Comparison test BMW K 1300 S, Kawasaki ZZR 1400, Suzuki Hayabusa 1300

Posted on by admin

Menus

Comparison test BMW K 1300 S, Kawasaki ZZR 1400, Suzuki Hayabusa 1300
Gargolov

Comparison test BMW K 1300 S, Kawasaki ZZR 1400, Suzuki Hayabusa 1300

Speed ​​bikes in comparison

The wind tunnel formed their faces, their beefy bodies signal pure strength and the urge for speed. In addition to the Kawasaki ZZR 1400 and the Suzuki Hayabusa, the heavily redesigned BMW K 1300 S complements the high-speed trio.

Like a destructive tornado, the airstream tugs at the smallest fold of the leather suit, roaring through the helmet shell with the power of hundreds of imaginary vocal cords. If the pilot is threatened with a powerful blow from an invisible wall, he should dare to venture out of the narrow corset of the slipstream behind the windshield. And he would do well not to. Losing the overview through the vibrating helmet visor for even a second would mean taking incalculable risks. 83 meters would have been covered in this time ?? at 300 km / h.

Buy complete article

Comparison test BMW K 1300 S, Kawasaki ZZR 1400, Suzuki Hayabusa 1300

Comparison test BMW K 1300 S, Kawasaki ZZR 1400, Suzuki Hayabusa 1300
Speed ​​bikes in comparison

Kawasaki ZZR 1400. And recently the BMW K 1300 S. Since the model year 2008, the Suzuki has even had 1340 instead of 1299 cm3 displacement and 197 instead of 175 hp rated power. At the same time, Kawasaki made significant changes to the intake and exhaust tract as well as the mapping of the engine management of the ZZR. BMW sent the K 1200 S to the sports studio for the 2009 season. It now bears its larger displacement (1293 instead of 1157 cm3) in its name as the K 1300 S and a long list of modifications in its papers: exhaust system with flap control, heavily revised cardan drive, longer wheelbase, conventional indicator activation and the options for a more extensive electronically adjustable Chassis (ESA II) and an automatic switch. And ?? Naturally ?? measured 174 instead of 166 hp peak power.

Optics and acoustics


Gargolov

Massive front: The ZZR is getting ready for the frontal attack with a broad face and four eyes.

To reduce these machines to their ability to maximize performance and top speed would, however, be effect-demanding, impractical, even primitive. Because it is like in real life: the true sovereign does not need to exercise power, it is enough for him to possess it. And it is precisely this basic attitude that each of these three conveys through their appearance. Aggressive tips, deep noses, high tail ?? It takes a long time to find these attributes of sportiness. Most likely to find it at BMW. But even with her, the edges in the lamp mask and paneling remain moderate, more finely set off than radically jagged. In general, taste or not, the BMW has done the visual overhaul well. It looks more modern, lighter, not as chubby as its predecessor. In contrast to the Japanese duo. The dictation of the wind tunnel, the doctrine of the teardrop shape are written in the panels of the Kawa and Suzuki. While the ZZR leaves it with a massive front emphasized by six lamps, the signature of the aerodynamicists on the Hayabusa runs through from front to back. In the USA, its rounded shape has long been the epitome of speed, in this country the motorcycle world is still arguing about the classification of the peregrine falcon’s hunched-over, pompous appearance.

Regardless of the result of the taste, there is no sign of aggression in the trio. And nothing to be heard either. When the in-line engines babble shyly at idle, nobody suspects anything of the violence lurking in the purgatory of the combustion chambers. The Japanese push cuddly soft, a nuance rougher goes the BMW four-cylinder to work. In return, he is more homogeneous, pushing vehemently through the rev range. No breaking in, no swallowing, nothing to spoil the joy of pushing forward.

Torque wave troughs


Gargolov

Grande Dame of Speed: Suzuki Hayabusa 1300.

Regarding the performance diagrams of the Japanese, it should be noted: Their torque wave troughs between 2000 and 3500 rpm have quite different effects in practice. Irrelevant for the Suzuki. Because the Hayabusa only generates one thing on the road: acceleration. It is simply a gem, the four-cylinder that the technicians from Hamamatsu screwed between the wheels of their flagship muscle man. Especially since the increase in cubic capacity gave the short-stroke engine more punch than its predecessor from 4000 tours? that probably less the clientele than the Suzuki advertising department needs. After all, the ZZR unit was threatening the previous Hayabusa engine, especially in the middle area. Whatever the case, the situation has now been cleared up again. The performance peak remains firmly in Hayabusa’s hands with measured 196 PS (Kawasaki: 177 PS, BMW 174 PS). The other two performance modes that can be selected on the handlebar switch, with a gentler response and 184 and 136 hp respectively, seem almost ironic in front of this deliberately staged summit storm.

The ZZR engine is different, which, in contrast to the Hayabusa engine, shows that breathing deeply after 2500 tours in practice. Well done, the capacity and performance dimensions of the bolide transform the torque dip into a noticeable, but not dramatically delayed throttle response. This weakness no longer has anything in common with the performance gap of the 2006 and 2007 ZZR models. In addition, the motor, which is even shorter-stroke than the Hayabusa, is no longer naked and revs up to just under five-digit range. If you really want to. However, life with the power bikes rarely takes place in the upper half of the usable speed range. Because it is quite simply enough when between 85 and 95 hp hike towards the rear wheel on 5000 tours and the slightest turn with the right hand provides an almost inexhaustible supply of power. This is exactly when the aforementioned feeling of sovereign power sets in, which explains the appeal of this type of motorcycle. And also why it is ultimately irrelevant how much peak power is available when. Because one thing is certain: there is always enough everywhere.

Heavy artillery


Gargolov

Chic instead of fat – the other power bike: BMW K 1300 S.

All the more so because the enjoyment of motorcycling, even with these powerhouses, only sets in on the country road in the long run. Where the pure power only provides the basis for superior gliding or tingling staccato cornering. And then all three of them nibble on their motorway-related DNA. Large moving masses in the large-displacement engines and torsionally rigid chassis give everyone a massive feeling. Compared to an all-rounder such as the 254 kilogram Suzuki Bandit 1250 S, the slightly heavier trio (BMW: 258 kilos, Kawasaki: 260 kilos, Suzuki 264 kilos) feels subjectively much heavier.

The BMW pulls out of the affair best in this regard. Thanks to the cylinder bank, which is tilted forward 55 degrees over the engine, the frame profiles allow a narrow knee joint, which combines with a moderately sporty handlebar and a comfortable knee angle to create a pleasantly balanced seating position. This is how you can do kilometers. The Kawasaki places its pilot a bit sportier. Only the bulbous tank and the sweeping frame flanks underline the massive feeling. That creeps into the Hayabusa disciples more strongly. Comparatively low handlebar stubs, high footrests and the widest knee joint in the test field add up to a rather inhomogeneous seating position. The situation for the pillion passenger: BMW ?? okay kawasaki ?? is okay too, Suzuki ?? moderate.

Nevertheless, once used to the dimensions of these machines, they can be used to tile wonderfully across country roads of any order. And brake at the latest with the BMW. The competition has no chance against the combination of partially integrated brakes, outstandingly functioning ABS and pitch compensation that prevents the front from submerging. Whereby the ZZR does well and with excellent controllable brakes ?? including well-functioning ABS ?? stay close. In contrast, the Hayabusa shows weaknesses in this area. High hand strength, moderate effect, no ABS ?? a shameful appearance for the speed queen. A similar picture emerges in the curves. The BMW is easier to throw in an inclined position, and the new design of the front ensures a clearer feedback than the previous model. The Kawa and Suzi follow closely, with the advantage of the Hayabusa, which can be bent neatly with the more modern Bridgestone BT 015 tires than the BT 014-tyred Kawa.

Core competencies


Gargolov

Key question for speed junkies: with the K 1300 S, BMW closes the performance gap to the Kawasaki ZZR 1400 and Suzuki Hayabusa?

And yet the inclined position is always just the preliminary stage for demonstrating the core competence of the power trio, the silky and at the same time so powerful acceleration. The Suzuki gets going brilliantly, pushes almost free of load change reactions, can be smoothly zapped through the transmission. In short: a dream. Apart from the somewhat sluggish entry, the ZZR engine is hardly less impressive. Thrust, gearshift, clutch? everything first division. Whereby the BMW tactics here cleverly. Although it still distributes the more pronounced load change shocks despite the elaborately soothed cardan drive, it quickly rehabilitates itself through a shorter overall ratio and above all through the shift assistant already used in the boxer model HP2 Sport. The effect of the system, which briefly interrupts the ignition when the gear lever is pulled up, thereby relieving the load on the transmission, is impressive. The clutch-free and almost seamless shifting ?? that works amazingly well even at constant speed ?? enthusiastic immediately and is worth each of the 360 ​​euros extra. For a better understanding: To downshift, the clutch must still be pulled.

In general, electronics have done it to the Bavarians. Tire pressure control and anti-slip regulation (surcharge: 400 euros) can be ordered as well as the electronically adjustable ESA chassis. In its latest expansion stage, the ESA II (surcharge: 740 euros), with a total of nine setting options that can be selected from the handlebars, hardly a wish remains unfulfilled. From ?? probably caused by the cardan reactions ?? Apart from the rear wheel trampling on rough asphalt in an inclined position and a fundamentally tight basic set-up.

In comparison, the suspension of the Kawasaki and Suzuki, which can only be adjusted manually, is technically modest, but its function can hold a candle to the BMW suspension elements. With the Hayabusa in particular, the range between comfort and basic sporty tuning is successful. The fork and shock absorber of the ZZR, on the other hand, clearly tend towards comfort, absorbing the smallest waves excellently, but reaching their limits in the case of rough impacts. What is more appealing remains a matter of taste. Like so much on two wheels. Because despite the similar aim, the trio is divided into two camps. Kawasaki and Suzuki are technically and visually clearly committed to the archaic core values ​​of speed bikes. The BMW indulges in the appeal of higher, faster, further not so unconditionally, with good handling and successful ergonomics, it retains a bit more suitability for everyday use. What pleases remains? as I said ?? a matter of taste.

Technical data BMW K 1300 S

engine
Water-cooled four-cylinder four-stroke in-line engine, two balance shafts, two overhead, gear / chain-driven camshafts, four valves, rocker arms, dry sump lubrication, injection, Ø 46 mm, regulated catalytic converter, alternator 580 W, battery 12 V / 14 Ah, hydraulically operated multiple discs – Oil bath clutch, six-speed gearbox, cardan, secondary ratio 2.82.
Bore x stroke 80.0 x 64.3 mm
Cubic capacity 1293 cm³
Compression ratio 13: 1
Rated output 129.0 kW (175 hp) at 9250 rpm
Max. Torque 140 Nm at 8250 rpm

landing gear
Bridge frame made of aluminum, double longitudinal control arm made of aluminum, steering damper, adjustable rebound damping, two-joint single-sided swing arm made of aluminum, central spring strut with lever system, adjustable spring base, rebound and compression damping, double disc brake at the front, Ø 320 mm, four-piston fixed calipers, disc brake at the rear, Ø 265 mm, double piston – Floating caliper, partially integral brake with ABS.
Cast aluminum wheels 3.50 x 17; 6.00 x 17
Tires 120/70 ZR 17; 190/55 ZR 17
Tires in the test Bridgestone BT 015 ?? E ??

Dimensions + weights
Wheelbase 1585 mm, steering head angle 60.4 degrees, caster 104 mm, spring travel f / r 115/135 mm, seat height * 830 mm, weight with a full tank * 258 kg, payload * 202 kg, tank capacity / reserve 19.0 / 4.0 liters.
Warranty two years
Service intervals 10000 km
Colors gray / black, orange, metallic silver
Price 15,750 euros
Price test motorcycle 17,700 euros
Additional costs around 206 euros

Technical data Kawasaki ZZR 1400

engine
Water-cooled four-cylinder four-stroke in-line engine, two balance shafts, two overhead, chain-driven camshafts, four valves per cylinder, bucket tappets, wet sump lubrication, injection, Ø 44 mm, regulated catalytic converter, 490 W alternator, 12 V / 14 Ah battery, hydraulically operated multi-disc Oil bath clutch, six-speed gearbox, O-ring chain, secondary ratio 41:17.
Bore x stroke 84.0 x 61.0 mm
Cubic capacity 1352 cm³
Compression ratio 12: 1
Rated output 140.0 kW (190 hp) at 9500 rpm
Max. Torque 154 Nm at 7500 rpm

landing gear
Monocoque made of aluminum, upside-down fork, Ø 43 mm, adjustable spring base, rebound and compression damping, two-arm swing arm made of aluminum, central spring strut with lever system, adjustable spring base, rebound and compression damping, double disc brake at the front, Ø 310 mm, four-piston fixed calipers, disc brake rear, Ø 250 mm, two-piston fixed caliper, ABS.
Cast aluminum wheels 3.50 x 17; 6.00 x 17
Tires 120/70 ZR 17; 190/50 ZR 17
Tires in the test Bridgestone BT 014, front ?? SL ??, rear ?? L ??

Dimensions + weights
Wheelbase 1460 mm, steering head angle 67.0 degrees, caster 94 mm, spring travel f / h 117 /
122 mm, seat height * 795 mm, weight with a full tank * 260 kg, payload * 175 kg, tank capacity / reserve 22.0 / 2.0 liters.
Two year guarantee
Service intervals 6000 km
Colors gray, blue
Price 13795 euros
Additional costs around 180 euros

Technical data Suzuki Hayabusa 1300


Artist

engine
Water-cooled four-cylinder, four-stroke in-line engine, a balance shaft, two overhead, chain-driven camshafts, four valves per cylinder, bucket tappets, wet sump lubrication, injection, Ø 44 mm, regulated catalytic converter, 425 W alternator, 12 V / 10 Ah battery, hydraulically operated multi-disc Oil bath clutch, six-speed gearbox, O-ring chain, secondary ratio 43:18.
Bore x stroke 81.0 x 65.0 mm
Cubic capacity 1340 cm³
Compression ratio 12.5: 1
Rated output 145.0 kW (197 hp) at 9500 rpm
Max. Torque 155 Nm at 7200 rpm

landing gear
Bridge frame made of aluminum, upside-down fork, Ø 43 mm, steering damper, adjustable spring base, rebound and compression damping, two-arm swing arm with upper cables made of aluminum, central spring strut with lever system, adjustable spring base, rebound and compression damping, double disc brake at the front, diameter 310 mm, four-piston -Fixed calipers, rear disc brake, Ø 260 mm, single-piston floating caliper.
Cast aluminum wheels 3.50 x 17; 6.00 x 17
Tires 120/70 ZR 17; 190/50 ZR 17
Tires in the test Bridgestone BT 015 ?? M ??

Dimensions + weights
Wheelbase 1485 mm, steering head angle 66.6 degrees, caster 93 mm, spring travel f / r 120/140 mm, seat height * 810 mm, weight with a full tank * 264 kg, payload * 185 kg, tank capacity / reserve 21.0 / 1.0 liters.
Two year guarantee
Service intervals 6000 km
Colors orange / black, black, gray, white
Price 13590 euros
Additional costs around 145 euros

MOTORCYCLE test result


Gargolov

The BMW K 1300 S (center) leaves the Japanese competition out of breath.

1st place: BMW K 1300 S
When power is in abundance, other things become even more important. For example handling, ergonomics or drivability. The BMW is convincing.

2nd place: Kawasaki ZZR 1400
Small causes, big effects. The mighty Kawasaki has stalked past the Hayabusa with unspectacular but sensible model updates.

3rd place: Suzuki Hayabusa 1300
No question, whoever is into pure power, likes the Hayabusa. In real life, the original speed bike demands concessions. Whoever accepts this will be happy with it.

Comments MOTORCYCLE scoring

engine
196 hp ?? It is a matter of honor that the Hayabusa wins the engine rating. And yet the how, not just the how much, is convincing with its excellent response behavior and easy control. The excellent draft gives the BMW a big plus in practice, while the Kawasaki has clearly caught up in this area compared to its predecessor model.

Winner engine: Suzuki

landing gear
In this weight class, handiness is not one of the strengths. Nevertheless, BMW has managed to train the K 1300 S to be nimble and trustworthy to drive. The Hayabusa and the ZZR 1400 are noticeably troubling their pounds. But the two Japanese women are in terms of comfort? despite the ESA chassis of the BMW? in front of the Germans.

Chassis winner: BMW

everyday life
Its excellent braking system brings the ZZR within striking distance of the BMW. Good: Both bikes are at the forefront in terms of safety with finely regulated ABS. Bad: no ABS and noticeably blunt brakes on the Suzuki.

Winner everyday life: BMW

security
Reason is the domain of BMW. A relaxed seating position, pillion comfort and extensive equipment are the trump cards of the K 1300 S. Pleasant ergonomics and acceptable wind protection give the ZZR good everyday qualities despite its sporty orientation. Deep handlebars, flat disc, moderate passenger comfort ?? the Hayabusa likes to scratch curves rather than pick up rolls.

Safety winner: BMW

costs
The inspection intervals make the difference. BMW (10,000 kilometers) is ahead of Kawasaki and Suzuki (6,000 kilometers).

Winner costs: BMW

Price-performance
Close decision: only two tenths separate the trio? despite the significantly higher price of the BMW.

Technical info: managers


Gargolov

Unlike the telescopic fork, the BMW Duolever deflects the front wheel vertically at the top (yellow arrow).

A telescopic fork takes care of the wheel guidance, suspension and damping, and on top of that transfers steering and braking forces. Actually perfect ?? if this multi-tasking did not have weaknesses. Above all: The friction of the seals and guides causes a relatively high breakaway torque and the fork dipping when braking.

But alternative concepts disappeared into oblivion? with one exception: the Telelever introduced by BMW in 1993 and replaced by the Duolever in 2004. The Bavarians separate the tasks of wheel guidance and suspension through a clever solution with two trailing arms (green arrows) that connect the rigid wheel carriers to the frame. A shock absorber (red arrow) takes on the suspension and damping tasks without the disturbing influence of bending forces. The alignment of the trailing arms, which points slightly downwards, enables another important effect: pitch compensation. When braking, the Duolever front barely plunges, so in this situation a large part of the suspension travel can be used. In addition to the gain in comfort, the tire maintains better ground contact and can transmit higher braking forces.

So is everything better? Nearly. Because the Duolever does not offer the feedback, the subjectively perceived feedback for the tire grip limit, a telescopic fork. Sports riders benefit from the retractable fork and the associated steeper steering angle when turning into bends. In addition, the response behavior of telescopic forks has been significantly improved through low-friction coatings. One of the reasons why this solution still plays the dominant role in chassis construction.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *