You replace your standard 7/8" handlebar with a 1-1/4" fat bar or a tapered bar and your handguards no longer fit.
Here's my response:
In April 2017, I replaced the stock handlebar on my 2016 model year Suzuki DR650 with a Pro Taper Contour Handlebar (Henry Reed Bend) (Fat Bar Post Link). The Contour Bars are tapered from 1-1/4" in the clamp area down to 7/8" along the controls areas. I liked that bar so much that I've now installed one on my most recently purchased 2012 DR650.
Among the issues faced going from a stock 7/8" to the Contour was fitment of the handguards. Back in 2017, I simply replaced the handguards I was using for a set that fit a fat-bar. My current model DR650 has Barkbusters installed and, instead of buying a new set (Barkbuster or otherwise), I simply replaced the lower guard clamps and the anchor bolt ... for $20.
These adapter kits were widely available on Amazon and, while they fit the job, by comparison of the kit components to those of the Barkbuster components, the quality of the materials is kind of suspect; much lighter aluminum, but I really can't speak to strength. Time will tell.
As can be seen in the following photos, I painted the adapter kit clamps and the Barkbuster frame.
Note that the Barkbuster posts were used in this application. That is the short post between the frame and the clamp.
No, the Barkbuster bar end expansion/anchor bolts did not fit the new ProTaper Controur Bar.
Barkbuster Expansion Bolt Outer Diameter = 17.5mm
ProTaper Bar End Inner Diameter = 14mm
While the expansion/anchor bolts in the kit fit, I acquired and anticipated using another set of better quality anchors made by ZETA (P/N ZE71-7911); about $16 by many part suppliers. While they indeed fit, the expansion tubes did not have outer collars that are necessary to remove the anchor, if ever necessary; something I missed when purchasing.
Anchor removal, such as was the case with the Barkbuster anchors, is accomplished by unscrewing the bolt out half an inch or so and then lightly tapping the bolt back into the bar such that the wedge pushes out of the expansion tube that remains stationary. The anchor tube needs the collar to hold it in place during that process. Without a collar the anchor tube will slide back and not separate from the wedge.
No worries, though, the expansion/anchor bolts in the kit did the job.
I will update any issues on this product and the related modification.
If anyone is wondering how to get that nice round hole in the grip-end that is needed for the handguard mount, the answer is a step drill bit. At least that's how I do it.
In this case, bar had a 7/8" control area with, so I drilled the grip end from the center out to the total 7/8". A fat bar adaption would, of course, require a 1-1/2" hole.
Avoid rubber overlap that may interfere with a tight contact between the handguard frame/expansion anchor bolt to the bar end. Use an Exacto knife to trim overlap and excess, if necessary.
A popular modification for dual sport riding, particularly when lots of forest single track is involved, is folding mirrors. A perfect example of why is shown in the screenshot below from video I recorded on the Perry Mountain Tower Run Rally (Stanton, Alabama, AMA Dual Sport Series, 2019). I fatally damaged one of the mirrors on my KLX250 that year weaving in and out of the trees that guarded the tight single tracks of the mountain.
After three events so far on my recently acquired 2012 model year Suzuki DR650, I finally got around to installing some folding mirrors this weekend.
Similar to my 2016 model year DR650 (July 2017 Post) and several other model dual sports, I purchased the DRC 161 Off-Road Folding Mirrors from Pro Cycle (<$25, each). Generally, I've found these mirrors to be pretty decent in terms of mirror reflection, size + extension, visibility and structure. They're great for the dual sport rally circuit. Seriously though, if I was planning a long adventure involving lots of pavement, I'd install the stock mirrors.
Yes, yes, there appear to be many cheaper, very similar looking folding mirrors online in sites like Amazon. However, I've tried a few of them and, while the 161s certainly are not top shelf, they're better than any of those $15-a-pair mirrors.
Knob Modification
Notwithstanding, not far into my first experience with the 161s back in 2017, I'd determined that the mirrors do, in fact, have somewhat of an operational flaw. That is, they require a tool to fold and/or adjust them; specifically a 4mm hex key. As you know, dual sport is a combination of road and trail. It's a pain to adjust the mirror moving from one surface to the next and, quite frankly, I didn't. I usually either left them up or down, and if you're going to leave them down, might as well just leave them off.
Rather than leave them off when I'd like them on (or down when I'd like them up), I came up with a very simple modification to replace the hex key adjustment with permanent M6 Compression Knobs (<$6 on Amazon for five knobs). Yes, only two are needed for this mod, but I've put all the additional knobs to use on other projects. In fact, two of them hold the ramp on my Black Widow AMC-400 motorcycle hitch receiver rack.
Here's how the modification works:
The 161 mirrors pivot on a 20mm long (thread length) M6 hex-head bolt with a 10mm hexagonal nut that is recessed in the body of the mirror pivot assembly to hold it from spinning (see photo below). The modification simply replaces that 20mm M-6 bolt and its 4mm hex-key head with a 30mm long (thread length) M-6 bolt (fine .75 pitch) with a 10mm hexagonal head. The new 30mm bolt is installed in reverse to the original bolt such that the hexagonal head of the new bolt sets in the recession where previously the hexagonal nut set. The nut is replaced with the knob.
The new 30mm M6 nuts extend an extra 10mm more than the original bolt, which allows installation of the knobs. Viola, quick adjusting mirrors.
Note that the 161 mirror is universal with no specific left or right mirror fitment; rather, each 161 mirror is designed for either left or right application. Therefore, the modification I've outlined is performed identically to each mirror. I have modified my mirrors such that the hexagonal bolt head (recession) points back and the knobs are positioned and pointing forward. That can be reversed if the user prefers the knobs pointing back.
Here are some photos of the modified mirrors installed on my 2012 Suzuki DR650.
Comparo to Stock Mirrors:
Below are measurements for comparison between the Stock and DRC161 mirrors:
Rise (measured from top edge of mirror perch to center of horizontal post where it meets the arm of the mirror):
Stock = 1.25"
DRC161 (adjustable) = up to 2"
Extension (measured from the center of the horizontal post along the arm and mirror surface to the outermost edge of the mirror glass area):
Stock = 9"
DRC161 = 8.75"
Mirror Size and Area:
Stock = square, 4" x 4.5", 18 in/2
DRC161 = round, 4" diameter, 12.5 in/2
Next stop.....
..... the Wild Bear Adventure Safari in Cocoa Beach, Florida, April 6 and 7 ... a rally that I will definitely be folding the mirrors out of the way.
The first leg of the 2022 AMA Dual Sport Series kicked off last weekend in the Creek; that is, Devil's Creek located deep in the Withlacoochee Forest near Brooksville, Florida. This event, hosted by my local club, Dixie Dual Sport, is truly a technical challenge, particularly if you get lost as did my five-rider group. We could have turned around to get back on track, but we noted a nearby forest road on the GPS that would have gotten us back on track. Ultimately, it did, but we had to go through part of the forest not on the event track.
We ultimately had three motorcycles stuck in that section. One in the water crossing that we were attempting to circumnavigate in the bypass and then the two you see in the photo above in the muddy bypass. Basically, we just pushed them all out. That's usually all it takes.
I spend most of my saddle time these days on dual sport rallies and similar events. For many of these events I receive GPX Tracks or Roll Charts or Both. As you may know, GPX navigation files come in either Route-form or Track-form, and Tracks are the norm for dual sporting. Of late, though, I've noted that some participants in the regional rallies (perhaps nationally) convert the Tracks to Routes. Such conversion can be accomplished on software applications like Garmin BaseCamp. I think this conversion is a mistake.
What follows is my opinion on why we do not want to convert the Rally Tracks to Routes. Of course, opinions, such as those reading my blog, may differ.
The photo above is my Garmin GPSMap 64st tracking the Event Organizer's path and accompanied with a roll chart during the 2018 Devils Creek Dual Sport Rally.
Routes and Tracks
By way of background, a Route is a map-based navigation wherein a GPS device navigates the motorist on roadways along a series of points (think of tacks sticking in a paper wall map) using embedded electronic navigation preferences and avoidances. By map-based, I mean those roads and waypoints carefully mapped out for Garmin City Navigator, TomTom Navigation and GoogleMaps (all three are different databases, btw). A Route needs one of those three maps to navigate and will navigate only along the "recorded" roads and to/from "recorded" waypoints.
A Track, on the other hand, is simply a ground-based recording of movement without regard to roads and waypoints. While a Track needs basic mapping perspectives for things like longitudes, latitude and, in some instances, elevation, it does not care about roads and waypoints and doesn't need any maps, such as City Navigator. For a few examples, I create, use and reuse Tracks for hiking, mountain biking, hunting and kayaking because there aren't any navigation identification points (roads or waypoints) in Garmin/TomTom/GoogleMaps for the locations/areas for conducting those kinds of activities. The photo below is an example of a hiking track in Garmin BaseCamp.
File Photo
Application to Dual Sport
Taking this closer to home, from the riding perspective, dual sport events are essentially "navigation" events. We're not out there racing or getting graded on our trials performances. No, it's about navigation, and a lot of work went into that navigation.
The reason Tracks are used for dual sport navigation is so riders can navigate the exact recorded paths that the event "Organizers" created for the ride (i.e. concise-navigation). The exact path was determined so as to include all those cool dirt roads and technical areas that the Organizer's thought would make for a great ride; oh, and avoid obstacles that might make for a bad day for someone. This is basically to say, for purposes of dual sport navigation, (i) the Organizers and not the GPS device have designed/determined/designed the navigation path participants will ride, and they have done so by actually riding and recording the paths and (ii) some of the paths selected by the Organizers may not even be roads that are recognized by the maps stored in the GPS device and used for Routing. As a result, converting a Track to a Route will change the path for the dual sporting event, perhaps significantly. On the former, (i, above) even if the GPS device recognizes the track-path as a roadway, it may divert the rider to a totally different recognized roadway because preferences/avoidances (e.g. fastest route) tells the device to do so. On the later, (ii, above) there are many trails on the Organizer's path that are not even recognized on the map services (e.g. City Navigator). In those cases, the GPS device decides how the rider will navigate point-to-point using only recognized roadways.
This screenshot is a Motorcycle Track in Garmin BaseCamp.
So, aside from camping, sponsor tents, drinking beer and vintage motorcycle shows, dual sport events are basically concise-navigation-events and conversion of a carefully developed and recorded Track to a Route creates a Route that will be different from the path that the event Organizers spent lots 'o hours putting together. I do understand that not all GPS devices are designed to navigate tracks. In those cases, hopefully there's a roll chart available.
I just purchased the Tusk Lithium Pro TLFP-9R Battery for my 2012 Suzuki DR650 ($89.99 from Rocky Mountain ATV). With over 50 years of riding and wrenching under my belt, surprisingly, the Tusk is literally my very first lithium-type battery purchase. My research and selection process was actually somewhat of a learning experience; still not 100% sure I made the right decision.
Commonly reported pros and cons of lithium batteries based on Internet research were as follows:
PROS: (i) smaller, (ii) lighter (iii) less maintenance, (iv) higher CCA, (v) longer lives (claimed) and (vi) no orientation ("this side up") issues.
CONS: (i) more expensive, (ii) not suited for cold climates, (iii) high voltage dissipation, (iv) require a "lithium-specific" charger and (v) battery compartment fitment challenges.
Yes, I'm a lithium neophyte, but my thoughts on a couple of the items:
I believe that the "less maintenance" pro is based on a premise that lead acid level monitoring is a great deal of maintenance, which, while important, is really not. However, such maintenance isn't required for "sealed" lead acid batteries or gel-electrolyte batteries. In addition, initial indications are that my new Tusk Lithium is going to require high-maintenance regarding maintaining a constant full-charge condition to avoid damage and assure a long, healthy life. I had to buy a lithium-specific tester, as discussed below, to stay on my Tusk Battery's maintenance.
My YouTube Channel has a video, Tusk Lithium Pro for DR650, that shows fitment of the TLFP-9R into the DR650 battery compartment. I consider the fitment process a "minor" challenge, as it required materials other than those included in the package and a considerable amount of trial and error putting a secure configuration. Folks with less experience dealing with such challenges are probably going to be put off. As discussed in my review of reviews below, the Tusk Battery received some low ratings due to fitment issues.
ONWARD .....
FIVE POUNDS LIGHTER THAN OE YAUSA!
Here is a comparison of dimensions and specifications of the three 12 Volt batteries that I considered.
Tusk claims a life of 5-8 years for the TLFP-9R. The Instructions note that the battery's lifespan will be shortened if "stored" in high temperatures (over 104F) or humid environments for long periods (over 30 days). Living in West Central Florida, I've come to believe this to be the case for all types of batteries. I generally replace all batteries every three years whether they're bad or not. For those living in cooler climates, the Instructions indicate that the Tusk Battery will not fully function in temperatures below 32F.
CRANKING AMPS AND AMP HOURS
Cold Cranking Amps (CCA) is generally a concept in cranking-type batteries. That is, batteries that start motors and are subject to a continuous charge off an alternator, generator or stator (e.g. batteries in cars and motorcycles). Amp Hours (ah) is generally a concept in deep-cycle batteries. That is, batteries that are designed to run electric motors and electric equipment without being subject to continuous charge (e.g. electric golf carts, boat trolling motors). Obviously, CCA are very important to our motorcycles. The higher the CCA, the faster and stronger the battery kicks over the starter motor. However, once started, a motorcycle battery is then tasked with supplying current to electrical components and accessories (e.g. lights, meters, heated gear, etc.). ah ratings are a measure of how many amps of draw the battery can support in an hour to run all those accessories without the current supply from the stator.
If a battery's ah rating is so low that it cannot keep up with the electrical requirements of the motorcycle (e.g. lights, meter, etc.), installed accessories (e.g. accessory lights), and the rider (e.g. heated gear, communication equipment, etc.), even under the constant supply of current from the stator, all those current demanding components and accessories are going to suck the battery dry and those high CCA ain't gonna get the bike started.
Bottom line ah is important...
...and the Tusk comes in short with 3 Amp Hours (ah), very short. Based on my research, 3ah is near the bottom of the reasonable range for motorcycle batteries based on a number of resources. One in particular, Motorcycle Brave, sets that range at 2.5ah to 32ah.
While I'd prefer more, I can manage with the 3ah because I simply don't run a lot of non-standard equipment and I changed my H4 headlight to a low-draw (and brighter) LED. Why go with the Tusk, though? Well, its was an inexpensive entry by a well-known brand for my entry into Lithium batteries.
As a side note, another option for dealing with high-draw electrical motorcycle accessories may be upgrading the stator. The stock stator on the DR650 is rated 200 watts and there are kits that will add another 50 or so watts. That would be a nice upgrade.
BCM VERSUS PCB
Battery Management System (BCM) and Protection Circuit Board (PCB, aka Protection Circuit Module (PBM)) both relate to electronic battery management and protections and seem to be a fairly significant elements of a lithium battery. Lithium batteries do not necessarily have both, some have neither. Based upon article after article, recommendations are to run from a lithium battery that has neither.
The Tusk TLFP-9R has a PCB.
The next two relevant questions are (1) which is better? and (2) which is needed? As it relates to the first question, there seems to be wide expert concurrence that the BCM is superior to the PCB. However, all discussions lead to the question of what is really, really necessary and those questions seem to be answered on an application by application basis. Here's a helpful table that shows the protections by type:
My simple read of most of this material is that BCM is most relevant when the lithium battery is feeding data to other sources for review or management; i.e. more complicated applications. PCB/PCM seems to deal with the protections that I would consider necessary for the simple electronic needs of my Suzuki DR650. However, I remind you that I'm no expert. Your interpretations of the online research material may differ.
WARRANTY
The Tusk Battery is Warranted for 2 Years, pro-rated. Shorai batteries are warranted for 5 years, pro-rated. Yuasa batteries are warranted for 6 months with full replacement.
CHARGING AND CHARGE MAINTENANCE
My Tusk TLFP-9R arrived with a charge of 12.99 Volts. The directions provide that the battery be charged if received with a voltage of under 13.0 Volts; close enough I suppose. Further, the directions suggest use of a Lithium-Battery-Specific Charger.
Digging through the Questions & Answers section for this battery on RMATV, I found a statement by the RMATV Staff that customers should expect free-standing voltage dissipation of 3%-4% per month. Further, the instructions clearly state that chargers with automatic de-sulfation features should not be used.
Since I only have a high-tech Schumacher Battery Charger with de-sulfation functionality, I needed to buy a lithium-specific battery charger. I purchased the Bikemaster Lithium Battery Charger ($30.05 at Amazon).
The Bikemaster Charger is a basic low-amp (specifically 2 amp) trickle charger using a standard two-pin connector. While not shown in the stock photo above, a fused (@7.5A) ring lead cable was included in the package from Bikemaster (right side in photo below). The ring lead should be mounted to the battery with the connector conveniently affixed to the frame because regular charging and voltage testing will be required for the Tusk.
Although sitting at 12.99 Volts upon receipt, I put the BikeMaster Lithium Charger on my new Tusk and it registered "Full" fairly quickly at 14.25 Volts. The product spec sheet indicates that the standard full-charged voltage ranges from 14.4V to 14.8V, and the voltage reading should never be higher than 15 Volts.
On an ongoing basis, the battery has an LED Charge Level Indicator Light; nice feature I suppose, but hidden away under the seat, unusable, on most motorcycle/ATV/UTV applications.
See the installation video link below for installation in my 2012 Suzuki DR650.
RATINGS
The TLFP-9R is rated 4.6/5.0 based on 99 reviews on the RMATV webpage.
I take comments and rating seriously. Of four (4) single-star ratings, 3 related to failure within a short period and 1 related to fitment. Of two (2) double-star ratings, both related to failure within a short period. Of five (5) triple-star ratings, 2 related to fitment, 2 related to low cranking power, and 1 related to low cranking power in cold temperatures, which the Instructions warn will occur.
It should be noted that the OE Yuasa Sealed Lead-Acid Battery was rated 4.6/5.0 based on 220 reviews. The pricy Shorai Lithium Battery was rated 4.7/5.0 on 247 reviews. Lastly, the Tusk TLFP-9R is available for sale on Amazon, but there are very few ratings.
INSTALLATION
As noted, the Tusk Battery is significantly smaller than the battery compartment. To compensate, the battery comes with seven (7) foam spacers of the following number and sizes:
(3) 5-7/8" x 4-3/16" x 5/16"
(2) 5-1/4", 2-1/2" x 5/16"
(2) 4-3/16" x 2-1/2" x 5/16"
Foam material is relatively firm, minimizing risk of deterioration, but my intention is to check it regularly given our climate here in West-Central Florida.
I have completed a video for the Tusk Lithium Pro that includes, in addition to much of the contents of this blog post, its installation in my 2012 Suzuki DR650. In short, I got the Tusk Battery securely installed, but needed to augment the foam spacers that came with the battery with other material that I had on hand.
Here's the video:
I currently have very little time with the Tusk, but will update for performance observations.
