Team-BHP - Aprilia Tuono 457 launched at 3.95L

A competitive product that touches 5L on road BLR ( and even lesser if you opt for BH in your native state), with an engine that is already pulling folks to buy the RS457 ? I am ecstatic. Its closest competitor is a decade old platform that got a price cut, or a fantastic product that is over Rs1.5L more but has its own charm. This bodes well for those of us who want to carve out an upgrade path to twin cylinder / premium segment bikes, but are not happy shelling out 8-12 L for a competent product.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ramki.grandhi (Post 5928505)

While the motorcycle looks phenomenal, a rookie question from me to get better understanding.

Q: Tuono 457 generates max power at 9400 rpm, R3 get max power at 10,750 rpm. i.e. on paper R3 seems to have better rev range. How does it translate in the real world? Does R3 give better pleasure of driving because of its high rev-ing nature?

Thanks a ton.

I think there is more to an engine than just those numbers. For example torque, weight, gearing and how well spaced they are etc. From what I understand Tuono/RS twins are more torquey. Having said that both are fun to ride in their own way. From my personal experience, R3 needs more precision when it comes to using that power effectively.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr.Ogre (Post 5928597)

I think there is more to an engine than just those numbers. For example torque, weight, gearing and how well spaced they are etc. From what I understand Tuono/RS twins are more torquey.

The Aprilia RS 457 has a 270-degree firing order on its engine, giving it a distinct sound and character. The 270-degree firing order also provides good rideability and smooth power delivery!

This makes the bike feel different :thumbs up

Happy riding,
surjaonwheelz

Quote:

Originally Posted by ramki.grandhi (Post 5928505)

I absolutely love the R3. Prior to the 457 engines entering the scene, that was the easy pick for me. But the issue with that engine is that, almost all the power is produced only at the top end. It is fun in its own way, as the engine is extremely rev happy and you can just keep the throttle pinned. But, what it also means is that you have to work the gearbox on not so open highways to keep pace. (its not bad, this shows up only when we compare it to more torque-ier engines like this one which has phenomenal torque lower down the RPM range) .
Now. what you would prefer is strictly a personal taste preference, but I have always seen people appreciate lower down torque on Indian roads because of the way our infra is.
Make no mistake, I am not saying that the R3 engine is bad, but its old-ish and it shows. The main (only ?) advantage that the R3 has over this one is the bulletproof reliability, and the way that the Yamaha sounds in that top-end. Oh also R3, is the best sports tourer that I have ridden. (I haven't ridden the rs 457, but its more commited from what i can see, tueno should be more comfortable but then you would have to deal with the wind.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by BullettuPaandi (Post 5926274)

I think your requirement asks for a Sports Tourer more than a Naked. This is just a rough rule of thumb, but most bikes comply to this: Nakeds are mostly meant for cities and don't offer nearly the same handling- particularly at high speeds- as their faired counterparts.

Looking at the images of the RS and Tuono 457s side-by-side, the foot peg position and seat inclination seem largely the same; only the handle bar seems a bit raised on the Tuono- and that too only with the aluminium risers, found on some pictures. I imagine the stance won't be too different on the Tuono from an RS with raised handlebars.

Considering the use-case, I think the RS with raised handlebars- and perhaps even a raised (more convex) windscreen on the RS, should you find the wind deflection to be inadequate for the upright posture while touring- would be a better mod for you.

Yes, it indeed looks like the only difference between the rs and tueno in terms of ergonomics is the handlebar. The footpegs seem to be almost exactly the same. So if I get an RS and replace the handlebar or use risers, it would meet my need better. The reason why I was looking at the tueno was because I didn't want a riding position that wasn't too committed. I also found the tueno a little bit more subtle than the RS. Anyway I shall wait for the test drives to begin and ride them back to back.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BullettuPaandi (Post 5928192)

It could be that the Headlamps assembly, Handlebar and even the larger sprocket helped offset the difference in weight. How much would the fairing weigh anyways; 3-5kg?

And/Or, a simpler explanation would be that they deliberately didn't consider the theoretical minimum value for each component- which they probably did for the RS- to maintain A2 compliance. 35kW/175kg is precisely 0.2!

I saw the point on weights being from headlamps assemble, the different handlebar and larger sprocket in some reviews also. But I find it hard to believe that the delta difference caused by this is as big as the weight lost by removing the fairing (I am assuming 3-5 kilos itself). But I guess , we would soon know, someone on Youtube would probably do a stripping of rs 457 and weigh itrl:

Quote:

Originally Posted by vinaygeorgeroy (Post 5928678)

If you are looking for comfort, RS is not where you want to look. It's a committed riding position. May be not as committed as an RC or R15 but it's plenty committed to be a hindrance for touring.

A handle bar swap is not straightforward. Both of these bikes get different top clamps, handlebars and gauge cluster mounts. Even if you work it out somehow, the flat handlebar & controls will foul with the fairings and windscreen on the RS.

Nakeds are fine for touring as long as the cruising speeds aren't 100-120+.

Quote:

Originally Posted by b16h22 (Post 5928721)

I have generally liked sports tourers and have toured on the R3 4-6 years ago, which is why I thought I would give this a try (probably an extended test drive or I will rent it out for a couple of days). I understand that the suspension is much stiffer, but no harm in trying. On the handlebar, thank you. I was assuming it to be an easy fix. As I have seen a lot of handlebar changes on a lot of bikes. I will do a more analysis on what are the options for rs 457.

Regarding the speeds, I am not sure I get you, are you telling 100 to 120 is fine, or that its fine only till 100? I am looking for something that can tour comfortably at 100 to 120.

Since I live in Bangalore, almost all the places that I want to take the bike to are 400 to 600 km away and a lot of it dead straight boring highways. I have done these rides on my classic 500 at cruising speeds of 90 to 100, and I want something that have higher cruising speeds.

Quote:

Originally Posted by vinaygeorgeroy (Post 5928749)

Regarding the speeds, I am not sure i get you, are you telling 100 to 120 is fine, or that its fine only till 100? I am looking for something that can tour comfortably at 100 to 120.
Since I live in Bangalore, almost all the places that I want to take the bike to are 400 to 600 km away and a lot of it dead straight boring highways. I have done these rides on my classic 500 at cruising speeds of 90 to 100, and I want something that have higher cruising speeds.

I was talking about the wind blast for extended periods which is the biggest achilles heel of the Nakeds when touring on highways. It's not like it's a hard number but usually the windblast gets on your nerves at around 110-120+ kph speeds. But it depends on the bike and how well it's designed for clean airflow without turbulence. That engine can do a lot more than the average 120 cruise:D

Quote:

Originally Posted by b16h22 (Post 5928769)

I was also talking about windblast��. I have no doubts about the engine.

Eagerly waiting for the road test reviews and test drives. Maybe I am just being hopeful, but the way the headlight unit is shaped and the conical curved structure on which the instrument console is mounted, they both seemed to be choices made for better aero. So maybe it could create a decent air pocket for a shorter 5.7 rider like myself.

Otherwise, if the windblast is too much at stable speeds of 120ish I think I would have to get the R3 itself. I am also slightly disappointed that Aprilia didn’t give the Tuono more suspension travel. The R3 suspension setup is also quite comfortable. It being cheaper than the Aprilia is an added bonus.
lol:

Quote:

Originally Posted by b16h22 (Post 5928721)

A handle bar swap is not straightforward. Both of these bikes get different top clamps, handlebars and gauge cluster mounts. Even if you work it out somehow, the flat handlebar & controls will foul with the fairings and windscreen on the RS.

I agree that it's not straightforward; especially on bikes with clip-on handlebars. But not so sure about the handlebars and controls fouling with the fairing and windscreen.

While increasing height, the handlebar will also be positioned closer to the rider- ideally, following the stock angle- to enable the upright posture. Most windscreens and fairings get narrower towards the top, which appears to be the case on the RS as well. So, usually there's enough room.

This is one of the common mods on most Sports Tourers; so clip-on risers should be available. If not, yes the clamp needs to be changed.

Regarding speeds while touring, it's just a factor of ease with the faired ones when opposed to Nakeds. Both for the bike and the rider- how easily the bike gets to a given speed when there's less drag; how easy it is to handle wind blast and, let's not forget the crosswinds. Generally, Sports Tourers are preferred as they offer the utmost ease; what can be tolerable on a test ride, can't be so on a 500km/day road-trip after all.