Kawasaki Z 800 2013 vs. Triumph Street Triple 765 R 2020

Kawasaki Z 800 2013

Kawasaki Z 800 2013

Triumph Street Triple 765 R 2020

Triumph Street Triple 765 R 2020

Loading...

Overview - Kawasaki Z 800 2013 vs Triumph Street Triple 765 R 2020

The Kawasaki Z 800 2013 and the Triumph Street Triple 765 R 2020 are both naked bikes that offer a thrilling riding experience. However, they have several differences in terms of their technical specifications and strengths.

Starting with the engine and drive train, both bikes have in-line engines with liquid cooling. The Kawasaki Z 800 2013 has a slightly lower engine power of 113 HP compared to the Triumph Street Triple 765 R 2020, which has 118 HP. However, the Z 800 has a higher torque of 83 Nm compared to the Street Triple's 77 Nm. The Z 800 has four cylinders and a displacement of 806 ccm, while the Street Triple has three cylinders and a displacement of 765 ccm.

In terms of suspension, both bikes feature upside-down telescopic forks at the front. However, the Triumph Street Triple 765 R 2020 offers more adjustability with compression, preload, and rebound adjustments for both the front and rear suspension. The Kawasaki Z 800 2013 only has rebound adjustment for both the front and rear suspension.

Kawasaki Z 800 2013

Kawasaki Z 800 2013

When it comes to the chassis, the Kawasaki Z 800 2013 has a steel frame with a double cradle design, while the Triumph Street Triple 765 R 2020 features an aluminum frame with a twin-tube design. The Street Triple's frame is lighter and offers better handling and maneuverability.

Both bikes have double disk brakes at the front with four pistons. However, the Triumph Street Triple 765 R 2020 has radial, monoblock technology for its front brakes, which provides better braking performance compared to the Kawasaki Z 800 2013's petal technology.

In terms of dimensions and weights, both bikes have the same front and rear tire widths and diameters. However, the Kawasaki Z 800 2013 has a slightly longer wheelbase of 1445 mm compared to the Street Triple's 1405 mm. The seat height of the Street Triple is also lower at 825 mm compared to the Z 800's 834 mm. Both bikes have a similar fuel tank capacity, with the Street Triple having a slightly larger capacity of 17.4 liters.

In terms of strengths, the Kawasaki Z 800 2013 has an eye-catching, chunky look and offers confident acceleration. It also has relaxed geometry and powerful brakes, providing a comfortable and exhilarating riding experience.

Triumph Street Triple 765 R 2020

Triumph Street Triple 765 R 2020

On the other hand, the Triumph Street Triple 765 R 2020 has a wide usable rev range and an active seating position, allowing for a more engaging and dynamic riding experience. It also offers high stability and has a great gearbox with a shift assistant, making gear changes smooth and effortless. The Street Triple's first-class chassis provides excellent handling and control.

However, both bikes have their weaknesses. The Kawasaki Z 800 2013 has limited freedom of movement for the legs, which may affect rider comfort on longer rides. The Triumph Street Triple 765 R 2020's traction control regulates early, which may limit the bike's performance in certain situations. Additionally, the Street Triple's seat has little grip, which may cause discomfort during aggressive riding, and its display is considered outdated compared to newer models.

In conclusion, while both the Kawasaki Z 800 2013 and the Triumph Street Triple 765 R 2020 are powerful naked bikes, they have distinct differences in terms of their technical specifications and strengths. The Z 800 offers a confident and exhilarating riding experience with its eye-catching design and powerful brakes, while the Street Triple provides a more dynamic and engaging ride with its wide usable rev range and first-class chassis.

Technical Specifications Kawasaki Z 800 2013 compared to Triumph Street Triple 765 R 2020

Kawasaki Z 800 2013
Triumph Street Triple 765 R 2020

Engine and Drive Train

Engine typeEngine typeIn lineEngine typeIn line
BoreBore71 mmBore78 mm
StrokeStroke50.9 mmStroke53.4 mm
Engine powerEngine power113 HPEngine power118 HP
Rpm at Max. PowerRpm at Max. Power10,200 rpmRpm at Max. Power12,000 rpm
TorqueTorque83 NmTorque77 Nm
Rpm at TorqueRpm at Torque8,000 rpmRpm at Torque9,400 rpm
Compression RatioCompression Ratio11.9 Compression Ratio12.65
Clutch TypeClutch TypeMultiplate in oil-bathClutch TypeMultiplate in oil-bath, Antihopping
TransmissionTransmissionChainTransmissionChain
Number of gearsNumber of gears6Number of gears6
CylindersCylinders4Cylinders3
StrokesStrokes4-StrokeStrokes4-Stroke
CoolingCoolingliquidCoolingliquid
DisplacementDisplacement806 ccmDisplacement765 ccm

Suspension Front

Front suspensionFront suspensionUpside-Down telescopic forkFront suspensionUpside-Down telescopic fork
AdjustmentAdjustmentReboundAdjustmentCompression, Preload, Rebound

Suspension Rear

AdjustmentAdjustmentReboundAdjustmentCompression, Preload, Rebound

Chassis

FrameFrameSteelFrameAluminium
Frame typeFrame typeDouble cradleFrame typeTwin Tube

Brakes Front

TypeTypeDouble diskTypeDouble disk
PistonPistonFour pistonsPistonFour pistons
Shock mountShock mountFixed caliperShock mountFloating caliper
TechnologyTechnologyPetalTechnologyradial, Monoblock

Brakes Rear

TypeTypeDiscTypeDisc
PistonPistonSingle pistonPistonSingle piston

Dimensions and Weights

Front tyre widthFront tyre width120 mmFront tyre width120 mm
Front tyre heightFront tyre height70 %Front tyre height70 %
Front tyre diameterFront tyre diameter17 inchFront tyre diameter17 inch
Rear tyre widthRear tyre width180 mmRear tyre width180 mm
Rear tyre heightRear tyre height55 %Rear tyre height55 %
Rear tyre diameterRear tyre diameter17 inchRear tyre diameter17 inch
LengthLength2,100 mmLength2,055 mm
WidthWidth800 mmWidth775 mm
HeightHeight1,050 mmHeight1,065 mm
WheelbaseWheelbase1,445 mmWheelbase1,405 mm
Seat HeightSeat Height834 mmSeat Height825 mm
Fuel Tank CapacityFuel Tank Capacity17 lFuel Tank Capacity17.4 l
License compliancyLicense compliancyALicense compliancyA

Pros and Cons in comparison

Pros and Cons in comparison

Kawasaki Z 800 2013

Kawasaki Z 800 2013

Overall, the Z800 delivered a sensational performance. Considering the fact that nothing was changed or optimised on the vehicle apart from the Remus rear silencer, a super final result.

Eye-catching, chunky look

confident acceleration

relaxed geometry

powerful brakes

Limited freedom of movement for the legs.

Triumph Street Triple 765 R 2020

Triumph Street Triple 765 R 2020

The Street Triple R is well equipped for the occasional track day and delivers good performance. This is where the lively three-cylinder engine really comes into its own. But the agile Triumph is also great fun on country roads, as long as you keep it revved up. All in all, the clear price-performance winner of the Street Triple range.

Wide usable rev range

active seating position

high stability

great gearbox with shift assistant

first-class chassis.

Traction control regulates early

seat with little grip

display outdated

Price Comparison Avarage Market Price Kawasaki Z 800 vs Triumph Street Triple 765 R

There are a few key differences between a Kawasaki Z 800 2013 and a Triumph Street Triple 765 R 2020. There are the same number of bikes of both models available on the 1000PS.de marketplace, specifically 7. It takes less time to sell a Kawasaki Z 800 with 56 days compared to 69 days for a Triumph Street Triple 765 R. Since model year 2013 1000PS.de editors have written 11 reviews for the Kawasaki Z 800 and 15 reviews for the Triumph Street Triple 765 R since model year 2017. The first review for the Kawasaki Z 800 was published on 9/6/2012 and now has more than 8,100 views. This compares to more than 58,400 views for the first review on Triumph Street Triple 765 R published on 1/10/2017.

Price Kawasaki Z 800

Model year
Current average market prices

Price Triumph Street Triple 765 R

Model year
Current average market prices

Alternative Comparisons

1000PS Partner

ChigeeContinental MotorradreifenMotorex AGcalimoto GmbH