SWM RS 650 R 2016 vs. Husqvarna SM 610 2005

SWM RS 650 R 2016

SWM RS 650 R 2016

Husqvarna SM 610 2005

Husqvarna SM 610 2005

Loading...

Overview - SWM RS 650 R 2016 vs Husqvarna SM 610 2005

SWM RS 650 R 2016

SWM RS 650 R 2016

Husqvarna SM 610 2005

Husqvarna SM 610 2005

Technical Specifications SWM RS 650 R 2016 compared to Husqvarna SM 610 2005

SWM RS 650 R 2016
Husqvarna SM 610 2005

Engine and Drive Train

TransmissionTransmissionChainTransmissionChain
CylindersCylinders1Cylinders1
StrokesStrokes4-StrokeStrokes4-Stroke
CoolingCoolingliquidCoolingliquid
DisplacementDisplacement600 ccmDisplacement576 ccm

Dimensions and Weights

WheelbaseWheelbase1,505 mmWheelbase1,500 mm
Seat HeightSeat Height900 mmSeat Height920 mm
Dry WeightDry Weight144 kgDry Weight140 kg
Fuel Tank CapacityFuel Tank Capacity12 lFuel Tank Capacity12.5 l

Pros and Cons in comparison

Pros and Cons in comparison

SWM RS 650 R 2016

SWM RS 650 R 2016

Unfortunately, our editors did not test this model.

Husqvarna SM 610 2005

Husqvarna SM 610 2005

The Husky is by no means an inexpensive entry-level bike. However, single-cylinder enthusiasts looking for power, a great chassis and civil service intervals have come to the right place with the Husky. A good iron!

Optimal chassis

independent geometry

linear steering feel

high-quality fork

qualitative workmanship.

Hakelige ignition lock seems to have been reworked cheaply

high price

not suitable for long-distance travel

spare parts supply problematic.

Alternative Comparisons