KTM 350 EXC-F 2013 vs. Husqvarna SM 510R 2005

KTM 350 EXC-F 2013

KTM 350 EXC-F 2013

Husqvarna SM 510R 2005

Husqvarna SM 510R 2005

Loading...

Technical Specifications KTM 350 EXC-F 2013 compared to Husqvarna SM 510R 2005

KTM 350 EXC-F 2013
Husqvarna SM 510R 2005

Engine and Drive Train

CylindersCylinders1Cylinders1
StrokesStrokes4-StrokeStrokes4-Stroke
CoolingCoolingliquidCoolingliquid
DisplacementDisplacement349.7 ccmDisplacement501 ccm

Dimensions and Weights

WheelbaseWheelbase1,482 mmWheelbase1,495 mm
Seat HeightSeat Height970 mmSeat Height885 mm
Dry WeightDry Weight107.2 kgDry Weight121 kg
Fuel Tank CapacityFuel Tank Capacity9.5 lFuel Tank Capacity9 l

Pros and Cons in comparison

Pros and Cons in comparison

KTM 350 EXC-F 2013

KTM 350 EXC-F 2013

The 350 is simply the new golden mean. In tough terrain on uphill sections, it is strong enough to compensate for a lack of riding skills with the throttle grip. But not too strong that it throws you off like a rodeo ox if you use it too hard. Downhill, it's light enough that you won't leave skid marks in your enduro underwear, even on rocky passages.

More refined look

thinner walls

new, practical fuel filter

Slightly increased weight.

Husqvarna SM 510R 2005

Husqvarna SM 510R 2005

Unfortunately, our editors did not test this model.

Price Comparison Avarage Market Price KTM 350 EXC-F vs Husqvarna SM 510R

Price KTM 350 EXC-F

Model year
Current average market prices

Price Husqvarna SM 510R

Unfortunately, the data available to us is not sufficient to provide meaningful price information for this model.

Alternative Comparisons