Bajaj Pulsar AS 150 vs Suzuki Gixxer SF comparison

Bajaj’s AS 150 and Suzuki’s Gixxer SF come face-to-face to qualify as the best-suited motorcycle for India.

 

The Pulsar AS 150 and Gixxer SF are two of the latest models from Bajaj and Suzuki respectively. The motorcycles are equipped with contemporary technology, and are designed keeping the requirements of different riders in mind. Bajaj has built the AS 150 to undertake or at least fit the profile of a dual-role bike — one as a commuter within the city, and the other to go on adventures over the weekend.

Under its skin, Suzuki's Gixxer SF is essentially the very capable Gixxer. The Gixxer SF is as adept as the previous model, but now has the added benefit of a fully faired design. Suzuki recently announced their Gixxer SF Cup, a one-make series to take place soon at two of India’s top race tracks, the Irungattukottai Race Track outside Chennai and the Kari Motor Speedway in Coimbatore, clearly stating the brand’s sporty intent for its Gixxer SF.

Let’s take a look at how the two motorcycles perform.

Sporty or adventurous?

The Bajaj Pulsar AS 150 and Suzuki Gixxer SF feel just a bit different from each other once you are astride. The Adventure Sport 150 has an upright, truly comfortable seating position. You sit upright with legs extending a bit towards the back and arms wide apart with almost no weight transferred to the wrists, making the bike good enough to use on a daily basis. On the Suzuki Gixxer SF, you sit with arms stretched out just a bit more and legs extending backwards a bit. The Gixxer SF feels good to ride within the city.

However, riding dynamics of the two bikes are different. The Bajaj AS 150 loves following a straight line, and is an able highway touring machine. The seat though plush and wide enough, can get slightly uncomfortable when cruising longer distances due to its squared edges. The Pulsar AS 150 is a decent handling bike around corners but lacks as confident a feel as the Suzuki Gixxer SF.

The Suzuki will turn into the corner eagerly and you can really bank on its wide, MRF tubeless radial tyres and well-sorted suspension to make the most out of any winding road. Not only does it outdo the AS 150 on this front but it also virtually puts to shame every other motorcycle in its category. The SF is a bit of a benchmark bike in its class.

The Gixxer SF shoots off with a well-tuned, low and mid-range power output, but the power tapers off rather quickly once you reach the far end of the rev range. The Gixxer SF is good for highway runs and will cruise nicely while seating you in a comfortable, yet slightly sporty riding position. We achieved 60kph from a halt in 5.3 seconds on the Suzuki. The AS 150 in this respect has a better high-end power delivery and even feels a bit faster. The Gixxer SF wants to be ridden hard every time. The Pulsar AS 150 has a calmer, more relaxed operation and yet we achieved the 60kph mark here quicker in 5.1 seconds, which speaks volumes of its high refinement levels.

At cruising speeds of about 100kph, both motorcycles feel smooth and equally eager to rev on. Here the Bajaj feels as though it has a bit more power to play with, but eventually both motorcycles can achieve speeds post 115kph going hard on the throttle.

Bringing all that power to halt on both the bikes are the potent Bybre braking systems. The Bajaj Pulsar AS 150 uses a single, 240mm petal disc up front, along with its 130mm drum brake at rear. This brings the bike to halt from 60kph in 17.56 meters only, without losing its composure. The Suzuki also makes use of a single Bybre made disc brake upfront but has a larger 266mm diameter. The brakes on the Gixxer SF offer good initial bite and excellent feedback at the brake lever. We managed to bring the Gixxer SF to halt from 60kph in 15.24 seconds, due credit for this also goes to its fatter radial rear tyre, which provides much needed stability under hard braking.

Ride quality on the Bajaj Pulsar AS 150 feels plush and absorbs bumps with no issue. The Suzuki though is a well-sprung motorcycle equipped with fat 41mm front forks and a monoshock at rear that absorb broken roads well and remains stable over largely any kind of bump or undulation. Constant feedback is provided from the light steering unit upfront. The Gixxer SF is equipped with a steel tubular frame that holds the engine as a stressed member.

All is faired, in full or quart

The quarter fairing on the Bajaj Pulsar AS 150 is a neatly styled unit that extends back sleekly into a tall, clear visor, providing practical wind blast protection when riding fast. A potent projector headlamp is thoughtfully provided, illuminating the road really well at night. The smart LED pilot lights also look good.

Now, the Gixxer SF’s full fairing was designed in the same wind tunnel where the Hayabusa’s cocoon was desgined. The SF’s headlight, which is directly connected to the battery, emits a bright beam at night and the SF gets reflective taping on both wheels.

Bajaj Auto decks its AS 150 with a good-looking digi-analogue instrument console that displays the time, has a shift-indicator light and a side-stand engaged text — all neatly displayed along with a digital speedometer and analogue tachometer. The AS 150 has handle-mounted rear view mirrors that work really well. The switchgear is blue backlit and the grips feel soft to touch. Bajaj also provides a hinged fuel-filler cap on the Pulsar AS 150.

The Suzuki Gixxer SF, on the other hand, has an informative fully digital instrument console, which most importantly displays the engaged gear and time as well. Suzuki also provides a bright shift-warning light here. The SF gets fairing-mounted rear view mirrors which work well, but feel a bit wide and stick outward when negotiating traffic. Grips and levers impart a feel-good factor on the SF.

The Bajaj AS 150 tail-light is borrowed from Bajaj’s Pulsar 200NS and so are the black grab handles mounted just above it. Good bits such as the alloy footrests and the side-mounted steel engine guard give the bike a premium feel. Going with the new trend, the exhaust unit is neatly tucked away under the bike.

The well-contoured stepped saddle is a single unit on the Gixxer SF. The motorcycle shares its tail-light with the Gixxer. Grab handles are nicely integrated in the rear panel design, making it seem like a single unit. Suzuki provides a side-mounted, twin-port exhaust on the SF, which is finished in titanium-like paint that is also heat resistant.

Overall quality and fit and finish on the Bajaj Pulsar AS 150 and the Suzuki Gixxer SF are top drawer, with Bajaj consistently improving quality of materials used.

Single motors, punchy performers

Thumb-start the Bajaj Pulsar AS 150 and its engine instantly settles into a vibration free and potent hum. The 149.5cc, single-cylinder and carburetted engine produces 16.8bhp at 9,500rpm and 1.3kgm of torque at 7,000rpm. Bajaj provides the AS with its patented twin spark technology. Rev the bike hard and the needle swings rapidly past the red zone as the refined, smooth and vibe-free engine revs willingly to meet its limiter at about 11,000rpm. The AS 150 has a particularly smooth shifting and 5-speed gearbox, in a 1-down and 4-up pattern. Bajaj also provides a light-action clutch here for seamless shifts.

The Suzuki on the other hand has a 155cc, carburettor-fed engine that makes a lower power of 14.6bhp made lower down at 8,000rpm and a slightly higher torque output of 1.4kgm made earlier at 6,000rpm. The Gixxer SF has a slightly gruff-sounding engine when revved hard but this does not result in vibrations felt anywhere. Power delivery is linear and is spread across a wide powerband, which is the reason why we didn’t need to downshift much here. The Suzuki Gixxer SF’s engine is mated to a 5-speed gearbox and each gear slots in with precise feel in a 1-down and 4-up pattern. The Suzuki’s clutch is well weighted and operates with a light feel.

On the Bajaj Pulsar AS 150, we managed to receive 40.2kpl in the city and 44.4kpl out on open roads, cruising at an indicated 90kph. The Suzuki Gixxer SF managed a bit more on this front, dishing out 42.5kpl in the city and 45kpl on the highway. Both motorbikes have identical, 12-litre fuel tank storage capacities.

Winner takes it all

The Bajaj Pulsar AS 150 and Suzuki Gixxer SF come with their own special features, and an important factor in the end is to consider how much they cost. The Suzuki Gixxer SF costs Rs 83,500 while the Bajaj Pulsar AS 150 will set you back slightly lesser, at Rs 79,000 (prices ex-showroom, Delhi).

Choosing between the two, it has to be the Suzuki Gixxer SF. This motorcycle, even though priced at a small premium, is a well-rounded package and feels a bit more enjoyable to use within city limits and on the highway. The Suzuki Gixxer SF also shines brighter when let loose on the twisties, where its handling genius is an eye-opener. The Bajaj Pulsar AS 150 is made for a more relaxed journey and also feels smoother around the edges, but lacking that all-round magic that Suzuki has achieved on its SF.

Specifications

Bajaj Pulsar AS 150

Suzuki Gixxer SF

Price

Rs 79,000 (ex-showroom, Delhi)

Rs 83,500 (ex-showroom, Delhi)

On sale

Now

Now

L/W/H

2070/804/1205

2050/785/1085mm

Wheelbase

1363mm

1330mm

Fuel tank capacity

12 litres

12 litres

Kerb weight

143kg

139kg

Engine layout

Four-stroke, single-cylinder, air-cooled

Four-stroke, single-cylinder, air-cooled

Displacement

149.5cc

155cc

Power

16.8bhp at 9500rpm

14.6bhp at 8000rpm

Torque

1.3kgm at 7000rpm

1.4kgm at 6000rpm

Specific output

112.4bhp per litre

94.2bhp per litre

Power to weight

117.5bhp per tonne

105bhp per tonne

Gearbox

5-speed, 1-down, 4-up

5-speed, 1-down, 4-up

Front suspension

Telescopic forks

Telescopic forks

Rear suspension

Monoshock, box-section swingarm

Monoshock, box-section swingarm

Front brake

240mm disc

266mm

Rear brake

130mm drum

130mm drum

Wheels

10-spoke

6-spoke alloy

Rim size

17 inches

17 inches

Tyre size

80/100 x 17 – 110/80 x 17 inches

100/80 x 17 – 140/60 x 17 inches

 

Read More

KTM 390 Duke vs Kawasaki Ninja 300

The KTM 390 Duke and Kawasaki Ninja 300 form a pair of fierce rivals. So which one should you pick?

In the last year, motorcycle enthusiasts across India have been spoilt for choice, especially when it comes to deciding on affordable, yet sporty motorcycles. Much of this is thanks to Pune-based Bajaj Auto, a company that has brought Indians two high performance motorcycles, the KTM 390 Duke and Kawasaki Ninja 300. This duo is among the best lightweight sportsbikes money can buy today, bringing to the table a heady mix of up-to-date style, top-notch specifications and really strong performance for the class.

The 390 Duke and Ninja 300 fit their parts as modern day sportsbikes viewed from any angle. However, their basic philosophies are more akin to chalk and cheese. The butch 390 is a naked sporty streetbike, where the mean 300 is a sleeker, fully-faired and unabashedly track-focussed motorcycle.

In terms of engines, the 390 Duke and Ninja 300 once again stand poles apart. The KTM uses a 373.3cc, single-cylinder engine, while the Ninja 300 houses a 296cc, parallel-twin. Both motorcycles run liquid-cooled, with fuel-injection offered as standard. The KTM is the more powerful motorcycle, generating 43.5bhp at 9000rpm, while peak torque is 3.57kgm at 7000rpm. The Kawasaki engine revs higher, as is more fitting, and produces maximum power of 38.5bhp at 11000 rpm, with 2.8kgm of torque on supply at 10000rpm. Both engines are built to perform.

The 390 Duke comes with a forged piston and Nikasil-coated cylinder bore, along with an enhanced cooling system in India. Meanwhile, the Ninja 300 uses wide intake ports and valves, pistons with flat crowns and lightweight cylinders. The KTM and Kawasaki bikes both deploy close-ratio, six-speed gearboxes that shift in one-down, five-up patterns. The KTM is easier to pilot in the city, thanks to a relatively stronger bottom-end, while the Kawasaki needs to be wound up a bit more and performs best when pushed to high revs. The Duke and Ninja both provide robust mid and top-end performance.

It’s all about acceleration and speed. The 390 Duke is capable of dashing to 60kph from standstill in a scant 2.47 seconds, surpassing 100kph in 5.70sec, and 150kph in 16.14sec. The Kawasaki isn’t as snappy initially, getting past 60kph in 2.89sec, 100kph in 6.50sec, but pulling much of that back to bag a more favourable 16.51sec at 150kph. The KTM’s third gear gets the bike to 102kph, while fourth is good for 126kph, and fifth, 151kph. The Kawasaki does 112kph in third, while fourth goes up to 136kph and fifth 150kph. The 390 Duke and Ninja 300 are potent bikes that both breach 160kph. The KTM nudges 162kph when flat-out in top gear, while the faired-in Kawasaki manages a higher, true 168kph.

It’s evident the KTM 390 Duke and Kawasaki Ninja 300 are top of their game, with few rivals to speak of in their class.

Hard on the brakes, we found both bikes perform closely, the 390 (47.59m) being quicker than the 300 (50.28m) to stop from 100kph. The Kawasaki however does better slowing down from 60kph, to halt in 16.06m, where the 390 takes 16.56m.

At the end of the day, both bikes here offer evenly matched and top scores across parameters, except for their pricing. The KTM 390 Duke retails at a smashing, value-for-money Rs 1.80 lakh (ex-showroom, Delhi), where the Kawasaki Ninja 300 sets you back a whopping Rs 3.50 lakh (ex-showroom, Delhi), which cements the odds in favour of team Orange over team Green. The 390 in fact, makes a solid case for itself in providing riders more performance for this much money than any other motorcycle made in this class.

Read More

Vespa LX 125 vs Yamaha Ray

We pitch the Vespa against the Ray to find out which one makes for a better ride.

With an ever-increasing number of women taking to two-wheelers, the Indian market for automatic scooters has lately been doing rather well. And in view of the growing potential of this segment, two-wheeler manufacturers here are launching several new offerings to woo the fairer sex. We pitch the two latest entrants to the market – Vespa LX125 and the Yamaha Ray – against each other to determine which one has the most ‘chic appeal’.

The Vespa, in vogue since the 1940s, continues to be popular with both the sexes to this very day. The LX125’s retro, flamboyant styling remains distinct still, making this one of the most recognisable scooters in India. Yamaha’s smart new Ray is no slouch either. It’s light and a very able ride in city traffic.

 

The clearly more charismatic Vespa fits the bill as a ladies scooter, while Yamaha’s Ray, likewise, preys on the same target audience, armed with a confidently light, contemporary air. So, which scooter is able to fight down its rival?

 

Design and styling

 

The LX125 and Ray are both purpose-built city commuters that are individually styled to fit into today’s market. The LX125 attracts buyers from every sphere of the market, while the sleeker Ray is aiming to strike more of a chord with the Indian youth. Both scooters are shod with 10-inch wheels –

 

the LX125 comes with upmarket, three-spoke alloys, while the Ray opts for relatively common-place pressed steel rims. The LX125 sticks by its famous, retro design theme, its rounded, bright body panels streaked with splashes of contrasting chrome, while the Ray relies on a next-gen design that uses sharper lines. The LX125’s classic instruments are plain-Jane in contrast to the Ray’s sharper styled, flush-fitted console, both scooters offering a prominent, easy-to-read speedometer and fuel gauge. There’s little to choose between these two premium scooters in terms of their switches, control levers and mirrors, both scooters offering adequate quality components.

 

A complaint we have with the pair however has to do with neither offering the feature of a brake locking clamp, a key safety requirement on gearless scooters. Both scooters do although provide welcome utility space with front storage compartments, the LX125’s bay sits flush-fitted in its body panel, and can be opened via a push of its ignition key, whereas the Ray has nicely sculpted cubby holes. Primary lockable storage space is of course available beneath the scooter seats, where the LX125 has a significantly larger boot. The LX125 gets a broader, ridged floorboard, while the more narrow, all-flat Ray floorboard is rubberised, proving very helpful in wet riding conditions. Fit-finish and overall quality are top-notch affairs on both scooters. Both rivals feel well built and sturdy enough to last trouble-free through several years of ownership.

 

Performance

 

Both the competitors are powered by four-stroke, single-cylinder and air-cooled powerplants. At 125cc, the LX125 engine boasts of a larger capacity, and this is the only Indian scooter to breathe through a three-valve head. Power output on the Vespa is 10.06bhp at 7500rpm, while maximum torque is 1.08kgm at 6000rpm, and the 113cc Ray puts out 7bhp at 7500rpm, with 0.82kgm of torque offered at 5000rpm. Both scooters come equipped with CVT transmission systems that work seamlessly to provide smooth automatic gearshifts. There is a performance disparity, which isn’t a key concern given both scooters aren’t built to enthuse speed addicts. The LX125 achieves 60kph in 10.07 seconds, while the Ray passes it in 12.23sec. Both engines run vibe-free with a refined and really smooth feel throughout their wide powerbands.

 

And they are both nearly at par in terms of efficiency. The LX125 returned 40.7kpl in city-riding conditions to the Ray’s 41.8kpl. Out on the highway, the LX125 posted 42.1kpl whereas, at 45.1kpl, the Ray returned a better figure. 

 

Ride and handling

The LX125 and Ray are scooters that are tailor-made to excel at city use. Both rivals are adept at running miscellaneous errands and feel apt for that to-and-fro office or college commute. The LX125 is a heavier scooter, meaning women are certain to feel more at ease on the 104kg Ray, which is a full 10kg lighter than the Vespa. Having said which, the LX125 isn’t a cumbersome scooter to manage. Both scooters rely on an upright riding position, the Vespa seats its rider on a higher saddle, with its handlebars aptly placed for even taller riders. The LX125 and Ray both come with well cushioned seats, although the LX125 has a roomier saddle. The Yamaha makes a better option for shorter riders, thanks to its lower saddle height along with a lower handlebar. The LX125 uses a single-side shock absorber with linkage in front, and a conventional hydraulic rear suspension, which proves capable of tackling poor road conditions and delivers good ride quality. It’s still not as good as the Ray though, a scooter that shares a similar rear suspension, but rides on superior telescopic fork front suspension, this always inspiring much better front-end feel.

Handling on both scooters feels apt for city running. The lighter Ray does, however, hold the upper hand, feeling more nimble, which goes a long way in making this scooter more of a breeze to ride through thick traffic conditions – a major asset sure to win many a lady’s heart.

The LX125 uses a larger diameter front drum brake, and stops from 60kph in 24.33m, while the Ray shines brighter again, stopping in a significantly shorter 20.95m from the same speed. The LX125 front brake is feeble and often feels most unnerving, an Achilles heel that proved a major safety concern on this scooter throughout our testing period. Vespa needs to move quickly to address this.

Verdict

The Vespa LX125 is a well-rounded scooter, with evergreen styling and good fit-and-finish.It’s also armed with a refined engine and acceptable fuel economy. However, the Yamaha Ray scores equally well across these parameters, going to show how keenly contested this match is. The Ray gains an upper hand in several other areas, thanks to its light, easy-to-manage nature, which is such a big plus for ladies who are looking for a practical scooter for everyday use.

What finally nails the deal completely in favour of the Ray is that, at Rs 47,469, its value-for-money price tag is a hefty chunk lower than the Vespa’s Rs 60,565 (both prices ex-showroom, Pune).

Read More

Bajaj Pulsar 200NS Vs KTM 200 Duke

The two best 200cc streetbikes in India are from one family. Which can trounce the other to take the throne?

Bajaj's Pulsar needs little introduction, being the model that sealed the company’s position on the bike manufacturer map. And the KTM 200 Duke is a seriously sporty streetbike we've already rated highly and can’t stop gushing over, thanks to Bajaj and KTM's generous, no-compromise specifications for this bike. So this is a duel between two top-class, seemingly similar streetbikes, using related engines and born of comparable ideals.

 

Stable mates

 

The Bajaj Pulsar 200NS and KTM 200 Duke make handsome naked streetbikes. The Pulsar sports smoother lines than the funky, more sharply styled Duke. In keeping with their diverse roles, the NS comes with a substantial front mudguard, while the KTM’s dinky unit betrays its out-and-out sporty nature. The Pulsar provides better instrumentation that is much easier to read, as we found ourselves struggling to see the data on the compact 200 Duke readout.

 

Comprehensive, crisp and illuminated switches are standard issue on both bikes, as are nice control levers and mirrors. Both naked bikes expose much of their frame sections, the Pulsar displaying twin steel spars where the Duke shows off trellis tubing. There’s a generous sprinkling of alloy on both motorcycles. Both motorcycles provide split seats, and the Pulsar’s go a notch up for feeling plusher. Both motorcycles come with high, smart-looking tail sections, the Pulsar showing off an alloy number plate mount.

 

One heart, double roles

 

The Pulsar 200NS and 200 Duke have similar liquid-cooled, four-stroke, short-stroke 199.5cc engine platforms, with common bore and stroke dimensions, albeit with a raft of well thought out changes. The major difference is the Pulsar combustion chamber lighting up on every power stroke via a trio of spark plugs, but losing out for using a carburettor where fuel-injection is standard on the Duke. Additionally, the NS drives its four valves via a single overhead camshaft, where the 200 Duke provides its quartet a dual overhead camshaft. Peak power outputs are 23.2bhp at 9500rpm from the Pulsar, and 25bhp at 10000rpm on the KTM.

 

Both engines are smooth and rev-happy, always goading their riders to pull them high into their powerbands. Both bikes enjoy well weighted, progressive clutches, and six- speed, one-down, five-up gearboxes that shift smoothly via toe shift levers. The Pulsar uses taller gear ratios where the 200 Duke goes with short gearing, giving it an ‘I’m high on steroids’ feel.

 

The KTM is a faster motorcycle, its shorter gearing helping it eclipse the Pulsar with nippy traffic-signal getaways. It’s a quicker accelerating bike and likewise, true top speeds have the Pulsar coming in runner up.

 

Comfort Vs handling

 

The 200NS goes the Yamaha YZF-R15 route with a twin-spar-type steel frame, while the 200 Duke uses a tubular trellis. The Pulsar uses more conventional telescopic front forks, where the Duke deploys top-drawer, fat upside-downs. At the rear, both motorcycles ride on linkage-free monoshocks, the KTM being one of few Indian manufactured bikes to use a lightweight, cast-alloy swingarm. The 200NS is clearly more comfortable. Both bikes come with firm ride quality. The Duke is decidedly sportier. Sharper handling is its forte, the wide bars helping the front end impart an effortless, lighter and more confident feel. Both bikes love to corner, and do so on rails, although the KTM holds the advantage. Helping it is way more grip offered by softer-compound MRF radial tyres. Both motorcycles provide good brakes. Fuel economy is likewise adequate for the performance on tap, the triple plug equipped Pulsar 200NS managing a slightly better overall 38.5kpl to the 200 Duke’s 37kpl.

 

Two bikes, a unanimous verdict

 

This has been a hotly contested match, with plenty of give and take, but in the end, neither bike’s able to leave the other any significant margin behind. True to its Pulsar heritage, few streetbikes are as sporty, still comfortable and practical enough to commute on as the value-for-money 200NS. Likewise, the 200 Duke is a more focussed sportsbike, its superior specifications justifying the price premium it commands.

 

Read the full story and far more detail in the Autocar India August 2012 issue.

 

Read More

Kawasaki Ninja 650 vs Ducati Monster 795

Kawasaki’s Ninja 650 and Ducati’s Monster 795 are India’s top two affordable superbikes. Read on for the details in this Autocar India exclusive do-or-die duel.

The surging influx of superbikes in India bodes well for bikers, and topping today’s list are two very fast, and useable twin-cylinder bikes, Kawasaki’s just launched Ninja 650, here thanks to Bajaj, and the Ducati Monster 795.

Read on to learn which of these tempting, top-class bikes makes the true segment leader?

A tale of two twins

You can’t mistake the Ninja 650 for the Monster 795. The Kawasaki is a bigger, smartly faired-in bike. Both motorcycles come with effective headlights, the Ninja using a broad, twin-beam unit.

The adjustable windscreen on the Ninja requires tools and effort to reposition, but offers an advantage over the M795, allowing comfortable riding at over 150kph, speeds the Monster has trouble sustaining because of excess wind blast.

The 2012 Ninja offers LED-powered, white-lit instruments with a bold analogue tachometer, digital speedometer, average fuel consumption indicator, remaining rideable range and an economy riding mode indicator. The 795’s digital console is meanwhile compact and slim, with a cascading bar tachometer, bold speedometer, odometer, trip-meter and oil pressure indicator.

Reach-adjustable clutch and front brake levers are available only on the Ninja, the Monster losing out here. Likewise, the 650 wins brownies for its hazard warning button. Both bikes offer good switchgear and superb palm grips, as well as functional rear-view mirrors.

You can’t miss the muscular Monster’s bright red trellis frame and signature exhaust cans sticking out at rear. The Ninja tucks its exhaust system under its engine bay. Bungee anchors and more practical grab bars are standard on the Kawasaki, while both big bikes provide good overall quality, fit and finish and a keen attention to detail.

Twin power

Both these rivals use short-stroke, two-valve per cylinder engines, the Kawasaki deploying a 649cc, liquid-cooled parallel twin, where the Ducati uses an air and oil-cooled, 803cc, L-twin. Dual overhead camshafts power the Ninja head, while the Monster exercises Ducati’s more positive ‘Desmodromic’ valvetrain management.   

The Ninja 650’s 71.1bhp peak power output at 8500rpm falls short of the Monster 795’s 87bhp at 8250rpm. The 795 is also a much lighter motorcycle, tipping the scales at 187kg versus the 650’s 211kg.

The Ninja sounds very refined, relatively tame and well behaved as typical of Japanese bikes, converse to the louder, brasher Monster 795. Both bikes offer a nicely weighted feel at their clutch levers, the Monster 795 offering hydraulic actuation. Shifting through both these six-speed gearboxes is a cinch.

This Ninja and Monster are both seriously quick motorcycles with useable performance that proves more than sufficient on Indian roads. Apart from their true 210kph top speeds, the acceleration numbers show the Monster is quicker to 100kph in 4.22 seconds, where the Ninja takes 4.46sec. This difference widens at 160kph, where the 795 clocked 10.41s and the 650 12.56s.

The Ninja is a smoother motorcycle, its power feeding in with a linear, easier-managed delivery. The M795’s cracking mid-range piles in with full force post 4500rpm, frantically driving the bike to its 8500rpm redline in every gear. It takes concentration to avoid bashing the 795’s rev limiter when gassing the bike in first and second.

Corner carving

The Monster 795 beats the Ninja 650 hollow on chassis hardware. Their basic frames are comparable, the 795 using a Ducati-trademark trellis steel spine where the Ninja has a twin-tubular steel unit. The Ninja thereafter loses out, using conventional telescopic front forks to the Monster’s upside-downs. At rear, the Italian bike is on top, for providing a monoshock with alloy swingarm, converse to the Kawasaki’s offset monoshock and twin-tube swingarm.

The Ninja is a more comfortable motorcycle, with its relatively upright, commanding riding position and better pillion accommodation. Ride quality is better damped too. The Monster 795 holds the edge with slightly quicker turn-in, but lacks the confident, more stable cornering prowess of the Ninja 650. Both bikes come with gluey tyres, the Ducati’s Pirellis providing better traction than the Kawasaki’s Dunlop rubber.

Twin-disc front brakes and single-rotor rear brakes are standard kit, but the M795 aces for using steel-braided brake lines, these working to deliver sharper brake response, opposed to the Ninja’s more progressive feel. The Monster 795 stopped in a really short 13.91m from 60kph during brake testing, while the Ninja 650 took 14.13 metres to come to rest from the same speed.

The Ninja 650 is a more frugal motorcycle, providing 24.5kpl riding in the city, where the Monster 795 gave us 21.7kpl. And during highway running, the 650 returned 27.7kpl with the 795 close behind with 24.8kpl. 

The winner takes it all

The stylish Monster 795 is a big, bold step in the right direction for Ducati India. The faster Monster 795 is hard to beat when seen as a character-rich, stylish naked muscle bike.

Still on our roads, the 795 can’t hold a candle to the considerably more affordable, refined, comfortable and well-mannered Ninja 650.

This practical new Kawasaki is about the most sensible big bikes we can recommend you go ahead and buy in India today.

Read More

Honda CBR150R vs Yamaha YZF-R15 V2.0

We ride the 150cc variants of Honda's CBR and Yamaha's YZF-R to rate one best-of-the-best.

Honda and Yamaha have locked horns in India, but never this fiercely. Over the last few years the R15 has epitomised the proper small capacity Indian sportsbike, earning quite a following along the way. With the YZF-R15 Version 2.0, the best just got better.

This Yamaha’s all prepared to take on Honda's spanking new CBR150R. Honda has had the luxury of time to evaluate and build a bike to take on the R15 V2.0. We tell you which bike chants the lighter, faster and meaner mantra with utmost sincerity?

Design & engineering

Neither the Honda CBR150R nor Yamaha’s YZF-R15 V2.0 leave you wanting for visual drama. The YZF-R15 V2.0 similarly shouts out its sportbike origins, its proven and attractive styling drawing from the acclaimed R1. Dual headlamps, a beefy fairing and a sharp tail mark the R15 out as a performance motorcycle.

The mini Fireblade’s sporty; humpback fuel-tank houses 13 litres, where the R15 fits in 12, and the Honda tips the scales at 138kg, just a wee bit more than the Yamaha’s 136kg. Both bikes come with easily read, sporty and compact instrument counters that display all required information. The CBR’s switchgear is a let-down on account of omitting both, a pass-flasher and engine kill-switch, which are standard R15 equipment.

Fit-finish, build-quality and paint lustre are impressive on both these attractive Japanese sportsbikes.

Engine, gearbox & performance

Japanese bikes are renowned for refined engines, and the CBR150R and YZF-R15 V2.0 acquit themselves as no exceptions. Both bikes share much architecture, with single-cylinder, four-stroke, liquid-cooled and fuel-injected hearts. The Yamaha displaces 149.8cc, the Honda 149.4cc, and both breathe via 4-valve heads, although the Yamaha drives its valve-train via a single overhead camshaft (sohc), where the Honda relies on dual camshafts (dohc). A noticeable difference is the CBR calling for you to get out the whip to rev it high into its powerband before it makes serious power, which used to be an original R15 shortcoming, rectified on the V2.0. The CBR makes little more power, but is outdone on torque.

Both sportsbikes delight with quick throttle response, creamy smooth power deliveries and little to no vibes. The Honda revs a 1000 odd rpm higher than the Yamaha, but this isn’t that much of an advantage when seen in light of the R15 never requiring to be ridden this hard to claim all its potential. Both bikes transmit power via 6-speed, 1-down and 5-up shifted gearboxes.

The CBR150R proved itself up on performance, a bonus on sportsbikes like these. From a standing start, the R15 outdoes the CBR150R to 60kph taking 4.58 seconds to 4.73secs.   

Ride, handling & braking

From the saddle, the CBR150R rider gets a relatively roomy, slightly more upright riding position as compared to the more track focussed YZF-R15 V2.0. While both riding positions are far from commuter friendly, this can be overlooked as fitting their sportsbike character.

On paper, the R15 has the extra hardware to give the CBR a run for its money. Although both rivals use comparable steel spar frames, the Yamaha throws in a cast alloy swingarm where the Honda makes do with a conventional steel swingarm. Furthermore, the R15 deploys superior suspension at rear, offering a linked monoshock.

The R15 handles with a more predictable, stable feel. The V2.0 also corners with more confidence, without being easily shaken by undulating surfaces, steering almost as quickly as the more nimble, shorter wheelbase CBR150R, and doing so while simultaneously offering superior ride quality. Better tyres further assist the R15, being softer compound, stickier rubber, with an exceptional radial rear MRF.

Disc brakes front and rear are standard, performing as well as expected on both bikes, with a good, solid feel at the levers.

Fuel economy

Do please skip the pair compared here and consider a Honda CB Twister or Hero Splendor if looking for fuel efficient motorcycles, having said which, these 150cc sportsbikes don’t disappoint when speaking efficiency. The CBR150R proves a notch more frugal in city riding conditions, where it delivers 46.9kpl. On the highway it’s capable of 42.9kpl. On the other hand, the YZF-R15 V2.0 returned 43kpl in city and 47.7kpl on the highway.

Verdict

Both 150’s look equally menacing and attractive, with superb quality and finish. The CBR provides noticeably better performance, an advantage only blunted by the R15’s more useable power, other than which the Yamaha creams the Honda with stellar ride.

This brings us to decision time, to unanimously elect one bike master of its game. The YZF-R15 V2.0 is our sportsbike of choice, the one we suggest you buy for being so sharply focussed and adept at doing what sportsbikes should, without any confusion along the way. In addition to which the deal tips further in Yamaha’s favour when you note the CBR150R is priced unfairly higher as well.

Read More

Ducati Multistrada 1200 vs BMW R 1200 GS

Poor roads, and often the equivalent of no roads are common across India. Crumbling infrastructure nationwide ensures ample terrain for rugged motorcycles like Ducati’s path-breaking Multistrada 1200 and BMW Motorrad’s trusty R 1200 GS to tackle and conquer. Certainly, few other motorcycles makes more sense in this country, than adventure-tourers like these, born and bred to deal with every possible environment.

Provided you can afford them, this pair represents the crème-de-la-crème of motorcycles on offer in India today. We bring these European rivals face-to-face in a no holds barred duel to find out which is the best of the best?

Dashing or sober, take your pick

The Ducati Multistrada 1200 and BMW’s R 1200 GS are both large, pretty tall motorcycles, each with individual character. The Ducati is decidedly sportier, oozing an Italian air of flamboyance, while the Beemer looks relatively sober and industrial, a more appealing bike to mature motorcyclists who’ve had their fill of sportsbikes.

The Multistrada comes with a sharper snout, led by twin intake vents and sleek headlights, while the GS has a more practical face with its asymmetrical headlight cluster. Both motorcycles provide manually adjustable visors, a boon when pushing either of these bikes over 140kph, which they are so easily capable of. Space age, digital instrumentation and a keyless ignition system wow you on the Mustistrada, where the GS sticks more to the conventional, using comparatively ho-hum, still easy on the eye analogue dominated instrumentation.

Ideal motorcycles for your Himalayan dream ride, touring the frozen landscapes of Ladakh or any other mountainous terrains of Northern India, both rugged motorcycles attempt to keep you comfortable through every eventuality, with heated grips, knuckle protection and reach adjustable levers. Indian riders will prefer the simpler Multistrada switches, which isn’t to say much is wrong with the solid, built to last GS controls, barring their cumbersome individual turn signal switches.  

Both motorcycles offer superb tank grip, comfortable riding saddles and the option of ample pannier space, the Mutistrada looking stylish despite when handicapped with their extra bulk. Exposed rear wheels add zing to both sturdy motorcycles.

The GS fails to match the panache that’s yours for the asking on the Mustistrada, as seen in its exposed trellis frame flanks, smart belly scoop and stubby silencers, but, the GS likewise enjoys a forte of its own. Like any BMW bike, you get the feeling a GS can outlive its owner, with such terrific overall quality and fit-finish as to make even the high quality Multistrada seem a notch lower.

Twin treats

Both motorcycles use distinctive four-stroke engines, the Multistrada’s (1198.4cc) installed as an L-twin with desmodromic valve actuation, while the R 1200 GS (1170cc) sticks to BMW’s traditional ‘boxer’ format, a horizontally opposed twin. Fuel-injection is standard, although the Multistrada is liquid-cooled, transferring its 150bhp via chain drive whereas the air-and-oil cooled GS puts down 110 horses through shaft drive. Although the Multistrada and GS are both content to toodle around and mingle with city traffic at low speeds thanks to their meaty torque curves, the GS enjoys an advantage in being smoother. The Multistrada has a more hard-edged, raw feel to it that’s always goading you to give it some gas. The Multistrada’s 12.1kgm of peak torque spins free at 7500rpm, outdone by the GS’s flat-twin that liberates 12.23kgm at 6000rpm.

Both big bikes go with hydraulic clutch operation and six-speed gearboxes. The clutch and gearshifts offer slick, smooth action on the Beemer, these still positive and precise but calling for more effort to operate on the Ducati.

You can’t help but fall for both motorcycle’s exhaust tones, the Ducati sportier where the BMW strikes a smoother, more sedate note. In fact, everything about the R 1200 GS’s engine is just so much more relaxed, the Multistrada giving you this more direct, exciting feedback that’s evident in the cracking response its ride-by-wire throttle feeds your wrist, especially in ‘Sports’ mode, where the engine mapping is at its aggressive best.

The GS rocks playfully to the right when given a blip of its throttle at idle, but stick it in gear, dial in some throttle, and you find yourself cresting an unending wave of liquid-smooth power, as the bike pulls seamlessly through its broad, flawless power band. The Multistrada feels more a sportsbike than adventure-tourer when shown the whip, lightening its front end while effortlessly distorting all its surrounding scenery into one big blur. Traction control can be had on both powerful motorcycles, the Multistrada offering this in eight varying stages of assist depending on the riding mode you choose, ‘Sports,’ ‘Touring,’ ‘Urban’ or ‘Enduro.’

The Multistrada is the bike to own if speed is your thing, as performance runs riot through its all Italian veins, this powerful motorcycle easily able to jostle the GS into its mirrors, then well beyond their reach as it accelerates hard, satiating all your high speed thrills.

The GS offers a different kind of experience, as it roars along with a refined, gentlemanly politeness the Ducati can never match.

Two-wheeled hovercrafts

Motorcycle riding positions don’t come more commanding than on the Ducati Multistrada 1200 and BMW R 1200 GS. These tall steeds seat their riders in near identical, higher than regular, upright positions that are certain to impress you. You feel the master of these machines, arms stretching out to their wide handlebars.

Frames and suspension setups are electronically controlled on both motorcycles provided you buy top of the line models. The Ducati uses a combination of a magnesium sub-frame ahead of its steering column, a steel-trellis around the engine and a cast alloy brace to hold its single side, alloy swingarm. Electronically controlled, fully adjustable Ohlins suspension comes with the Multistrada 1200 S, which uses upside-down telescopic forks and a monoshock at the rear.

On the Beemer you get a twin section frame, BMW Motorrad’s signature Telelever five-way adjustable suspension with a single strut in front, a single side, alloy swingarm and fully adjustable Paralever rear suspension.

ABS is available for both bikes, and disc brakes are standard.

You can alter damping to suite the terrain, or your riding style and ride quality simply doesn’t get any better than astride both these capable motorcycles, the Multistrada and GS capable of gliding over potholes, cocooning their riders so well as to keep them just as cosseted as atop a magic carpet. Both seats are broad enough to offer superb support, but the Multistrada drops a wee bit short of matching the softer BMW’s saddle.

There’d be few Indians who would actually take these bikes off-road, but Indian roads often being just as good as riding off-road is what makes them so sensible for us. Find a well surfaced highway though, and the Multistrada starts shining through. Its superior performance is complemented by lighter, sharper handling, which has the BMW feeling heavier, never as quick to turn in and really struggling to keep up when having fun scything through twisty tarmac. The Multistrada corners as well as—if not better than—expected from a motorcycle of this segment, while the GS does feel relatively reluctant to play catch up in the corners. Wide handlebars on both bikes provide excellent leverage when negotiating congested conditions.

The Ducati comes with tailor made multi-compound Pirelli tyres, where the BMW sticks with Metzeler rubber, footprints that generate prodigious grip for both machines with ample stopping power always at hand to haul these motorcycles down safely from high speed. Front end dive is reduced on the BMW thanks to its innovative Telelever suspension, but all said and done, we’d never hesitate to choose the Ducati over the Beemer as our date to the handling prom.

Can’t go wrong with either

You require forcing our backs to the wall, and then aiming a gun at our temples before we pick one from these truly top-class motorcycles for you, for few bikes, if any can match the practical sense both these Adventure-tourers provide on Indian roads.

The Multistrada offers razor sharp performance, adequate comfort, accomplished handling and all of it with panache to make it stand out as the singularly most outstanding motorcycle anyone could own in India. The supremely refined R 1200 GS is perhaps the only other model we would consider the day we got tired of this Ducati, and looked around for something less aggressive, more mature as well as user friendly on our roads.

Now, if only Ducati and BMW Motorrad could look at the Indian market with stronger commitment, to lower their stratospheric pricing on both brilliant motorcycles to a more affordable level.

Read More