Menus
- Motorcycles from KTM, Ducati, Triumph and Suzuki in comparison
- MOTORCYCLE scoring / test result
- The four engine concepts
- Technical specifications
Jahn
16 photos
Jahn
1/16
How many cylinders does a biker need to be lucky? Which engine concept impresses with which advantages? A comparison of four fundamentally different bikes in the three-quarter liter class.
Jahn
2/16
As the heaviest, the GSR does not have it easy in comparison. Boring four-cylinder? The post goes from 3500 rpm. The 750 is inconspicuously fast. And good.
Jahn
3/16
Quiet-running four-cylinder with subjectively less spectacular performance characteristics in the Suzuki.
Jahn
4/16
Suzuki GSR 750.
Jahn
5/16
All bikes have their advantages. It’s all a matter of taste?
Jahn
6/16
Equipped with all virtues and yet anything but boring: The Triumph shines with impeccable handling and beguiles with sound and performance.
Jahn
7/16
Triumph Street Triple R..
Jahn
8/16
Triumph Street Triple R – best compromise? The three-cylinder with smooth running despite the large individual displacement.
Jahn
9/16
KTM 690 Duke, Ducati Monster 696, Triumph Street Triple R and Suzuki GSR 750.
Jahn
10/16
A real hot spur, the KTM – as long as the road is level. Then the super-handy Duke is hard to beat in winding corners.
Jahn
11/16
Water-cooled four-valve engine: the KTM-Single exhausts the single-cylinder concept.
Jahn
12/16
KTM 690 Duke.
Jahn
13/16
All engine concepts have their advantages – and above all their very special charms.
Jahn
14/16
The Ducati is a character bike. The V2 sound is cult, the seating posture is idiosyncratic, the driving experience is characterized by a high emotional value.
Jahn
15/16
Air-cooled two-valve: The Monster-V2 ignores the virtues of progress.
Jahn
16/16
Ducati Monster 696.
Middle class concept comparison
Motorcycles from KTM, Ducati, Triumph and Suzuki in comparison
How many cylinders does a biker need to be lucky? Which engine concept impresses with which advantages? A comparison of four fundamentally different bikes in the three-quarter liter class.
Some say it depends on the inner values. The others claim that size and appearance are important criteria. Inner values? Well, with 72 millimeters (bore) and 46 millimeters (stroke), i.e. around 187 cubic centimeters of displacement, no state can be made in engine circles. Especially not when others flaunt values of 102 or 80 millimeters and can lead 654 cubic centimeters into the field. Unless you have four of the cylinders described at the beginning in the form of their key data. So after all: it depends on the quantity (the cylinder). What matters much more, however, is what you make of it. What does that mean for sound, character, running culture, performance development and, last but not least, for the available top performance? Where does the single-cylinder have the edge, where does the four-cylinder show its strengths? Even the V2 or in-line three-cylinder is the best compromise?
Who else but the KTM 6th90 Should Duke have a chance to defend the stew’s honor? After all, the Austrians are still building the most powerful series single-cylinder with the high-compression (11.8: 1) single and can also boast many years of and certainly helpful racing experience. In any case, the 690 can even top the 65 hp promised at the factory on the test bench and pushes an honest 70 hp onto the roll. The use of state-of-the-art engine technology and the use of lightweight and resilient materials make the necessary speeds possible today, at which, for example, an old XT 500 engine would have long since thrown components around and left oil behind. The KTM single reaches its top performance at an enormous 7500 rpm, and it can turn up to 8500 rpm before the limiter intervenes. Extreme values, as well as the achieved mean piston speed of 22.7 meters per second at maximum speed, with which the KTM is slightly in the critical range beyond the 20 m / s mark.
Buy complete article
Middle class concept comparison
Motorcycles from KTM, Ducati, Triumph and Suzuki in comparison
Ducati with its comparatively old-fashioned air-cooled two-valve engine leaves it at 18.1 m / s at the maximum permitted 9500 revolutions. We’ll get to the high-revving three- and four-cylinder engines later. As close as the performance values are, in practice the two engines are worlds apart in every respect. The nervous racehorse on the one hand, the well-behaved, good-natured draft horse on the other. The KTM single operates in favor of possible high speeds with relatively little flywheel mass, which would actually be necessary to help it to run properly at low speeds. Accordingly, the stew picks up on the chain in a jerky and unruly manner, even below 3000 rpm, strolling is not his thing. The engineers were able to get rid of vibrations quite well using a balancer shaft, but the engine’s combustion processes are very present at every speed. With its toxic characteristics, it encourages the whipped driver to always drive faster or more aggressively. The supermoto-like seating position, aggressively far forward and close to the handlebars, as well as the short geared transmission also support such attacks.
Tight turns, which the Suzuki completes itself just above jogging speed without grumbling or jerking in the second, can only be done with the KTM in said gear position with sensitive support from the clutch. Better to step in the first one briefly and hold the bitingly appealing single with feeling in the throttle hand under tension, then to dash forward vehemently when tearing it open. As a fun side effect, wheelie fans will surely enjoy the fact that the light KTM likes to go on the rear wheel from time to time. The KTM single-cylinder feels really good between 4000 and a good 7500 rpm, where it finally reaches its top performance. In the range from 5000 to 6700 tours (see performance diagram on p. 48) it surpasses all others in terms of top performance and gets down to business in the lower gears. The angry character in connection with the short gear ratio and the low weight secures the KTM the crown in the “second-gear-out-of-the-turn sprint”. The Ducati Monster retracts the red lantern in this discipline and cannot excuse itself with a translation that is too long – this is only slightly longer than with the KTM. Rather, the 25 kilos heavier weight has an impact here, but above all the significant performance gap between 4000 and 5000 rpm has an effect, in an area where the KTM is massively increasing performance. This trailer of the V2 lets the Ducati take a breather in the range of around 50 to 60 km / h. Once it has lost meters, it can no longer make up for it. The smallest of the Ducati V2 family pleases with its proper running smoothness and well-mannered response to gas commands and it does not generate any annoying vibrations. Instead, it delivers the pulsation so loved by the fans, accompanied by a dull thump that sounds like more than just under 700 cm³. With a slight jerking of the slide and clear load change reactions, the 90-degree V2 is not recommended for strolling city trips, where the very directly engaging, difficult-to-dose clutch is no pleasure, but rather for brisk country road rides. If you work hard in the hard, but crisp shiftable gearbox and keep the engine always in the high-performance range between 5500 and 8000 tours, you will put the little Italian on the asphalt and have a lot of fun.
Jahn
Equipped with all virtues and yet anything but boring: The Triumph shines with impeccable handling and beguiles with sound and performance.
Triumph riders have that anyway. In the saddle of the Speed Triple, even die-hard single or V2 fans should get the hair on the back of their necks when starting the bike. The hoarse, smoky roaring triplet runs almost as silky and vibration-free as a four-cylinder, but has the necessary rough charm that saves it from being accused of being a boring turbine. Smooth concentricity from idle and smooth, jolt-free throttle response enable just as problem-free acceleration from the lowest speeds as with the four-cylinder.
The successful coordination of the British triplet can be seen in the combination of lavish top performance and rich pulling power (up to 3500 rpm, the 675 is ahead of the game). Despite the lack of displacement, the triple beats the Suzuki quad (measured 105 PS) and delivers more tractive power (the power that drives the motorcycle in the tire contact area) over the entire speed range. This is exactly how the pilot feels in the saddle: There is never a lack of performance, there is always powerful progress everywhere. The cranking of the engine turns on because of the beguiling three-cylinder hiss, but rarely has to be really.
Almost comparatively unspectacular, because it is even and without an explosion in performance, the triplet increases over the entire speed range and turns with power in the direction of the limiter, which only locks at 12,600 tours. With an average piston speed of 22 m / s at that maximum speed, the Triumph engine is already beyond the aforementioned threshold of 20 m / s. The concept of the short-stroke four-cylinder Suzuki makes it easy to stay well below the 20 mark at 17.6 m / s despite the permitted high speeds of up to 11,500 rpm. With a stroke of just 46 millimeters, the GSR pistons cover the smallest distance between the upper and lower reversal point, the loaded components inside the engine can be designed more filigree and thus lighter and thus enable the high speeds due to the lower moving masses. The great concentricity of the four-cylinder is the result of the firing sequence: one of the four cylinders ignites every half crankshaft revolution (180 degrees), while with the single-cylinder a combustion process only takes place every second revolution (720 degrees).
So it’s no wonder that the Suzuki four-wheeler gently accelerates from idle and accelerates smoothly – in this respect, the 750 series mutates into the queen of sweeps in second gear. The fact that the smooth-running and only subtle whispering engine loses the acceleration competition against KTM and Triumph is due on the one hand to the higher weight of the GSR, and on the other hand to the fact that the 750er pushes a bit cautiously at the beginning and only comes to the point after about 3500 tours corresponds to almost 45 km / h in 2nd gear. The Suzuki cannot make up for the ground lost at the beginning on the short distance. Beyond this speed mark, however, there is hardly a stop for the lively Japanese woman, she pulls evenly powerfully through the speed range, happily slams into the limiter with momentum. In narrow terrain and the associated numerous hard braking and braking
The GSR also inspires acceleration orgies with the lowest load change reactions.
The rule that multi-cylinder engines consume more fuel than single-cylinder because of the more numerous moving parts and the higher friction due to the larger number of bearings, seems to want to punish the Suzuki lies. Their additional consumption is only small, with just under or over four liters per 100 kilometers, KTM, Ducati and Suzuki can be considered quite economical. Only the Triumph Drilling approved around a liter more than the rest of the field. But who in the saddle of the British woman thinks of such banal values? In comparison, it offers the most suitable, most relaxed and yet sporty arrangement of bench, footrests and handlebars. Small and large drivers feel that they are in good hands and would prefer a slightly thicker, firmer seat upholstery.
Otherwise, hardly anything spoils the driving pleasure: The 190 kilogram British girl can be thrown wonderfully easily in an inclined position, turns easily, stays neutral on course and offers great feedback from the front wheel. The fully adjustable chassis offers enough reserves for almost any road surface, the fork responds sensitively and can handle both fine and rough bumps properly. A hammer, this triumph. In principle, this also applies to your brakes, if you can and want to do without the unavailable ABS. The bite and controllability of the double piston stoppers are a blast. Beginners and those with gross motor skills should, however, be careful with the brake lever at the beginning: A real two-finger brake is at work here. This also applies to the KTM single disc. Bite and controllability are on a high, if not quite Triumph level. And at the latest with a pillion passenger and after several hard downhill braking, the Duke’s system is slightly on its knees: The braking effect diminishes somewhat after heavy use, while the Street Triple can withstand such tortures without complaint.
Jahn
The Ducati is a character bike. The V2 sound is cult, the seating posture is idiosyncratic, the driving experience is characterized by a high emotional value.
Incidentally, jagged lean changes are not quite as drastic with the British model as with the KTM, which hits the hook in the tightest of spaces, but the Duke seems overhanded and nervous in this regard, reacts super-sensitively to the smallest steering impulses and its fully adjustable spring elements are difficult to optimally adjust . Either the fork acts relatively softly, then there is a lot of movement in the front with the relatively long suspension travel, or sporty taut, then the KTM rubs towards the edge of the curve on rough terrain.
The sitting posture is also not ideal for everyday use in the long term – moved far forward to the tank, close to the wide handlebars, the posture is more suitable for bolting on the Supermoto slope. So the Duke has little to do with straight-line stability when driving at full throttle over the track and with rides with a pillion passenger. To do this, you can bend your elbows over the asphalt, but, as mentioned, always looks a bit nervous, and when braking is the clearest of all. Everything together leads to the realization that the KTM, also because of its rough engine characteristics, belongs more in the hands of ambitious sports drivers than in the hands of beginners, who are attracted by its low weight. Speaking of beginners: Since its introduction (still as 600), the smallest in the monster family has been considered the beginner or women’s monster. Sure, it is light, low, and therefore easy to control, but it still has the monster image and a great sounding V2.
Everything is correct, but the 696 has more to offer, even if it takes some getting used to. The wide, straight handlebar of the Ducati, which is moved quite far forward, conveys a bit of the old M-handlebar feeling of earlier days, as well as the high-mounted footrests angled the legs sharply and provide a sporty flair. The spring elements only do justice to such a drive to a certain extent: The non-adjustable fork should respond more sensitively and will bend significantly during heavy braking maneuvers. The rather hard rear end doesn’t quite fit in with it. On a perfect surface, however, the Duc impresses with decent feedback and neutral cornering behavior. Turning in, bending over, everything goes very light-footed, but the Monster lands too early in an inclined position, also noticeably stands up when braking and thus limits the fun on bends.
The Ducati, of all things, is the only one in the test field to shine with standard ABS, which also controls sensitively and at short intervals, keeps the brake pressure in the optimal range and therefore works great. An ABS has been announced for the Suzuki GSR 750 at least for late summer, the test machine had to do without it. Is that why the Japanese deliberately designed the brakes so blunt to protect against overbraking? In any case, the effect and controllability were somewhat disappointing and, especially after changing from the Triumph, caused wide eyes before the first corner. Uiuiui, just the two-finger stoppers, now felt like an eight-finger brake. The sitting posture on the 750 is almost as good as on the Triumph, the driver has to stretch a little further towards the handlebars, but he also sits on a more comfortable bench. The Suzuki also turns lightly, but does not fall from one lean angle to the other as easily as the Duke or Street Triple show. The GSR wants to be a little more concentrated, but then also pulls quite neutral and stable through the curve and only touches down relatively late. The fork, which can only be pre-tensioned, provides decent feedback and could indeed be a bit more sensitive, but the fork and shock absorber shine with a well-functioning basic setting despite the non-adjustable damping.
In general, the four-cylinder Japanese woman can keep up with the field thanks to her good motor manners, her performance and her properly functioning chassis, despite the highest weight. In everyday life, it’s time to come, because with a good view in the mirrors, great light and the necessary seating comfort also for the front passenger, it cuts a fine figure in daily use and also offers the greatest range. Almost as if the motto was reason instead of driving fun.
So do four small pistons make more sense than one big one? Yes and no. The truth is probably in between. Reason (i.e. the scoring) sees the three-cylinder solution at the forefront – with this engine, the state can always be made anywhere. But the other engine concepts also have their advantages – and above all their very special charms.
MOTORCYCLE scoring / test result
Jahn
All engine concepts have their advantages – and above all their very special charms.
engine
All good things come in threes: The Triumph three-cylinder shines with great smoothness, gentle response, great power from the bottom and great revving. It also delivers a beguilingly hoarse sound. The four-cylinder of the Suzuki is hot on his heels, but can only hold a candle to the British triplet with a more civilized load change behavior and less hard shifting gearbox. The hearty roaring Ducati-V2 is definitely fun, but weakens a bit in the important middle speed range and shows the most rowdy load-changing manners as well as the bitchiest clutch. The KTM stew is characterized by a hard, rough engine running below 3000 rpm and an overly direct response, which is very energetic in the middle range.
Winner engine: triumph
landing gear
Handy and yet stable: The Triumph shows how it works. Not quite as handy as the bustling KTM, but extremely precise, neutral and stable at all times, the British model pulls its course and never stresses the driver. The fully adjustable chassis is nowhere bare. The by no means unwieldy Suzuki has to admit defeat to all when it comes to handling, but scores with solid handling, especially with a pillion passenger. The fully adjustable chassis of the KTM makes it difficult to find a compromise between easy to swallow and sporty and firm, but it is unbeatable in terms of handling and freedom from lean angles. The front passenger likes the very handy, stable Ducati least of all. Their spring elements turn out to be too soft at the front and too hard at the back. In addition, it touches down too early.
Chassis winner: triumph
everyday life
This is where Suzuki’s hour strikes: the GSR 750 has to admit defeat everywhere else, in everyday life it proves to be the most harmonious companion. Comfortable seats for driver and passengers, good visibility in the mirrors, extremely bright light, the greatest range – this is how you win. The also very pleasant Triumph loses mainly because of its shorter range and equipment. Ducati and KTM are lagging behind, both are bikes for special use and primarily want to offer driving pleasure and not so much utility. The Monster leaves feathers mainly because of its modest equipment, the Duke because of its meager range because of its small tank. What both have in common is the moderate seating comfort for driver and front passenger.
Winner everyday: Suzuki
security
The ABS brings victory: The Monster is the only one in the field to offer an ABS, which also works really well and thus scores the decisive points. The Triumph, however, has the most effective, because the most snappy and best controllable brakes. The KTM stoppers are also poisonous, but the single disc bends a little under extreme loads. The performance of the dull acting Suzuki brakes remains a little disappointing. After all: ABS should be available from late summer.
Safety winner: Ducati
costs
Driving a Ducati is cheap: Long 12,000 inspection intervals make monster driving cheap. Every 7500 kilometers, the KTM has an expensive service, the Triumph does not offer a mobility guarantee and consumes the most fuel.
Winner cost: Ducati
Price-performance
The Triumph wins here together with the Suzuki, which has fewer points but also costs less.
Price-performance winner: SUZUKI / Triumph
| Max points | Ducati | KTM | Suzuki | triumph | Overall rating | 1000 | 595 | 577 | 644 | 661 |
| placement | 3 | 4th | 2 | 1 | Price-performance note | 1.0 | 1.9 | 2.2 | 1.3 | 1.3 |
Jahn
A real hot spur, the KTM – as long as the road is level. Then the super-handy Duke is hard to beat in winding corners.
Test result
1st Triumph Street Triple R
Strong, great-sounding engine, top chassis, extremely effective brakes – the British driver mixes up the field and leaves nothing to be desired (except for ABS).
2. Suzuki GSR 750
Even if it inconspicuously collects points and shines with its suitability for everyday use: the GSR is not a “boring four-cylinder organ”. Criticism of the blunt brakes should be taken seriously.
3. Ducati Monster 696
The monsters live from the feeling that the wonderfully thundering V2, which is a little weak in the middle, conveys. Commendable: the standard, almost optimally regulating ABS.
4. KTM 690 Duke
A bike of extremes: extremely handy, but also extremely uncomfortable, with an extremely snappy single cylinder hanging on the gas, which runs extremely rough below 3000 rpm. Still extremely cool.
The four engine concepts
Jahn
KTM 690 Duke, Ducati Monster 696, Triumph Street Triple R and Suzuki GSR 750.
Single cylinders are not easy to revolve and four-cylinder offer sluggish pulling power – long live the cliche. Modern engines turn many prejudices upside down, but ultimately cannot get completely out of their conceptual skin. For example, a single cylinder (with the same cubic capacity) will not achieve the speed stability of a multi-cylinder due to the larger mass of the piston and necessary connecting rod as well as the heavier, because larger valves. In order to get the best performance and torque from the engine, the best possible cylinder filling is to be ensured. This requires large valve cross-sections and the largest possible valve lifts. Larger valves, however, are heavier and limit the possible speeds as well as the valves that at some point no longer open and close properly (fluttering). Incidentally, four- or five-valve engines have an advantage over the two-valve engine in terms of the largest possible inlet and outlet cross-sections, but require complex valve control. The centrifugal mass required for concentricity in the single cylinder also stands in the way of high speeds. Short-stroke design in favor of a larger bore and larger valves increases the runout problem. With the two-cylinder, twice the number of work cycles per unit of time promotes concentricity, while smaller rotating and oscillating masses allow higher speeds. So does everything speak for the “multi-cylinder engine”? Yes and no. Higher engine weight, more construction work and the higher internal friction due to the number of bearing points and the overall higher friction on the piston rings are clear counter-arguments.
KTM 690 Duke
Water-cooled four-valve engine: the KTM-Single exhausts the single-cylinder concept
Ducati Monster 696
Air-cooled two-valve: The Monster-V2 ignores the virtues of progress
Triumph Street Triple R.
Best compromise? The three-cylinder with smooth running despite the large individual displacement
Suzuki GSR 750
Smooth-running four-cylinder with subjectively less spectacular performance characteristics
Technical specifications
Jahn
Quiet-running four-cylinder with subjectively less spectacular performance characteristics in the Suzuki.
| Ducati | engine |
| design type | Two cylinder four stroke 90 degree V engine | injection | Ø 45 mm |
| coupling | Multi-disc oil bath clutch (anti-hopping) | Bore x stroke | 88.0 x 57.2 mm |
| Displacement | 696 cm3 | compression | 10.6: 1 |
| power | 55.0 kW (75 PS) at 9000 rpm | Torque | 69 Nm at 7750 rpm |
| landing gear | frame | Composite frame made of steel with screwed cast aluminum parts |
| fork | Upside-down fork, Ø 43 mm |
| Brakes v / h | Ø 320 / Ø 245 mm | Assistance systems | SECTION |
| bikes | 3.50 x 17; 4.50 x 17 | tires | 120/60 ZR 17; 160/60 ZR 17 |
| Tires | Pirelli Angel ST | mass and weight |
| wheelbase | 1452 mm | Steering head angle | 66.0 degrees |
| trailing | 96 mm | Suspension travel v / h | 120/148 mm |
| Seat height * | 780 mm | Weight with full tank * | 185 kg |
| Payload * | 205 kg | Tank capacity / reserve | 15.0 / 3.0 liters |
| Service intervals | 12,000 km | price | 7990 euros |
| Price test motorcycle | 8890 euros | Additional costs | around 305 euros |
| KTM | engine |
| design type | Single cylinder four-stroke engine | injection | Ø 46 mm |
| coupling | Multi-disc oil bath clutch (anti-hopping) | Bore x stroke | 102.0 x 80.0 mm |
| Displacement | 654 cm3 | compression | 11.8: 1 |
| power | 48.0 kW (65 hp) at 7500 rpm | Torque | 67 Nm at 5500 rpm |
| landing gear |
frame | Steel tubular frame |
| fork | Upside-down fork, Ø 48 mm | Brakes v / h | Ø 320 / Ø 220 mm |
| Assistance systems | – | bikes | 3.50 x 17; 5.00 x 17 |
| tires | 120/70 ZR 17; 160/60 ZR 17 | Tires | Michelin Pilot Power |
| mass and weight | wheelbase | 1472 mm |
| Steering head angle | 63.5 degrees | trailing | 115 mm |
| Suspension travel v / h | 140/140 mm | Seat height * | 870 mm |
| Weight with full tank * | 160 kg | Payload * | 190 kg |
| Tank capacity / reserve | 13.5 / 2.5 liters | Service intervals | 7500 km |
| price | 7,995 euros | Price test motorcycle | – |
| Additional costs | around 250 euros |
| Suzuki | engine |
| design type | Four-cylinder, four-stroke in-line engine | injection | Ø 32 mm |
| coupling | Multi-disc oil bath clutch | Bore x stroke | 72.0 x 46.0 mm |
| Displacement | 749 cm3 | compression | 12.3: 1 |
| power | 78.0 kW (106 hp) at 10,000 rpm | Torque | 80 Nm at 9000 rpm |
| landing gear | frame | Bridge frame made of steel |
| fork | Upside-down fork, Ø 41 mm | Brakes v / h | Ø 310 / Ø 240 mm |
| Assistance systems | – | bikes | 3.50 x 17; 5.50 x 17 |
| tires | 120/70 ZR 17; 180/55 ZR 17 | Tires | Bridgestone BT 016 “EE” |
| mass and weight | wheelbase | 1450 mm |
| Steering head angle | 64.8 degrees | trailing | 102 mm |
| Suspension travel v / h | 120/135 mm | Seat height * | 820 mm |
| Weight with full tank * | 211 kg | Payload * | 189 kg |
| Tank capacity / reserve | 17.5 liters | Service intervals | 6000 km |
| price | 8290 euros | Price test motorcycle | – |
| Additional costs | around 190 euros |
| triumph | engine |
| design type | Three-cylinder four-stroke in-line engine | injection | Ø 44 mm |
| coupling | Multi-disc oil bath clutch | Bore x stroke | 74.0 x 52.3 mm |
| Displacement | 675 cm3 | compression | 12.65: 1 |
| power | 78.0 kW (106 hp) at 11700 rpm | Torque | 68 Nm at 9200 rpm |
| landing gear | frame | Bridge frame made of aluminum |
| fork | Upside-down fork, Ø 41 mm | Brakes v / h | Ø 308 / Ø 220 mm |
| Assistance systems | – | bikes | 3.50 x 17; 5.50 x 17 |
| tires | 120/70 ZR 17; 180/55 ZR 17 | Tires | Pirelli Diablo Rosso Corsa |
| mass and weight | wheelbase | 1405 mm |
| Steering head angle | 66.1 degrees | trailing | 93 mm |
| Suspension travel v / h | 120/130 mm | Seat height * | 830 mm |
| Weight with full tank * | 190 kg | Payload * | 191 kg |
| Tank capacity / reserve | 17.4 liters | Service intervals | 10,000 km |
| price | 8990 euros | Price test motorcycle | 9408 euros |
| Additional costs | around 350 euros |
Related articles
-
Ducati Monster 821, Suzuki GSX-S 750, Triumph Street Triple RS
34 photos 1/34 Three motorcycles, three drive concepts. Ducati Monster 821, Suzuki GSX-S 750 and Triumph Street Triple RS in…
-
35 photos 1/35 BMW S 1000 R, Ducati Monster 1200 S, KTM 1290 Super Duke R and Triumph Speed Triple R in comparison test….
-
Comparison test: Ducati Diavel, Suzuki B-King and Yamaha Vmax
Jahn Comparison test: Power Bikes 2011 Ducati Diavel, Suzuki B-King and Yamaha Vmax Content of Big appearance, powerful sound waves, pressure from all…
-
Comparison test Ducati 996 S, Honda CBR 900 RR, Triumph Daytona 955i
PhotoGargolov Comparison test Ducati 996 S, Honda CBR 900 RR, Triumph Daytona 955i Strategy games Win with four? Or would you rather be brisk with three?…
-
Comparison test Cagiva Raptor against Ducati Monster M 900 against Triumph Speed Triple
Comparison test Cagiva Raptor against Ducati Monster M 900 against Triumph Speed Triple The speedsters Flitzer: You are naked, run around nimble,…
-
Comparison test: naked bikes BMW, Ducati, Triumph, Yamaha, Kawasaki
fact 66 pictures fact 1/66 If you want a real all-rounder, the Yamaha FZ8 is the right choice. fact 2/66 No trace of saving: Despite the …
-
Comparison test of mid-range naked bikes over 100 hp
31 pictures 1/31 Yamaha MT-09 SP, Kawasaki Z 900, Triumph Street Triple R, KTM 790 Duke, Ducati Monster 821 and Suzuki GSX-S 750 …
-
Comparison test of mid-range bikes
Gargolov comparison test mid-range bikes Underdogs They show off neither displacement nor performance, they do without a racing outfit and …
-
Jahn 35 pictures Jahn 1/35 Husqvarna TC 250 R in the motocross comparison test. Jahn 2/35 Yamaha YZ 250 F in the motocross comparison test. Jahn 3/35 Husqvarna TC …
-
Comparison test Ducati Monster 797 and Suzuki SV 650
Artist 28 photos 1/28 Ducati Monster 797 and Suzuki SV 650 in comparison test. 2/28 Ducati Monster 797: Modern, the first: The…