Honda CB650F 2014 vs. Suzuki GSR 750 2017
Honda CB650F 2014
Suzuki GSR 750 2017
Pregled - Honda CB650F 2014 vs Suzuki GSR 750 2017
The Honda CB650F 2014 and the Suzuki GSR 750 2017 are both naked bikes with similar technical specifications. However, there are some notable differences between the two models.
In terms of engine power, the Suzuki GSR 750 2017 has a higher output with 106 HP compared to the Honda CB650F 2014's 87 HP. This means that the Suzuki GSR 750 2017 will provide a more powerful and thrilling riding experience. Additionally, the Suzuki GSR 750 2017 also has a higher torque of 80 Nm compared to the Honda CB650F 2014's 63 Nm, which will result in better acceleration and responsiveness.
Both bikes have a similar frame made of steel, providing stability and durability. The braking system on both bikes is also the same, with double disk brakes and double piston calipers at the front. This ensures excellent braking performance and control.
Honda CB650F 2014
In terms of dimensions and weights, both bikes have the same front and rear tire widths and diameters, as well as the same wheelbase. However, there are slight differences in other aspects. The seat height of the Suzuki GSR 750 2017 is slightly higher at 815 mm compared to the Honda CB650F 2014's 810 mm. This may be a consideration for riders of different heights. The Suzuki GSR 750 2017 also has a slightly higher kerb weight of 211 kg compared to the Honda CB650F 2014's 200 kg. This may affect the bike's maneuverability and handling, especially at lower speeds.
In terms of fuel tank capacity, the Suzuki GSR 750 2017 has a slightly larger tank with a capacity of 17.5 liters compared to the Honda CB650F 2014's 17.3 liters. This may result in slightly longer riding range on the Suzuki GSR 750 2017.
Suzuki GSR 750 2017
Looking at the strengths of each bike, the Honda CB650F 2014 is praised for its excellent braking performance, sporty appearance, and comfortable upright seating position. On the other hand, the Suzuki GSR 750 2017 is commended for its attractive overall appearance, stable handling, successful tuning of suspension elements, sufficient comfort, and easy-to-read instruments.
As for weaknesses, the Honda CB650F 2014 does not have any listed weaknesses. However, the Suzuki GSR 750 2017 is noted to have a brake system that requires a lot of manual force and a box swingarm that is not particularly aesthetically pleasing.
In conclusion, both the Honda CB650F 2014 and the Suzuki GSR 750 2017 have their own strengths and weaknesses. The choice between the two will ultimately depend on the rider's preferences and priorities, such as desired power output, comfort, and aesthetics.
Tehničke specifikacije Honda CB650F 2014 u odnosu na Suzuki GSR 750 2017
Prednosti i nedostaci u odnosu na
Prednosti i nedostaci u odnosu na
Honda CB650F 2014
The look is successful, the brakes surprisingly powerful, the chassis an impeccable compromise and the engine a smooth and confident comrade. For this coherent and high-quality combination, the introductory price of just under 8,000 euros is acceptable.
Suzuki GSR 750 2017
A razor-sharp design with an aggressive front and narrow rear - just as speedy street raiders have always wanted. It is a pity that the rear swingarm was neglected (officially for weight reasons, unofficially for cost reasons), and the front dual-piston brake system seems a little weak. However, the performance during the ride, both at high speed and in tight corners, is quite good.
Usporedba cijena Prosječna tržišna cijena Honda CB650F vs Suzuki GSR 750
There are a few key differences between a Honda CB650F 2014 and a Suzuki GSR 750 2017. It takes less time to sell a Honda CB650F with 45 days compared to 117 days for a Suzuki GSR 750. Since model year 2014 1000PS.de editors have written 14 reviews for the Honda CB650F and 12 reviews for the Suzuki GSR 750 since model year 2011. The first review for the Honda CB650F was published on 11/4/2013 and now has more than 14,100 views. This compares to more than 5,400 views for the first review on Suzuki GSR 750 published on 10/5/2010.
