Oh, you did a torque to weight ratio instead of a power to weight ratio. Didn't read your original post carefully on my little phone. Got it.I didn't! I did however get the TORQUE figure from your post which I have quoted above!
I guess she relies on having the SATCOM phone with $50 on it to make an emergency call. As you say, unless she has SEAL training, how long can she survive waiting for help to arrive? Maybe that's the thrill of it, for some its jumping over the Grand Canyon or a few school buses, for her maybe the challenge and risk.
Just don't know how well the Honda performs, loaded down with gear well past design specs. When you consider having less torque, one has to make up for it with more clutch action. So frame stress and clutch wear can come into play. What is surprising is purchasing a used bike with no idea of how it was maintained or abused, and putting it through the rigors of her trip. Its commendable its holding up so well. The real test would be to send the Honda to the Himalayas and let it run side by side with the Himalayan in that environment.
I guess I'm not sure exactly how a SATCOM works, but when she's in the middle of nowhere with no cell phone reception (to use a browser to find someone who could rescue her), how would she know who to call? And that's assuming someone would be willing to locate her and give assistance.
The SATCOM p[hone uses satellites, and is used in remote locations. Pretty much 100% coverage around the world. She would call either her parents or a pre-arranged person and they would use the coordinates from the SATCOM phone to pinpoint her location. Whoever she calls is responsible to relay info to rescue teams.
What makes you think the Honda is over loaded? A quick search says it can handle over 300 lbs and I would be very surprised if Noraly and gear come close to that.
Yep.... for what she is doing I felt the torque to weight ratio was probably more relevant since it’s not about speed so much as the ‘tractor factor’; also that to get to the power on the honda requires far higher revs, and the weight distribution on the himalayan will be better. It’s like she has chosen a thoroughbred to pull a plough!Oh, you did a torque to weight ratio instead of a power to weight ratio. Didn't read your original post carefully on my little phone. Got it.
Personally I would prefer the Himalayan over the Honda for adventure touring and chose the Himalayan over the Versys X300 after back to back test rides.
I agree with your last statement. For me the Himalayan would have been the choice. For her the Honda is probably better because of the weight savings make it feel more controllable for her. It would be interesting if she would answer this topic on her blog or other media sources that I don't belong to.
Obviously I don't know, but, reading between the lines on how things were going for her over the past year, I think it more likely that it was money savings she was looking at, perhaps the drop in her YT income in combination with the uncertainty of an Africa trip, not wanting to have to leave another bike somewhere in the world.
Well let's see what Honda thought of the previous design:
Good points. From the news outlets I monitor South Africa went into another lock down so she got out of there in time to continue riding.
You read way too much into marketing jargon. Everybody bumped up to 300cc because everyone else was bumping up to 300cc and by bumping up to 300cc maybe some of those with 250cc will let go of their current bike and buy a new one. Same old marketing game that has gone on since the introduction of motorized vehicles.
I can tell the difference when riding a single cylinder 250cc such as Noraly's Honda and a 411cc single. All I am saying is I'll take the bike with the greater low end torque any day. the only advantage the smaller displacement Honda has is less weight. I'm not moto-crossing, I don't need a peaky high rev bike, I want a tractor for most terrain, especially with gear that throws the balance of the bike off compared to an unburdened bike. My Montesa 250cc Impala was a thoroughbred 2 stroke, would do a 100 mph, handled great, but I wouldn't want it where I ride the Himalayan.
www.itchyboots.com
I respect her judgement and opinion, she's ridden both. Now you can also go around the world on a Honda C90 if one prefersHere is what Noraly says as to why she bought the Honda CRF 250L...
10.000km Review of Honda CRF250L
Absolutely
any bike will do, one just needs the 'proverbial' to do long trips. 
www.madornomad.com
...and that's great. For you. This is why there are so many different bikes out there. I couldn't have taken the Himalayan to the places I have taken my KLX250S, and couldn't have taken either to the places I have taken my Van Van 200. I also wouldn't have wanted to endure either of those bikes where I have taken the Himalayan.
maybe the average person doesn't have the finances to own multiple bikes, so they need to pick the one best matched to their current riding preferences. I certainly would not be well suited for a BMW 1250 GS, too tall, too heavy, too expensive etc. Perhaps for Noraly she now has found the perfect bike in the Honda suited for her capabilities, riding style, preferences etc. As I said it is more the rider than the bike, depending upon their skills they have and the type of riding they prefer, they should match to the right bike. So there will never be the "best" bike as each rider is different. Seems the Himalayan appeals to a pretty large group of riders however.
Many of us that found the Himalayan bought because of what it is, and what it isn't. I couldn't own it if it were my only bike because I do need to travel sustained 65 mph from time to time. For me it is a great bike to explore and find new roads and paths.