the definition of 'better' differs from person to person. If you are looking to push the envelope more and more in terms of speed every time you ride the bike and you are a mile munching guy and/or a track guy, a faired bike would be better for you.

The naked bikes are 'general purpose' bikes, meaning that they are made so that you won't have to think twice before taking it out in the city traffic. They are lightweight, quick to turn, relatively less bulky, and have a comfortable sitting posture.

also naked bike are easy on the pocket in case you tend to drop your bike more often.

It purely lies on the eyes and the mind to which its hooked up.

Faired: for tracks, better cornering, wind resistance, powerful, cool factor

naked: for city, flickability, cheaper, comfortable

so when compared naked bikes are more PRACTICAL.

In a nutshell:

A fully faired sportsbike will give the most amount of power and speed per litre of fuel. Also it is engineered to be aerodynamic to aid the fuel consumption. To be the fastest of all breeds of bikes.

So in theory probably the most efficient of the bikes?

IMO fairing models are not superior bikes. It depends on what are we trying to measure. Each are better in its own terms.

Why have something when it is not required! The Fairings on a city or a street ride. Especially for someone mainly focused on street ride.

Dis-advantages of having a fairing:
1. Cooling is not always as efficient as a naked bike.
2. Even if cooling is efficient, the hot air from the radiator is blown directly at the legs through the fairing vents which makes it really un-comfortable to ride in thick traffic especially for city/street usage. The heat increases more and more with the size of engine as well. After a while the whole frame gets heated up due to the hot air blown.
3. Vibrations if not fitted properly or after a crash. Even a crack might rattle, leading to a change of an entire piece.
4. Cost involved in case of crash
5. weight
6. Cost of clip-ons(mainly on faired bikes). They tend to break easily on a fall.
7. More comfortable pillion seats are not part of faired bikes mostly. A suzuki inazuma 250 might help a pillion sit more comfortable than a ninja 250R

The requirement of a person completely depends on himself. Some of them might not consider any of them as a concern, Some might think all of them as one.

Oh!!! Its nothing got to do with a purchase; I was generally thinking on these lines, or may be if I explain as what got me into this...

R1 retails around 14L, while FZ1 around 9L & MT01 around 12L; all are litre class, all are respected; Ofcourse let's keep the engine differences aside for this discussion, but not the fact that all of them are capable of going over 200 Kmph. I often hear people saying the wind blasts are impossible to handle over 120-130 Kmph. While this number is not a bench mark, it is quite true that I've experienced on speeds over 135 & I'm sure it must be horrible over 160.

One can still crouch on the naked, but I'm sure it doesn't deflect the wind as much as a faired one & I take that controlling a faired one is better than naked on such high speeds. Just city rides & naked? Hmm...quite a thought.

I thought a MT01 or FZ1 (or even K1300R) give the almost same as handling a R1 or Busa in the city. Am I incorrect?

K1300R & S1000R? I don't think K1300R is lighter than S1000R. Right?

Well...drop is a valid point, but, when we buy we don't consider this factor a major one isn't it?

Tks HarishK

In maintenance or in control?

Nice point

And one observation is that, when you notice the driving stance in any of the naked bikes at higher speeds, the rider is still leaning forward like a faired bike, if not to that extent.






EDIT

That brings out another question from me, street bike & a litre class...hmm

Is it? News to me; I'm under the impression that in a LC engine, no matter its R1 or FZ1, the radiators are responsible. Agreed, probably heat dissipation is better on naked due to open air, but, would that contribute to a great extent? Not sure.

News to me I'll have to check on that. Good point though.

How the hell didn't I think on these lines? Forget about fitting, the rubber bushes between the fairings needs to be replaced every now & then.

You mean naked is lighter? See above.

Agreed, but with respect to controlling on high speeds?

I perfectly agree that requirements contribute to variety of options in the market, but, one point that keeps coming often in mind is that - which is better on high speed control? Faired, aggressive riding posture or naked, relaxed riding posture. If speeds weren't a concern, then, why opt for a litre class altogether? I mean, a Inazuma could easily do 100-120 right?

Why not! There are many of them who use superbikes only on streets/city. Passion has no reason !

Your are right. But imagine only LC and LC along with air cooling! Better isn't it. The time the radiator takes to kick in itself might be more in naked bikes due to this! My opinion.!

Depends on what bike we are looking at. Fairing adds weight. However faired high-end bikes weigh less due to various other factors and materials used to reduce weight. A bike with similar components and no fairing would surely be of less weight.

You are right. High speed control is always better on faired bikes. But thats not always the thing in biking. But why a litre class! depends on where you ride as well. A wide-open 10 lane road before you with no single being on sight, a naked bike will not stop someone from trying that speed thrill(which will be annoying due to air-blast however). At the same time he would still enjoy city riding to the most.. sometimes even more than a faired bike.

Personally I love faired bikes and sometimes cruisers which has those big wind shields to protect the rider from the heavy blast. Even I think that a naked thousand might not even get tested to its full capability when it comes to performance/speed. But it is not only about speed which has led to demand and evolution of such bikes.

No idea about the maintainance. For the country like our's, buying a naked bike would make much sense than spending about 2-4lakhs extra on faired sbk unless you're a track junkie(just my thought). When compared with power it's obvious that faired once are the winner. But even naked bike's power is much more than enough for city use. And controlling a naked bike in traffic is much easier than faired bike. Plus bad heat issues in faired sbk's.

First we need to clarify the categories, which I majorly classify as three:

1. Superbikes/ SuperSports: The 1000cc Superbike and 600cc Supersports category is the one which has the highest R&D expenditure among the production motorcycles. Hence, these bikes often have high power outputs from 160 to 200 bhp and from 115 to 135 bhp respectively for each category.
Their basic component level is ultimate among similar cc bikes: Brakes, tyres, chassis, etc. Their powerband can be quite peaky.

These obviously are the lightest despite a fairing on them. Because the extreme Research and Development (R&D) shows up in the levels of engineering. These are very expensive too, due to the same R&D costs & high quality component levels.
For example: BMW S1000RR, Kawasaki ZX 10R, etc.

Some bikes having similar focus have a different cc category though: like Daytona 675, GSXR750, etc.

2. Sportsbikes: These are generally focussed towards sports but not that aggressive. Their engines are often derived from earlier variations of Superbikes/Supersports but they won't be updated so regularly. Hence, these are priced much lower due to less R&D costs.
Powerband may differ but doesn't exceed the Category 1 bikes. They may be around or below 600cc too.
For example: Honda CBR 600F, FZ6 (full faired version), GT650R, YZF R6S, etc.

3. Naked street bikes: Basically, unfaired streetbikes which have better low end and mid range torque than Category 1 bikes.
Again, these least require to be updated, because they're for the streets where power doesn't matter as much and torque is more needed.
For example: FZ1, Hornet 600, GSR series, Street Triple, etc.


Conclusion: This post answers most of your doubts:
Why are mostly faired bikes often lighter than naked? The R&D.
Why are Category no. 1 bikes often the most expensive? The R&D Cost plus highest level of components involved.
Why is R6 even more expensive than FZ1 despite being a 599cc? Obviously, the R&D costs which are more in updating R6 every some years.

Any more doubts? Please ask...

See this point; this is exactly what I was saying in my first post; open highway, but cannot speed a lot due to wind factor. City & litre class? Hmm...; let me give another perspective, where do I brake more often comparatively? City or Highway? City right? And wouldn't you consider the forward leaning posture has a better stance on braking?

Exactly my point Let me put it this way, I know the wind blast handling capability varies between individuals, lets take 150 Kmph as ballpark figure for the next point.

Right, if it weren't speed, then why a litre class naked? Why not stop with a 400cc naked? That is best in terms of maintenance, cost effective, provides the max speed that one can handle the wind blasts & ofcourse more suited than a litre class to ride in a city.

Well not really; otherwise, we wouldn't be having a N250, GT650 & all the high end bikes from 848 Evo to S1000R.

Err...you mean riding a MT01, Bandit 1250 leagues between 9-10 AM on the weekdays

And controlling a naked bike in traffic is much easier than faired bike. Plus bad heat issues in faired sbk's.[/QUOTE]

Samarth, you've just given the generic classification of these bikes that I'm more than aware of; my question is specific on

Guys, nice topic and the most interesting thing for me is the wind blasts. I'm totally a naked bike lover and even now eagerly waiting for the Kawakasaki er 6n (if at all it comes) not that I dont like the Ninja 650R but just because my heart says wait for the naked version I have to !
The major thing which makes me worry is wind blast after going through the post. I have never been used to speeds above 150kmph, experienced it just once in my life. When everybody is saying naked bikes are not good for speeds above 130kmph it worries me and I've been dreaming about touring India at constant speeds around 150Kmph for a long time now and I feel the kwacker is the ideal bike for that
My question is how will a faired bike like the ninja 650r save you from the wind blasts when you are already sitting upright and the windscreen is just till your chest height ?
Will the Kawasaki er 6n be alright for speeds around 150kmph? (somebody plz say yes)

Since you've specific questions that're more off from this discussion, the best place to get this answered will be here - http://www.xbhp.com/talkies/motorcyc...ip-thread.html

I posted this here because there seem to be a long silence in that thread and only others from the owners are posting rarely somethings. Ok forget about the word Ninja here and answer the question in general, is it impossible to ride a naked bike at speeds around 150kmph ? Then how come there are so many models which can do speeds well above that ?

Then its time to think about alternatives

Anything is possible

I've been told that its difficult to keep with the wind blasts above 125; personally I don't crouch up to 138; I crouch only if I need to get over 140.

Intent this thread to keep discussion on...