Why is the 610 so under powered?

[Flynn]

I actually really like the styling of the older bikes and a 2001 is hardly old school. It is well into the modern era. I always got the impression that carburetor engines were thought to be more powerful than fuel injected engines.

 

[RDTCU]

I actually really like the styling of the older bikes and a 2001 is hardly old school. It is well into the modern era. I always got the impression that carburetor engines were thought to be more powerful than fuel injected engines.

The 05-06 carb bikes were easier to get power out of than the 07+ FI 610's.
The earlier carb bikes were a different story.

 

[Flynn]

Are you referring to the performance difference between the Dellorto carburetors and the Keihn carburetors?

 

[Spice Weasel]

The 05-06 carb bikes were easier to get power out of than the 07+ FI 610's.

How can a JD tuner or Power Commander not be easier than fiddling with a carb? Do you mean the carbed bikes benefited more from tuning because they were set up worse from the factory?
Its a pity you have such a limited budget Flynn, you could have bought an SXV instead, if you could have found one for sale.

 

[RDTCU]

If he doesn't like the maintenance on the 610 he would have an aneurysm with an Ape, haha

 

[rancher1]

The 05-06 carb bikes were easier to get power out of than the 07+ FI 610's.
The earlier carb bikes were a different story.

The 07 bikes were also carb, not fuel injected.

 

[RDTCU]

The 07 bikes were also carb, not fuel injected.

At least here in the states the 07's had Mikuni injection...
I've worked on one and almost bought another in 2011 before the 630's went on clearance.

http://www.topspeed.com/motorcycles...sqvarna/2007-husqvarna-sm-610-ie-ar27840.html

 

[mg94]

There's a lot of confusion I see on what and when things changed, so let's clear things up:
-1998 to 2000 SM 610 R/TE 610 (minus the E): left kicker, racing model, very similar top end to the SM 610 S and TE 610 E (same bottom end as Seel Replica).
-1998 to 2004 SM 610 S/ TE 610 E: street oriented model, 9.5:1 compression ratio, e-start and 800 grams e-start counterweight (the steel disc behind the flywheel). Dell'orto phm 40 until 2000, mikuni 41 depression later (ugh). 46 hp (34 kw) quoted on the bike's documents. No rev limiter, at least until 2000 no catalyctic converter.
-2005 to 2007 SM 610/ TE 610 (no letters): 11:1 compression ratio, 500 grams e-start counterweight, FCR 41 MX. 54 hp (40 kw) quoted on the documents. Rev limiter at around 8200 rpm.
-end of 2007 to 2009: SM 610 ie / TE 610 ie: same as previous, fuel injection and rev limiter at around 7600 rpm (but not all models, some still at 8200). 52 hp (39 kw) quoted on the documents.
-2010 to death of Husqvarna: SM 630 R/S (no real relevance of last letter)/ TE 630. 12.4:1 compression ratio, piston bore from 98 mm to 100, completely different head design (DOHC instead of the older SOHC). 60 hp (45 kw) quoted on the bike documents.

-2004 SM 634 R Eddy Seel Replica: Race model, no compatibility with street models. (longer stroke kit).

 

[rancher1]

The simplest way to explain the difference is the left hand kick models were competition motors and the electric start motors were dual sport motors. Upgrades over the years produced more power. The TE 610 left hand kick competition model goes all the way back to 1991 and finished its life as a TE 570 in 2002 in the US but I think it was produced until 2004 in limited quantities.

 

[Flynn]

The 630's are certainly head and shoulders above the old stock carb 610's, but are pretty gutless from the factory due to running ridiculously lean. If the previous owner hasn't done it, you'll want to install some sort of fueling tuner from JD or Power Commander, and open up the exhaust and intake.

I had mine for 2 weeks before I got the tuner ordered, and about another couple weeks after that I gutted the factory cans.

Now having an '06 carb'ed 610 I've got to disagree with you there! This thing pulls like a train, it power wheelies in 2nd and gets the front pretty light in third, all in a normal seating position.

The only mod mine has is a straight through exhaust. Gonna get it on the dyno and see what she's making. But I would love a JD Jet kit but I don't think they sell them anymore.

From what I've read the 630s are heavier and that off sets the 5 or so horsepower gain. The SWM650RS has got a lot of reviews saying how "soft" it is and that is basically a 630.

I wonder if I could actually blag a test ride? No dealer nearby I guess anyway.

 

[ghte]

The SWM imho (I had an 2011 TE630) is a better all around bike than the 630. There is an updated ecu giving better milage. The suspension travel has been slightly restricted via washers in the bottom of the top fork leg. This gives a more stable road ride and less suspension compression under severe braking. The 630 had a tendency to pitch riders off on the bitumen when the rear knobby hooks up on a bend. The sudden traction was capable of high siding the rider. The SWM is a more settled bike. It is probably 5% less willing in really tough off road terrain but 10-15% better on road. That said the off road ability is still excellent and way superior than the KLX and DR's of the world.
Having ridden a KTM 690 many times I am glad I went for the SWM. It is a more all around true dual sport machine. The 690 is a great bike but is more of a big brutish dirt bike. If I were 20 years younger, would probably have gone for the Husky 701/KTM 690 however.
I had a Safari tank installed toady at the factory-only 35 minutes away. The owner was given a demo SWM 650 to ride around Australia last year and report back. He did 9,000 k's without it missing a beat. This included a Simpson dessert crossing (read 1000 sand dunes). They also did long hauls sitting on 120-130 kms without issue. The two SWM's on the trip only had one flat and did not boil over in 35 C heat in the sand dunes. Can't say much more than that.

 

[ghte]

By the way the 610 and 630's are not under powered when compared to larger displacement bikes such as the KLR and DR and Tenere 660. In fact they are much more powerful, tractable, rideable and lighter.

 

[Watercat]

The ass-DYNO on my 2006 TE 610 registers it in the tear-yur-arms-off range . . . . . . . Hold on tight . . . . . .

Have fun . . . . .

 

[BiG DoM]

There is an article somewhere comparing the power to weight ration of these bikes with a Ferrari!

 

[panchogarrancho]

Enjoying the hell out of mine

 

[GreekMountains]

There's a lot of confusion I see on what and when things changed, so let's clear things up:
-1998 to 2000 SM 610 R/TE 610 (minus the E): left kicker, racing model, very similar top end to the SM 610 S and TE 610 E (same bottom end as Seel Replica).
-1998 to 2004 SM 610 S/ TE 610 E: street oriented model, 9.5:1 compression ratio, e-start and 800 grams e-start counterweight (the steel disc behind the flywheel). Dell'orto phm 40 until 2000, mikuni 41 depression later (ugh). 46 hp (34 kw) quoted on the bike's documents. No rev limiter, at least until 2000 no catalyctic converter.
-2005 to 2007 SM 610/ TE 610 (no letters): 11:1 compression ratio, 500 grams e-start counterweight, FCR 41 MX. 54 hp (40 kw) quoted on the documents. Rev limiter at around 8200 rpm.
-end of 2007 to 2009: SM 610 ie / TE 610 ie: same as previous, fuel injection and rev limiter at around 7600 rpm (but not all models, some still at 8200). 52 hp (39 kw) quoted on the documents.
-2010 to death of Husqvarna: SM 630 R/S (no real relevance of last letter)/ TE 630. 12.4:1 compression ratio, piston bore from 98 mm to 100, completely different head design (DOHC instead of the older SOHC). 60 hp (45 kw) quoted on the bike documents.

-2004 SM 634 R Eddy Seel Replica: Race model, no compatibility with street models. (longer stroke kit).

yes i know its a VERY old post but ...do you still have the husky 8 years later?!