[rideon74]

Here's a quick comparo video of the Adventure vs. the Himalayan.

Adventure vs. Himalayan owner speak

Looks like the Yezdi is on a path to give RE some tough competition in the dual-sport segment.

I could relate almost all of the pros & cons of the Himalayan, having previously owned a 2018 BS4 version myself. Quite surprised that some of quality issues stated by this BS6 Himalayan owner are still plaguing the product.

Unlike the KTM, the Yezdi has gone for the jugular in terms of pricing and ride dynamics - even the styling to a large extent. Will this kind pressure will quite possibly get the RE team to offer a better deal in the forthcoming Himalayan versions? It just might.

[ebonho]

https://youtu.be/soz0ogUi3Ss

Top speed is underwhelming for a 30 bhp bike.

Must be the weight.

[rarkit]

Why does the bike have two exhausts? Does it provide any functional value or are they just going for nostalgia?

[kosjam]

Originally Posted by ebonho

https://Youtu.be/soz0ogUi3Ss

Top speed is underwhelming for a 30 bhp bike.

Must be the weight.

Being an adventure tourer, the engine state of tune might be to give better low end torque, at the cost of high end power. You can either have a peak at the high end (like KTM does) or give a flat curve for power/torque across the revv range.

It should mean that low speed tractability would be excellent on the bike. And lets face it, how much is top speed an issue if drivability is superior?

[ebonho]

Originally Posted by kosjam

Being an adventure tourer, the engine state of tune might be to give better low end torque, at the cost of high end power. You can either have a peak at the high end (like KTM does) or give a flat curve for power/torque across the revv range.

It should mean that low speed tractability would be excellent on the bike. And lets face it, how much is top speed an issue if drivability is superior?

For some people speed is everything. Or almost everything. That's why they ride bikes.

I'm one of them.

This is especially true-r for countries like ours starved of larger capacity bikes with more power.

So when you go up capacity, you expect to get more speed. At the very least.

I don't even know what rideability (drivability) means to be honest. Every bike is rideable with the right right wrist on the throttle.

This (video) is not of the Adventure. It's of the roadster.

Which means the Adventure will likely be even slower. Because it's fatter, at the very least. Don't yet know how it's geared

[Sudarshan42]

The Yezdi Adventure promises to be everything and more than RE's upcoming Scram 411. The Scram was supposed to be a lighter and cheaper version of the Himalayan, and the Adventure is already that. Add a more powerful engine (at least in peak terms) and hopefully better brakes, and I know which of the 2 I'd prefer.

[ebonho]

Originally Posted by rarkit

Why does the bike have two exhausts? Does it provide any functional value or are they just going for nostalgia?

The original Yezdi as I recall also had a 1-imto-2 exhaust configuration.

[kosjam]

Originally Posted by ebonho

For some people speed is everything. Or almost everything. That's why they ride bikes.

I'm one of them.
I don't even know what rideability (drivability) means to be honest. Every bike is rideable with the right right wrist on the throttle.

Well, in that case, the KTM bikes are ideal for you, pocket rockets at a lower price point...

rideability or drivability is frankly the ease of riding/driving. For example. A bike with a more linear torque curve ensures you dont have to keep upshifting or downshifting constantly to remain in a preferred rev range, for example the honda unicorn or its siblings. The bike will chug along merrily without complaint even on 5th gear at 40 kph.
In comparison for example, a ktm 390 adventure will struggle to maintain 40 even in 4th gear, causing you to constantly downshift or upshift in traffic.

hope that makes sense, i was riding both bikes in my head while writing this explanation

[ebonho]

Originally Posted by kosjam

Well, in that case, the KTM bikes are ideal for you, pocket rockets at a lower price point...

rideability or drivability is frankly the ease of riding/driving. For example. A bike with a more linear torque curve ensures you dont have to keep upshifting or downshifting constantly to remain in a preferred rev range, for example the honda unicorn or its siblings. The bike will chug along merrily without complaint even on 5th gear at 40 kph.
In comparison for example, a ktm 390 adventure will struggle to maintain 40 even in 4th gear, causing you to constantly downshift or upshift in traffic.

hope that makes sense, i was riding both bikes in my head while writing this explanation

I'm sorry I still don't get it.

The bike has gears that are meant to be shifted.

If not shifting (too often) = rideability, then the Activa is the most rideable bike out there.

What has any of that got anything to do with expecting a 30 bhp bike to be faster than what the video shows ... that was my original point.

I do own a 2013 Duke 390. And a 2002 Bullet Std 500.

Cheers, Doc

P.S. I don't get this "linear torque curve" thing either, as if it's the holy grail of motorcycling.

Used to have comments flowing out of my ears of internet riders dissing the Ninja 250 for having too peaky a torque curve ... and not being "rideable"

Till I rode one when looking for a replacement for my Duke 200, years ago. And was hooked before the first corner from my gate. It was that sweet.

Maybe ... just maybe ... it's not the bikes that are not rideable.

Maybe it's the riders who need to learn how to ride?

Just a thought.

[Cyborg]

Originally Posted by ebonho

Maybe, just maybe, it's not the bikes that are not rideable.
Maybe it's the riders who need to learn how to ride?
Just a thought.

Proper thoughts Doc

Each and every bike is different and needs to be ridden differently. All this nannying etc etc has become too much nowadays. UTube is to blame for putting too much jargon and complicating the pure sense of riding, the bike and rider - simple really. Ride the bike which you want to buy, maybe two, three times for a decent period of time and you should know if the characteristics are for you or not. This should not take very long. If yes, buy, if not, keep looking.

Three other things which ought not to matter:

1. RPM, needing to see what RPM to change gears is so not necessary. While riding, the way the bike moves, sounds should be good enough to know when to shift up or if the bike seems to struggling in a higher gear for the speed, shift down.

2. Gears, need power, drop a gear (or two) and disappear. Are we getting so lazy so as to not want to move around the gearbox, that’s where the fun is at in riding. Depending upon how powerful the bike is, running through the gearbox, redlining each gear is the thrill in riding.

3. Gear indicator, another thing which is blown out of proportion. Sure it’s nice to have, but mostly only while you are new to the bike. Within a short period of time, any rider should know and understand which gear she is moving in.

In summation, to really enjoy the ride you needn’t keep looking at the display, just your bike, the sound she makes and the way she feels while doing her thing should be paramount in what should be a gratifying riding experience.

Some may agree (old school riders) with what I have written/said, others may not. Like with the above whatever floats your boat is what you should be looking at because riding should only be about pure pleasure and the feel with being one with your ride. Nothing else matters

Cheers

[VijayAnand1]

Being a BS IV Himalayan owner, the Hima's engine was good but isn't great, it was refined by RE standards, but not great, the gearing ratios were a bummer. Lots left to be desired in terms of quality and what not. With the Yezdi being a liquid cooled and an engine that's related to the Mojo, should eat the Himalayan for breakfast any day.

​The Himalayan does have its pros, but definitely not a long term bike in my book. And with a full 11 kgs lighter than the Himalayan, if Yezdi did their homework well, especially with QC, the rusting and poor quality paint and welding issues which plaqued the JAWA brand series, taken strict care of, and provide good service backup with niggle free initial ownership, they've got a fantastic winner in their hands. One thing I did notice of the ADV Yezdi is during start up and ride reviews, the engine tends to have a snatchy throttle response and abrupt stalls, faulty fueling maps perhaps or low fuel is anyone's guess, but this I observed in one too many videos. Every motorcycle has its unique pros and cons, and sure enough, with time, the Yezdi trios won't be anything indifferent to the "spotlight of shame" that it'd be put to.

Yezdi to cement its "seal of deal" definitely needs to iron out any negating issues by proactively heeding to first goers feedback. Get that first lot experience right and the rest should be a party for Yezdi.

Hopefully, swing my leg over for a test ride, if and when I get the time to do so of the new Yezdi, especially the Scrambler that has taken up my keen interest.

Cheers!
VJ

[ebonho]

Originally Posted by Cyborg

Proper thoughts Doc

Each and every bike is different and needs to be ridden differently. All this nannying etc etc has become too much nowadays. UTube is to blame for putting too much jargon and complicating the pure sense of riding, the bike and rider - simple really. Ride the bike which you want to buy, maybe two, three times for a decent period of time and you should know if the characteristics are for you or not. This should not take very long. If yes, buy, if not, keep looking.

Three other things which ought not to matter:

1. RPM, needing to see what RPM to change gears is so not necessary. While riding, the way the bike moves, sounds should be good enough to know when to shift up or if the bike seems to struggling in a higher gear for the speed, shift down.

2. Gears, need power, drop a gear (or two) and disappear. Are we getting so lazy so as to not want to move around the gearbox, that’s where the fun is at in riding. Depending upon how powerful the bike is, running through the gearbox, redlining each gear is the thrill in riding.

3. Gear indicator, another thing which is blown out of proportion. Sure it’s nice to have, but mostly only while you are new to the bike. Within a short period of time, any rider should know and understand which gear she is moving in.

In summation, to really enjoy the ride you needn’t keep looking at the display, just your bike, the sound she makes and the way she feels while doing her thing should be paramount in what should be a gratifying riding experience.

Some may agree (old school riders) with what I have written/said, others may not. Like with the above whatever floats your boat is what you should be looking at because riding should only be about pure pleasure and the feel with being one with your ride. Nothing else matters

Cheers

My thoughts exactly man.

The solution to all torque curve woes lies in your right wrist.

Im stuck in my Safari 10 km either way, morning, evening, 6 days a week.

It gives me time to observe motorcycle riders on our roads.

I don't know if it's our famous Indian mileage fetish.

Or simply riders who are at best commuters.

But the angle of the right wrist tells the entire story man.

The fact that a driver in a Safari has enough time to observe that angle actually puts the final nail in that sad coffin.

I swear on all I hold holy and dear that I have this overpowering urge to jump out of my car and help twist that poor jammed throttle to life ... for once in its life.

Cheers, Doc

[kosjam]

Originally Posted by ebonho

I'm sorry I still don't get it.

The bike has gears that are meant to be shifted.

Till I rode one when looking for a replacement for my Duke 200, years ago. And was hooked before the first corner from my gate. It was that sweet.

Ur right, bike has gears that are meant to be shifted. But shifted when you want to, not because of the limitations of the bike. I have had the Ninja 300, it was a good bike with a very good torque curve. In comparison, the KTM does not. A bike which forces me to concentrate on the shifting of gears just to ensure it wont stall, rather than concentrating on traffic, is IMO not a very good bike.

Moto enthusiasts call having an uneven power curve on a bike, its "character", to an engineer like me, it is just lazy engineering.

Originally Posted by ebonho

Maybe it's the riders who need to learn how to ride?

Just a thought.

i wholeheartedly support this point, but maybe, the obsession with speed is the reason why manufacturers are willing to put out such vibey and bad rideability bikes...

[ebonho]

Originally Posted by kosjam

Ur right, bike has gears that are meant to be shifted. But shifted when you want to, not because of the limitations of the bike. I have had the Ninja 300, it was a good bike with a very good torque curve. In comparison, the KTM does not. A bike which forces me to concentrate on the shifting of gears just to ensure it wont stall, rather than concentrating on traffic, is IMO not a very good bike.

Moto enthusiasts call having an uneven power curve on a bike, its "character", to an engineer like me, it is just lazy engineering.



i wholeheartedly support this point, but maybe, the obsession with speed is the reason why manufacturers are willing to put out such vibey and bad rideability bikes...

All race prepped and race tune bikes are extremely angry snarly grumpy spitting poorly idling machines.

You cannot climb on to a KTM and expect to ride it like a Honda.

Stalling a bike 9 times out of 10 is on the rider. Unless as Vijay alluded to above there is an organic issue contributing.

I think we belong to two different polar ends of the biking universe to be honest. Peace. Enjoy your ride.

Cheers, Doc

[Astonite]

Scrambler looks great. Waiting to test ride the same.
However, got to ride the Roadster yesterday here in Chennai.

Initial Impressions:

Pros
1. The low end torque is great
2. Doesn't feel heavy like a RE
3. Could cruise at at 90Kmph with no trouble (this bike had one of those tiny windshield, not sure how much that helped)
4. Confidence inspiring dynamics - never felt scared at speeds or while taking the U Turn
5. Vibrations are there but very livable.

Cons
1. The side stand touches the exhuast (the extender to put the side stand length should have been bigger) - thank god I was wearing my crocs yesterday.
2. Seat height though it's 790mm - didn't feel like it. probably because of the seat shape (thin build, 5'4")

The cons reported above might not bother most people - I can overlook them too if Scramber doesn't impress me - about to finalize on the new Yezdi - Scramber vs Roadster will be contenders.

P.S: Did sit on the Adv - had to stretch my hand completely (problem with my build, nothing to do with the bike), hence did not test ride it.