GSX-R 600 K6 or 2005 Aprilia RSV-R

Definitely find that I rev mine more than the SV, it's not on purpose but more that to get going you open the throttle and have to keep it open longer to get that acceleration - and then by the time it's properly accelerating you've had it open a second or so at the lesser part of the power band and are going quicker than when you originally thought "I need to be faster, let's open the throttle".

Bit hard to explain so maybe that doesn't make sense, but basically it's that I choose to use one of the gears, and by the time I've "used" it enough (i.e. got to use part of the power band) I'm going faster than I originally intended.

Originally Posted by Tzindo

Hi well I owned a 2005 Mille R and have ridden a Yamaha 600 on a California race school and they are very different machines. I imagine the GSX is similar to the Yam so I will just go with that as a comparison.

The Mille R has fantastic grunt and the shocks soak up all the bumps that are part of the UK road network. It just smoothes them out and if I take another bike down the same road, its a rougher ride.

The Yam 600 needs to be thrashed, but it has an amazing pull throught the revs once you get it going and you end up questioning the CC. Very powerful, light, fantastic handling, but a bit much for the public road I would imagine in that you have to rev it to get the best out of it and then you are in treble figures. So I am not sure I could live with that.

The Mille R is not perfect and although I loved it for blasting around on , for me it was top end heavy. I took it to the track as well and whilst the straights were good, with a huge surge of torques the corners were a nighmare. You tipped it in and then wow, how far did it just flop! So as a result of that I decided to sell it. I paid 11 K for it brand new and chipped it and upped the airbox size - there's loads you can do to them if you like to fiddle. However I lost a lot of money on it trading it in. This is not going to be the case for you as you are buying (potentially) the 2005 model.

Mille R
Plusses - loved the noise, torque and suspension and fantastic brakes.
Minuses - top heavy - huge financial loss.

Conclusion - Excelent road bike - just avoid the track (Knockhill). Very usuable on A and B roads.

GSX- R
Plusses - again here I can only assume as not ridden the Suz. Loads of pull, handling is fantastic as so light and pulls like a train once you get the revs up.
Minuses - a race bike for the road - in that I would race it every where. So would not buy one for that reason as I cannot resist that and like my license.

So probably offended a few 600 owners and Mille owners alike - but those are my experiences.

BTW chopped the Mille in for KTM Superduke 990. Another kind of animal.

What kind of tank range did you get from the Mille? A superduke would be ace, but a guy i know who has one says sometimes he's refilling at 60-70 miles!

Tank range on the Mille R was around 120 130 as far as I remember. Pretty normal for a sports bike. Yes the KTM has a poor range. Its all to do with the fuel light and pickup being in the wrong place - I think. There's petrol in it but the light comes on around the 70 mile mark. You can if you are brave push it to a 100, I have bailed out at around 85.

You can get a larger tank - carbon fibre and £1000.00 or you can buy the latest model that has the problem fixed about 120 miles to the tank. Still its a fab bike but a pain for any distance work.

Its a shame as the riding position would suit using it for long distances. Thats my only gripe with it, otherwise I'd have one. Think i must need a K1200s

How about a Tuono? its an RSV-R....with no fairing and sit-up bars. Its a mental monster of a bike!

Well, I want one...

Matt

[northwind]

I could make room in my life for a Falco, myself... Hooligan tourer The TUono's probably a great bike, but I can't get over the looks. I suppose they're the truest of the factory streetfighters in that they look like they were built out of a crashed Mille, in a shed with poor lighting, by someone still recovering from the injuries sustained crashing the Mille

Originally Posted by northwind

I could make room in my life for a Falco, myself... Hooligan tourer The TUono's probably a great bike, but I can't get over the looks. I suppose they're the truest of the factory streetfighters in that they look like they were built out of a crashed Mille, in a shed with poor lighting, by someone still recovering from the injuries sustained crashing the Mille

And thats why I want one, everyone will think I'm well 'ard and won't mess when I turn up the next say on the SV with the top-box

Matt

[TimTucker]

Messie and Jelster (who had a Falco) could probably give you more information on the differences between an inline four and a big twin. I've not ridden fours much at all, and I've only done 700 miles on the RSV-R, but here's my opinion anyway.

I'm not going to say anything that disagrees with what others have posted. It's a big bike. The newer RSVs are a little smaller than the original Milles, I believe, but compared to a GSX-R 600, it's a big old lump of metal. The riding position isn't too different from an SV-S. You canted forward a bit more, but the pegs are quite a bit further back.

Suspension and stuff on the RSV is top notch. I just love the anodised massive top yoke and instruments. The computer can do lap times and also tells you your maximum velocity and average speed when you're at rest. It also has a programmable shift light. The default is 6,000 rpm, which is max running-in revs. After first service, Southern Cross set it to 10,200 rpm. They said there's not much point in going much past that point. The limiter cuts in at 11,000.

On the road it feels hugely powerful, but not intimidatingly so. You twist the throttle and it begins to propel you towards the horizon at an ever-increasing rate of knots, but it feels controllable at all times. There's none of the mad rush you get from a four as it gets into its stride. I was in third on my brother's Blade, it hit 8,000 and tried to lift the front wheel at 85-90 mph, which came as something of a surprise to me!

In the corners it feels completely planted and the suspension, once adjusted correctly, seems to soak up everything thrown at it. I, myself, haven't noticed a tendency to tip in too fast or anything like that. I'm sure I've had it over further than I've ever had the SV, but it felt absolutely fine.

The brakes are absolutely stunning, as you would expect from radial Brembos, and make a lovely hissing noise.

It can be an absolute pig in traffic. One recommended mod, which I've had done, is to fit a smaller front sprocket (one tooth less). This makes it much easier to ride in slow-moving stuff. It also cooks your right leg at such times, as the exhaust from the rear cylinder heats up the frame and sub-frame.

Service intervals are every 6,000 miles and shouldn't be too costly, though parts can be, I'm sure. And availability might be a worry.

The GSX-R will be a completely different kettle of fish, I think. A small, high-revving pocket rocket with great handling that will bimble through town quite happily.

I was thinking about a GSX-R 750 but, having ridden one briefly, I'm happy with the choice I made. The Aprilia looks fantastic, has huge presence and, in the end, I'd rather have a big v-twin pushing me along than a high-revving four. That's just personal preference, though, and I can see why people might prefer the rush of a four.

Aye, I had a Falco and followed that with a K4 GSXR 600.

The Falco, like somebody else mentioned about the Mille felt "top heavy". Maybe it's because I'm only 5' 10", a 6 footer may feel more comfortable with it, but I just didn't like going round corners on it. Build quality was fair, but the electrics are very poor. Aprilia have a well known problem with the battery size and the current consumption but a new new battery can solve that. The starter switch gear tended to play up, and this in conjunction with the battery made it unreliable. Not something I could tolerate when I was using it to commute across London.

The Falco was very comfortable though, and would make a good long distance sports tourer. The sound was awesome, and the torque almost pulled your arms off. Tank range - well it's a big twin, so 110 miles was about it's limit.

The K4 Gixer was a peach of a bike, and if it wasn't for my back problem I may well have kept it. Comfortable for a sports 600 (I did 3 trips to Europe on it) and with a decent end can it howled like a banshee. I loved getting in the zone on the Gixer. However, that was it's biggest problem, I just couldn't stop riding it fast. It's true, the Gixer voices do exist . Build quality was a bit iffy, 18 months old and the paint was flaking off of the wheels and the bolts were all furred up.

Since I have had the FireBlade I haven't looked back. You can pick up a 954 (RR2/RR3) 'Blade for the same money (£5000) and it gives you all the torque and 135 bhp as well, about the same as a Gixer 750. I keep looking to find a replacement and can't find one. I can't find anything that does what I want from a bike better than the 'Blade, so I'd add that to your list too .

.

i have a K3 sv650, and wanting a bigger bike to tour, went for the Falco.
had quite a few older il4s, but wanted a v twin, the Falco has excellent build quality, a very nice rotax engine, which is regaurded as bullet proof.
it doesn`t actually feel much heavier than the SV to ride. (i think the RSV may be a bit taller) but it does need an optimate to keep it charged.
just done 3400 miles round europe on it, very comfortable. having put the 16t front sprocket back on to increase tank range i did find it a bit to high geared round town.
it is seriuosly good fun using the roll on power
i think your choice comes down a lot to what you want from it, and if you want something a bit different or not. sure either will do the trick, as both regarded as good bikes. the aprilia is just a bit better