Triumph Street Triple 675 R 2013 vs. KTM 690 Duke 2013
Triumph Street Triple 675 R 2013
KTM 690 Duke 2013
Visão geral - Triumph Street Triple 675 R 2013 vs KTM 690 Duke 2013
The Triumph Street Triple 675 R 2013 and the KTM 690 Duke 2013 are both naked bikes that offer a thrilling riding experience. However, there are several key differences between the two models.
In terms of power, the Triumph Street Triple 675 R 2013 comes out on top with a horsepower of 106, while the KTM 690 Duke 2013 falls behind with 68 horsepower. The Triumph also has a higher torque of 68 Nm compared to the KTM's 70 Nm. The Triumph's engine is a three-cylinder, while the KTM has a single-cylinder engine. Both bikes have liquid cooling systems.
When it comes to suspension, both bikes feature upside-down telescopic forks at the front. The Triumph's forks are made by Kayaba, while the KTM's are made by WP. The rear suspension on both bikes is also provided by Kayaba and WP respectively.
Triumph Street Triple 675 R 2013
In terms of chassis, the Triumph Street Triple 675 R 2013 has a double tube frame, while the KTM 690 Duke 2013 has a tubular frame. Both bikes have four-piston front brakes with radial technology. The Triumph's brakes are made by Nissin, while the KTM's are made by Brembo.
In terms of dimensions and weights, the Triumph has a narrower front tire at 120 mm compared to the KTM's 160 mm. Both bikes have the same diameter for their front and rear tires at 17 inches. The Triumph has a shorter wheelbase at 1410 mm, while the KTM has a longer wheelbase at 1466 mm. The Triumph also has a lower seat height at 800 mm compared to the KTM's 835 mm. In terms of weight, the Triumph is heavier at 183 kg, while the KTM is lighter at 149.5 kg. The Triumph also has a larger fuel tank capacity at 17.4 liters, compared to the KTM's 14 liters.
KTM 690 Duke 2013
In terms of strengths, the Triumph Street Triple 675 R 2013 offers a tense and playful chassis, agile handling, low weight, powerful brakes, and comfortable riding experience. On the other hand, the KTM 690 Duke 2013 has the advantage of being lightweight, offering sufficient power, and having low fuel consumption.
However, the Triumph Street Triple 675 R 2013 does have a weakness in its slightly abrupt brake application, while the KTM 690 Duke 2013 lacks the ability to adjust the frame and offers less comfort compared to the Triumph.
Overall, both the Triumph Street Triple 675 R 2013 and the KTM 690 Duke 2013 are impressive bikes in their own right, with each offering unique strengths and weaknesses. It ultimately comes down to personal preference and riding style when choosing between the two.
Especificações técnicas Triumph Street Triple 675 R 2013 em comparação com KTM 690 Duke 2013
Prós e contras em comparação
Prós e contras em comparação
Triumph Street Triple 675 R 2013
Se procura uma moto naked animada no segmento de gama média que seja especialmente divertida para passeios desportivos em estradas rurais, a Street Triple 675 R é a escolha perfeita. Se a sobretaxa razoável para a R compensa, deve ser decidido se quer realmente ajustar o chassis ou deixá-lo na configuração básica bem escolhida.
KTM 690 Duke 2013
Para pura diversão, a 690 Duke sem o R já é suficiente. O potente motor monocilíndrico é quase idêntico, tal como o peso e o manuseamento, e o aspeto é demasiado semelhante para ser um verdadeiro ponto de venda para a 690 Duke R.
Comparação de preços Preço médio de mercado Triumph Street Triple 675 R vs KTM 690 Duke
There are a few key differences between a Triumph Street Triple 675 R 2013 and a KTM 690 Duke 2013. It takes less time to sell a Triumph Street Triple 675 R with 52 days compared to 60 days for a KTM 690 Duke. Since model year 2009 1000PS.de editors have written 16 reviews for the Triumph Street Triple 675 R and 29 reviews for the KTM 690 Duke since model year 2008. The first review for the Triumph Street Triple 675 R was published on 20/07/2008 and now has more than 13.000 views. This compares to more than 14.800 views for the first review on KTM 690 Duke published on 28/09/2007.
