Suzuki GSX1400 vs Kawasaki ZRX1200S

Grown men and women have been known to shed a tear when they see a nicely-restored GS1000S or Z900, but what happens when they're given a modernised version? They stay away in droves, if you can believe the sales figures. Which is dumb. Because they're missing motorcycling's answer to mud wrestling. Big, naked, and lots of grunt.

You can put up a convincing argument that bikes like the Kawasaki ZRX1200S and Suzuki GSX1400 are really modernised throw-backs deliberately pitched at the (mostly) blokes who rode their forebears twenty years ago. The styling screams early eighties, along with the UJM across-the-frame-four engine configuration. And what you get is a big, fat, engine, housed in a basic twin loop frame.

But you'd be a fool to yourself and... well, just a fool to dismiss this lot as pure retro. Fact is these bikes have a hell of a lot to offer any rider and present a real performance alternative to the head-down bum-up supersports set.

Okay, let's get down to biz and see what we're looking at...

CASUAL SPECS
While they might look basic to the casual observer, these two bikes come with some fairly high-tech credentials. For example, the Kawasaki is running a variation on the marque's ZZ-R1100 sexy liquid-cooled powerhouse (with carbs), itself a successor to the mighty GPz900R. Suzuki's engine department is a variation of the slick GSX-R air/oil cooled engines, but running an up-to-date twin-butterfly fuel injection system that has been adapted from the supersports models in the range.

Suspension looks straightforward, but it's serious kit with full adjustment at both ends, while both machines run six-piston front brake calipers. Our examples were wearing the latest Bridgestone sports-touring rubber, with the emphasis on the former. Frames on both are steel twin-loop items.

The Kawasaki runs a five-speed gearbox and a 10,500rpm redline, while the Suze has six cogs and 9000rpm marked as the limit.

Claimed weights are almost identical 227kg and 228, while the fuel capacity sees the Kwaka wanting with 19lt compared to 22lt. Claimed seat heights are identical at 790mm.

DISTINCT GO
Though running head-to-head in the market, there's a distinct difference between the two powerplants. Get on the ZRX and you'll be thoroughly delighted with its easy nature and broad spread of power. It's no ZX-12R, but is quick enough for anything resembling a road. Double the metric ton is in easy reach.

Then you hit the Suzuki - which doesn't have the same top-end push, but a monster bottom and midrange. Silky and truly awe-inspiring. Dyno figures for the two give the game away to a large extent. Various examples put across Dynojet set-ups around the country have revealed the Kawasaki is making on the high side of a real 110PS at 8500 and close to 11kg-m at 7000. Meanwhile the Suzuki just tops 100PS at a significantly lower 6000rpm while reaching a max torque of over 12.5kg-m at just over 5000rpm. The Kawasaki does more, though the Suzuki gets there earlier and easier. An intriguing mix and either qualify as serious performance.

On the road, this means the Suzi is deceptively fast while the Kawasaki has significantly more punch as you explore the upper reaches of the tacho dial. At 100km/h the Kawasaki is spinning at 3400rpm and the Suzuki at a very low 3000.

Our Kawasaki's gearbox and clutch felt clunky - we suspect this had a lot to do with spending too much time in the hands of would-be stunt riders in its demo career. The Suzuki's gearbox was super slick, though the clutch was a little on the grabby side.

Suspension on both is pretty well-sorted, and there's not a lot to pick between the two. The Suze gives the impression of less front dive under brakes, while the feel on the front stoppers for both machines is unspectacular.

Speaking of sharpness, the Kawasaki scores quicker steering - the chassis numbers back this up, with the Suze running a much longer (55mm) wheelbase and slightly more rake (26 degrees versus 25) though a tad less trail (105mm versus 106).

When it comes to suspension, the Kawasaki runs marginally better control. Damping and springing seem to be a little steadier, without sacrificing comfort. It's a close call, but we'd pick this as a contributing factor to the Kay's greater comfort for larger riders. Lighter riders on the Suzuki will disagree.

COMFY THEN?
You sit deeper in the Suzuki, and the Kawasaki feels narrower - an impression enhanced by its much slimmer fuel tank. Kawasaki's seat is the harder of the two but works okay over distances, while the Suzuki's compressed too much for two of our taller riders (who would reupholster the seat) - the mid-sized folk loved it. The Kawasaki runs a slightly more forward sports-touring stance.

Points go to the Kwaka for the fairing, which makes a difference over long trips, and its accompanying twin headlamps. There's not much to pick between them when it comes to pillion accommodation - the Suzuki wins for a little more pillion legroom. Both machines run lots of luggage strap mounts, and the GSX runs a centrestand - though the grab handle for it is tucked too high under the sidecover.

There's nothing in the fuel consumption stakes - about 15km/lt for both. Finish on both exhaust systems was nothing to write home about. Both were suffering after a couple of months' duty as test bikes.

THE FAVOURITE?
Err, probably the Kawasaki. The sticker price is higher, but you score the fairing and significantly more horses. Of the three folk who rode both, two went for the Kawasaki and the other is undecided. But there ain't much in it, and the Suzuki gives the impression there's an awful lot more horses hiding in there somewhere - just waiting for a half-interested tuner. It is also a true naked with killer styling, is a little more pillion-friendly and runs more fuel range.