looks are subjective.....i like apaches look way more than FZ.aggressive and sporty

-apache has better braking braking than FZ (even a 160 with a drum)
just change the tyres to zappers and then ride an apache.you will see who smokes whom
-TVS is as reliable as yamaha,apache's engine wont last long or its prone to breakdowns-this is rubbish
-if tvs tyres are worst so is FZ's alloys
-apache is as good as FZ in cities...just change the tyre to zappers.
-apache smokes FZ in performance so therefore highway performance is better
-pillion seat of the apache is better than the FZ
-apache has better mileage
-Apache is more a VFM proposition

FZ only has better refinement and better handling(by a very very small margin) when compared to an apache which has stock tyres!
overall apache is way better than FZ

Looks might be subjective but FZ sells purely for it's one and only USP i.e Style!!

LOL...found this old post...... not really 160 CC toh kitna hai bhai????

Not so really 160 CC but a bike which hits 144 kmph on the speedo ...wah

and still gives 54KMPL!

lol it doesnt hit 144 anymore

These small points are worth the check,specially the panel one and they are right.
No doubt the front brake of FZ is miles better than the RTR, RTR being way to bitey when not careful.



You find that "childish" cuz you own the FZ my frind, and are a member of "fan boy" group of FZ, i dont consider 7 CC's as a difference, you got to ride both the bikes back to back,spend more time on them on twisties to get my point, which cannot be understood by sitting on front of the comp screen and typing.

Oh thanks for the info. man... i am not interested to start a brand war or some thing like that and stop calling other brand owners who are not interested in your likings as fan boy... i thought you are a guy who has good knowledge in this from your other threads/posts... but i was wrong... i meant the word childish not to harrase you or to bash you... i just threw it as a friendly word... you mistook it... Different people have different interests and tastes in bikes which they find most suitable... if you don't find FZ to be your liking then leave it man, there are other who likes it...

Ok Ok no wars here, all smiles....

this is what i hate with the what bike section, the thread starter starts the thing and goes sleeping leaving evryone except him discussin the bike....

No hard feelings or offence bro.

He he he i just it in that sense only... coz i like both bikes...... both are good in their own respects... and in the end we are talking about some small marginal differences of both the bikes...

Definitely no hard feelings bro... coz we had seen each other for long times here in xbhp... and we know each other...

araigh were is the @Thread starter... which one did you buy bro?

We need to understand that the alloy rims on an FZ16/FZ-s are Mag. Which basically means they're made of Magnesium alloys. The wisdom of using these materials is fast going out of favor due to the inherent hazards of the Magnesium metal. They're even banned in certain racing circuits. Yamaha may have done this for a number of commercial reasons... This also means that Mag rims are lighter than regular Aluminium rims, but most importantly they're much softer than Aluminium alloy rims of the same size and volume. Thus taking care not to abuse them in the worst potholes is important. So I guess it's not a defect 'per se', it's just the way the material behaves under the given conditions.

Between the 2, I would suggest you to go for the FZ (without any doubt)..

Hi guys,

I am Harish from madurai. I own a KB100RTZ(1991). Though I am just 18, I thought I could tell what I know.

Let us be clear that these bikes are bulit for their "SPECIFIC PURPOSES".

I have driven a FZ once so I just know a thing or two. As all say it loses out breath after 100. But cruising between 60-80 is worthy biking on a FZ. It is more of a style statement kinda thing. I just love the bike's muscular looks. In fact looking at its bulky appearance for the first time, I mistook that it would be heavy. But that's a big NO. The biker is prone to wind blast without a doubt. And a lot of owners claim that if you are pulling up the rpm meter high often don't expect anything above 40. It is definitely much comfortable than the RTR. I would say one can use it for city biking and highway cruising. Not for drag kind of things(No hard feelings). The engine is more refined than any other 150cc(may be a honda will match). Above all you get a Yamaha's solid reliability. I am not aware of the mag problem in FZ(if it really exists).

Coming to the RTR. I have driven it plenty of times as my close friend has one(FI version).Its something else for sure. Something no one expects out of a 160cc bike. And as somebody already said, saying that TVS engines are prone to breakdown is all rubbish. TVS has become a reliable and competative member in the 2-wheeler industry. No one expected such a bike from TVS. The bike is simply bulit for the kill. It is an outrageous dynamite. Mileage(40) is not good as the FZ(not sure,becoz my friend always chases). My outlook is that the bike is not for cruising. You won't even feel to do so. It is simply bulit for perfomance. Lot of modern stuffs too(like the 0-60 timer). The silencer sound is lovable but some may find it annoying. It has sporty look and seating position. As people say, the bike's brakes gives you a bite many times. In fact here in madurai many lethal 2-wheeler accidents were on RTR's and many claim it is due to the brake and short wheel base(not sure of the braking part but yes, short wheel base means less stability). But I wouldn't account this point to biking since I believe our riders are not engaged in rash driving. Finally it is a fun to drive kinda bike.

I feel the only common thing between the two bikes is that you can corner like hell on both.

I like both the bikes and find it odd comparing as I believe they belong to different category. Again it is just "MY" outlook. SO NO HARD FEELINGS!!!!!!!!.

FZ vs RTR no compro! simply go for the RTR(without any doubt) RTR is a killer! just ride the 2 bikes! you will know! Who said RTR cant be used for cruising? it cruise all day at 80-90 kmh/r!!!it also turns out to be more Fuel efficient than the FZ! FZ is a commuter bike for the cities RTR is a performer! its your call!

+1 both are of different categories one concern is more on looks and other concern is more on power.. but overall FZ is a much better package then apache if and only if you don't need more power get the apache..

even the apache start dieing after 105 it is not fz only..

apache doesnt "die" at 105, it starts losing power at 115 FZ starts dying at 85-90 itself from my experience!! FZ better package???? no way!! apache-you get rear disc option,better console,better alloys, better mileage!!!!even that counts! id say apache anyday over an FZ!!!!!!

115 you are joking right just post a video proof can you with gps reading ?? or have you got a crappy speedo? or are you talking about 180?

I have done 123 on FZ and on apache both said no to go any further

on fz front - better braking, better handling,much better looks(despite looks being subjective and all if I make a poll only apache owners will vote for apache looks), better chassis, better refinement, better tyres, reliability, not much problems, cheap spares,more torque, much more comfortable, and great mid and low range grunt, weighs less so can be handled by almost anyone..

max payload of apache is 130kg I have tried to run the bike by making a 100 kg pillion sit behind me and the bike was going here and there and was not running straight... you can give it a try buddy if you want..

Apache got better mileage only when you ride it sanely rip it and you will get the same mileage as fz and ride fz sanely you will get around 50kmpl check out ownership experience threads if you don't believe me.. it is more or less same..

there are only 2 things which are worth mentioning which I really liked in apache first the throttle response and next the sound..

I will pick fz anyday over apache 160..