Husqvarna SM 610 2005 vs. Husqvarna SM 630 2011

Husqvarna SM 610 2005

Husqvarna SM 610 2005

Husqvarna SM 630 2011

Husqvarna SM 630 2011

Loading...

Overview - Husqvarna SM 610 2005 vs Husqvarna SM 630 2011

Husqvarna SM 610 2005

Husqvarna SM 610 2005

Husqvarna SM 630 2011

Husqvarna SM 630 2011

Technical Specifications Husqvarna SM 610 2005 compared to Husqvarna SM 630 2011

Husqvarna SM 610 2005
Husqvarna SM 630 2011

Engine and Drive Train

TransmissionTransmissionChainTransmissionChain
CylindersCylinders1Cylinders1
StrokesStrokes4-StrokeStrokes4-Stroke
DisplacementDisplacement576 ccmDisplacement600 ccm

Dimensions and Weights

WheelbaseWheelbase1,500 mmWheelbase1,495 mm
Seat HeightSeat Height920 mmSeat Height910 mm
Dry WeightDry Weight140 kgDry Weight142.5 kg
Fuel Tank CapacityFuel Tank Capacity12.5 lFuel Tank Capacity12 l

Pros and Cons in comparison

Pros and Cons in comparison

Husqvarna SM 610 2005

Husqvarna SM 610 2005

The Husky is by no means an inexpensive entry-level bike. However, single-cylinder enthusiasts looking for power, a great chassis and civil service intervals have come to the right place with the Husky. A good iron!

Optimal chassis

independent geometry

linear steering feel

high-quality fork

qualitative workmanship.

Hakelige ignition lock seems to have been reworked cheaply

high price

not suitable for long-distance travel

spare parts supply problematic.

Husqvarna SM 630 2011

Husqvarna SM 630 2011

Unfortunately, our editors did not test this model.

Alternative Comparisons

1000PS Partner

LOUISContinental MotorradreifenSchuberthcalimoto GmbHMotorex AG