Roll on power 400 vs 650
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
Joined
·
4,876 Posts
0-60 mph is about six seconds on the 650, 11 on the 400. I'd say that is significant.
But the 400 actually has pretty good throttle response once you get on the freeway. It's a nice power band at that higher rpm. 650 is still better, but the 400 holds its own. I usually can pass what I need to.
Honestly, people make too big a deal about having extra power. My favorite is, "for safety's sake". I live in the car capital of the world with the worst congestion by most reports. I've safely piloted my 400 and before that a 250 for going on two decades. Never really saw a need for much more than a 400. I find agility, nimbleness and lightness very useful riding around Los Angeles. True the 650 is more of a the highway king, but I've never felt deprived on the 400.
But the 400 actually has pretty good throttle response once you get on the freeway. It's a nice power band at that higher rpm. 650 is still better, but the 400 holds its own. I usually can pass what I need to.
Honestly, people make too big a deal about having extra power. My favorite is, "for safety's sake". I live in the car capital of the world with the worst congestion by most reports. I've safely piloted my 400 and before that a 250 for going on two decades. Never really saw a need for much more than a 400. I find agility, nimbleness and lightness very useful riding around Los Angeles. True the 650 is more of a the highway king, but I've never felt deprived on the 400.
Joined
·
14,316 Posts
The 650 is definitely quicker but not amazingly so. About the only time I miss the 650 acceleration wise is in passing maneuvers on 2 lane roads. I need to plan ahead more and have a longer passing zone to safely pass on the 400 than the 650. That can be a bit of a pain if your on one of those roads with lots of hills and curves where longer passing zones are few and far between.
I think Liamjs meant 1/4 mile Bolzen.:sad4:
Joined
·
4,876 Posts
No I meant 0-60. That was my count with a gps. Could be off a second on either. I just wanted to put out my results as a comparison between the two. Has anyone taken a stop watch to the two?
Joined
·
2,811 Posts
Actually the 400 while a fine scooter will leave you under powered in certain circumstances , like trying to pass into the wind with a 300 pound rider .
With the 650 99% of the time you will have plenty of power . That said if the driver weighs in at 300 pounds with a 200 pound passenger your going to be pushing the 650 too in certain circumstances .
Some thing I learned a long time ago is this , no one bike is two bikes . And you can't make a 400 what a 650 is , or visa verse .
To solve this problem I have lots of bikes , one is what the other isn't . Is a scoot like the 400 a happy medium ? Probably most of the time , until it isn't . There are several guys on this board who have both and it seams to work for them . Will it work for you ? It depends on how you use them or it . If I could only have one bike it would be hands down the 650 Burg with a ton of luggage . If I could have only two it would be the 650 Burg and a Honda Big Ruckus for zipping around town . In the end it's what works for YOU !
TheReaper!
Joined
·
4,876 Posts
+1 with Reaper... By their nature, design and model type, the Burgmans are a compromise of several roles to fulfill, especially the 400.
The little Burg does a grand job of being the most practical bike on the planet. The 650 is a little more dedicated in its highway tourer role, but in comparison to true touring bikes, its a compromise as well. But my God, what a great compromise Suzuki made. Love both of 'em!
The little Burg does a grand job of being the most practical bike on the planet. The 650 is a little more dedicated in its highway tourer role, but in comparison to true touring bikes, its a compromise as well. But my God, what a great compromise Suzuki made. Love both of 'em!
Joined
·
902 Posts
Just my 2c......
The 650 is the better bike, the 400 is more fun to ride.
The 400 is capable, but the 650 more so.
The 400 is lighter, and quicker handling, and needs to have it's neck wrung to ride on faster roads. That's what makes it more fun to ride, in a busy normal commute on mixed roads you're getting closer to the edge of the envelope on a 400....and you do it with less gas!
But they are both great.
The 650 is the better bike, the 400 is more fun to ride.
The 400 is capable, but the 650 more so.
The 400 is lighter, and quicker handling, and needs to have it's neck wrung to ride on faster roads. That's what makes it more fun to ride, in a busy normal commute on mixed roads you're getting closer to the edge of the envelope on a 400....and you do it with less gas!
But they are both great.
Joined
·
1,545 Posts
650 much faster. But the 400 has more than enough. I have tested the 0-62mph time (that tends to be the figure everyone wants over here in urop! Mine managed 8.4 seconds with 2000 miles on the clock, but 7.9 seconds with 6000 miles showing. Those are speedo times filmed. The method was to film the speedo and then count with stop watch afterwards. Not the most accurate but gives a fair indication. The bike is completely standard, no sliders etc. I can hit the ramp going on at 30mph but be doing 70mph or more to join the traffic without any problem at all.
How do you read out 62 on an analog scale?
62 indicated is 56 true/ 62 tru is 68 indicated.
Whach your film again and I'd be surprised if the true 0-62 time isn't at least 0.5 -0.8 seconds more
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
Join the discussion
Join now to ask and comment!