| Author | Message | ||
     Hughlysses |
Complete with video: http://www.motorcycle.com/shoot-outs/brutish-v-twi n-streetfighter-comparo-part-3-2014-ebr-1190sx-vs- 2014-ktm-1290-super-duke-r-video | ||
| Classax |
I just don't get it. How is it that a bike with 111cc extra gets away with making less power and reasoning is; "Look closer and you’ll see the EBR’s power advantage isn’t much of one at all, and only appears at the very top of the rev range. Everywhere below that point and the Super Duke properly trounces the SX, which shouldn’t come as a surprise considering its bigger engine. " The Duke out duels the Buells in low and midrange grunt with a 100cc more and gets the win, yet the RX does the same thing to every other liter bike on the market and it gets not even a nod. I disagree about the in town fueling, I found the Duke to be ill behaved around town compared to my RX. | ||
| Ljm |
Had to turn out that way. What else are they going to say? "Oops, we messed up in our bike of the year.." | ||
| Court |
The workmanship on the EBR is absolute art! | ||
| Mrsuperbuckets |
You could tell the review was heavily biased, I could barely hear them talk over the massive ktm dick in there mouth! | ||
| Hughlysses |
Classax- ain't that the truth. I'd think the fact that they've spent at least a couple of months on the Duke vs. a week or two on the EBR factors into the equation too. Of course, drop $2k off the EBR price and suddenly it's a lot more attractive. | ||
| Ffbuell1 |
Both great bikes but for a brand new company (E.B.R.) and the fact it is made in the U.S.A. and has a better warranty and is now (at least for a limited time $2,000) less I will take the E.B.R. | ||
| Classax |
They say vibey at 5k at 80mph?!? Didn't mention that unlike the Duc or Duke Vtwins the 1190 engine smoothes out the higher its revved. I also disagree with the radiator fan discharging onto the rider. I've ridden these machines in Texas rush hour traffic and been grateful for fan configuration. I do agree the KTM seems more refined, but to me the difference between riding it with the aids on vs off are night and day. I guess I can't get too niffed since the SX was the runner up for best super bike and in the running for bike of the year. (Message edited by classax on October 18, 2014) | ||
| Nobody |
Yes, I think the fact that they devoted an entire article to comparing the 1190SX with their bike of the year is a huge thumbs-up for EBR. | ||
| Buellmojo |
Much needed advertisement, and a good explanation of what the SX really is... but lets bash them for their... what seemed... to me anyway... opinions, all because they didn't choose the EBR? We all know EBR is doing such a great job of representing their motorcycles on their own, so shame on them for even doing this comparison in the first place, not to mention, giving EBR the much needed press time...shame on motorcycle.com! | ||
| Oldog |
I spent a lot of time a while back studying the Katoom, things they did not get to, in order to service the valve lash you must remove the cam shafts if the LC8 is like the earlier engines, the 1190 is like the 1125, you can set the valves in an hour and the EBR is said to be frame off for service with the machine built to do this, The KTM's of the earlier generations were said to be difficult to service for various other issues, but the testers never live with the bikes. | ||
| Oldog |
Oh I left out that many of the older lc8 engines developed water pump issues early on... ( over several year models ) IIRC are not the EBR foot rests adjustable, as well as the levers? | ||
| Hootowl |
They claim the ebr gets 30ish mpg. Wtf. | ||
| Hughlysses |
I made this comparison chart a while back for a discussion thread at ADVrider (price for the SX has been updated to reflect the $2k discount). The data all comes from Cycle World tests of these bikes. The data for the SX is based on their test of the RX since they haven't done a full test on an SX yet and the bikes are identical as far as power train. I'd guess the SX might lose a little in the quarter mile compared to the RX as the speed is enough for the lack of a fairing to come into play. Note the KTM had nearly a 10 HP deficit in power compared to the EBR based on their data while Motorcyclist claimed only a 5 HP difference. Also notice Motorcyclist did not post any other "hard" comparisons except for the dyno chart. Based on the data above, the SX should tie it 0-60 and beat it in the quarter mile.  | ||
| Classax |
Buellmojo I appreciate your sarcasm. Its not lost on me. My issue is part of the problem is the miss and disinformation that is out there on these bikes. They said the 1199 Panigale was "brutal" in the amount of heat transmitted to the rider. Now the SX is brutal because hot air spills out AROUND the riders legs? I've ridden both and they aren't on the same planet in terms of heat to the rider. So which is it, the SX is as hot as the Panigale, the writers have limited vocabulary, they feel they must always write in extremes, or their human temp gages top out at "brutal". It creates misinformation. Buell's approach has always been give the rider a great chassis with a torquey motor which makes it easier and more practical to ride. They got slammed for decades for being down on power. The KTM takes this idea to the extreme and then gets the win? WTH? Yet they routinely crown the S1kRR the superbike champ? Inconsistent. They talk about fit and finish, they must mean the RX with exposed wires because the SX is very clean in execution. The feel of the plastics is a little thin but that's the price of light weight. Again more misinformation He said the KTM has more of the bike vissble from the cockpit, where as the SX kind of has you floating out in space, but the KTM makes him feel most like he's flying. Which is it? Inconsistent They talked about not noticing the SX TC, EXACTLY!!!! The light blinks for a few seconds to let you know "hey I saved you back there" but other than that you get the same feel from the bike all the time anywhere below lvl 15. The KTM is a whole different animal depending on the mode and TC settings. Turn it off and its a serious handful. They imply here the SX TC may not work or is of little value. Misinformation. A major design parameter of the EBR engine is that it gets smoother with more REVs which is the opposite of other L and narrow v twins. The KTM gets more VIBEY the harder you push not less. The implication is the SX is vibey at highways speeds, but so is the KTM and when the pace picks up only one bike gets better not worse. Misinformation. 5K in 6th gets me 85mph and 41mph, drop down to the legal limit and you're almost lugging it with 55mpg showing on the clock. Despite the smaller tank, a 200 mile tank on the hwy has been done. Or you could up the pace and cruise a 5.5k at 90mph, the start of the engines happy place, and be very smooth with no vibes in the pegs or bars for hours on end. They claim the KTMs brakes are better but again its a matter of style. The KTM gives a really strong initial bite. The ZTL2 with stock pads are very linear in feel, so one gives you nearly all it has up front and the other gives you what you ask for with a direct correlation between lever effort and braking force. They both stop great but the ZTL, I'm finding easier to trail in and off hard into corners now that I've figured out how to use them. Its the Vtwin vs I4 approach to rinding hard, you wouldn't tell a rider an I4 is better than a V2 or vice versa, they take a different approach to get the most out of. Same with the ZTL vs Regular set up. To my mind the KTM is not mechanically more refined, it gets away with a few flaws because it has so many electronic nannies. Of course that was only a 75 mile demo ride so I could be very wrong. But the above is the kind of stuff I expect a pro to write about, I don't need you to devote whole paragraph to the dyno chart unless it actually impacts the ride. But as I said I can't complain if its being pitted against their bike of the year. (Message edited by classax on October 19, 2014) | ||
| Court |
I hope you send that to the editor | ||
| Buellmojo |
They both liked the SX, but they also both liked the KTM better, I am not seeing the issue here? They praised EBR for their first effort, as being a solid, and impressive machine, just raw in a sense, and the very reason they were even there in the first place. As you expressed in your write up, your opinion is different than theirs (and very biased...HAHA)... yet you admit, you have not ridden neither of the motorcycles that were tested, in the manner in which they have anyway...so where is your information (opinion) coming from, your RX experience, that seems no less than inaccurate, and nothing more than misinformation in itself. I agree with Court, send your thoughts to the editor... and when you do... include your extensive use, and experience with the SX, and the Super Duke R, and how you have come to the conclusion (delusions) that anything EBR is in a league of their own, and nothing out there, could/can ever be at the unmistakably elite status of an EBR machine. Let us know how that turns out for you!?!? I enjoyed when Siahaan made his comment about Rotax, and the "Superfighter" title. | ||
| Classax |
More of that great sarcasm. Too funny. I'm not complaining about the article or saying the KTM is better or not. I'm saying part of obstacle for EBR is miss or disinformation often from the press. part of that is the inconsistent or sometime ill informed writing of the reviewers. Not just on this review either. Like I said I only did 75 miles on the KTM, and about 200 on an SX so...there is room for error. I just have a hard time swallowing the KTM out buelling a Buell and winning bike of the year on the same merits the Buell has been traditionally panned. Oh well, ride what you like, there are no real bad bikes in the Super categories. | ||
| Court |
If you want a real treat ..... Pull a milk crate up next to an EBR .... Sit for 42 minutes and just stare...wonder...touch. It's technical and manufacturing wizardry. I also ... Over the years....sense an ongoing proclivity to hold BUELL / EBR to higher, almost imaginary, standards. There exists, what appears to be a reluctance, to admitting an American can build that level of quality. | ||
| Classax |
There's a big difference in the meaning of the phrases, "good for a first effort" and "good in the first effort". Or "decent for out of the box" and "decent out of the box". I feel like there's been too much of the former despite the case being the latter. | ||
| Buellmojo |
As you mentioned Court, not a milk crate, but never the less, a tall step... I did exactly as you suggested for about 45 minutes or so... I was actually fortunate to fully examine two of them, a red one first, and then a yellow one. I was obviously not as marveled as you might possibly be, but I enjoyed what I saw. I felt very fortunate I had the opportunity to completely inspect them, all the while, having a great conversation with the new owners of the two. | ||
| 2kx1 |
That was a weak comparison test. Not a single wheelie. Not a single stoppie. No burnout? What the hell kind of bikes were they testing? | ||
| Panhead_dan |
They were testing NEW bikes. You know, new bikes with "rider aids". Them new bikes won't do wheelies, burnouts and such. Computers won't allow that sort of riding. | ||
| Malott442 |
@ Dan. I can tell you right now that both bikes have defeatable aids. I've wheelied a 1290 super duke. I only rode it 15 miles, but I can tell you the SX is going against stiff competition in the fit and finish, acceleration, and ease of use categories. I'm eagerly awaiting my test drive. | ||
| Panhead_dan |
envy | ||
| Classax |
One thing I really did like about the Duke was once you turn the TC OFF, you really get to experience the motor. Seemed like even at the lowest settings the TC really watered down the power. To be clear it is an EXCELLENT MACHINE! Great for hooning but not so much for going fast. Turning off the TC exposes the fact that the chassis geometry struggles to get all that power to the ground, especially with such cushy suspension. Makes you FEEL like you're really on the ragged edge of the bikes abilities and getting the most of it. Scary fun. I think the SX/RX are kind of the opposite. The chassis and geometry seem like they can harness a much more powerful engine and still get the power to the ground well, which lets you hoon at will. It really lets you push and be confident because the bike feels so unfazed by much of anything you do. Like its singing that whole "anything you can do I can do better" song to you the entire time. The EBR TC doesn't kill your power until you’re actually in a wheel spin or wheelie situation, which in the lower levels you can still override with a little conscious effort. Super fun! I could never live with the SX though. Those wide bars and seating position are just too wheelie friendly and I would surely lose my license. | ||
| Sprintst |
KTM needs that motor in the RC8 | ||
| Tootal |
So I'm just having a problem believing somebody promoting a communist dictator on his t-shirt. I mean REALLY?!  | ||
| Phelan |
I wish they would have turned off TC and tried the EBR that way. Dan was telling me the other day another EBR dealer dyno'ed an 1190 with TC3 and pulled 116 RWHP, then 160 RWHP with TC off. I think that could make a significant difference. In Erik's words, "turn that %$@! off"  . | ||
| Classax |
The manual tells you NOT to dyno with the TC on. I run the TC on 3 on the street, I have no problems keeping up with other liter bikes and can walk away from a few. On the track coming off a corner wide open its MONEY!!! | ||
| Phelan |
Yeah I don't doubt that, I think they just forgot it was on. |
