Suzuki GSX-S950 2021 vs. Yamaha MT-09 2020
Suzuki GSX-S950 2021
Yamaha MT-09 2020
Pregled - Suzuki GSX-S950 2021 vs Yamaha MT-09 2020
The Suzuki GSX-S950 2021 and the Yamaha MT-09 2020 are both naked bikes with similar technical specifications. However, there are some notable differences between the two models.
In terms of engine performance, the Yamaha MT-09 2020 has a more powerful engine with 115 HP compared to the Suzuki GSX-S950 2021's 95 HP. However, the Suzuki GSX-S950 2021 has more torque with 92 Nm compared to the Yamaha MT-09 2020's 87.5 Nm. Both bikes have fuel injection systems and liquid cooling.
Both bikes feature upside-down telescopic forks for the front suspension and swing arms with monoshock absorbers for the rear suspension. The chassis of both bikes is made of aluminum and has a twin tube frame design.
Suzuki GSX-S950 2021
When it comes to braking, both bikes have double disk brakes at the front. However, the Yamaha MT-09 2020 has slightly smaller front disk diameters at 298 mm compared to the Suzuki GSX-S950 2021's 310 mm. Both bikes also come with advanced rider assistance systems such as ABS and traction control.
In terms of dimensions and weights, the Suzuki GSX-S950 2021 has a slightly wider rear tire at 190 mm compared to the Yamaha MT-09 2020's 180 mm. The Suzuki also has a larger fuel tank capacity at 19 liters compared to the Yamaha's 14 liters. The Suzuki GSX-S950 2021 has a longer wheelbase at 1460 mm compared to the Yamaha MT-09 2020's 1440 mm. The seat height of the Yamaha is slightly higher at 815 mm compared to the Suzuki's 810 mm. The Suzuki GSX-S950 2021 is also slightly heavier with a kerb weight of 214 kg compared to the Yamaha MT-09 2020's 193 kg.
Yamaha MT-09 2020
In terms of strengths, the Suzuki GSX-S950 2021 has a punchy engine with good sound, stable brakes, and a comfortable seating position. On the other hand, the Yamaha MT-09 2020 has a powerful engine with plenty of torque and fine control of traction control.
In terms of weaknesses, the Suzuki GSX-S950 2021 has a chassis that is too soft and not adjustable, and the cockpit is not easy to read in sunlight. The Yamaha MT-09 2020 lacks a blipper function, has high handlebars that give little feedback, rough throttle response, and early-regulating ABS.
Overall, both the Suzuki GSX-S950 2021 and the Yamaha MT-09 2020 are capable naked bikes with their own strengths and weaknesses. The choice between the two would depend on the rider's preferences and priorities.
Tehnične specifikacije Suzuki GSX-S950 2021 v primerjavi z Yamaha MT-09 2020
Primerjava prednosti in slabosti
Primerjava prednosti in slabosti
Suzuki GSX-S950 2021
"Mali" GSX-S950 je prekleto blizu GSX-S1000, zato se zdi, da bo treba ponosno doplačilo za 1000 ustrezno utemeljiti. Kdor pa bo želel, da bi bil tako športen kot pri modelu GSX-S1000, bo že zaradi nekoliko premehkega, neprilagodljivega vzmetenja propadel. Vendar pa se ta udobnejša zasnova modela 950 zelo dobro ujema z značajem motorja. Motor, ki ima (le) 95 KM in je enak motorju GSX-S1000, je namenjen navoru od spodaj in na sredini; trmasto vijuganje nima smisla. Če torej iščete razmeroma udobno golo kolo, ki je primerno za A2 in ga vizualno skorajda ni mogoče ločiti od vrhunskega modela, lahko prihranite veliko denarja!
Yamaha MT-09 2020
Hitra vožnja je mogoča, vendar naporna. Visoka krmilna ročica je na dirkalni stezi neproduktivna in zahteva veliko fizičnega napora. MT-09 ne more dohajati modela Street Triple R niti z vzmetenjem WP.
Primerjava povprečnih tržnih cen Suzuki GSX-S950 vs Yamaha MT-09
There are a few key differences between a Suzuki GSX-S950 2021 and a Yamaha MT-09 2020. It takes less time to sell a Yamaha MT-09 with 110 days compared to 298 days for the Suzuki GSX-S950. Since model year 2021 1000PS.de editors have written 10 reviews for the Suzuki GSX-S950 and 57 reviews for the Yamaha MT-09 since model year 2013. The first review for the Suzuki GSX-S950 was published on 6/16/2021 and now has more than 37,200 views. This compares to more than 39,900 views for the first review on Yamaha MT-09 published on 6/10/2013.
