that’ s not fair. And it’ s not. The DR-Z felt so much better on tarmac and surprisingly good on sand too, the latter from a smoother and much torquier power delivery, with no doubt a greater flywheel weight. While the 390 was clearly at an advantage on sand with that aggressive rubber. While both bikes are offering two ways of approaching the adv market, their pricing is quite different. The KTM comes in at $ 11,999 ride-away( 6 month rego and full tank of fuel), and the Suzuki at $ 14,899 plus on road costs, which could add another $ 600 to the ticket.
CLEAR OPPOSITES The two engines here are chalk and cheese. While not that different torque-wise on paper, the ride difference is vast in delivery. The KTM actually has a hair more torque at 39Nm against the Suzuki’ s 38Nm, but my guess is the 4S makes that torque substantially lower in the rev range. Horse power figures have the KTM a clear winner at 33kW while the DR is back on 28kW. The Suzuki has that traditional thumper feel which punches off the bottom and then revs very smoothly and briskly to red line. It always feels strong and flexible given its 398cc capacity. The KTM is a whole different ball game. Very revvy in general, it is comparatively flat off the bottom. It then comes into the power and goes into launch mode like a cut cat, revving frantically until the limiter restores some order. Anyone familiar with 125 two strokes will be happily at home with the KTM engine. And up a tight and twisty gravel road it is huge fun, and quick, a real hoon power delivery. However, on truly tight single track the 390 is flat and lacking punch off the bottom – making the clutch your friend. The Suzuki is an easier ride in these very tight conditions.
KIWI RIDER 37