– Motorcycle News, Editorials, Product Reviews and Bike Reviews

Motorcycle News, Editorials, Product Reviews and Bike Reviews

New KTM 200 Duke Available This Month in U.S. Market

KTM has announced details of its new 200 Duke for the U.S. market. Available later this month, and priced at $3,999, KTM is pitching the new model as a perfect entry point for new riders, as well as an “ultra lightweight commuter.” The 308 pound (without fuel) machine has some impressive specifications.

Somewhat unusual for such a small displacement motorcycle, the 200 Duke comes standard with a beefy 43 mm USD fork, wide 150/60ZR17 rear tire, generous 3.5 gallon fuel capacity, and a four-piston radially-mounted front brake caliper. ABS is standard.

This new model sounds like a hoot to ride, and MD should have that opportunity soon. In the meantime, check out the following press release and specifications for the KTM 200 Duke:


The all-new KTM 200 DUKE packs a mighty punch thanks to an ultra-compact single-cylinder 4-stroke power plant with state-of-the-art injection electronics and close-ratio, 6-speed transmission. The generously sized, ergonomic 3.5-gal. fuel tank feeds the highly efficient engine and provides exceptionally long range. A predatory design and lightweight tubular steel trellis frame proudly display its BEAST-inspired DNA and shout DUKE. Confidence-inspiring handling is managed by WP APEX 43 mm USD forks and an APEX Linkless rear shock. Braking duties are easily covered by the 4-piston radially-mounted BYBRE front brake caliper featuring Bosch 2-Channel ABS, as well as Supermoto ABS functionality. Impressively low weight and a massively appealing low seat height of just 31.6 in. eliminate the intimidation factor and make the KTM 200 DUKE as easy to handle as it is exhilarating to ride.


  • State-of-the-art, single-cylinder 199.5 cc engine with twin overhead camshafts provides the perfect balance of performance and rideability.
  • Ultralight trellis frame featuring a bolt-on rear subframe in contrasting colors ensure agile, corner-carving flickability.
  • High-quality 43 mm open-cartridge APEX front forks by WP for excellent response and stability whether riding twisty roads or around town.
  • WP APEX rear shock with progressive travel and adjustable preload provides well-balanced suspension whether you’re riding solo or two-up, with or without luggage.  
  • Powerful BYBRE brake system developed in cooperation with Brembo features a large 300 mm front brake disc for increased stopping power and feel.
  • Advanced 2-channel ABS is standard and offers Supermoto functionality to disengage ABS in the rear for committed rear wheel slides.
  • Sharp aggressive styling runs from the front to the rear for a look that is pure DUKE.
  • A 100% digital LCD display includes engaged gear, fuel gauge, RPM alert and service reminder information.  
  • A large, ergonomic steel tank gives the KTM 200 DUKE a fuel capacity of 3.5 gal. and enhanced comfort to keep the ride going.
  • The two-part seat offers first class sport riding ergonomics with maximum support for both rider and passenger.
  • Underbelly exhaust system provides increased cornering clearance and enhanced style.
  • 17-in. cast alloy wheels in striking KTM orange and premium tires put the power down with confidence.  


Engine Type: Single Cylinder, 4-Stroke, DOHC

Displacement: 199.5 cc

Bore/Stroke: 72/49 mm

Starter: Electric; 12V 8Ah

Transmission: 6 Gears

Fuel System: Bosch EFI, 38 mm Mechanical Throttle Body

Lubrication: Wet Sump

Cooling: Liquid Cooling

Clutch: Wet Multi-Disc Clutch, Mechanically Operated

Ignition: Bosch EMS

Frame: Steel Trellis

Subframe: Steel Trellis

Handlebar:  Steel, Tapered, Ø 26/22 mm

Front Suspension: WP APEX USD Ø 43 mm

Rear Suspension: WP APEX Monoshock

Suspension Travel Front/Rear: 117 mm / 4.6 in; 128 mm / 5 in

Front/Rear Brakes: Disc Brake 300 mm / 230 mm

Front/Rear Wheels: 3.00 x 17”, 4.00 x 17” 

Front/Rear Tires: 110/70ZR17”; 150/60ZR17”

Steering Head Angle: 25º

Wheelbase: 1,357 mm ± 15.5 mm / 53.4 ± 0.6 in

Ground Clearance: 140 mm / 5.5 in

Seat Height: 805 mm / 31.6 in

Tank Capacity: 13.4 L / 3.5 galWeight (without fuel), Approx: 140 kg / 308.6 lbs


  1. SCutchins says:

    54 year old experienced rider, including a few years racing WERA and CCS. I bought a 390 Duke just for the sheer fun of it, and man this thing NAILS the fun factor! Not enough power to get out of its own way, which makes me think the 200 might be a little too small, but in curves and on the brakes it is a weapon.

    The only bike I have ever had where I am rolling along having a total blast and look down to see that I’m going BELOW the speed limit.

    I ride it more than my 1290 Super Adventure R.

  2. I can’t help but add my two cents into the big bike, little bike controversy. I have had both. On the big side I bought Ducati Fogy brand new and yes I enjoyed the acceleration and top end speed but I never really liked the way the bike handled. Going way back I had a replica of the BSA triple that won at Daytona one year. I loved that bike “war flutes” and all. It handled way better than the Triumph version with the same motor (I also had one of those). Speaking of Vintage BSAs and Triumphs. I liked the BSA 650s but I liked the Triumph Daytona 500 better.

    However, to the point, I like “Thumpers” and I had a couple of Yamaha SRX 600s. I liked them so much I bought my wife a Yamaha SRX 250. To this day, I have never ridden a sweeter handling bike and I felt so comfortable on it that I rode it more aggressively than on any other bike I ever rode. I used to enjoy teasing squids on their liter bikes in Chicago’s Wacker Drive under ground which was shear madness on my part-make a mistake and your dead.

    The fact is unless you live in Nevada, you are never going to experience the top end potential of the big bikes and even if you do track times it better be a big track to use their power. I have always in enjoyed riding smaller bikes even a vintage Gilera 125 (again another thumper)

    Reading about KTM’s 200 I have to admit I would be tempted. I would also like to hear more about that British two stroke project written about here a few weeks ago. If the price was reasonable on the latter bike, I would bite.

    Ole man Que

  3. Mototech says:

    It looks great. Also, the new ones have been updated with Twin-channel ABS

  4. Mike says:

    I don’t understand this bike. As others have commented, the 200cc engine will be borderline on freeways, so commuting is out. Personally, I wouldn’t ride it on the freeway – not enough acceleration at speed to get out of trouble.

    Next, it’s got a 3.5 gallon tank. Why? For long rides? On the freeway? If this is a backroads only bike, drop a gallon and the associated weight.

    When did 31.6 inches become “massively appealing low seat height”? Most women and many men with shorter inseams will immediately confirm that’s not a massively appealing low seat height.

    It’s got a good price though (for today’s prices). I just don’t understand what it’s intended purpose is and why it is configure they way it is. Big “?” from me.

    • todd says:

      Mike, I’ve commuted on a 70’s 125 Honda along the freeway for a little while. Commute times see traffic speeds approaching 35 mph, bumper to bumper. The 125 enduro was great for splitting the whole way through the mess. When traffic did ease up, it could keep up but obviously wasn’t intended for high speed use. Being in the SF Bay Area, much of my commute over the past decades has been through forested mountain roads. There’s not much use for power on this commute and small, lightweight bikes are a delight to commute on.

    • Dave says:

      Lots of people who live in urban areas won’t care about extended freeway riding. A couple exits from one town to another. It’ll be a lot faster than most 200-300cc scooters, for instance.

    • Reginald Van Blunt says:

      I suspect with 300lbs and 200cc it will NOT be geared tall, so the 25 hp at 10,000 rpm is probably what is happening at the top speed of 80 to 85 mph. The torque peak at 8,000 rpm suggests this bike is a whizzer, however for normal local ride speed averages near 45 mph it will do just fine if one leaves early. Could be ok for exploring country roads, quick runs to the 7-11, and occasional ‘quick like a bunny’ jaunts on the local freeway. The tank issue is not a valid concern, rather start out with plenty of fuel for a long ride, then use up the weight later in the trip. Bet it gets good milage with a small engine if not going faster than comfortable. IMO only.

      • Reginald Van Blunt says:

        Just found out manufacturer fuel consumption possible rate is 80 mpg. Adds another functional perspective. Maybe moto GP needs a 200 cc class.

        • mickey says:

          They used to have a 50 and a 125 cc class in GP. Sounded like a swarm of bees headed for the first turn lol

    • Kermit the frog says:

      Gee, Mike. A useful 3.5 gallon tank makes the bike too heavy for you? Put less gas in. Stop at 2.5 gallons and you’ve “saved” what, 6 lbs? Lose weight yourself. Then walking will be easier. You know…The kind of walking one does when they don’t fill their gas tank all the way and go for a longer than the usual ride to the Piggly-Wiggly and back and run out of fuel.

      If this little scoot is too heavy I suggest hitting the gym although why you think so is beyond me. Are you gonna carry it when you run out of gas because you failed to put that extra 1 gallon in to “save” those nasty 6 extra pounds? Don’t worry cuz when the tank is empty the bike weighs a much friendlier 21 lbs. less. If you can’t carry it at least you can push it. 😉

      And the real reason freeways are unsafe is not due to bikes like this or even 150cc models are too slow. It’s entirely the fault of idiots in cars, trucks, vans and yes, motorcycles riding like they’re on a racetrack. Flying between cars that are moving. Riding down the shoulder of the road. Kicking car doors or pounding on their hoods/roofs because “damn cagers be in my way…’n’ sheit!”).

      I can hear those guys now…”If only KTM made a bigger version of this bike, I’d buy it right now! Gosh gee willies! If only KTM made this bike into a 390″…But then you’d have more morons saying stuff like…”If only KTM took that 390 motor and put it into an “adventure” style bike! I’d be on that like a cheap suit!”…

      One could say if people would only put their money where their mouth is. Given where some of the mouths here might be, I shudder at the thought. Think, gentlemen. Think. Is it any wonder motorcycling as a hobby is tanking? It’s not very affordable and when a manufacturer makes what people claim to be craving they come on sites like this and demand “more or less”. More power. More displacement. Less weight. Less fuel capacity. Blah, blah, blah, blah. Ad nauseam.

      FFS, don’t buy this bike and do your level best to convince beginners that they NEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEED a 650cc four cylinder to venture onto the skeeery freeways.

      • Mike says:

        Very sharp commenting Señor Kermit.

      • fred says:

        While I agree with most of what you say in principle, you sound a little stressed out. Buy what you can afford and like, and ride what you own. It’s okay if other people don’t get it.

    • cw says:

      Not all commuting requires freeways.

      Freeways are often built along the same general path as their 55-and-under progenitors.


  5. Ducman says:

    Just priced the 390 Adventure. Nearly $8k out the door.$450 for freight and $400 to put it together. Tax, tags and fees were the rest. I guess I’m out of touch with new bike pricing.

    • Kermit the Frog says:

      You’re not alone. One local shop is axing approximately $1,000 for freight and setup on the 390 Adventures. Who knew airing up the tires, putting oil in the motor and hooking up a battery was so expensive? 😉 Oh yeah. Getting it out of the shipping crate. I understand but…

      …I want my dealer in business but not to give me the business.

      I understand the freight part of the equation or at least I think I do. The only let-down (to me, so far) I see for this bike is the instrumentation. It appears to be the older and fuglier one from previous generation Duke 390 models.

      As Antoine and Merriweather (of “Men On Film”) would say, “Hated it!” 😉

      As for the lads here that think the bike too small for the real world, well I’m old enough to remember when this bike would have been “small” but not “too small”. Get a big bike then and massage that neeeeeeeeeeeeeeeed for speed, LOL! I ride in a world where I obey the rules because to not do so risks all that I have worked a lifetime to attain. A job. A family. A reputation and more. If I wanted to ride like I was on a track I would simply go to a track. Nothing wrong with spirited riding so long as I don’t ghost someone or myself. People say cars don’t see us. They do. And they’re fed up with not just stupid riders but stupid drivers too.

      That would include the ones mentioned here by other folks. The one’s that exceed the posted limits on public roads whether in a car or on a bike. Our roads are good it’s our drivers and riders that are unsafe. At any speed.

      Later! 🙂

  6. bmbktmracer says:

    Nifty little fun machine for urban dwellers and new riders. Great bike to hang off the back of a motorhome. I’m with those who think this would be better as a dual-sport. Best to learn in an offroad environment and for the campground crowd, just more useful. Anyhow, even though it seems like fewer motorcycles are being sold, it’s nice that the number of choices is increasing.

  7. Reginald Van Blunt says:

    Had a new Honda XL 200 in the mid eighties, and worked it like a mule. On the street it was pretty neat, but in the dirt, lack of tire flotation and little bottom end made for a very long day 90 mile desert loop. I thought I was gonna die.
    Was very entertaining on curvy mountain roads – downhill.
    I am still optimistic about the fun factor of this KTM. Gotta be a ton better than mid eighties, even if a little heavy for 200cc.

  8. mickey says:

    It’s more fun to ride a slow bike fast….NAHHHH…it’s more fun to ride a fast bike fast. Trust me.

    Have never enjoyed riding tidlers. Ridden daughter in laws Ninja 250 and a new Yamaha R3 at a Yamaha demo days and the little bikes just don’t do it for me. Shift 4 times and your doing like 29 mph. Have to shift a couple of times just to get across an intersection.Have to have the tach needle in the hemisphere all the time. Let off the gas even a little bit and you have to downshift at least twice. I understand wanting to feel like you are racing, but not every ride, every day.

    Probably a great bike for 16- 17 year olds. Beyond that even the 390 Duke is lacking for a good street bike IMO

    todd will probably disagree

    • fred says:

      Of course I should trust you more than my lying eyes. 🙂 I have a couple of 250’s, tiddlers as you call them. I can hit 40mph in first at redline, and I can putt around in 5th at 29mph, though they’re happier in 3rd or 4th at that speed. You really need to make up your mind. You can shift a couple of times going through an intersection on almost any bike, but redline on either a Ninja 250 or on an R3 will get you through most intersections in first.
      My TW200 behaves more like you describe, with extremely low gearing, but not 250/300cc sport bikes.

      As for fun, very few riders quit motorcycling after riding a small, sporty bike. They tend to quit because riding stopped being fun after getting bigger/faster/heavier/more expensive bikes. You can have a lot of fun on a “tiddler” without attracting to much unwanted attention. Ride the big, bad, fast bikes in the same manner, and there’s a good chance that you’re going to be hauled away in a body bag or in a paddy wagon.

      Anecdotally speaking, many riders’ experience parallels mine – I kept getting bigger and faster bikes before I learned the ride proficiently on the smaller, slower bikes already owned. I applaud KTM for bringing the Duke 200 to our shores, and hope it will help both new and not-so-new riders to improve their skills.

    • John A. Kuzmenko says:

      I went up the displacement ladder and came back down. I now ride a 2020 Yamaha MT-03.

    • todd says:

      Since you asked, I told you this before; you’re doing it all wrong. Fred already said what I was thinking but I’ll reiterate. You are apparently lugging the bikes. Don’t be afraid to keep the bike in its power band. Don’t short shift. These sorts of bikes are fun for hauling around the mountain roads, maintaining corner speeds and truly learning how to ride correctly. Can you take sharp corners at 50+ mph on your CB1100? If not, practice on something like this. You don’t need heavy acceleration if you don’t slow down in the first place. Don’t be surprised when a group of people on Groms want to pass you!

      • mickey says:

        That’s the whole point of a big motor Todd, you dont have to rev the dog snot out of it to make big power. The CB makes almost 60 lbs ft of torque from 2000 rpms to a peak of 65 lbs ft of torque at 5000 rpms. You get all the hustle you need in a 3000 rpm range. It handles well enough to carry plenty of corner speed and coming out the other side you just twist the throttle a bit to accelerate briskly without a bunch of revving and shifter dancing.

        Today I rode 146 miles of country curvy roads on the CB with my brother on his Bonneville 1200. Thought about this article while riding and thought no way would I be wanting to take this ride on a 200 cc single. Oh, it would have made it alright, but the work involved in the ride would have taken all the joy out of it for me.

        Riding the torque wave is what I enjoy.

        • mickey says:

          Btw if a guy on a Grom wants to pass me, I’ll gladly pull over and let him by. I dont ride on public roads to race other people, I ride to enjoy the ride. He can ride at a pace that’s comfortable for him, and I’ll ride at a pace that’s comfortable to me. As long as I am riding safely within the confines of the law (or close lol) then I don’t think I’m doing it wrong.

          • Jeremy says:

            If a guy on a Grom wants to pass you, believe me, the only way that will happen is if you pull over and let him. Fun little bikes, but they aren’t going to pass anyone going over 50 mph without permission.

        • cw says:

          You gents seem to be two talking about two different things.

          On a short ride, I tend to experience conditions that highlight the advantages of a smaller bike.

          On a longer ride, I tend to experience conditions that highlight the advantages of a larger bike.

          I learned on 250s. I started on a 500. I know have a 1250.

          I currently would like a smaller bike again. I tend to only be going 5 miles away and coming back.

          I’d argue the more casual the ridingz the less benefit of a larger bike.

          Outside of social/perceived social approval, that is…

  9. trent says:

    I don’t understand buying a bike that you can’t take on the express/freeway. Which for me at a minimum is a 250. When I rode a little Ninja, I loved it but thought it could do with another 50cc. Then they came out with the 300 and then the 400.

    However, I see quite a few Groms here on the street. There must even be a club of sorts, because I usually see guys riding them in pairs, or even larger groups. And those have only 125cc. So it won’t surprise me if the same thing happens with this 200cc KTM Duke.

    • Kermit The Frog says:

      You can take it on the freeway so perhaps it’s simply a matter of you won’t. Minimum size for freeway use in America is 150cc. This little bikelette will do just fine. It’s about having fun, not massaging one’s ego. If it’s not “safe” that’s likely due to the way the owner and/or those (mostly this) driving/riding next to them behave. In the early seventies i rode all over on a 175 Enduro and that bike was my “E” Ticket to fun.

      These days it seems the “E” must stand for “ego”. Not saying that’s your case, I’m just saying it often is. It’s NOT just the HD riders that act like they own the road you know.

      • fred says:

        A bike with a top speed of 75mph is not going to be fun on a 75mph freeway. At least not for more than a few miles. I’ve done it, but it’s not the best way. If the Duke 200 is capable of 80-85mph VMax, then it would be okay on the freeway, but it would probably be a lot more enjoyable on surface streets and two-lane roads.
        It’s not so much a question of ego as it is choosing the right tool for the job. My 250’s are adequate on the freeways, but it’s not where they shine. Taking a 150cc bike/scooter on the freeway may be legal, but most of the time, it’s not a great idea.

        • mickey says:

          Heck here in Ohio with a 65 mph speed limit, a bike with a 75 mph top speed had better stick to the slow lane except between the hours of maybe 10 AM-2 PM out there with the blue hairs in the Buicks running 65 mph in the fast lane… and then again between 8 PM and 6 AM, otherwise they will get run over.

          65 mph here is just a suggestion no one pays attention to.

          • fred says:

            Fair enough. Hopefully the Duke 200 will be able to hit 80-85mph. The other hope is that people who buy it will have the good sense to play to its strengths rather than than its weaknesses. Buying a Duke 200 for freeway us would be like buying a cruiser for track days. Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should.

          • mickey says:

            Well one thinks a 150cc is big enough for the freeway. One thinks a 250 would be the minimum and I think a 400 would be pushing it. Like you said, just because you can doesnt mean you should. I think speed limit in Utah when I rode thru there was 80 mph, so is a 150 or 200 or 250 still good enough? I’m not going to run any engine for any length of time at 80% or more of available revs. There is no safety cushion.Plus it’s not my style.

            Of course these little bikes aren’t really made for freeway work, but there are a lot of states that take a lot of freeway work to get to the twisy bits. There are also a lot of states with some pretty long steep hills and mountain passes not suitable for small low horsepower bikes.

            Small bikes are just so limited on where they are suited to. City commuting maybe.

            At 70 years old, after 54 years of riding, I dont see me going to anything less than 500cc…ever. If I can no longer hold up a 500, I’ll just quit. Not ego driven. Just know what I like and how I like my motorcycles to perform. Fine for others, just not for me.

          • fred says:

            Our thinking is similar, but with different conclusions. You decided that riding just wouldn’t be fun anymore if you had to downsize below 500cc. I kept my 250’s as insurance against the day when I couldn’t ride bigger bikes, but as I started riding them again, I re-discovered just how fun and capable they are. My issue with my 250’s is the size of the bikes, not the power of the engines. The seat and the pegs are a bit close. If I were much stiffer, I’d have a hard time getting my feet up on the pegs. I’ve added a bit of seat height on one of them, and have considered adding another inch or so to improve the ergonomics.
            As for power, I can easily outrun city traffic, as long as they don’t think I’m racing them. 🙂 Both are capable of breaking any U.S. speed limit, not that I’m admitting to have done such a thing. With saddlebags and a tailpack, I can pack sufficiently for longer trips.
            Personally, I prefer the ergo’s and power of my 600cc sport-tourer, but the little 250’s are a great deal of fun to ride, and really don’t present any significant limitations for solo riding.
            When I was riding 2-up regularly, and did a lot of longer rides, I thoroughly enjoyed my Concours 14.

          • mickey says:

            Undoubtedly many of our responses originate from the type of riding we do and the environment in which we ride. Southern Ohio is not the Bay Area, it’s not the city (it’s rural), our roads are not technical enough to give a small bike a handling advantage over a big bike, but are certainly open enough to give a big bike an advantage to use it’s power over a small bike. Our roads are country curvy, more sweepery than tight kinky curves (think Cherohala vs the Dragon), 45-55 mph speed limits with very little traffic and few stop signs or stop lights, few towns. Hundreds of miles of this, and we don’t ride between rows of cars here.

            I have ridden through 42 states (all 4 corners of the US), 2 provinces in Canada and 5 countries in Europe, and the worst places for me to ride are crowded cities, crowded freeways, and very tight technical roads. I enjoy places like Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, Northern California, Oregon, Colorado, Nevada, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, North Carolina, Maine etc. I loved Germany, Switzerland, Austria,and Lichtenstein. The worst places for me were southern California, Chicago, St Louis, Boston, Miami, New York City.After coming back from So Cal a few years ago, I opined that if that was the only environment I had to ride a motorcycle, I probably would not own one. Same after coming back from New York City…and there is nothing besides family that is more important to me than riding my motorcycles…year round.

            No doubt a 200cc single or 300 or 400 twin can be fun to ride under certain conditions. I just don’t ride in those conditions, therefore this size bike, no matter who makes it doesn’t appeal to me. Even Fred admitted he preferred the power of his 600 sport tourer, and todd recently admitted buying/riding a 690 Duke, both considered mid sized, certainly not what I would call tidlers.

            I just don’t see this KTM being very useful to many people besides urban city dwellers and rank beginners. No one is going to throw it on the back of a motor home because the people who like this KTM styling would appeal to, most likely don’t drive motor homes. They’d probably prefer a Honda 125 cub, or the new Honda CT 125.

            It will probably be popular in San Fran or LA or New York City, some other major cities IF there is a KTM dealer close by. And that’s a big if.

            I’d bet Honda sold more CB 1100’s than KTM will sell of these (by a bunch) and the CB 1100 was considered a very poor seller.

          • Jeremy says:

            “No one is going to throw it on the back of a motor home because the people who like this KTM styling would appeal to, most likely don’t drive motor homes.”

            Funny you should say that. I just saw a 390 Duke on the back of a RV earlier this week!

          • mickey says:

            Really? That’s too funny.

            Well, I am the guy that in 1968 said the 750 CB Honda would never sell because it was way too complicated and in 1975 that the Goldwing would never sell because it was too big and had the kick starter in the gas tank ha ha

            Apparently not much of a predicter

        • Curly says:

          You’re right on with 85mph. An Indian bike magazine tested it at 138kph which is 85.7mph. Not too shabby for a 200 but yeah, a better back roader than a Freeway bike.

  10. Curly says:

    By the specs this bike seems like a 400 with a half sized engine. I have to believe it would be a much better performer with 50 fewer pounds to lug around and on 100 and 130 width tires. I understand they are aiming it at first timers that want to be on a big bike but you can’t beat physics.

    • Anonymous says:

      This, and a 125 have been available outside of the US all along so it’s probably exactly he same chassis as the 390. I don’t get the 150 rear tire either, nor does it make sense to me on the 390, for that matter. I guess it’s just for looks.

    • Tom R says:

      How would you propose removing 50 pounds from a 308-pound, street-legal motorcycle?

      Please be specific, and keep in mind those pesky laws of physics…and highways.

      • Curly says:

        You’re right that 50 pounds would be a stretch but a good start would be to drop down to 40mm forks, a 2.15-17 front wheel with a 90 or 100 width tire, a 3.00-17 rear rim with a 130 tire. From there maybe thinner wall frame tubing and bits and bobs wherever. I suspect that the bike is what it is to just for commonality of parts with the 390 to make it cheaper to manufacture. For reference an RD200 was under 280 pounds full of gas in the 1970s with 22hp and 82 mph top speed.

        • Dave says:

          I think the 20lb difference between this modern bike and an RD200 is weight that 99% of riders would be happy to carry.

      • todd says:

        My Friend’s Honda S90 back in high school weighed 180 pounds and stuck like glue on $25 skinny tires. I felt my Yamaha 90 was too heavy at 196 pounds but we would race each other anyway. He would beat me in tight corners but I had the upper hand in top speed. I could hit 75 mph where the Honda would just break 55. Yeah, this 200 has no reason to be over 300 pounds, that’s not much less than my 690 but I’m sure it helps KTM save some money by sharing parts with the 390.

  11. Kevin says:

    KTM’s line up will soon consist of: 200, 390, 490, 690 790 890 1290 Dukes. Those seem like pretty slim slices of market share to me. I hope it works. I’d like the 490 – 500cc twin size please, with the promised 70hp.

  12. randy says:

    how about doing some more reviews of new bikes. Start with the Z900.

  13. southbound says:

    Will you make a dirt playbike with that engine please? Most fun I ever had in my 40 years of riding was my XR200R.

  14. Reginald Van Blunt says:

    I am having a difficult time categorizing this small displacement with big features, but what an adventure getting used to what ever it will give on a Saturday morning. Hope it will fit an adult size peep. AND AFORDABLE !

wordscape cheatgun mayhem 2 unblocked games