I'd asked this question twice that left unanswered; hope this time I get it. How does the 3 spark plug justify?

Old Fox Sir, very good, straight to the point, no-nonsense review by you...! I agree with you about the Touring part. People do touring on bicycles, 2 strokes, M80's, 100cc's, etc. and this Duke is so much better than all these.

Just take her out and bear some discomfort if any...! Or get a FAZER's or R15's fairing bolted on.

That aside, IMO one thing that should affect its touring ability even more is the gearing. Rev limiter touching gearing isn't suited for touring... It would be like touring in 4th or 5th gear, while you're actually in 6th.

And the 12L tank and fairing absense aren't that big a deal as it is made out to be, atleast to me.

The 3 spark head is used exclusively to pass the emissions without having to use Fuel injection which would have increased the Pulsar's cost by 15k and made it much closer priced to the Duke. By comparison, 2 extra spark plugs(over the Duke) would cost 170 bucks. For a more detailed technical discussion, read the 200NS thread on TB#P

@Samarth +1 to everything. Anyways, if the bike is returning 70% of 58kmpl @100kmph, it still translates to 40kmpl. And 40*12 = 480km. Not a bad tank range at all. As for the gearing, as per the review, it is, at least, taller than Duke.

What are you asking exactly? The benefits of 3Si is it?

Bajaj say that the 72mm Bore of this bike, was too large for properly implementing the DTSi Twin spark as each spark was miles apart from other. (Although, how the Duke does it well enough with a single spark, was not explained by them).

So, they had one more spark in the middle. It seems it gave even better combustion and mileage as they claim 58 kmpl and smaller catalytic converters in the end can.
A test result claimed 38 kmpl for P220 and 54 kmpl for P200NS. This is a big difference.

(What we still don't know is, how are the heat/stress levels of the engine? But we'll know it soon enough.)


@ Antz.Bin: If that's true, then its a good thing. Because last time I heard, Pulsar was going around 136 kmph or so... Could be a slight overgearing, if at all.

Well, I wasn't really talking about merits/de-merits of fairing, but was only saying lack of fairing doesn't mean that the bike is not for touring. Absolutely agree that fairing protects you from wind blast, which tires you out easily if you are doing high speeds continuously.


Absolutely sir, agree to the fact that a good fast bike on track makes you forget lot of things, after all there are very few things that can match the thrill of seeing rpm needle climbing fast to redline! and yes, touring part is very clear too, it was just my typical rhetoric, couldn't hold it back

Missed seeing your earlier posts with the query. However, better late than never.

The 3 spark plug 4 valve head is a designers' nightmare actually and no one would prefer using it unless the gains were substantial enough to justify the troublesome challenges of manufacturing one such tolerance critical component.

The gains are primarily in combustion efficiency, which in an internal combustion engine is THE main factor. Three plugs make for a very rapidly advancing flame front that promises extremely quick and complete combustion inside the cylinder. In the 200NS engine, the designers have made major gains in mass burn fraction. This quick and complete flame propagation allied with good airflow assured by the 4 valves ensures the fuel gets burnt quickly, completely and efficiently thereby not only producing more power but also reducing its BSFC (Brake Specific Fuel Consumption) i.e. gives you more miles per liter. And these gains are all the more present when engine rpm's rise as is the case with this short stroke engine.

The 200NS engine is so clean that the catcon is a small diameter unit and is located in the header pipe itself. There's no end can per se in this bike though.

Can i get those fb,twitter and youtube icons in my signature too,Sir? Please?

Technically, thats right! Cruisers, sports tourers and cross country are different categories. Just because you can ride the world on it doesnt make it a touring bike. There are plenty of folks who take their 100cc steeds to Ladakh every year, that doesnt make the Passion Pro a touring bike.

Wind blast is not the only factor in touring, is it? R15's riding position isnt very comfortable for you, thats what we can understand!

Not severe when you are there for a few mins at a stretch, but a big factor when you need to keep it there for most part of the day!

And that 3rd plug is hilarious!! 72mm bore is too much for 2 plugs to clean up? Yeah right.

+1,. This site needs a 'like' button..
Anyone listening?

Lochrt999: 1 stop on pulsar and 3 stops on R15. A cbr or ninja wouldnt even ask for that '1',you know.. Get the point,brother.. Fairings are very very handy when it comes to touring in 3 digits.. And even 'aayi' know this..

We need to understand the aim of a motorcycle based on its usability before we compare two or more motorcycles from totally different categories (Commuter, Sports/track focused, Street Fighter, Touring, Sports Touring, Dual Purpose etc.).

These comparisons are mostly done when different motorcycles fall into the similar price range. In this case, logic is sidelined over personal preferences and often people end up arguing why a certain motorcycle shouldn't be good enough in a particular area where the other motorcycle may excel. Since a person starts considering his options mostly based on his purchasing power rather than what he wants to do with that motorcycle, the “not-so-strong” areas of a motorcycle are instantly highlighted as its negatives. We need to understand the difference between the “not-so-strong” areas and the actual negatives while choosing between any two rides. For example, the less seating comfort on an R15 is not its negative point but just one of its “not so strong” area because R15’s a sportbike; however, if an R15 doesn’t handle well or doesn’t inspire confidence while taking a sharp corner then that is its negative point. We can use many more similar examples to understand before passing our judgement on a motorcycle’s own capabilities, rider’s not included. This shall help in comparing two appropriately matched motorcycles rather than anything that falls within the buyer’s purchasing power.

This is probably the reason why we are seeing comparisons between R15, Duke 200 and 200NS on this thread. I also personally feel that it’s incorrect for Bajaj to declare that Duke 200 will compete with Yamaha R15 and Honda CBR250R in the market. When the manufacturer says something like this, then automatically comparisons are inevitable between these machines even when we know how really different each motorcycle is from the other. It would have been better for Bajaj to instead simply declare that these new motorcycles shall be game changers in the street fighter category. Comparisons between these motorcycles unnecessarily highlight the differences between them and eventually those differences are often declared as negatives! Then it’s only a matter of time when fanboyism starts to play its part! The funny thing is that in recent comparisons between the R15/Duke, some members revel in the fact that how the KTM will be the much quicker machine in most situations. Ofcourse it will be, it has 50cc more, is light and more importantly have much more bhp and torque. It’s made this way and R15 is not! What R15 provide is a more relaxed acceleration towards hitting its power band at higher rpms along with track focused handling. Universally, street fighters are made to provide more “fun” to the rider in city riding/tight traffic conditions. So the Duke 200 will do that better than an R15, big deal! Similarly the R15 will probably provide a relatively stress free experience at high speeds due to better wind protection even for that small amount of time. I do feel that it was incorrect of Bajaj to highlight R15’s and CBR250R’s performance figures during the unveiling of KTM. Why was that necessary? Couldn’t they just have given KTM’s numbers? But Bajaj did it, and I believe that’s the source of these useless comparisons! An informed biker will always be aware in what way CBR250 is a better machine than the KTM. Bajaj just did it because they think they can directly attack the R15 and the CBR with the KTM. I don’t think that’s possible though. R15, Duke 200 and CBR250 are niche products in our country, and not mass motorcycles. Their target buyers are/should be genuine bikers who are aware of what each motorcycle is meant for. So ideally, none of these motorcycles should impact the others sales figures much!

Regarding touring, let’s leave it. But not all Harleys are touring motorcycles. They have a specific “Touring” line up and they do provide wind protection atleast with a wind screen, and most of them have fairings as well! And please, Royal Enfield has been a joke for a touring motorcycle, which is before Classic 500 was launched, in my opinion!

So please let’s not compare any more to avoid the mud slinging on each other. This is a first impressions thread, let it be that. For this reason, this may not be the correct thread for this post. But I still felt that it’s alright to post it here considering the recent discussion in progress.

Never Expect a Review so soon, Hats off to Xbhp team, And From my end am so satisfied with the review Still, Waiting for more to come

Old Fox's review and comparison is pretty balanced and just to all types of users, what say? Kudos to him for such a wonderful job.

great review. I love the red version.

To achieve combustion efficiency ,why cant a single Iridium tipped plug be used, in the place of many plugs.

Well, who said combustion efficiency can't be achieved with single spark plug?? and that's not the only concern, you need to treat emissions to confirm to emission standards. One proven method is to use FI, which increases over all cost of the bike, but it has other advantages such as hassle free cold starts. The second method is not invented yet, would you mind pitching in??