Comparison test of the 1000 super sports car in 2006

Posted on by admin

Menus

Comparison test of the 1000 super sports car in 2006

Comparison test of the 1000 super sports car in 2006

The show must go on

The mystery repeats itself. Whenever we think that nothing is going up, the next generation of incredible super athletes comes. This game has no limits?

Yes, it has limits. 200 kilograms full of fuel, with everything for cooling, lubrication, in general for the
smooth operation is necessary. It doesn’t go below that. At least not in 2006. 200 kilograms ?? this is currently the sound barrier of the ultra-light, ultra-powerful 1000cc super athletes. And it is held by ?? n / A? ?? exactly! From
one that already existed last year. From the Suzuki GSX-R 1000.
But we already had less, some might say now. Kawasaki ZX-10R, model year 2005. 199 kilograms! But that’s yesterday’s news. 205 kilograms is the fighting weight of the new ZX-10R, which not only looks more expansive than the old 10er, but especially the new exhaust system with two G-Kats is likely to be significantly heavier.
Good news, however, on the Honda front. The fire blade has become lighter by the same amount. 205 kilograms represent real progress. The previous model weighed in at a hefty 211 kilos. The R1, moderately renovated, remains at 204 kilograms. And we’d better not talk about the MV Agusta in this context. 222 kilograms ?? with that she marches briskly towards the thick ship class. At least if you apply athletic standards.
But seriously: What role do a few pounds more or less play? In a test field of this caliber, where every plug connection, every screw, every little detail is bursting with fascination. Do they limit the ease with which these cars catapult you from standstill to 250 km / h? Blur the captivating casualness with which
these powerhouses degrade all driving resistances to insignificance? Do they diminish the greed with which fully-fledged 1000 units rush into the five-digit speed range? Reduce the unshakable stability with which the ultra-
light chassis can handle even the worst blows? No, they don’t. At least not noticeably. However, the standstill on the Weight Watchers front shows one thing very clearly: that the air at the
Tip becomes incredibly thin.
It is similar with the exorbitant services. The four-cylinder engines deliver between around 160 and 170 hp on the clutch (see performance diagram on page 24). It doesn’t just work that way. It’s not just messed around somehow. This is hell. But one that is Euro 3 these days
Fulfills. At least with Honda and Kawasaki with G-Kat. In contrast, Suzuki, Yamaha and MV Agusta leave it at one point-
controlled Kat with secondary air system and Euro 2. What doesn’t change the fact that we are in awe of these services ?? enjoyed once ?? will be forever burned into the cerebral cortex.
In view of such constellations, one thing is clear: the chase for points will be close. Very close. Presumably so tight that there are just a few tiny dots
squeeze between winner and loser. Points that ultimately count far less than the skills of those who operate these burners. So always remember: In this class, the driver matters more than ever.
And one more thing: in civilian life, much of what these high-flyers can do cannot be even remotely verified. This requires closed terrain, preferably in the middle of January in the sunny south. Valencia. On the tricky Spanish Grand Prix course, the test Quin-
tett first show what it’s made of before the winding hinterland calls.
So Valencia. If you want to survive on these devices, you need a clear head. And if you want to shine here, you need a lot
Talent. A lot of talent. Just like ex-Grand Prix driver Jurgen Fuchs, who takes on the racing for MOTORRAD, and the 1000 athlete comparison two years ago-
Ren commented with the epoch-making words: “It’s really no longer the material.”
This assessment remains unchanged. When there is almost 850 hp in the boxes-
roaring warmly in the alley, normal mortals gifted with reason inevitably feel a good measure of respect. Frontal attack on the body and stomach, so to speak. A competition on the knife edge. And at the highest level.
Before that, the established ones too
Forces, Suzuki and MV Agusta, need not fear. One because it set the standard a year ago. The on-
because the closed slope is in
the past was her favorite discipline, while she confidently leaves the whole common sense of consumption, comfort and wellbeing to others. With ergonomics to get used to, a torture even for fakirs. A long tank that makes it unnecessarily difficult to transfer weight to the front when accelerating and makes the way to the handlebars long and long. The latter is installed deep in the cellar anyway, so that bellies don’t actually have to climb up at all. No this is not good. Not even on the racetrack, especially the one
Nippon competition is at least two steps ahead in this regard.
Indeed ?? and that’s the amazement-
liche ?? this fact has never prevented the F4 1000 S from achieving fast lap times. Just as little as their sluggish handling. Or not in comparison
outstanding performance. 159 measured PS:
The Italian thoroughbred deserves the red lantern, because even the Honda, which has always been a little on the drip, now delivers 163 hp. Not to mention Suzuki (166 PS), Yamaha (169 PS) and even more Kawasaki (171 PS).
And indeed: with 1.45.18 minutes, she beats like everyone else,
MV with tires for the race track with Michelin Power Race in medium / soft mix and, in this model year, also in matt black, is once again better than it feels. With a
decisive restriction: “After three laps at this speed I need an oxygen tent and a re-briefing on how to drive on a Japanese thousand,” gasps Jurgen Fuchs. “That thing is an awful effort. When turning, pushes over the front wheel so that I’m always two meters away from the curb. The only fun corner is the long left over the crest. Since she is really fed up. But otherwise! The grip on the rear wheel was already missing last year. And the brake? well. “
1.45.18 minutes. The new Fireblade should be able to do that better. Something
steeper steering head angle, ten millimeters less caster, less progressive rocker arm, reduced spring rate. But harder springs in the fork including newly tuned damping? the Honda has done well this suspension. Actually very good. “The blade is very nicely balanced,” enthuses Jurgen after his first turn. “It gives you a tremendous feeling for the limit. The feedback from the front wheel is especially great. In addition, it is ideally neutral in the acceleration phase, so that the tight lines at the corner exit are easy to hold. Great.”
That’s a lot of praise for one that is straight
has not always done very well among professionals in the past. There are also steps backwards. The front brakes-
location ?? two 320 discs with radially screwed four-piston biters ?? has lost its superior qualities. The reason: Honda reacted with less aggressive pads to the fork flutter that sometimes occurred in the last model year. The new friction pairing does not come close to the old one in terms of controllability, which after a few sharp turns-
driven laps despite constant deceleration a shifting pressure point.
That is basically what can be criticized for the chassis of the new Blade. That others are a little more manageable, maybe. The engine receives more criticism. Especially in comparison with the competition and when driving on the last groove. The Honda developers un-
did a lot to dispel the points of criticism expressed in the past: Larger exhaust ports, new valves, more compact combustion chambers, increased compression, new valve springs, higher speed, shorter secondary ratio (42 instead of 40 chainring) ?? it is an extensive catalog of measures that helps the current Fireblade to generate seven more horsepower compared to the previous year’s model. Nevertheless, the following applies: She has not yet reached the level of her Japanese competitors. Both in the middle and at the top there is a little lack of pressure and speed, which is why the Honda engine seems to be more “busy”, at least on the racetrack.
Above all, the lack of speed reserve is probably what is costing time. At the
Impeccable ergonomics and the meanwhile quite smooth throttle response can certainly not be the reason why the Honda, which can be easily and safely controlled even by less fast pilots, does not exceed 1.45.43 minutes under Jurgen.
In itself, that’s quick
and inaccessible for the normally gifted. But considering the times that Jurgen Fuchs burns into the asphalt on a Suzuki GSX-R in Valencia, the pace seems rather mediocre. The defending champion pulls her track a second faster. And shows at every corner exit, on every short straight, where its brilliant strength lies. This four-cylinder is really hard to beat. The smooth throttle response, the full acceleration from medium speeds, the fine revving pleasure ?? You can feel that not only on the racetrack, but also in everyday life. “In addition, the Suzuki turns in much more agile than the Honda. But then, from the apex, there
it loads of work. When she is pulling, she always wants to go the wide arc. But the brakes held this year. And this engine! Very first cream. “
Well, that’s right. And is a warning
to those who follow that, at least in this test, newer does not necessarily mean better. A GSX-R doesn’t get the butter off bread that easily
to take. Not even from the carefully mo-
Well-kept Yamaha YZF-R1. Actually, it’s the tiny things that keep you from the front-
differentiate between women. The swing arm is twenty millimeters longer, the wall thickness of the frame is smaller here and there in the My area. Nothing decisive, really. Which is why nothing fundamental has changed in the quality of the R1.
The Yamaha dances through the labyrinth of curves with great ease, behaves neutrally down to the deepest slopes, cheers between the corners in the highest tones. Turns out like no other, but is
still urgently dependent on this speed. In the middle, between 6000 and 8000 rpm, there is still a considerable dent in the performance curve. But the five-valve engine turns 1000 rpm higher than the competition? and even 1500 rpm higher than the Honda unit. This saves time where you can save a shift on the Yamaha. Just like the fact that after the revision, the R1’s peculiarity of pulling itself deep into the spring when accelerating is largely a thing of the past. In addition, this Yamaha is probably the first,
which has the best gearbox in such an illustrious test field. Pleasant on the country road, important in racing mode. “It’s enough if I only take a third off the gas and the next gear is already in place,” says Jurgen, praising the R1 switch box. And reveals how you save time when changing gears. For that he blames the brakes. “At first she doesn’t come, then by force. It feels like an emergency stop every time. And it became soft in the end. “
Nevertheless, it is enough to distance the Honda and the MV. Low 1.44.9 times mark the performance level of the R1 on this cool January day. To the Su-
however, zuki cannot unlock them. That remains ?? so one should think in view of the previous year’s performance of the wild Kawa ?? reserved for the new ZX-10R. Especially when you look at their test bench curve. Practically
power and torque are congruent with the Suzuki. The only difference is that the Kawa engine saddled up an extra blast of power and increased five horsepower compared to the previous year.
Incidentally, the green, as the first trial rounds have already shown, has become tamer. Compromise. An engine with more smooth running, a chassis with a not quite so borderline and set up solely for circuit performance. What makes civil life easier? and not necessarily more difficult on the slopes. As the good performance of the GSX-R proves, which is similarly conditioned. And lo and behold: with a lead of five hundredths of a second, the ZX-10R sets the fastest time. However, if you can make the rounds-
times in their totality, a blink of an eye behind the Suzuki. Practically a dead race with varying advantages over here and there.
The strengths of the Kawa in brief.
Your brake ?? a poem. In the paddock-
Jargon: »Kick-Ass-Brake«, a force that can be finely dosed in everyday life. The class scale and the test motorcycle without the one from last year in the 2005 model-
occurred pressure loss. The chassis:
not quite as agile anymore, but left-
ner, with reserves. And enormous rear wheel grip. The seating position: a little less
compact, further away from the handlebars, not quite as front-wheel oriented. This is not uncomfortable, but it is harder to maintain your posture at full acceleration. Rising from practically every corner
the front to heaven. “It’s a great feeling,” reports Jurgen. “Because it’s easy to control. And because the 10 series now has a nerve-saving, adjustable Ohlins steering damper as standard. ”
All in all, that’s enough to get one point more than the Suzuki in the race track standings. To a brilliant victory over the previous year’s champions-
it’s not enough. Will it be enough on the country road to overthrow the Queen from the throne? Attentive MOTORRAD readers who have read the top test in issue 4/2006 already know, however, that the Kawasaki has a problem with the original “Dunlop Qualifier” tires in B specification. Harmonized the
Michelin Power Race on the piste flawlessly with the ZX-10R, the Kawa with the standard front tire steers in sluggishly and imprecisely, gratefully picks up every bump or bump in order to lose its track and leaves it lacking grip-
sen. Constant corrections as well as a sudden loss of liability? that spoils the driving pleasure, at least on undulating terrain, so lastingly that the undisputed qualities of the Greens, the finely adjustable brakes and the brilliant engine, fall behind.
The positive influence that other tires can have on the ZX-10R was shown by changing the tires to the Pirelli Supercorsa Pro (also in the rare 190/55 rear tire format) of the MV, which, by the way, also harmonize wonderfully with the racer from Varese. Much more homogeneous and neutral, the 10er pulls its course, steers more fluently
one, just builds more trust. But that ?? so it says in the MOTORCYCLE-
Articles of Association ?? unfortunately cannot be used in everyday life-
assessment.
Yamaha chose the first tires perfectly. Soled with the famous Michelin Pilot Power, the R1 bends easily,
smooth, precise in all corners that
public life has to offer. The brakes, which are still cautiously responsive under race track conditions, are not so noticeable here. The creamy, appealing fork and the comfortable shock absorber all the more. And also that
the power delivery with medium speed range not with the Suzuki-Spon-
tanity can keep up. Before that is misunderstood: The R1 also has
Enough pressure anytime, anywhere, and the quintet’s dignified running culture. But none of them can match the lively, exuberant liveliness of the GSX-R. The Honda, despite a shorter gear ratio and significantly increased zest for life, isn’t. And the Kawasaki, whose quiet engine-
running and the gentle throttle response are far more important on the country road than on the racetrack, either. The gear ratio of the ZX-10R is too long because of the racing first gear.
On the other hand, the suspension setup is still tight, but definitely
suitable for everyday use. The same applies to the new Fireblade. With the difference that the also new Bridgestone BT 015 harmonize splendidly with the jack of all trades. As a result, it is at the front of practically every chapter. In total, that‘s enough for second place, just ahead of the R1 and the ZX-10R.
As in the last comparison, the MV lands in last place in the everyday rating. Hard chassis set-up, fuel consumption, pollutant values, view in the mirror, inspection costs, price ?? oh, let’s leave that. It’s a motorcycle for
die-hard fans, and that’s enough. Would we rather turn to the radiant one? and surprising ?? Winner too. The “old” lady Suzuki GSX-R 1000 wins. And rightly so. That doesn’t mean that the others are so significantly less good at something that you can do something with them
would be unhappy in everyday life. In direct comparison, however, the GSX-R 1000 offers the best all-round carefree package for racetracks and country roads. However, this could end as early as autumn. Then, if you follow the two-year rhythm, the new GSX-R 1000 will arrive. Because even if this year the limits have been shown: the show must go on and on.

Buy complete article

Comparison test of the 1000 super sports car in 2006

Comparison test of the 1000 super sports car in 2006
The show must go on

Scoring: engine

As usual. On the drive side, the GSX-R sets the tone.
Top performance, exemplary performance, smooth
Response and load change behavior. The closest comes to that
Suzi in-line quad still the Kawa engine, which is mainly due to
its stiff and difficult to dose clutch
as well as the long first gear. The Yamaha can too
not quite keep up with the Suzuki. Besides, it beats
the performance dent in the draft, while the Honda loses ground in load change behavior. This is also the main weak point of the MV, which particularly affects everyday use. In addition, the bony gear gives a point deduction.

Scoring: chassis

And again the Suzuki is ahead, this time just before the very homogeneous and wonderful hand-
common R1. The Fireblade holds up well, is not quite as handy, but very well coordinated. This chapter suggests
the problematic initial tires of the Kawa are clearly reflected. Especially in terms of handiness and steering precision, the
Green feathers and ends up at MV level overall.

Scoring: Security

The victory for the Kawasaki is very close to the Suzuki in this chapter, and it is above all else
attributed to the formidable brake. In contrast to its predecessor, the current Fireblade can no longer quite keep up. The fork flutter is no longer an issue, so the Honda
is right at the forefront when it comes to chassis. The R1 follows with some distance. Also because, despite the steering damper, the tendency to kickback is most pronounced. With the MV, the brake is at best mediocre. And consideration for yourself
Good will only possible by looking over your shoulder.
You can’t see anything in the mirrors.

Scoring: everyday life

There is everyday life, even with these
Precious items. Honda, Suzuki and Yamaha master it almost equally well and, given their athletic abilities, absolutely convincing. The kawa too. She loses something through
Range and payload. You get stuck on the MV
Turn your thumb, but there is no criterion for that.

Scoring: comfort

Anyone who laughs here now has not understood anything.
Comfort is also a key issue for super athletes.
If you sit well, you drive faster. At least in the long run. So
on Yamaha, Suzuki and Honda. In this order. The MV
is at the beginning of the chapter “Torture Chair”. As for the seating comfort
in the second row: sponge over it.

Scoring: costs / environment

Euro 3, I hear you trap. Honda
and Kawasaki are fit for the future, the rest have to be detained. Especially the MV, because it not only blows out happily, but also tips in powerfully. The proud price of over 20,000 euros and the high inspection costs also cause point loss-
cost, while everyone else largely agrees at least on the price of a good 13,000 euros. The Yamaha also does
attracts attention with the lowest inspection costs,
while there is a stalemate when it comes to maintenance costs.

1st place – Suzuki GSX-R 1000

Suzuki GSX-R 1000 You could guess but not know. The GSX-R is a great success that also asserts itself against the fresh competition. A close but deserved victory.

2nd place – Honda Fireblade

Honda Fireblade It’s not quite enough. Cool
calculated, two dots separate the Honda from the GSX-R. From an emotional point of view, the Suzuki engine in particular makes the difference.

3rd place – Yamaha YZF-R1

Yamaha YZF-R1 R1 fans can count on eight points
Difference to the best in the exhaust gas rating. A total of seven points difference to the GSX-R. What happened if? But this also applies to Suzuki.

4th place – Kawasaki ZX-10R

Kawasaki ZX-10R Another really good sport-
motorcycle. But it could be better. The tire choice went wrong.
With a different front tire? but that‘s against the rules of the game.

5th place – MV Agusta F4 1000 S

MV Agusta F4 1000 S »When the gondolas mourn
wear” ?? what. The MV is just a very special motorcycle. If you measure that by normal standards, it goes under. Basta!

Technical data: Honda CBR 1000 RR Fireblade

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, three-phase alternator 344 W, battery 12 V / 10 Ah, hydraulically operated Multi-disc oil bath clutch, six-speed gearbox, O-ring chain.
Bore x stroke 75.0 x 56.5 mm
Displacement 998 cm3
Compression ratio 12.2: 1
rated capacity
126.4 kW (172 hp) at 11250 rpm
Max. Torque 115 Nm at 10000 rpm
Pollutant values ​​(homologation) in g / km
CO 0.660 / HC 0.210 / NOx 0.099

Chassis: bridge frame made of aluminum-
um, 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 320 mm, four-piston fixed calipers, disc brake at the rear, ø 220 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
Bridgestone BT 015 »G« tires tested
Dimensions and weights: wheelbase 1400 mm, steering head angle 66.5 degrees, caster 100 mm, spring travel f / r 120/135 mm, seat height * 810 mm, weight with a full tank * 205 kg, payload * 180 kg, tank capacity 18.0 liters.

Two year guarantee
Service intervals every 6000 km
Colors silver, black, red / black
Price 13190 euros
Additional costs 200 euros

Technical data: Kawasaki ZX-10R

Engine: water-cooled four-cylinder four-stroke in-line engine, two overhead, chain-driven camshafts, four valves per cylinder, bucket tappets, wet sump lubrication, injection, ø 43 mm, regulated catalytic converter, generator 424 W, battery 12 V / 10 Ah, mechanically operated multi-disc oil bath clutch , Six-speed gearbox, O-ring chain.
Bore x stroke 76.0 x 55.0 mm
Displacement 998 cm3
Compression ratio 12.7: 1
rated capacity
128.7 kW (175 hp) at 11700 rpm
Max. Torque 115 Nm at 9500 rpm
Pollutant values ​​(homologation) in g / km
CO 0.516 / HC 0.142 / NOx 0.069

Chassis: bridge frame made of aluminum-
um, upside-down fork, ø 43 mm, adjustable spring base, rebound and compression stages-
damping, two-arm swing arm made of aluminum,
Central spring strut with lever system, adjustable-
bare spring base, rebound and compression damping, double disc brake at the front, ø 300 mm, four-piston fixed calipers, disc brake at the rear, ø 220 mm, single-piston floating caliper.
Cast aluminum wheels 3.50 x 17; 6.00 x 17
Tires 120/70 ZR 17; 190/55 ZR 17
Tires in the test Dunlop Qualifier “MTJ” / “J”
Dimensions and weights: wheelbase 1390 mm, steering head angle 65.5 degrees, caster 102 mm, spring travel f / r 120/125 mm, seat height * 800 mm, weight with a full tank * 205 kg, payload * 177 kg, tank capacity 17.0 liters.

Two year guarantee
Service intervals every 6000 km
Colors green, black, silver
Price 13145 euros
Additional costs 170 euros

Technical data: MV Agusta

Engine: water-cooled four-cylinder four-stroke in-line engine, two overhead, chain-driven camshafts, four valves per cylinder-
lighter, radially arranged, bucket tappets, wet-
sump lubrication, injection, ø 46 mm, uncontrolled catalytic converter with secondary air system, alternator 650 W, battery 12 V /
9 Ah, hydraulically operated multiple discs-
Oil bath clutch, six-speed gearbox, O-ring chain.
Bore x stroke 76.0 x 55.0 mm
Displacement 998 cm3
Compression ratio 13.0: 1
rated capacity
122.0 kW (166 hp) at 11750 rpm
Max. Torque 109 Nm at 10200 rpm
Pollutant values ​​(homologation) in g / km CO 2.231 / HC 0.681 / NOx 0.175

Chassis: tubular steel frame, load-bearing motor, upside-down fork, ø 50 mm, adjustable spring base, rebound and compression damping, 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 310 mm, Six-piston fixed calipers, rear disc brake, ø 210 mm, four-piston fixed calipers.
Cast aluminum wheels 3.50 x 17; 6.00 x 17
Tires 120/70 ZR 17; 190/55 ZR 17
Pirelli Supercorsa Pro tires tested
Dimensions and weights: wheelbase 1408 mm, steering head angle 66.0 degrees, caster 99 mm, spring travel f / r 118/120 mm, seat height * 820 mm, weight with a full tank * 222 kg, payload * 196 kg, tank capacity 21.0 liters.

Two year guarantee
Service intervals every 6000 km
Colors black, red / silver, blue / silver
Price 20,390 euros
Additional costs 244 euros

Technical data: Suzuki GSX-R 1000

Engine: water-cooled four-cylinder four-stroke in-line engine, a balancer shaft, two overhead, chain-driven camshafts, four valves per cylinder, bucket tappets, wet sump lubrication, injection, ø 44 mm, uncontrolled catalytic converter with secondary air system, 375 W alternator, battery
12 V / 10 Ah, mechanically operated more-
Disc oil bath clutch, six-speed gearbox, O-ring chain.
Bore x stroke 73.4 x 59.0 mm
Displacement 999 cm3
Compression ratio 12.5: 1
rated capacity
131.0 kW (178 hp) at 11,000 rpm
Max. Torque 118 Nm at 9000 rpm
Pollutant values ​​(homologation) in g / km CO 3.006 / HC 0.770 / NOx 0.085

Chassis: bridge frame made of aluminum–
um, upside-down fork, ø 43 mm, adjustable spring base, rebound and compression stages-
damping, two-arm swing arm made of aluminum,
Central spring strut with lever system, adjustable-
bare spring base, rebound and compression damping, double disc brake at the front, ø 310 mm, four-piston fixed calipers, disc brake at the rear, ø 310 mm, two-piston fixed 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 014 “J” / “SJ”
Dimensions and weights: wheelbase 1405 mm, steering head angle 66.2 degrees, caster 96 mm, spring travel f / r 120/130 mm, seat height * 810 mm, weight with a full tank * 200 kg, payload * 175 kg, tank capacity 18.0 liters.

Two year guarantee
Service intervals every 6000 km
Colors blue / white, red / black, black
Price 13090 euros
Additional costs 140 euros

Technical data: Yamaha YZF-R1

Engine: water-cooled four-cylinder four-stroke in-line engine, two overhead, chain-driven camshafts, five valves per cylinder, bucket tappets, wet sump lubrication, injection, ø 42 mm, uncontrolled catalytic converter with secondary air system, alternator 560 W, battery 12 V / 9 Ah, mechanically operated-
Actuated multi-disc oil bath clutch, six-speed gearbox, O-ring chain.
Bore x stroke 77.0 x 53.6 mm
Displacement 998 cm3
Compression ratio 12.4: 1
rated capacity
128.7 kW (175 hp) at 12500 rpm
Max. Torque 107 Nm at 10500 rpm
Pollutant values ​​(homologation) in g / km CO 2.020 / HC 0.712 / NOx 0.146

Chassis: bridge frame made of aluminum-
um, 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 320 mm, four-piston fixed calipers, disc brake at the rear, ø 220 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
Michelin Pilot Power, rear »G«
Dimensions and weights: wheelbase 1415 mm, steering head angle 66.0 degrees, caster 97 mm, spring travel f / h 120/130 mm, seat height * 810 mm, weight with a full tank * 204 kg, payload * 191 kg, tank capacity / reserve 18.0 / 3.4 liters.

Two year guarantee
Service intervals every 10000 km
Colors blue, red / silver, black
Price 13,300 euros
Additional costs 195 euros

Leave a Reply

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