[man_of_steel]

Originally Posted by ku69rd

The other day you were recommending about the MRFs which come on the Duke 200 which will be a decent replacement but am sure its performance will hardly hold a candle to that of Metz.

Always go for an after market part with the same or more quality as the stock! Going for a lesser quality part, that too tires, is scary!!

[ebonho]

Originally Posted by ku69rd

Mate,
When we import tires obviously they would be murderously expensive right . Do not see the 390 selling beyond a few thousands year on year, it will be a direct import. The other day you were recommending about the MRFs which come on the Duke 200 which will be a decent replacement but am sure its performance will hardly hold a candle to that of Metz.

The MRFs are pretty good. And at 8K a pair, they are not cheap either.

[ku69rd]

Originally Posted by ebonho

The MRFs are pretty good. And at 8K a pair, they are not cheap either.

Doc,
Thought the MRF would be more of a harder compound when compared to metzellers. You do have a valid point though that they are not cheap

[ebonho]

Originally Posted by ku69rd

Doc,
Thought the MRF would be more of a harder compound when compared to metzellers. You do have a valid point though that they are not cheap

Funnily enough, in spite of what you read of the Metzellers, you take some time to get used to them. The MRFs bed in and come up to speed quicker. Of course, this is my personal and limited opinion.

[ku69rd]

Originally Posted by ebonho

Funnily enough, in spite of what you read of the Metzellers, you take some time to get used to them. The MRFs bed in and come up to speed quicker. Of course, this is my personal and limited opinion.

Doc,
Why wouldn't you want to test the 390 with MRF for a direct feedback

[ebonho]

Originally Posted by ku69rd

Doc,
Why wouldn't you want to test the 390 with MRF for a direct feedback

LOL don't get me wrong bro. The Metzellers are very good. But if it comes to buying decision for the next pair and the prices do not come to reasonable levels, then short of hitting the track, I would go with the MRFs expecially when hitting rocky offroad terrain. And ride sensibly otherwise.

[invincible7]

I am sure there would be a very valid reason why KTM choose to go with Met rather than MRF when the later was already running for their D200.

[Jaggu]

Off topic: How is MRF in wet, didn't see any sipes towards the center and a friend confirmed that its really dicey on water and sand? Met on the other hand has a better thread design?

[VW2010]

How is MRF in wet, didn't see any sipes towards the center and a friend confirmed that its really dicey on water and sand? Met on the other hand has a better thread design?

@jaggu

MRF gets jittery compared to the METZ on wet. Metz strength is riding wet and the difference in grip is evident. This is not from experience but extensive research in the last few weeks post the announcement.

For a place like chennai that i come from the replacement will be a MRF. if that is going to bring more rains to us, i would offer this as a sacrifice for the city

[NitinMakhija]

I have ridden both the bikes for good distances. Yes, Metzs are better than MRFs in both conditions (Dry - Marginally & Wet - Considerably). But the incremental cost for this improvement seems to be costly. And the next point is whether the user needs this incremental improvement? So if u have good amount of money, go for Metz, If u dont have any, stick with MRF, and If you have limited funds, take an informed decision.

[invincible7]

I find this argument a bit weird - if KTM would have launched the bike without the Met, then many of us will talk about how the handling could have been better with the Met and some of us may have upgraded to them aswell, now when the product does comes with it as a factory fitment we are arguing whether there is a cheaper alternative available to complement the bike even though the handling may be compromised a bit in the bargain.

[heavy_foot]

Few people have reported battery issues and starting troubles. One guy had his onboard console throw up an error apparently related to a dead battery. Someone else had to push start the bike few times as it would not start. Is there any one else facing similar issues ?
Note - I follow the KTM Duke 390 Mumbai Owners Club (The Dukes of Mumbai) FB page.

[ebonho]

Originally Posted by invincible7

I find this argument a bit weird - if KTM would have launched the bike without the Met, then many of us will talk about how the handling could have been better with the Met and some of us may have upgraded to them aswell, now when the product does comes with it as a factory fitment we are arguing whether there is a cheaper alternative available to complement the bike even though the handling may be compromised a bit in the bargain.

Purchase price and running cost is always a factor for any serious biker. Nothing can be seen without this part of the equation in place.

Originally Posted by heavy_foot

Someone else had to push start the bike few times as it would not start. Is there any one else facing similar issues ?

Providing you actually can (am not sure you if you can), how advisable is it to push start a bike with an electronic fuel pump that is usually first primed when you put on the ignition, before thumbing the starter?

When my 200's battery went dead (because I had been riding the 390, and had left the 200 parked), I jumped it with another battery, and then left the bike running for some time. The charging circuit is apparently powerful enough to fully charge a dead battery within 10-15 minutes of running.

[aks_karthik]

Any updates on delivery of KTM 390.

[VW2010]

aks_karthik

Pushed to 3rd week of september now.