a half times his body weight! ;)

http://40.media.tumblr.com/a5e698c45...wbzuo1_500.jpg

http://i607.photobucket.com/albums/t...pssd1sam0v.jpg

Hmmmm im pretty sure it isnt mine lmao. I reckon this lot weighed in over 370kg :incon_aargh[1]:

Pulled like a freight train up the M6, 2 up.

This is not true, especially for off road riding, but unfortunately its quite a common myth. Unless you are going to race your power/weight ratio is much less important than proper suspension setup - proper for bike+rider+luggage weight and your type and style of riding. On the road things are easy - bike wants to remain in the vertical position, and if rider does not disturb to much everything is OK :-) Things become a bit more complicated off road. Bike still wants to remain in the vertical position, but due to the surface quality it is impossible. Rider actions are necessary to keep the bike running. First thing we have to do is to lower center of gravity - we simply stay on the pegs. Rider becomes a big mass attached to the bike only in 2 small, low laying points - footpegs (keeping our mass partially on handlebar is a technical mistake). Rider is trying to coordinate body weigh shifting with the movements of the suspension and the bike. Weight shifting and timing - those 2 things explains why light bikes are easier to handle offroad. We need less body shift, and we have more time to make a shift.

There is a very simple example to illustrate above rule. Lets assume that 2 friends go offrod. First is 75kg on 210kg KTM 690R (150kg bike+Safari tank 20Kg+40kg U-bag). Second is 120kg on 165kg KTM 690R (150kg bike + 15kg U-bag). Both combinations weight the same - 285kg. Offroad handling of the first bike will be much worse comparing to second rider.
So, unfortunately - you will not improve handling of your bike by reducing body weight. You will improve your endurance and technique, but bike handling will always depend on non-shifting mass of the bike (bike+luggage)

You have taken and snipped that quote totally out of context of its original meaning! It was largely related to power to weight ratio and part to do with unsprung weight being unaffected by rider/bike weight loss other than from the wheels. If you re-read the whole of the paragraph in context then there is no myth, on-road or off-road�

I also mentioned this earlier if you look closely at the earlier posts in the thread�

Now here is the REAL myth! This is not true. Standing on the pegs does not and cannot lower the centre of gravity, in fact it in reality raises the centre of gravity. You are mixing up two principles of physics here: CoG and leverage. The reason, whilst riding off road, you may want to stand on the pegs is to intentionally raise your centre of gravity! By standing and raising the CoG, you are make yourself a more effective lever making the bike easier to tip side to side and front to back, with less effort and more control, which you alluded to here�

Whilst true, that is absolutely nothing to do with lower CoG, but just being able to manipulate a higher CoG more effectively as a long lever. As long as the rider is �attached� somehow to the bike, seat, pegs, bars or whatever, and only the tyre contact patches are touching the ground, it is totally and irrefutably impossible to lower the CoG by standing. It does not and cannot happen. It�s not a matter of opinion, just physics. Advice to �weight the pegs� is fine; it works. Just don�t ask a dirt bike instructor to explain it, ask a physics professor.

There are of course plenty of advantages of standing, again nothing to do with lower CoG, such as: Decoupling the rider from the bike allowing the rider and machine to move independently; providing suspension through the knees; improves visibility; allows the ability to change position to allow preloading/unloading of front/rear suspension to negotiate obstacles; gives the ability to move the now raised centre of gravity fore/aft and left/right to suit the terrain. There are many benefits of standing off road but NONE are due to a lower centre of gravity.

Indeed so, but that�s more to do with where you put the extra weight, the weight distribution, rather than the fact it�s attached to the bike simply because you�ve added weight to a bike in all the wrong places, like a massive tank full of fuel slopping about and big bag on the back. You�ve got two variables: (1) effects of distribution of weight on the bike; (2) effects of rider weight and versus bike weight, which cannot be separated in the test. If you instead did a proper controlled experiment (which tests just one variable), using two identical bikes but handicapped the lighter rider with 2x 30Kg lead weights strapped either side close to the CoG of the bike in between the rider�s legs, there would be little or no discernible difference between the pair, even though in one case +60kg is attached to the bike and in the other +60Kg attached to the rider (assuming the static and dynamic sag was setup accordingly).

Mmm, not entirely sure that stacks up� I think you�ll find that if you stuck the 75Kg rider (from your example) on the 165Kg bike (and set up the suspension to suit), that combination would be a damn sight more nimble, handle better, go a lot quicker and be more competitive than with the 120Kg rider on board! By your analogy you�d expect all professional riders on short circuits, in road racing, trials, speedway, motocross, enduro, supermoto etc. to be big burly 120Kg+ blokes. Funnily enough, they�re not (apart from perhaps McPint ;) ). I wonder why? :eusa_think:

Back to the question in the OP� Is it beneficial shedding weight from you�re Tenere?

Yes, 20Kg is possible if you can afford it, of course every little helps. But if you can�t, it�s a lot cheaper to shed some of your own weight (if you have some spare), or maybe do both?

OK, let's try something else. When you go next time for technical riding test 2 options on your bike.
1. Put 40kg fixed luggage to your bike - any place you want, but it must be fixed.
2. Take 40kg backpack.

Once you're back, tell me which setup gave you better handling.

Once you're back, tell me which setup gave you better handling.

Is it beneficial shedding weight from you’re Tenere? Answer depends on reason why we wanna do this. For better weight/power ratio? No. Its better to sell tenere and buy KTM990adv and eat what you like :-) For better of-road handling - Yes, and your diet will not change a lot (unles you can lose 50kg :-). Is it expensive - Yes. Is it worth - Yes. XT660Z, OTR modified suspension, excel/talon whels, weight reduction (exhaust, battery, tail etc) gives you best long range adventure bike you can buy today, and the only 200kg ready to go.

Firstly, I'd suggest one would have to be slightly mad to take 40Kg on a technical ride wherever you put it! I wouldn’t ever take anywhere near 40Kg of gear even in the car for the longest of camping trips.

However, if I absolutely had to take 40Kg of stuff, I’d definitely opt for putting it some throw-over type arrangement on the seat behind me, or spread it around a bit, maybe tank panniers too? It would be positively dangerous IMO to carry that sort of weight on your back whilst riding a motorcycle on the road, never mind off-road, or even worse on a technical trail. 40Kg is 30% more than the maximum the British Army would carry in a Bergen, and that’s hard enough work to lug when you’re on foot!

Sorry, I shan’t be trying your test out. There’s no way I’m going anywhere on a motorcycle with 40Kg on my back! ;)

Thsi is an exercise we have in one ednuro school in Poland. Ofcourse we don't go for a long trip, we just go one round on the motorcross track to see how our luggage impact handling of our bikes. We have also version for ladies,. We give them light bike (120kg) and 20kg luggage. Maybe you can try this one :-) - still gives you a good picture how this works.
Or you can choose modification of this exercise made by my wife. She goes without luggage, and I carry her 20kg and mine 30kg :HappyRoll_ANPIUI:

Just remember, it's not the size that matters, it's what you do with it that counts.

Yeees, I know...my wife tells me that every Saturday night...:D