Suzuki GSX-S1000F 2016 vs. Suzuki GSX-S1000 2015
Suzuki GSX-S1000F 2016
Suzuki GSX-S1000 2015
Преглед - Suzuki GSX-S1000F 2016 vs Suzuki GSX-S1000 2015
In terms of technical specifications, both the Suzuki GSX-S1000F 2016 and the Suzuki GSX-S1000 2015 have the same engine type, engine power, torque, fuel system, transmission, number of cylinders, strokes, cooling system, displacement, front suspension, rear suspension, shock absorber, shock mount, front and rear tyre width and diameter, wheelbase, seat height, fuel tank capacity, and frame type. They also both have ABS as an advanced rider assistance system.
The strengths of the Suzuki GSX-S1000F 2016 include its top exciting engine, strong Brembo brakes, great accessories, and fine traction control. The engine of the GSX-S1000F is known for its thrilling performance, providing a powerful and exhilarating riding experience. The Brembo brakes offer excellent stopping power and control, ensuring safe and confident braking. The GSX-S1000F also comes with a range of accessories that enhance its versatility and convenience, such as luggage options and a windscreen. Additionally, the fine traction control system helps to improve stability and grip in various riding conditions.
Suzuki GSX-S1000F 2016
On the other hand, the strengths of the Suzuki GSX-S1000 2015 include its legendary Suzuki engine, sharp sound, rev-happy nature, harmonious tuning, pleasing design, strong brakes, taut chassis, and no performance cheating. The engine of the GSX-S1000 is highly regarded for its reliability and performance, with a reputation for delivering impressive power and torque. The sharp sound of the engine adds to the overall excitement and character of the bike. The rev-happy nature of the engine allows for spirited and engaging riding, while the harmonious tuning ensures a smooth and seamless power delivery. The design of the GSX-S1000 is visually appealing, combining aggressive lines with a sleek and sporty aesthetic. The strong brakes and taut chassis contribute to the bike's responsive and agile handling, providing a thrilling and enjoyable riding experience. Furthermore, the GSX-S1000 is known for its honest and transparent performance, without any artificial enhancements or gimmicks.
In terms of weaknesses, the Suzuki GSX-S1000F 2016 is criticized for its ABS not being sporty enough, limited wind protection, and a knee angle that may be a little too acute for some riders. While the ABS system on the GSX-S1000F provides added safety, some riders feel that it could be more responsive and better suited for sporty riding. The wind protection on the GSX-S1000F is limited, which may result in increased wind buffeting at higher speeds. Additionally, the knee angle on the GSX-S1000F may feel uncomfortable for riders with longer legs or those who prefer a more relaxed riding position.
Suzuki GSX-S1000 2015
On the other hand, the weaknesses of the Suzuki GSX-S1000 2015 include its old base, weak performance in the rev range, and load change. The GSX-S1000 is based on an older platform, which may not offer the same level of refinement and technology as newer models. In terms of performance, some riders have noted that the GSX-S1000 can feel slightly underpowered in the higher rev range, requiring more effort to extract maximum performance. Additionally, the bike may experience some load change during aggressive acceleration or deceleration, affecting its stability and smoothness.
In conclusion, both the Suzuki GSX-S1000F 2016 and the Suzuki GSX-S1000 2015 offer impressive performance and features. The GSX-S1000F 2016 stands out with its top exciting engine, strong brakes, great accessories, and fine traction control. On the other hand, the GSX-S1000 2015 is praised for its legendary engine, sharp sound, rev-happy nature, pleasing design, strong brakes, taut chassis, and no performance cheating. However, the GSX-S1000F 2016 has some weaknesses related to its ABS, wind protection, and knee angle, while the GSX-S1000 2015 has weaknesses related to its old base, weak performance in the rev range, and load change. Ultimately, the choice between the two models will depend on the rider's preferences and priorities.
Техничке спецификације Suzuki GSX-S1000F 2016 у поређењу са Suzuki GSX-S1000 2015
За и против у поређењу
За и против у поређењу
Suzuki GSX-S1000F 2016
Suzuki has chosen a somewhat wooden name for the GSX-S 1000 F, but otherwise the ingredients have been finely put together. The handlebars and the bike's stance are strongly reminiscent of a naked bike. The chassis as well as the engine will delight sports bike fans. A truly worthy sports tourer.
Suzuki GSX-S1000 2015
Some might be surprised that after waiting so long, Suzuki did not launch the ultimate, uncompromising power naked bike. Instead, the Suzuki GSX-S 1000 with its 149 hp seems almost too well-behaved. But once you ride it on the race track, you quickly realise that the engine is far more powerful in real life and that the rest of the performance of the chassis and braking system is also impressive. In return, it also offers a large portion of everyday and practical suitability - not bad ingredients when you have to cover everything from everyday to race track with a single bike.
Поређење цена Просечна тржишна цена Suzuki GSX-S1000F vs Suzuki GSX-S1000
There are a few key differences between a Suzuki GSX-S1000F 2016 and a Suzuki GSX-S1000 2015. In terms of price, the actual average price of a Suzuki GSX-S1000F 2016 is about 34% higher. Compared to Suzuki GSX-S1000 2015 there are more Suzuki GSX-S1000F 2016 bikes available on the 1000PS.de Marketplace, specifically 9 compared to 6. It takes less time to sell a Suzuki GSX-S1000 with 86 days compared to 140 days for the Suzuki GSX-S1000F. Since model year 2015 1000PS.de editors have written 10 reviews for the Suzuki GSX-S1000F and 36 reviews for the Suzuki GSX-S1000 since model year 2015. The first review for the Suzuki GSX-S1000F was published on 9/30/2014 and now has more than 13,100 views. This compares to more than 17,100 views for the first review on Suzuki GSX-S1000 published on 9/27/2014.
