I dont know about Praful. But what I understand of "lazier" is that its not jittery around corners and takes a little more intent on the riders side to actually make dive into the corner. Which inturn provides more confidence to the rider egging him on to HIGHER corner speeds. Nobody I think is talking about 180 being slower in the twisties. Not me atleast.


I am not really sure why the rim size would affect flickability. Maybe it does. As far as I know, its quite obvious that increasing the wheelbase is going to make it less flickable.

Having ridden both back to back twice in a row, I can say only that the 180 feels heavier&more stable. Not a great shake difference, or loss in agility/flickability, but I could feel the fatter rear tyre&slightly longer handlebar. Necessary considering the bigger swingarm&wheelbase. It should feel much more sure footed in the twisties. 160 will feel easier in tight traffic conditions.
I couldn't take it beyond 60 as it wasn't run in, but I could see about 750rpm difference (the 180 was lower obviously) at that speed. I really wanna see the difference at speeds above 80kmph.

Thanks for conferring me with the title, but you can keep it! :P

Keep all the psychological preconceptions mumbo jumbo aside and go and have a TR of the bike. You would definitely agree its better than giving out armchair opinions!

Did you see me write about increased swingarm or anything tech spec related to handling? Infact I din't know the swingarm length has been increased till you guys said it now. All I knew was the rear is a wider and a 17" now.

I just had a TR of the 2 bikes back to back and this is what I and loads of others 'felt'. We did not 'imagine' it. :P

And why are you jumping the gun, did I say its become so sluggish that its become as lazy as a Unicorn? The RTR 180 is still pretty much flickable, but not as razor sharp as the 160.

As a parting note, please do let me know how I can put some theory into what I feel? You can keep at your technical theory as much, but the fact is that the 180 is definitely not as razor sharp as the 160, but its not so much slower that its slower than anyone else in the competition.

I felt no difference :-P. felt both were equally lazy :-D

Santa
________
Live sex

dude i can sit here sippin on beer and tell you the same too...
what you're typing on ur keyboard may be out of ur "imaginative" fairytale mind for me too....

just cuz you had the drive of both the bikes doesnt make you the guy with the "World's best test driver" tag...

like you think what you felt is the most honest report for the bike and that's how the bike behaves....i have the same theory for my ride too....

you have ur own points i have mine here....


i'll agree on that.....

compared to R15 it is...

but in right hands it can show it's pair of LED's to R15 too....

Well maybe you've had one too many beers...

I don't see anywhere in my post that screams about saying I am the last word when it comes to test rides. Look back a page or two, there are others too who agree with what I've said.

And if you still feel that "we" are in own fairytale world, then beer on buddy I got nothing else for ur thick head!

Oh MR "i know it all".....

oops i didnt knew about the bikes...
you just opened my eyes and introduced me to the real biking world...
and look you just got me off with my hangover too....

for me may be u wrote this after reading what others posted in last two pages....

in that way you're having solid backing...

oh!!!!!!
i'm lost now.........

Wider rubber on the rear and a longer wheelbase on the same bike.

Give me some solid backing as to why will the flickability dynamics remain the same given that the above mentioned variables have been changed?

Sir i agree that 110 with 10 more MM's than RTR will provide little more grip around the corners,but will not make it hard to flick as while cornering only sides have the contact...and to top it all it has one inch shaved off...it's 17" now...and 500gms lighter too(though it hardly matters)

and 26 mm are close to almost inch so how itthese tiny MM's will affect the overall brilliant handling package.....???
atleast i never felt when i thrashed the machine for 20 kms....but the point is that was how i felt and that's my opinion...no hard feelings..

Hey Guys Great News for me , ill be getting my bike tom , ill post good pics asap!!!

....waiting for tomorrow

Bang On!

Now please read my previous posts. All that I have said is, the 180 is lazier than the 160 i.e. when you put into into a gap in traffic the 160 will respond a wee bit quicker. That's about it, no where have I said that handling has gone for a toss, it still handles like a dream. The only thing better at handling out there is the R15.

An inch may seems small, but its definitely gonna make a difference to handling no matter how small it maybe.

So we cool now?

Ok sir.....

sorry for the hard words if you felt that....


i understood now what was your point in bolds....

anyways the RTR family is one great handler no doubt....

+1 to that...

I've done faster laptimes on the chennai track in a carb 160 than on my 220, that in itself speaks volumes of the bike's capability.

Phew..Finally the dust has settled down.

Renny dude, thanks that at least you got the point which i was trying to make.In fact, if you closely take a look at my posts again, then you will definitely get to know what i was implying!!


Thank you, YAMAHA!!

I think the misunderstanding was created when the term "lazier" was misunderstood.

I had an opportunity to TR the RTR180 today morning in Hosur Road in peak traffic hours. I felt it is harder to manouver this around traffic than the RTR160 (before anyone throws a bomb at me, let me say that I have ridden the RTR160 in all kind of road conditions - off road, peak traffic, long straights, winding hills - because of daily road conditions back home: Nepal). There is definitely that edgy feeling in the RTR160 while riding it. It is not present in the RTR180 which turns easily, but not as much. I am only talking about riding it in traffic, and nothing else, because I have not experienced the RTR180 in other conditions.

One thing though, Renny, theoretically speaking, one inch reduction in rim diameter does not translate to the full inch reduction in the whole rear tire + rim package for these two bikes. The RTR160 has 100/80 rear tires with 80mm side profile. The RTR180 has 110/80 which means 88mm side profile. So, with the correct PSI and brand new tires (brand new contact patch ) , the rear wheel for the RTR160 would be 18 inches + 80*2mm = 24.2 inches (considering 1 inch = 25.4mm) and the RTR180 would be 17 inches + 88*2mm = 23.9 inches.

So while considering the actual dynamics, it would mean 0.3 inches difference in rotational diameter of both.

Also, another point is, if you are to take flickability into account, an inch increase in wheelbase would affect a bike more than an inch reduction in wheel size would.

Peace.