For those who think GS is a tourer, a 150cc bike is not a tourer.

but gs can cruise comfortably at high speed,such is the straight line stability.
in our country if you are to go by the definition of tourer then you will be amused to see that people here tour on even dio.

[You guys are just thinking about 6ht cog of GS. The power is not enough on highways where you need power in tricky situations. 150cc engine strains a lot at high speeds. A bigger engine is more relaxed at high speeds.

If somebody goes on bicycle, you can't call the bicycle a tourer. I toured on Splendor too, but I never felt as enjoying as touring on Karizma. Now with four lane highways everywhere, you will get bored to death with 150cc on highways. Also, braking is good on the 200cc+ bikes, than a 150cc bike (the front disc is smaller in all 150cc bikes).

I did 100+ kms in my dio quite a few times with a couple of breaks in between. . So gs150r would be a good tourer. And i'm assuming TS isn't gonna do hardcore touring.

the thing is for a hardcore tourer a zma will seem insufficient,he will rather prefer cbr 250 r,ninja 250 r or even 650r and there are litre class too.
i have done 350 odd kms on a passion,that unpleasant thing was i couldn't go over 75.now that's not a hardcore touring.
touring speed varies in between 80-95 kmph for a 2 wheeler with occasional out burst to 115-120.gs 150 r can keep up a 80 odd kmph without straining the engine.overtaking will be a little pain in the ass.

The real hard-core touring bikes abroad are the pretty powerful and heavy bikes in the 650-1000cc class. In India, the term touring can mean different things to different people, but I think its ridiculous to call light 100cc bikes as tourers as these clearly struggle in this role, and track bikes with a sporty riding posture like the R15 are also not tourers.

For my needs as a tourer...
1) It should comfortably carry 2 adults (75+75kg) and some luggage (lets say 20-25kg) on highways and hilly roads. That implies enough power & torque so that a speed of 60-80 km/hr can be maintained and bursts of 100 km/hr (while overtaking for example) can be done without the engine feeling strained or vibrations & rattling spoiling the show. The riding ergonomics, a comfortable seat and an effective suspension to soak up all the bumps are very important here.
2) Remain stable....against cross winds as well as when big vehicles pass by at speed.
3) Good brakes are essential.
4) Nice powerful headlights and tubeless tyres would be good to have.
5) Reliability !! (thats what made BMWs such legendary tourers)

only reliability,i thought there is more in the bikes that made them apt tourers.
your requirements really calls for a 200cc+.have a look at cbr if budget permits.if not then p220 0r 200ns[i prefer the former for touring].

Don't look at 150cc bike for your requirements. You need a bike with 200+cc bike. If you are budget conscious, Karizma and P220 are the choices. With infamous Bajaj quality issues, P220 is not as reliable as a Karizma.

Consider suggestions only from those who are experienced in touring and who actually used the bikes. There are a lot here who haven't toured much and just assume and suggest.

Agree Totally.

Disagree. If you check the over 1980 pages of the P220 DTSi ownership thread, you will find just 1 (One) report of an engine seizure on a P220 carb (Owned by BlackRival) . That too was due to negligent behavior by a non-owner riding the bike from Mumbai to Goa without checking engine oil prior to the ride. By comparison, there have been more than one seizures/knocking complaints reported by ZMA owners on ZMA ownership thread. Even me, a 'very occasional' visitor on the ZMA ownership section can see this.

I don't mean to say that P220 is *more reliable* than so and so. I only meant that the stereotype that Pulsars are *unreliable* can easily be done away with.

Agree. Check public profiles of all suggesters and look for the no. next to

About Me -> Maximum Kilometers done in a day on a motorcycle

Assuming everyone here to be truthful about this field, anything higher than 500 is good.

P.S.: I am only talking about the non Fuel Injected, Carburetted Pulsar 220 which sold in much much higher no.s (15 times more month on month by conservative estimates) than the older FI.

'Not much reliable' doesn't mean that engines will seize frequently. You have to spend lot of time with P220 and service center to keep it in shape. Frequent small niggles made many to sell it. I have known many personally and I don't suggest a P220 if somebody wants a more reliable bike.

There are minor niggles with any bike if you don't keep it in proper shape, karizma is no exception. I have toured on Karizma for 40k along with other P220's, and many of them attend service center very frequently due to many minor issues. If somebody doesn't mind spending more time with service center, they can consider P220 as an option too.

This is my opinion with my experience in the past years. Please don't prolong this, which may lead to brand wars. Rest my case here regarding this.

Well then, I guess my definition of reliability differs from yours. .

In the past 10 months, I have visited the SVC/mechanic/garage a total of 3 times. Those visits were for periodic service. But thats just me, maybe I have been luckier than your P220 owner friends.

Even I don't want this to turn to 2007 all over again, but I guess you will also agree that some things have definitely changed since then.

ZMA R

Is good for touring
FE is around 35-40 for me

One problem Is that you cannot Kickstart on all gears. like Yamahas
Self start works on all the gears.
Once when my Battery was low it was a Pain.

Its a good perfomer and 70Kmph+ perfomance is amazing

Do you mean that if the bike was stopped in some gear and if you pull the clutch lever and disengage the clutch its not always possible to kick start the bike but its always possible to use the electric starter? That sounds a bit odd.

Another question out of curiosity: Is it possible to start and run the Karizma even with a dead battery or no battery?

answer of both of your questions is yes.

I am not a die-hard Karizma fan and I dont hate GS 150R either.

If one can live with an ugly 1980 model brake paddle that hits the GC adversely, if one can live with AC setup for headlight, then I surely would recommend GS150R.

The TS has already said that he is not tad too much interested in drags and chases and I guess GS 150R does the rest of the work efficiently.

Karizma has always been (in)famous for the nose heavy plastic that starts giving up in a month or so, in most of the cases. Adding to it, the bigger turning radius and comparatively poorer fuel efficiency, I believe, GS 150R is the machine to buy.

The rake and trail of GS150 R is as wonderful as that of Karizma making it as stable as Karizma, and trust me, the engine is smoother and more lasting then Karizma. Plus one gets the advantage of saving 15k at the onset.


However, one should not forget that the spare parts would be a concern as you dont generally get the Suzuki spare parts in open market that easily. Also, even if the bike is meant for slow cruising at 80-100 kph, however, on a GS 150R, it would be a threat and a pain to overtake a roadways bus doing 90-100 kph.

A little reserve of power is never a bad bet.

Think about it.