This page updated July 2016. Since then RRP have refined the CB-X still further. See here
RRP Level 3 kit plus accessories as listed below.
221kg (487lbs) plus 25kg transit/15kg piste payload. Me about 105kg in gear.
UK to southern Morocco leading fly-in tours, plus some solo riding after.
Honda’s CB500X came out in 2012, an adventure-styled road bike, one in a range of three new CB500s (below) using a smooth, slim and economical 471-cc motor. It was pitched as an inexpensive and unintimidating first big bike to suit the L2 power-to-weight license category in Europe. You probably know all that – if not there’s more about the CB-X’s origins on the intro page.
Possibly having clocked the 500X-based Thai rally racers, Rally Raid Products in the UK spotted the potential to upgrade the 500X’s reliable, compact twin-cylinder platform into a budget, all-road travel bike by improving the basic suspension and increasing the front wheel size. You can read about the full development process here where there’s also a good FAQ.
To prove the concept, in 2015 Dakar Rally rider Jenny Morgan (whose original idea it all was) rode the Trans-Am Trail there and back (right). Around the same time three levels of RRP kits were gradually released, with L3 giving you the works: more travel, spoke wheels and a fully adjustable shock.
In its way the ‘CB500X RR’ is a 21-st century iteration of Kawasaki’s extinct KLE500 (left). Other comparisons include Honda’s Transalp, Yamaha’s XT660Z Tenere, the 650 V-Strom and what’s now the BMW F700GS (formerly 650GS). All bar the XT are mid-sized twins which make great travel bikes: comfortable long-distance machines that can handle the odd rough track while carrying loads and eating up the road miles. Many of those bikes are based on old designs; the 500X uses a modern engine that’s smoother than a Tenere, more economical than a current Transalp and physically smaller than a V-Strom or 700GS. And it’s cheap too: £5k when it came out with plenty of used examples at £3500 when I was looking. Now £5.5 new with a commensurate increase in used prices. Service intervals are 8000 miles.
Stop me if you’ve heard this before but I’ve long believed a parallel twin of around 500cc makes an optimal do-it-all bike in what I call the AM Zone where realistically you’re dealing with imperfect roads and gravel tracks, rather than pristine highways punctuated with fully franchised service areas. At the same time you’re probably not seeking out BAM-style challenges for which all the above listed bikes would be too heavy. For that a 450 single trail bike fits the bill – more poke than a 250, less vibration and weight than a big tumper. But that category is also currently undersubscribed.
Years ago I modified a Suzuki GS500 to test this 500-twin idea, I ran a 660 Tenere for a bit, was lent a BMW F650GS just before it became the current 700, and in 2015 briefly looked at a TDM900 and a 650 Versys before buying myself a 2014 CB500X which ended up like this:
In its standard form the Honda is a pleasant machine that handles, brakes and goes as nicely as the people you’re likely to meet on it. Alongside a 700GS or V-Strom it’s a compact bike that’s easy to manoeuvre in traffic and manage on the trail. For its performance potential it’s also the most economical bike I’ve every owned. Up to 90mpg Imp is possible pootling along Moroccan back roads and as with many bikes, there’s a 20% improvement in economy if you stick below 105kph (65mph). The worst I got was 57mpg in north Spain where it seems the winds are forever in your face, the litres read short or quite possibly, running heated gear draws power and so costs fuel. Inspect the full fuel record here.
CB500X vs CRF250L
• Capacity: 250cc vs 471cc
• Claimed power: 24hp vs 47hp
• OE wet weight: 146kg vs 197kg (add >10% once equipped)
• My cruising speed: 60 vs 70-75mph
• Service intervals: 8000m
• Alternator max output: 337w @ 5000rpm vs 500w @5000rpm
• Av. fuel consumption: 86.7mpg vs 74mpg
• OE max fuel range: 140m/270m
• Cheapest on ebay today: 2012/8000m/£3000 vs 2013/9000m/£4000
My 2012 250L’s fuel consumption may have been some 15% better (once I retuned the fuel controller), but the point of this pointless comparison is that I bet if I’d run my 500 at the 250’s speeds I’d have got similar results. On a 500 you get the choice – it’s largely immune to gradients, headwinds, loads or your impatience. At times on the 250 I was stuck at 55-60 with nothing left for overtaking which in its way can be quite tiring.
The 250’s other benefits are clear and include lower purchase price and insurance and not least the much lighter weight (reduced shipping costs, easier picking up, less intimidating off-road). For a lighter rider than me the 250’s a great choice for a travel bike. Me, I’d love to see a CRF450L.
Apart from being a great value machine, the fuel consumption is the 500’s outstanding feature. It must all be down to the internal efficiency of tractable motor and perhaps the bike’s slim frontal profile. For normal bike riding in today’s traffic conditions I really can’t see the need for more power other than the thrill of annihilating other traffic. For an ostensibly bland 180-degree P-twin, the X sounds good and looks great too.
The more I think about it the more important light clutch operation and a slick gearbox contribute in making a bike enjoyable to ride. With it’s long link rod the ‘box isn’t as slick as the ancient TDM I ran a year back, but the six gears were spaced just right for my usage. On the road I rarely had to change down to overtake so perhaps the gearing is on the low side for road-only riding. Some say raise the front cog one tooth to 16. I admit I frequently try to click up from sixth, but then it’s only a 470cc.
Brakes I’m beginning to think are nothing special – again the aged TDM with 50k on the clock showed the way. Like other things it could be down to the Honda’s budget spec: softer pads or less flex-prone braided hoses might make a difference. There’s still 3-5mm left in both pads at 8000 miles, so I imagine they’ll last till 12k+. I had no issues with the ABS on the dirt. If that ever was a problem then it’s now become a hoary urban myth with modern ABS systems. My front brake has developed a low, sonorous, foghorn-like squeal as I come to a halt. I quite like it.
As expected, the suspension was similarly basic but functional, especially up front. It gets the job done but will be overcome by high speeds, heavy loads or rough roads. Having said that, I wasn’t so desperate as to look into adjusting the original shock (no tool supplied).
The Pirelli Scorpion Trail tyres are amazing, wet or dry, and for a small road bike the comfort is as good as you can expect for me at 6′ 1″. Sometimes it tingles at higher rpm; sometimes it’s completely smooth (with bar ends removed). The mirrors give a great view of my shoulders, like bike mirrors have done in all the decades I’ve been riding. The switchgear was intuitive and with a good feel and for its size, the dashboard (right) was among the best I’ve had on a bike: fuel; time; trip; speed and rpm – all I want to know legible at a glance. As long you keep pressing them, the two-button mode/set combination is also intuitive enough without the humiliation of referring to the manual.
The bike used no oil (changed with filter @ 6000 miles) or coolant; no bearings have worn out as far as I can tell. It starts and ticks-over at a steady 1222.22 rpm, sounding just like it did the day I bought it. Not a single Honda thing broke or came loose, unless you count the excess load on the twin fairing mounting bolts on the headstock (right). As RRP recommend, fit M8 nylocs here (and the chain adjusters too), even if it means adding a 13mm to your toolset. Overall, for what it costs and what it does, as it comes out the crate, the 500 gets a ….
My four-year-old Barkbuster Storm handguards went on with the usual small fitting and clearance limitations. They were handy for leaning the bike on walls and cliffs when briefly without a sidestand, though never got tested in a fall. It meant I didn’t need to fit the shorty adjustable levers which RRP supplied.
A Palmer Products windscreen adjustment bracket with the taller Honda screen gives variable height plus three tilt angles, but I can’t say it transformed my ride into a cocoon of still air – I’m on a motorbike after all. It’s value is as much in keeping the chill and windblast off you, as well as pelting rain – and this it did. Due to its leverage, and to spare the fairing-mount bolts, I removed the screen during the tours.
Daytona heated grips (new, but several years old) were great in northern Spain and on chilly High Atlas mornings. They mean you can wear less thick gloves. Compared to Oxford grips I’ve used recently, they’re not as hot and whole design is like something from the 70s (effectively ‘on’ or ‘off’) but they’re very easy to fit.
Aerostich Sheepskin Saddle Pad. Had this for years – on its 3rd or 4th bike by now. One day in Morocco I took it off and paid the price within a 100 miles (it’s possible the Honda seat foam may have crushed-out by now). It does nothing more than take the edge off a long day without looking too much like a dead animal. I thought it too had crushed out, but a quick wash with some hotel room shampoo and it was good as new. Yes it gets wet but dries quickly with a quick rub.
Tutoro automatic chain oiler. Also a successive fitting, Tutoros pump oil using a weight suspended in the reservoir: when the bike’s in motion it pumps according to your adjustment; when at rest it stops. I thought the snake-tongue feed to the sprocket would get knocked off on the piste, but with the more rigid mount it’s still there. It’s a sorry sight the way the oil picks up sand and grit on the piste, but there’s no way round this other than a full wipe down then running dry. As we’re on and off the piste all day that’s not practical, so I let it go and cleaned between tours. The JT x-ring chain seems to be hanging in there: three adjustments in all that time (ie: one more than normal, according to past experience).
Luggage. A last-minute, cobbled together set up once I realised my Magadans wouldn’t fit on the RRP side racks. In fact it all worked surprisingly well, but I was hotel-based. What I needed access to was in the ME holdall, the Touratech tail pouch or the ammo pouches on the crash bar. One dry bag carried camping gear that was never used, the other 15-year-old SealLine picked up a nick that’s easily fixed with some Aquaseal. The ME holdall doesn’t claim to be waterproof so inside was an old model Watershed UDB. It didn’t rain on the whole trip.
Tyres I’m running out of new tyres to try in the sizes needed so I fitted an ageing but unused Keidenau K60 on the front and Golden Tyre GT201 150/70 R17 TL 69V on the back. No complaints as expected, though the stiff and huge 201 felt like overkill for the little, 47-hp Honda and, as you’ll have read, was hard work to fit on the BARTubeless rear rim. Five thousand miles in, the rear GT looks less than half worn and the front K60 less than that. Much of this must be down to cool tubeless running at high pressures (‘as high as possible; as low as necessary’ – who said that?), as well as the engine’s even power delivery which lays down velcro-like traction rather than arm-stretching torque.
Rally Raid Level 3 kit and other RRP bits
My bike only got the L3 kit (left) fitted a couple of days before I left for Morocco. The job took about four hours at RRP’s well-lit workshop. I dare say it’d have taken me as many days of intermittent roadside blundering. In the preceding months I’d fitted the RRP bashplate, racks, footrests, rear brake guard and, to save time in the RRP workshop, the top triple clamp which became a bit of a faff.
The L3 kit costs £2200 with tax which, for what you get, is actually pretty good value, especially if you can get a used 500X at a good price.
FYI: some RRP bits I bought, some RRP supplied to test in exchange for advertising in AMH7
RRP pannier and tail rack
The RRP side racks are an ‘unrectangulated’ design similar to what RRP produce for the subframeless 690. They’re designed for soft baggage – or not designed for hard luggage – and rely largely on the strength of the mount plates and thick tubing, rather than opposing forces supported by a cross-brace behind the number plate. Unlike the 690, the 500X has a meaty subframe on a par with an XT660Z so could manage with a lighter supported rack. The tail plate-rack is a CNC job that’s become common these days.
For my sort of use, at a total of 6.5kg I found the racks very easy to fit, but probably heavier than a conventional ‘cube/tube rack’ like the Hepco (right), even if the H&B hangs out so far back it’s in another time zone.
It looks neat, slim and minimal – and the side racks may suit shallow, weight-spreading throwovers like the recommended GL Siskiyous. But they were too shallow and slim to take my lower-hanging Magadans. The fat, upswept pipe also gets in the way, as it did on my GS500R. (To retain a slim profile I got it lowered). Fitting the tail plate meant losing the useful Honda grab rails (saving 1.8kg. I made my own from a belt). There’s plenty of room behind the side racks for tool tubes – a great idea though not something I’ve tried yet. On my trip I just stuffed a 10-litre fuel bag and some inner tubes in there.
While waiting for the boat back from Santander I noticed the LHS side rack looked bent inwards perhaps a centimetre at the right angle plate (barely discernible right, but you’ll notice the lean in the chain oiler reservoir). The only time the bike fell was when the original sidestand broke, and even then I partly cushioned the fall. It suggests that, not surprisingly, even with soft bags the current design isn’t up to a static drop, let alone a crash.
I was interested to try this unsupported rack idea, but next time round I’d go back to a conventional, cheaper, stronger and lighter cube-tube rack from H&B or B&Q.
At 3kg and £200, this is a heavy bit of kit in steel with a few thin alloy plates, but it protected the vulnerable sump and cat and is something every bike of this kind needs unless you like dealing with this. I never heard or felt any dramatic clangs on the piste, and an inspection underneath revealed no gouges. The integrated crash bars make handy mounts for ammo pouches – useful as my last-minute baggage set-up lacked exterior pocketure. The bashplate’s flat base makes a stable support for the bike.
For oil and filter changes, undo the front oil filter guard plate, then release the pin through the centre-stand mount at the back of the bashplate (early pins were a tight fit – remove the paint and grease liberally). Let the bashplate pivot down on the front engine mounts (you don’t want to mess with those any more than once) – the 14mm drain plug is right there on the LHS and once undone will spurt out past the plate. Here’s a video.
RRP rear brake reservoir guard
Still there and undamaged so probably worth it for the odd stray stick or stone that could ruin your day.
RRP XL footrests
Solid grip, great support and no more vibration than OEs, despite their rubber caps. I thought this was a bit of bling on anything other than a full-on dirt bike but now see they’re definitely a worthwhile add-on. They’re also a little lower (right) than the originals which is a benefit for aged knees.
RRP elongated sidestand
The two-inch L3 suspension lift requires a longer sidestand – RRP copy and elongate the original design. A harsh lashing down on the outbound ferry bent the stand just below the pivot. I nursed it but it broke two days later. Kicking it back out of the way, I was surprised how thin the tube’s walls were – it didn’t have much heft to it.
RRP promptly send on a reinforced item.
I’m still a bit wary but so far so good. I actually think an equilaterally stiff round tube with a thicker wall would be a better long-term solution to the greater forces exerted on the longer RR stand, as well as a wider foot for soft terrain. When a side stand is all you have, it needs to be bombproof. Recently RR told me that this was exactly how current stands are being made, and for the same sound reasons.
RRP triple clamp and fork kit
As you can read here, RRP perform a major makeover on the basic OE forks whose main attribute is that they have a chunky 41-mm diametre. The extra height giving 170mm of travel is achieved by fitting a dog-legged (or is it gull-winged?) top triple clamp so the fork top sits a little lower, as well as doing something inside the tubes, all to make room for the larger diametre wheel. Inside they fit full length linear springs (in three rates; assume I got the heaviest) plus new damping rods with a shim stack (a form of cartridge emulation?) plus thinner oil. My contribution to the party: a nice pair of floppy rubber gaiters.
The forks get preload adjustment as well as bleed valves on the tops, and after T1, I cranked them up a full turn and a bit. With the back-end similarly jacked up, that was a great improvement on the piste, but I can’t say the action on small, sharp-edged bumps (stones and rock ledges on the piste; pothole edges on the road) matched that of my old Hyperpro-shod X-Country. It’s probable that running the front K60 at no less than 26psi (it being tubeless on a non-tubeless rim) may have contributed to the harsh response to sharp edges. Also, the XCo was 30-kg lighter with 220mm of travel up front, but no adjustment and it ran on the same terrain on similar tyres at the same pressures. On the road there’s not much in it but when combined with the HP shock, it was probably the best suspension I’ve just off road since my IT250J.
Discounting the fickle eye of the beholder, as of just now I’ve unearthed three-and-a-half actual reasons why USD forks are better than RWU: less deflection (fatter ø tube near the fulcrum); reduced unsprung weight; more travel (hard to work those two out), and it’s said, most USDs are cartridge (long story; look it up). The other difference is Hyperpro progressive springs.
Despite the few similarities on these two bikes and their use, all that adds up to probably too many variables to make a useful comparison other than one felt better than the other. State-of-the-art USD may be best, but fitting a set on the budget-oriented CB-X is OTT and the RRP makeover is a huge improvement for the money. It’d be interesting to try out progressive fork springs on the CB500X, as – depending on who you ask – the theory is they deal with small and large as well as fast and slow better than linear. And while we’re having an argument, Mac is better than PC. Since then I met Jenny and John in the Pyrenees (left) and hear they’ve developed a cartridge fork for the CBX.
The RRP top clamp raises the OE bars, but not enough to make standing up comfortable for me. That could be fixed by pivoting the bars forward, but then the Storms would hit the clocks which they only just clear. RRP have just produced some risers for fatbars, (left), but because fatbars are lower than the OE steels (right), I’m not sure it would make a great deal of difference to the overall height – a stronger bar would be the main benefit. For more rise you then need to get into longer cables and wiring, because you’re trying to make a trail bike from a road bike.
Since this report was written, in response to customer demand RRP have manufactured an ABS switch (left) to allow you to switch the ABS on or off on the move.
Some people believe ABS can be a liability on the dirt, where it reduces braking distances or limits the ability to lock the back up and ‘rear wheel steer’, if you have that skill level. That may have been the case many years ago on some bikes, but I must say I never found the ABS to be a problem at the typical speeds I rode this 220-kilo Honda on the dirt.
RRP replacement mudguard
If the unmarked state of the radiator is anything to go by then this mudguard – forget what it’s from, a Transalp? – does a great job. It looks like it’s part of the original bike but front and back has significantly more coverage (right). And though I never encountered any thick clay which blocked up the tyre but, I’m told it’s a two-tool job to remove it.
RRP rear shock
Though it only has 170mm to work with, the longer Tractive shock (below) gives you a full range of adjustments – no less than four settings to juggle, plus your variable loads and of course, the terrain. While obviously an improvement over the original, 2000 miles in I increased the as-delivered preload and damping settings quite a lot to get a good ride most of the time. Again, I felt the similar Hyperpro shock on the XCountry gave a superior response and control (165mm – nearly the same as the CB-X RR) while the Tractive was similar to the F650GS. The big difference is both those BMWs had an accessible remote preload adjustment (RPA; a knob) to improve the ride crank the knob.
Tractive do make hydraulic RPAs, but on the 500X unit there wasn’t enough room to fit one that would be up to the task. I was also told the short Honda spring might cause coil binding if it was excessively preloaded, though you’d think that’d be easy to limit.
The lack of an RPA means the full potential of the sophisticated and costly Tractive shock is difficult to realise without removing the LHS footrest hanger and faffing around a few degrees at a time with an allen key on a ring spanner (the supplied, multi-bit Tractive tool won’t fit, though it works the damping dials fine). That’s OK to get the preload in the ballpark, as I did by adding 2.5 turns (right; about 60% of the way down the threads), but not for tweaking on the road as conditions change. As I said in a post somewhere, it’s all the wrong way round on this and most shocks: a travel bike primarily wants easily accessible preload adjustment – I suspect your fancy damping controls only really matter to racers. Once set, I never touched the Hyperpro XCo’s three damping settings. The good news is RRP have recognised this need and are working on a less bulky manual (worm-drive) remote preloader for the Honda so the shock can come out of the shadows.
I do wonder if siting the shock’s remote reservoir right alongside that hot, lean-buring engine is a great idea. Whatever’s in there, gas or oil or both, the point of moving it away from the shock body is to keep it cool so the damping doesn’t fade.
Though it could be a case of imagining what you’d expect to happen, I’m sure on some warm, 25°C-days crawling up a rough track at little more than walking pace and with the radiator fan whirring away, the shock’s action went off and got more bouncy – ie: reduced damping effect.
I read that Tractive told RRP mounting the shock by the barrel shouldn’t be a problem, but that does seem counter-intuitive. A more conventional position would be somewhere near the LHS pillion footrest (as on the XCo), and I can already see the reservoir would slot nicely into the corner where my Tutoro reservoir currently sits. I may get round to untangling my remote and refitting it towards the back, though you’d think RRP went through all this before settling on the current position. Feb 2016: RRP have come up with an alternative location for the remote reservoir on the RHS pillion peg (left). Other refinements are doubtless in the works.
Another thing I’d question are RRP’s spring rate guidelines as copied from here:
They’re clearly guidelines, but at 95kg (210lbs) should I be written off as morbidly obese? Who knows, but by the time I’m dressed in a combination of winter and off-road biking gear (and have scoffed a few meat pies) I’m already right in the max, 120Nm spring category (as fitted on my bike). And this is before I load my bike up with 15-25 kilos of gear. I presume the added weight of the L3 kit is taken into account, as with racks and protection and other bits, my bike is about 24kg heavier than what I bought. That’s to be expected: any travel bikes will make proportionally similar weight gains to be ready for overlanding.
A couple of road tests mentioned their Level 3 test bike (different set up from mine) felt on the soft side. I’d say if you’re pitching a conversion suited to overland travel (in the European sense) then for well-fed adventurists like myself, the RRP shock springs are a bit on the light side. I see the X RR are more on an all-road touring bike than a dirt road tourer. As such riders will load it up with hard luggage and racks and stiff, long-lasting all-road tyres (like the K60s I used). Again, I hear that RRP may be considering firmer spring options.
Fyi RRP’s recommended rear settings are:
• Preload 11 turns from just touching free spring length with shock removed
• Rebound 12/24
• High speed compression 7/18
• Low speed compression 12/24
My current settings for a pretty good ride without payload:
• Preload 2.5 turns from whatever it was on fitting (about 60%)
• Rebound 18/24
• High speed compression 13/18
• Low speed compression 17/24
It’s possible my high-speed compression (shock speed, that is, not ground speed) was set too high (13/18) to react quickly enough to sudden, sharp hits – and the stiff GT201 at >28psi may not have helped here. RRP recommend the cushier TKC 80 for their 500X conversion, a great tyre but for me not such a practical choice. The suspension should work with all kinds of tyres, though whatever you run, varying tyre pressures makes a huge diffeence to both the traction and the ride quality. I’ve now backed off to 10/18 and will seek out local potholes, kerbs and acute speed bumps. The rebound, though high at 18/24, feels about right which suggests it’s constraining a spring that’s already quite highly preloaded. Still more experimentation needed here before the shock can get a fully qualified rating. I realise from watching Juan’s video below that in the rush of fitting it at RRP I never received the Tractive manual to go with the shock, only the tool. According to Juan below, Tractive suggest unloaded shock sag at 10% of total travel (1.9cm) and fully-loaded sag at 30% or 5.7cm. Use the spring preload adjustment to set the right sag.
On the whole, a stiffer spring will need less compression damping (otherwise it will feel stiffer still), and more rebound damping to stop the spring returning to its original length so quickly, and bucking the bike.Good explanation of rear suspension workings from CB500X-RR developer, Jenny M.
RRP wheels with BARTubeless sealing
In response to customer suggestions (including mine), tubeless spoked wheels was something new that RRP asked me to try out in Morocco. I’m pleased to say it went better than my DIY version on the Tenere. As you may know, I’ve been experimenting with this idea for years and BARTubeless seems the best solution so far. No air was lost on the trip but two months after, when I got the bike serviced, the shop reported that both Slimed tyres were at half pressure or so, so air loss at about a psi or two a week needs to be monitored. It could be the rim seal, the valve or the tyre carcass.
One limitation is the front rim (right) isn’t tubeless with the required ridges alongside the well to contain a tyre bead. That meant I was advised to run the tyre at no less than 1.6 bar (23 psi). Not wanting to risk spoiling my people’s holidays, I erred on the high side at 26psi which (as suggested) may have contributed to the forks’ poor response at low speeds. One solution would be to provide a tubeless front rim so it could be run down to 20psi safely.
The rims themselves are probably overbuilt, but like a subframe, that’s not a bad thing for a travel bike as opposed to a rally racer. The spokes have not budged, and this was running rocky pistes where one abused XR came in with nearly every front spoke loose.
Besides the balanced suspension lift, 19-inch front wheel is what transforms the Honda bike into a trail bike. For a travel bike I’m convinced a 19 on the front is the best compromise for road and trail. I wouldn’t even call it a compromise. On the back the 17-inch size is retained though the wheel is actually heavier than OE by a couple of kilos. But again, for a travel bike where durability is vital, this mass is in the right place. The tubeless wheels are a solid and reassuring set up that’s now proven. I’ll get my future bikes BART’d.
While my bike’s ready-to-roll weight (before luggage) has increased by over 10%, the RRP accessories including the Level 3 kit, as well as my own bits and pieces have increased the 500X’s all-road functionality by way more than that. I have some reservations about the suspension, but that could be down to my set up and could all be tuned out or is being addressed by RRP. Running the standard bike on what we rode in Morocco would have ended in tears.
Surprisingly the bike’s added height doesn’t give an impression of top-heaviness – that must be something innate to a bike’s weight distribution. Neither was stability or roadholding affected in any way other than perhaps improving it. The ‘trail bike stance’ and the way it all looks like it was designed that way from the factory is the main benefit and biggest credit to the RRP kit.
Of all my recent bikes I’d compare the 500X RR with my old XT660Z – similar economy and range, off-road utility and protection, but much better build quality, a much lower centre of gravity, a smoother motor and better suspension. The BMW F650GS is really quite a different bike – longer and lower and with a lot more power, but not as nimble. And by the time that new bike was equipped with protection and travel gear it came in at 8 or 9 grand. It would be interesting to hop back onto a standard 500X as, suspension apart, that wasn’t such a bad bike either. On the right, the updated 2016 model.