[Darth Sid]

This might turn out to be a short thread. Planning to buy a new bike and have narrowed it down to the two bikes mentioned above.

The FZ16 and Fazer are good looking bikes, well designed, solidly built, handle well and feel planted. The suspension is to my liking and the drivetrain feels refined. However, being only 153 cc, the lack of performance may be a problem. I've test ridden the machine a few times and found that even though the FZ is faster than my Bullet, it has to be revved hard to get some power (even though I could feel the 'spot' around the midrange.)

The Karizma R costs about 8K more but seems to justify its price better... I think. I've ridden the older Karizma a couple of times and found it would easily reach 80 km/h without feeling stressed and still had more to give. But, that was a long time ago. I test rode a 1 km old Karizma R a few days ago and was not-so-pleasantly surprised. Is the Karizma R really that refined? The engine felt like that of a Bullet. It vibrated the same way. I could feel every stroke as if it was proper long stroke engine. The front visor was shaking like that of an old Kinetic Honda minus the rattle. The vibrations wouldn't die down up to 5000 RPM. Is that normal? The bike was brand new and was waiting to be picked up by its new owner. Didn't feel very fast either but that could be because it was not run-in yet. No such vibes in the FZ.

The bold text above is the key question. So far I haven't come across any negative comment about the Karizma but the test ride left me with questions about the much touted refinement. Not considering the P220 because of refinement and reliability issues even though I feel it looks better and it has those extra 3 units of power.

Switching over from a '79 Bullet which I've been riding for nearly 10 years. (Not selling it off. Will hand it to my brother.) Need a low maintenance bike to take me from point A to B yet be entertaining enough to 'replace' my Bullet.

Please suggest.

[musicmanaman]

I think you should go with the FZ 16, it feels light to handle and the engine has a nice poke to it.

[sriramv.iyer]

Go Karizma! The engine is indeed very refined and the one you rode could be an aberration. 'FZ loses steam after 85-90 kmph - You'll never feel short of power in a ZMA.

If you've narrowed down to these two bikes, I would suggest to blindly choose ZMA (if you are not in the game for looks)

[desideep]

Originally Posted by sriramv.iyer

Go Karizma! The engine is indeed very refined and the one you rode could be an aberration. 'FZ loses steam after 85-90 kmph - You'll never feel short of power in a ZMA.

If you've narrowed down to these two bikes, I would suggest to blindly choose ZMA (if you are not in the game for looks)

Thats very true go for the ZMA.

And i know the feeling of switching over to the main stream biking. i have gone thorough the same... if you have any confusions PM me or i am sure you have my nmber.. but out of these two go fo the ZMA.

[Sheel]

Originally Posted by Darth Sid

TIs the Karizma R really that refined? [i]T

Originally Posted by sheelpriye

It indeed is Techno as i have ridden(and owned/own) both for significant period to comment upon and as far as braking goes, FZ/Fazer is streets ahead and before the guys scream bloody murder, then maybe i would need to sort out my riding skills, so excuse


The engine of the Karizma is way superior to Fazer/FZ with the only deterrent being gasket leaks but you can always overlook it,

The Karizma's spares are obscenely expensive and the quality that comes attached with it makes it rubbish

Its a really tough call to make, if the Karizma's engine came with the Fazer/FZ then simply nothing like it,

^if you would be riding more out in the open high-ways then it would be better to stick with the Karizma, else FZ/Fazer( a better built motorcycle)yes, it is not only about the engine, the plastics too have to weather it

and as some one has already pointed out, you would get bored with a slower bike soon and for me it shall be real hard to over-look the over-packed HH workshop, plastic quality of Karizma and a better handling braking combo of FZ/Fazer, still the Karizma is what i shall bring home

I had replied this at another forum and it is a copy paste

Originally Posted by sheelpriye

gaskets don't leak, they cause leak and it is not everyday that gaskets do leak,
and anyways a Fazer/FZ rider can just grumble about the fact that Karizma disappeared into the distance and he can't do a damn thing about it.

[Grafin]

The FZ is a good machine for a dash upto the 100km/h mark.

It loses out after that.

But in the city, all you need is mid range torque and good pull which the FZ delivers in style.

The Zma engines vibrates more than the FZ and the spares parts comparison between the two bikes is a lot, the FZ spares are dirt cheap compared to the other.
(for eg:Chain sprocket and chain cost- 2200 + labor for KZ vs 1180 +labor for FZ)

In the last one and a half years im using the FZ, all i have replaced is a fused bulb and oil.

Its easy to maintain.

I moved over from a Zma R to the FZ and my wallet feels a lot heavier ever since.

Zma is the perfect tool for long trips and the seats are far better than that of the Yammy.

[Darth Sid]

Wow! You guys know what I'm thinking, don't you? Are you all psychic? Ok, what number am I thinking of now?

Jokes apart, now I'm leaning further towards the Karizma. But, should I also consider the P220? What about the quality of that bike (P220)?

[Darth Sid]

Originally Posted by musicmanaman

I think you should go with the FZ 16, it feels light to handle and the engine has a nice poke to it.

It does handle exceptionally well but the poke didn't seem hard enough. I feel that is its sole shortcoming. It would have been the obvious choice if it had the same performance as the Karizma.

[ravi@64bhp]

Grafin, Karizma's chain sprocket set is 800 only. 2200 is three years back.

I do not agree that Karizma's engine vibrates more than FZ. If you ask me, there is no comparison between FZ's engine and Karizma's engine. The torque levels of Karizma are well above the FZ. I have toured on Karizma for 40k kms, and never felt, not a single time, vibrations from the engine.

As for the disc pads, I heard that Hero Honda is sourcing brake pads from KBX for Karizma and the price is now around 1150.

[devarshi84]

Why not look at Apache RTR and Pulsar 220?

Pulsar 220 is a better value than Karizma bike to bike, fun to fun, and long term reliability. The pulsars are Bajaj's mainstay in the market. Also the spares are cheaper.

Apache RTR on the other hand is a very potent bike which is more powerful than FZ and almost in the leagues of Pulsar 220 and Karizma.

If performance (a mix of handling and power) are important, apache is one of the best out there. Consider it something similar to the Ford Fiesta 1.6S.

between the two I would select the FZ. Karizma is a spirited cruiser but then coming from Enfield I wouldn't really look at a Karizma.

[Darth Sid]

Originally Posted by sriramv.iyer

Go Karizma! The engine is indeed very refined and the one you rode could be an aberration. 'FZ loses steam after 85-90 kmph - You'll never feel short of power in a ZMA.

If you've narrowed down to these two bikes, I would suggest to blindly choose ZMA (if you are not in the game for looks)

I believe you there. The FZ does seem to focus more on midrange.

Indeed looks take a back seat when I look at the Karizma. It was a good looking bike when it was first lauched but now it looks dated (but not bad at all and I love that yellow instrument panel!). The FZ (or Fazer) is the kind of motorcycle I'd love to be seen riding but I'd rather be not seen if the bike can go fast enough.

So, how do I know what a normal Karizma feels like? It's hard to come by one for a test ride. What vibrations are normal and when should they disappear? If I know beforehand, I'll know what to expect the next time I check it out (if I don't book it before that!)

Originally Posted by Sheel

I had replied this at another forum and it is a copy paste

Wow! That post almost looks like you typed it specially for me. The build quality of the FZ right down to the plastic parts seems superb. However, I doubt that this bike is fast enough to entertain me. Surprisingly, I was able to open the throttle fully with a pillion rider in a narrow street without reaching 'dangerous' speeds.

The FZ is an excellent bike but I feel I might get bored with that bike since it's not that fast. You are right.

[Darth Sid]

Originally Posted by Grafin

The FZ is a good machine for a dash upto the 100km/h mark.

It loses out after that.

But in the city, all you need is mid range torque and good pull which the FZ delivers in style.

The Zma engines vibrates more than the FZ and the spares parts comparison between the two bikes is a lot, the FZ spares are dirt cheap compared to the other.
(for eg:Chain sprocket and chain cost- 2200 + labor for KZ vs 1180 +labor for FZ)

In the last one and a half years im using the FZ, all i have replaced is a fused bulb and oil.

Its easy to maintain.

I moved over from a Zma R to the FZ and my wallet feels a lot heavier ever since.

Zma is the perfect tool for long trips and the seats are far better than that of the Yammy.

Originally Posted by ravi@64bhp

Grafin, Karizma's chain sprocket set is 800 only. 2200 is three years back.

I do not agree that Karizma's engine vibrates more than FZ. If you ask me, there is no comparison between FZ's engine and Karizma's engine. The torque levels of Karizma are well above the FZ. I have toured on Karizma for 40k kms, and never felt, not a single time, vibrations from the engine.

As for the disc pads, I heard that Hero Honda is sourcing brake pads from KBX for Karizma and the price is now around 1150.

So, some parts are costly and others aren't. If the bike is really that reliable and long-lasting, these expenditures shouldn't be required too soon.

Well, clearly the 223cc engine's output is superior but I'm trying to find out what a normal Karizma engine feels like. What vibrations are normal and what vibrations aren't. If I know beforehand, I'll know what to expect and also if I book one before I test ride one again, what should I expect from the new machine. I'm really getting closer to finalizing the Karizma. But, let's look at devarshi84's post as well...

[Darth Sid]

Originally Posted by devarshi84

Why not look at Apache RTR and Pulsar 220?

Pulsar 220 is a better value than Karizma bike to bike, fun to fun, and long term reliability. The pulsars are Bajaj's mainstay in the market. Also the spares are cheaper.

Apache RTR on the other hand is a very potent bike which is more powerful than FZ and almost in the leagues of Pulsar 220 and Karizma.

If performance (a mix of handling and power) are important, apache is one of the best out there. Consider it something similar to the Ford Fiesta 1.6S.

between the two I would select the FZ. Karizma is a spirited cruiser but then coming from Enfield I wouldn't really look at a Karizma.

Now, yours is a fresh perspective.

Is the Pulsar really that long lasting? I really doubt it. Considering its lack of refinement, I feel I may start facing problems with the bike some years down the line. I've seen mixed opinions on the P220. Some say it's refined, reliable and long lasting while many others counter that view. I have seen some rattled up Bajaj bikes that had been taken good care of. Otherwise, it does seem more attractive with its performance figures. Plastic quality is crap, though.

The Apache is almost there but not quite there, right? Or, are you suggesting it handles better than the Karizma? Not a big fan of its looks.

The FZ is an excellent bike but lacks performance. Coming from Enfield, why should I not look at the Karizma? This I'd like to know.

[Darth Sid]

Originally Posted by desideep

Thats very true go for the ZMA.

And i know the feeling of switching over to the main stream biking. i have gone thorough the same... if you have any confusions PM me or i am sure you have my nmber.. but out of these two go fo the ZMA.

Baiji, sent you a PM.

[devarshi84]

Originally Posted by Darth Sid

Now, yours is a fresh perspective.

Is the Pulsar really that long lasting? I really doubt it. Considering its lack of refinement, I feel I may start facing problems with the bike some years down the line. I've seen mixed opinions on the P220. Some say it's refined, reliable and long lasting while many others counter that view. I have seen some rattled up Bajaj bikes that had been taken good care of. Otherwise, it does seem more attractive with its performance figures. Plastic quality is crap, though.

The Apache is almost there but not quite there, right? Or, are you suggesting it handles better than the Karizma? Not a big fan of its looks.

The FZ is an excellent bike but lacks performance. Coming from Enfield, why should I not look at the Karizma? This I'd like to know.

I have owned a pulsar 180 Gen-I before. Considering Gen IV pulsar is light years ahead, based on proper care and maintainence pulsar will weather well. If you fear about the front cowl, a street fighter look 220 is available.

Most pulsar 220 owners (young) thrash their bike hence the rattles and maintainence. Karizma will be more expensive to maintain in comparison since a close friend of mine has owned Karizma before and he had to shell out a lot. But its been two years and prices may have come down.

Apache is 180cc so it lacks displacement and power compared to Pulsar and Karizma. But I have driven a 160 (belongs to a friend) and based on my experience Apache RTR handles better than both. The gearbox is butter smooth and you cannot help rev it on straights and enjoy corners. As a complete package Apache earns more brownie points than Pulsar 220 and Karizma.

Do take a TD to decide for yourself though.