2016 Suzuki GSX-S1000/GSX-S1000F

Editor Score: 86.25%
Engine 16.0/20
Suspension/Handling 12.0/15
Transmission/Clutch 8.0/10
Brakes 9.25/10
Instruments/Controls4.25/5
Ergonomics/Comfort 9.25/10
Appearance/Quality 9.5/10
Desirability 9.0/10
Value 9.0/10
Overall Score86.25/100

Suppose you wanted a nice new orthopedically correct naked bike, but you didn’t want all the latest fly-by-wire techno-gadgetry that accompanies the best of them along with the $15,000-plus price tag. Well, you’re still out of luck, really, because Suzuki’s all-new GSX-S1000 does use the traction-control system (first seen on its latest V-Strom 1000) to tame its mighty GSX-R1000 Four-cylinder. And ABS is a $500 option.

2015 Suzuki GSX-S750 Second Ride Review

Beyond those acknowledgments of modernity, though, you’re on your own. No electronic suspension, no auto-blip electric shifter, no auto-wheelie control to keep you from looping out. We real men don’t need that stuff anyway. What we do need in the modern era is a bike we don’t need Trump’s accountant to afford: How’s $9,999? $10,499 for the ABS version is still $1500 less than a new Kawasaki Z1000 ABS – the bike that finished last in our 2014 Super Naked Street Brawl. The bike that won it, the KTM Super Duke R, sells for about 70% more than the new Suzuki.

073015-2016-Suzuki-GSX-S1000_John_Burns_D4N9499

Okay, the GSX-S1000 is no match for the Austrian defending champ, but it feels like it can more than hold its own against the Kawasaki. For one thing, Suzuki says the new 1000 weighs about 10 pounds less than the GSX-S750 we tested not long ago, and the official MO scales are within five pounds on that bike. Suzuki says the GSX-S1000 ABS comes in at 461 lbs wet, which undercuts the Kawasaki by 27 lbs and puts the Suzuki right there with the premium-priced BMW S1000R and Ducati 1200 Monster.

Suzuki notes it has been known for light, agile roadsters, and company reps say it’s time for Team S to get back to where it once belonged. Market research told Suzuki that the discriminating, experienced, former sportbike-owning 40-plus year-olds who buy liter-class nakeds for weekend tooling-around rate light weight and agility above outright power and top speed. Too true. Enough really is enough on the street. Or is it?

The road to Alice’s Restaurant is paved with good inventions. The red bike at left is Yoshimura’s GSX-S750 rolling test bed, and the red one up front is its GSX-S1000. The stocker gets the same Metallic Triton Blue as the MotoGP bikes, the nicest paint I’ve ever seen on a Suzuki I think.

The road to Alice’s Restaurant is paved with good inventions. The red bike at left is Yoshimura’s GSX-S750 rolling test bed, and the red one up front is its GSX-S1000. The stocker gets the same Metallic Triton Blue as the MotoGP bikes, the nicest paint I’ve ever seen on a Suzuki I think.

Not that they didn’t give the GSX-S1000 a killer motor anyway, but the long-stroke 2005-2008 GSX-R engine in this bike has been defanged via milder camshafts and other tuning changes. Instead of screaming on to 185 (crank) horsepower at 11,500 rpm like the old K5 GSX-R, Suzuki says this one makes 145 horses at 10,000 rpm and 78.2 lb-ft of torque at 9500. It’s definitely fast enough for street use and definitely stout enough for hoiking wheelies out of every corner if you’re a good hoiker, but it doesn’t have the kind of top-end rush that makes your pupils dilate. It does have that sort of rare, if not-quite-raw, flavor and raspy snarl we’d almost forgotten about after spending so much time on all the modern fly-by-wire laser-beam sportbikes.

What are those long things coming out of the right grip? Throttle cables(!), and they go straight to the four butterfly valves in the GSX-S’s 44mm throttle bodies. This bike still uses Suzuki’s old SDTV system (Suzuki Dual Throttle Valve) to sedate power delivery a bit, which first appeared on the amazing new GSX-R750 of 1996.

You don’t get the old GSX-R1000 slipper clutch or its titanium valves. You do get 3%-lighter pistons and that classic angry/friendly snarl in a package crankshaft-rated at 145 horsepower, which will likely translate to near 130 horses at the wheel. You’ll be expected to adjust the 30mm intake and 24mm exhaust valves every 14,500 miles. Alternator output is 385 watts, and heated grips and things are in the accessories catalog.

You don’t get the old GSX-R1000 slipper clutch or its titanium valves. You do get 3%-lighter pistons and that classic angry/friendly snarl in a package crankshaft-rated at 145 horsepower, which will likely translate to near 130 horses at the wheel. You’ll be expected to adjust the 30mm intake and 24mm exhaust valves every 14,500 miles. Alternator output is 385 watts, and heated grips and things are in the accessories catalog.

You’re supposed to be able to sort through the three power modes on the fly with the toggle switch on the left side of the Renthal Fatbar, but I had to pull over to make my bike switch. Mode 1 gives full juice, immediate throttle response and the least traction control. Mode 2 gives full juice with slightly tamer throttle response (which I liked best) and a bit more TC. And Mode 3 is rain mode: If it’s anything like what’s on the new V-Strom 1000 (it is), you should be able to climb medium-steep rocky trails without spinning the back tire out from under yourself. Which is sometimes convenient. You can also switch the system off. The Bosch ABS, though, stays on at all times.

The bike’s frame is all-new, and a place where Suzuki says the 1000 lost 10 pounds compared to the 750. Using the latest computerized practical analysis technology let them build a main frame lighter than the GSX-R1000 frame; the arched swingarm is the same specification and size as the GSX-R1000 swingarm.

Light weight and great ergos make light work of tight backroads.

Light weight and great ergos make light work of tight backroads.

The 310mm front discs and Brembo calipers (straight off the GSX-R1000) provide massive-enough stopping power without being at all grabby when you first grab them. Suzuki says ABS only adds 1.4 lbs to the bike, and $500 to the bottom line.

The 310mm front discs and Brembo calipers (straight off the GSX-R1000) provide massive-enough stopping power without being at all grabby when you first grab them. Suzuki says ABS only adds 1.4 lbs to the bike, and $500 to the bottom line.

From the saddle, the new bike really does feel nice and light and controllable: The seat’s reasonably low at 31.9 inches, you sit up, hominid-like behind that nice handlebar on a thick-enough seat. Steering is light enough without being too light; 3.9 inches of trail via 25.0 degrees rake, and a 57.5-in. wheelbase, is right in there with the class contenders.

Exploring Lightweight Materials

Besides light weight, the other part that’s expensive on motorcycles is quality suspension. KYB supposedly built all-new stuff for the GSX-S: a 43mm inverted fork with a “durable plated finish” which looks like chrome, and tapered outer tubes for optimal rigidity/compliance, anodized a light gold for that expensive look. The fork is three-way adjustable, with 4.7 inches travel. The single KYB shock out back works through its linkage to turn its 63mm stroke into 5.1 inches of wheel travel; it’s rebound adjustable, and has five preload settings and a wrench under the seat, but has no adjustments for compression damping.

The backlighting is adjustable along with other things. Ride mode is usually displayed where the temp gauge is in this pic. My bike usually claimed it was getting around 44 mpg.

The backlighting is adjustable along with other things. Ride mode is usually displayed where the temp gauge is in this pic. My bike usually claimed it was getting around 44 mpg.

On smooth pavement, I totally concur with our man Jeff Ware, who already rode the bike in Europe, no complaints. Both ends hold up their end either hard on the gas or hard on the brakes. On choppy, bumpy, gnarly pavement, though, the GSX-S’s suspenders are no match for the stuff BMW and KTM put on the S1000R and Super Duke R. On those bikes, there almost isn’t any such thing as bad pavement. On the Suzuki, you’re a pavement inspector general. The fork jabs your upper body over bumps, then the harsher rear delivers the body blow, and serial big bumps can have things feeling out of sorts. Another cost-reducing measure would be the absence of a steering damper on the GSX-S – a thing the BMW and KTM both use to good effect when making haste down gnarly backroads. If you’re young and tough, that sort of drama just makes you stronger. It just makes me slow down a little. I probably could’ve made things a little more compliant if there’d been time to play with the adjusters a little.

Since the bike’s only $9,999, why not order up the Öhlins fork cartridge kit and rear shock like Yoshimura did with its GSX-S, which they brought along for the ride? Yosh has a bunch of trick items for the bike already, including a fender eliminator and its 50-state legal Signature series slip-ons ($649 for this carbon one), which require zero modifications. The rest of the under-engine exhaust is all Suzuki stainless steel, complete with catalyst and SET valve. (Custom paint by Matt Polosky at ColorZone Designs.)

Since the bike’s only $9,999, why not order up the Öhlins fork cartridge kit and rear shock like Yoshimura did with its GSX-S, which they brought along for the ride? Yosh has a bunch of trick items for the bike already, including a fender eliminator and its 50-state legal Signature series slip-ons ($649 for this carbon one), which require zero modifications. The rest of the under-engine exhaust is all Suzuki stainless steel, complete with catalyst and SET valve. (Custom paint by Matt Polosky at ColorZone Designs.)

For normal riding around on reasonably smooth pavement, the GSX-S is tough to beat; the ergos are totally humane, and though you’re turning about 5500 rpm at 80 mph, the Fatbar and engine counter-balancer smother nearly all the big Four’s vibrations. For warm-weather riding, nothing beats a naked bike. For cool-weather riding and for people who just like plastic, how nice of Suzuki to also offer up the GSX-S1000F.

Speaking of accessories, how about some cool blue anodized brake calipers from the Suzuki catalog, which will go for about $400 each.

Speaking of accessories, how about some cool blue anodized brake calipers from the Suzuki catalog, which will go for about $400 each.

GSX-S1000F

Suzuki tells us the F version is exactly the same as the S but for its H7 twin-halogen headlight-equipped fairing, a bit more oil in each fork leg and about 10 pounds more mass. The F’s only available with ABS: $10,999. (The S gets a single H4 halogen light.)

Suzuki tells us the F version is exactly the same as the S but for its H7 twin-halogen headlight-equipped fairing, a bit more oil in each fork leg and about 10 pounds more mass. The F’s only available with ABS: $10,999. (The S gets a single H4 halogen light.)

Suzuki’s Tim Olson says American Suzuki insisted upon a faired version of the bike, and Suzuki responded with the GSX-S1000F, which it classifies as more “sports tourer” versus the S’s “sports roadster.” Luggage capacity, however, will be limited since no hard bags are in the works.

Running along the fogged-in Pacific with the temperature in the 60s in my lovely new perforated Dainese jacket, I was just about as chilly on the F as I had been on the S, but I suppose the fairing would help if it really was cold and you were dressed for it, and added heated grips and the taller accessory windscreen – maybe some handguards. Aesthetically, from the front, I can’t help thinking Angry Birds. When we start delving into the sports-tourer arena, this creature is going to require more comforts than a small fairing and an extra headlight…

The F version pokes a slightly bigger hole in the atmosphere. One cool new feature is Suzuki’s new Easy Start: Just jab the button and the 32-bit ECU spins the starter exactly the right amount to achieve ignition – never more than 1.5 seconds! Quite a change from my old GS550, which would crank until dead. A new “Open type” regulator/rectifier opens the stator output to control the charging level to the battery, using smaller components that produce less heat.

The F version pokes a slightly bigger hole in the atmosphere. One cool new feature is Suzuki’s new Easy Start: Just jab the button and the 32-bit ECU spins the starter exactly the right amount to achieve ignition – never more than 1.5 seconds! Quite a change from my old GS550, which would crank until dead. A new “Open type” regulator/rectifier opens the stator output to control the charging level to the battery, using smaller components that produce less heat.

Anyway, there you have it. For $9,999 – way less expensive than the bikes Suzuki’s gunning for here, including the Triumph Speed Triple and Yamaha FZ1, the rare but very nice Honda CB1000R, the Z1000 Kawasaki – I give the S two thumbs way up. In its MotoGP-inspired paint, it’s one of the prettiest nakeds out there. It’s light and powerful, makes the right noises, runs super-smooth down the superslab, it’s cucumber-cool and comfortable. Will it rekindle the GSX-R flame in the hearts of the middle-aged American malefactors who embraced the original lightweight wonder 30 years ago? Fingers crossed. I hope so.

+ Highs

  • The price is right
  • Light is also right
  • Should be impossible to kill
– Sighs

  • Suspension seems a tad harsh over broken pavement
  • Not the slickest GSX-R gearbox ever, but not bad
  • Shame we couldn’t just keep our ti valves and 185 hp…

073015-2016-Suzuki-GSX-S1000F-Statics_D4N9378

2016 Suzuki GSX-S1000 ABS
Engine Type Liquid-cooled, four-stroke, forward-inclined inline four-cylinder, four-valve per cylinder, DOHC
Engine Capacity 999 cc
Bore x Stroke 73.4 mm x 59 mm
Horsepower 145 hp at 10000 rpm (claimed)
Torque 78.2 lb-ft. at 9500 rpm (claimed)
Compression 12.2 : 1
Fuel System 44mm throttle-bodies w SDTV and 3-mode TC, 10-hole long-nose fuel injectors
Clutch Wet, multi-plate
Transmission 6-speed constant-mesh
Final Drive Chain
Front Suspension 43mm KYB fully adjustable telescopic fork, 4.7-in. travel
Rear Suspension KYB link type single shock with rebound and preload adjustment, 5.1-in. travel
Front Brakes Dual 310mm semi-floating disc, Brembo radial-mount 32mm four-piston caliper
Rear Brakes Single 220 mm disc, one-piston Nissin caliper
Front Tire Dunlop D214 120/70-17
Rear Tire Dunlop D214 190/50-17
Seat Height 31.9 in.
Rake/Trail 25°/3.9 in.
Wheelbase 57.5 in.
Ground clearance 5.5”
Curb Weight (Claimed) 461 lb. / 459 lb. base model/ 471 lb. GSX-S1000F
Fuel Capacity 4.5 gal.
Colors Metallic Triton Blue
MSRP $10,499 ($9,999 base), $10,999 GSX-S1000F

Free Insurance Quote

Enter your ZIP code below to get a free insurance quote.

Suzuki Dealer Price Quote

Get price quotes for Suzuki from local motorcycle dealers.

Suzuki Communities

  • Mad4TheCrest

    John, I’ve read elsewhere the bike isn’t too smooth at constant throttle. Did you experience any of that? Also, is this bike 50-state or only 49-state like the 750 version?

    • Branson

      I’d like to know this too for sure. The fact he liked Mode 2’s “tamer” throttle response over Mode 1 tells me 1 was kinda jerky. Hard to say whether 2 is good, or just less-bad than 1. I suspect the latter.

      • john burns

        To me, that kind of off-idle jerkiness is like handlebar vibration. Some people are bothered by it more than others. This one’s a big, tuned-for torque four with an old-school cable throttle, and it does sometimes give a big hit that you feel a little more, but no worse than every other GSX-R1000 I’ve ridden and the big air-cooleds that preceded them. Where it can be a problem is in tight corners, and I think since I am in the habit of trailing rear brake in them, it never seems like a problem to me. You can also often dial it back by taking out the too-much-slack new bikes always have in their throttle cables. In normal riding I don’t notice it in any mode. But yeah, I have read reviews where it’s a big problem, so ?? Maybe you have to learn which journalists you’re in sync with? Sorry to say, but there’s a certain amount of subjectivity involved I suppose.

        • Will

          John, which engine do you prefer – Z1000’s or GXS-S’s? My local dealer has the Kawi on sale for $9,998 and I’m interested.

          • john burns

            go back and read our, ahhh, Naked Smackdown or whatever we called it in April `14? Has it been over a year already? I think we all really liked the Z engine, its chassis was a little underwhelming next to the other bikes (which were all pricier Europeans as I recall).

        • VForce

          JB is right on the money on taking out the slack of your throttle cables. This is something that is often overlooked. My ’01 VFR 800 is by no means a powerhouse and has very smooth fuel injection (no, its not the VTEC…) but was always very sensitive to the slightest of throttle openings. Sometimes it would really make me feel like I was a new rider again. Just a few minutes adjusting out the slack in the throttle cable had my VFR’s throttle response super smooth and me not feeling like a noob.

      • 12er

        I never use sport mode on my Multi just due to any bump the throttle response is mucho elevated. Its smooth and not what I call a “light switch” like many new bikes are stock but just too much power for too little input.

    • john burns

      Hmmm, it’s news to me that the 750 is 49-state legal. But the 1000 is definitely a 50-state model. Smooth? You mean like surging or like vibration? I thought it was fine at a steady 70 or 80 mph, and less vibration than I would’ve expected. Really smooth for a big solid-mount four, actually.

      • panthalassa

        this maybe what mad references by “constant throttle” … not so much about vibration, or predictability of the accel response, but difficulty maintaining a steady speed.

        “I had a big complaint after spending a week living with the naked GSX-S1000: the annoying on/off throttle response. The GSX-S1000F has it too. It wants to either accelerate or shut off, and maintaining a constant speed is a delicate balancing act between the two. The tendency made itself known as soon as our ride began, leaving the Grandstand and heading through traffic in Douglas. Out of town, on a bike like this in a place this, it stops being a problem because you are either accelerating or slowing, and that’s when this machine works best.

        Take a corner smoothly, rolling on the power, and everything is brilliant. Ease off for any reason and again you bump into that annoying on/off tendency.

        Suzuki says it’s a choice the firm made, to give the machine aggressive acceleration and a quick throttle action. It’s something you adapt to, and eventually forget about, and I’m sure lots of riders will live with it, or see it as the price of aggressive performance.”

        http://www.visordown.com/road-tests-first-rides/first-ride-suzuki-gsx-s1000f-review/27896-2.html#ixzz3hWsKILyE

        • Mad4TheCrest

          Yeah Pantha, that’s one of the reviews I had in mind. I was curious if Burns had noticed it. My biggest concern though was about the 50-state availability, and it was good to hear we Californians can get this one. (And I can always hope they’ll get the 750 here sometime next year.)

      • Mad4TheCrest

        See postscript on this Suzuki website for the 750 (‘not available in California’). http://www.suzukicycles.com/Product%20Lines/Cycles/Products/GSX-S750/2015/GSXS750.aspx

        Possibly because, unlike the new 1000, this was an existing ‘Rest of World’ model just now brought over, and Suzuki didn’t want to engineer in the charcoal canister to CARB certify it. Probably no real loss, since Cook’s review for Motorcyclist complained it was too dumbed down, power wise, for experienced riders hoping for a naked Gixxer 750.

  • Old MOron

    So in a nutshell: “For normal riding around on reasonably smooth pavement, the GSX-S is tough to beat,” and for its price you give it “two thumbs way up” relative to the other Nipponese roadsters and the Speed Triple.

    That’s a fair achievement for $10K. But somehow it doesn’t make me want to go out and buy one. This seems like a fine bike. It’s prolly just me.

    Oh well, bring on the comparos! Maybe the rare, if not-quite-raw, quality of the GSX-S will really shine in back-to-back testing.

    • Stuki

      The Big Japanese makes really ought to start prodding/supporting their dealers to offer test rides for this kind of bike. Being all stuck up about it was fine when what they sold were sportbikes and they were the only game in town. But in this genre, they’re the upstart who need to show off their stuff, and the test ride friendly Euros the established makes.

      • Old MOron

        You know, I’ve started to type that twice, myself. Firs I was typing a response to DickRuble. Then I thought it would be better to respond to John Burn’s post about syncing with a moto journo. But I agree with you 100%. If people could ride this thing, they could come away saying, “Sheesh, I don’t need to spend another 70% to get a Super Duke.”

  • DickRuble

    A dismal failure for Suzuki. You have to wonder how executives come up with the idea of resuscitating a 05 engine to make a contemporary street bike, when they have a more modern, already in production v-twin (the V-strom). Was detuning the old I4 easier than fitting the v-twin in a frame? Not to mention the abysmal design, the substandard suspension, the so-so transmission. If that’s how Suzuki plans to get back on track with sales, they have a lot of work to do.

    • Stuki

      Suzuki did think about using the V-Strom twin. But the team responsible for it, all fell asleep from sheer boredom, from trying to use that tractor lump in a sporty bike.

      The K5 engine is awesome, as liters go. Visceral and responsive. Even Ducati don’t build twins that are that engaging. So unless Zuk really screwed up the translation, it simply has to be a great engine. Only downside is the one shared with all liters: you’re either on a track or going waaaay too fast; or you’re kind of stuck in a less than engaging part of the curve 95% of the time, rendering the experience a lot less visceral than the spec sheet and lineage promises.

      • DickRuble

        on the street, with the I4 you will be out of the power band 95%. V-twins are slim, have torque and power where it matters. The SV650 is an icon. The bigger V-strom is not that different. They could have had a worthy offering at 1000cc, cheper than the KTM, but offering a simpler experience.

        • john burns

          It was called TL1000S and not many liked it, not really because of the engine tho. Out of the power band 95%? Maybe you should ride one before passing judgment Dick.

          • DickRuble

            It was called SV1000. The TL1000s was more of your generation.

          • therr850

            Heyyy, wait a minute. You aren’t that old guy that used to close Sixty Minutes are you. Does nothing please you? Is there nothing you don’t know better or more about than anyone else? I had a Suzuki GV800 v-twin for a few years and it was a great bike, sold poorly and didn’t last long and was I glad to sell it and get back on an I-4. Suzuki may be guessing with this model but they probably did lots of research before spending the money to put it into production. It would make a great replacement for my GSF1250S Bandit but I’ve got a good Sport Tourer with a taller windshield, hard bags and after market seat.

            One more question; were you not told, ever, if you can’t say something nice, don’t say anything.?

          • DickRuble

            ok so … you sorta like the GSX but you won’t buy, right? .. That’s what I was forecasting… For Suzuki, that’s a failure.. What your reason not to buy is does not matter to them. You don’t buy, they failed….

            As for the last question, that’s advice you should follow if you don’t have intelligent arguments to back your statements.

          • therr850

            God, you’re so aloof. More knowledge than the manufacturers. The most intelligent man on earth. Why do you waste your time here. We are not worthy. Bye.

          • Tim B

            After 2 R1’s (which were beautiful machines) I got a ’97 TL1000S. Chipped, tuned and full Yosh stainless system. Binned the steering damper. It’s a pig to look at, a pig to ride around town, to drive around roundabouts, forget about parking lots. It’s noisy, obnoxious, old tech and not even that fast, especially compared to an R1. The R1 used to blow through 200kph, the TL walks past it like a tired donkey on a hot day. It’s heavy, cumbersome, and the suspension takes some dialling in, or $$$ if you actually want to fix it. Not the most comfortable thing either.

            That said, I LOVE that machine. There’s so much wrong with it that you have to be committed to it. And like many things you committ properly to, you appreciate even more…The engine is worth it for the sound alone. I believe in 10 years it’ll be considered a modern classic. It’s the Trans-am of motorcycles. Whenever I see someone on an SV1000 I just have to ask myself…why?

          • DickRuble
    • Y.A.

      Suzuki did what you are suggesting, and it failed miserably. The SV1000 was a good bike, but it didn’t fit Americans’ tastes. This class has expectations of I4s and there is no better I4 for Suzuki to draw from for this than the K5 1000. It has been retuned so that its powerband matches where you are on the street… it’s not far off from the SV1000 actually in that regard, but it makes much more power which is what buyers in this class want.

      Don’t confuse what you want to be the only path of success for Suzuki. They tried it your way and it bombed. Personally I too would prefer a ~1200cc twin to a liter 4, but its clear that would not be a successful path for Suzuki. Dial back your self importance a bit and stop confusing opinion with fact.

      • DickRuble

        Well, speaking of self importance. Call back when you have the sales numbers for this bike.

        • Y.A.

          Being that it just came out that’s a pretty silly request. I will say I’m certain that barring another economic recession they will be better than the SV1000. This bike will be around for more than 6 years for sure.

          • john burns

            I could’ve made a bit more clear that Suzuki talked a lot about its Heritage with this bike, “hearkening” back to the old GS1000 inline Fours from the old days, also the GSX-Rs and even the GSX-RRs. Also, they were trying to keep the cost down, and I believe an inline is cheaper to build than a Twin. I see the similarly equipped V Strom 1000 ABS is listed at $12,699. Over 20% more than this bike.

          • DickRuble

            “I believe an inline is cheaper to build than a Twin”. Maybe an engineer can help us here… my intuition is that with half the pistons, half the cylinders, half the injectors, …. a twin would be simpler/cheaper.

          • Kevin Duke

            Not sure there’d be much difference in build costs, but keep in mind a V-Twin has twice as many cams and cylinder heads as an I-4.

          • Y.A.

            There’s nothing inherent to the V twin design that would preclude a 4 of similar displacement from being as torquey. Look at the hole in the Ducati Superbikes’ midrange for example. There is no reason this thing couldn’t be as torquey as a twin. In fact, most modern 1L 4s make as much or more torque than the SV1000, and the street tuned ones are just as gutsy down low.

            It also helps that all the tooling and stuff needed to make this 4 is already available and can be utilized elsewhere. The DL1000 is a one off and its price reflects that. It’s not difficult to see that a bike built around that engine would cost more.

            I understand that you want a v twin in place of a 4. I do too. But wanting something doesn’t mean it is the most rational decision or best business case. Give it a rest.

          • DickRuble

            Why don’t you give us a lesson in engineering? Go ahead, expand. Explain to us how same displacement (1000cc) engines V-twins and I-4 are equally capable of the same torque at the same rpm. Hint a V-twin cylinder has twice the size of an I-4 cylinder.

          • Y.A.

            Yea, and a 4 cylinder has twice the cylinders, so they have the same displacement. 2×500 = 4×250. Now it’s your turn. Explain how cylinder count affects specific torque. Because from what I see pretty much all high performance naturally aspirated engines do about 80lb-ft/L, regardless of displacement, cylinder count, whatever. From pickup trucks up through F1 cars, ~80-85lb/ft per liter is about the rule.

          • DickRuble

            You’re missing the point. The point is not the peak torque, but at what rpm it is coming. Here, chew on these two dyno charts, of 2005 motorcycles, a GSXR and an SV

            http://www.holeshot.com/dynocharts/images/gsxr1000hi_05_dynochart.gif

            http://www.holeshot.com/dynocharts/images/dyno_2005_sv1000.jpg

          • Y.A.

            Cylinder configuration has nothing to do with the shape of the powerband; engine tuning does. And in any case, SV1000 is officially rated at 116HP @ 9000 RPM and 75lbft @ 7000 RPM (peak torque really comes at about 7500 RPM on dynos). GSX-S1000 is officially rated at 145 HP @ 9500 RPM which means it makes at least 80lb-ft peak, but more likely closer to 85-90lb-ft down around 6000-7000RPM. So this thing will out torque the V twin motor everywhere. So what exactly is your complaint? If you prefer the sound of a v-twin that’s one thing- I do- but this thing has the same exact powerband as the SV1000 with 25% more power.

          • Ser Samsquamsh

            There is no complaint- you are debating the resident troll.

            This new Gixxer looks great to me. The radiator shroud is like a nice calligraphic stroke. Not as weird looking as the CB1000r or the Z1000.

          • toumanbeg

            I never could understand why people feel that way. I ride an ’05 FZ-6. MY normal ride about town numbers are 8KRPM at 45 to 50 mph. In 2nd gear. I have plenty of torque there. Enough to go through traffic like a fart though cheesecloth. When I’m doing the two lanes out in the country, I shift to 4th and drop my rpm’s down to 4 to 6K.
            Motorcycles are not automobiles. Everybody knows that but very few of us stop to think about what that means. You would be crazy to ride around at 8,000 rpm in an automobile. It doesn’t bother a well designed and built motorcycle. The reason you have a transmission is to match RPM with desired speed.
            With the “F”, I would probably keep it in first gear around town.
            From 20 to 60 mph, I’ll toast your twin. That is because I am at the start of my power curve with lots of gear left.

          • bobplugh

            But it only has half of the number of cylinders!

          • toumanbeg

            You are forgetting all the little bits that keep the twin from flying apart above 6,000 RPM. Then there is the extra work on the frame and suspension to keep it from pulsating through a corner. Remember, you have the inertia from that big front piston going up and down, A lot of kinetic energy there and it has to go somewhere. 4’s buzz, twins shudder.
            Two big pistons moving slow have more energy then 4 small pistons moving fast. That is why twins are torque monsters. Torque is king up to about 60mph. Then it is HP that matters.
            That torque requires heavier rods, pistons, cranks, etc..

          • bobplugh

            tourmanbeg: You are wrong. The equation for kinetic energy is: KE = 1/2 mv^2 … Notice that Velocity Squared term. So a mass weighing 2x and moving at 1/2v has *LESS ENERGY than a mass weighing x and moving at v:
            KE = 1/2 * (2x) * (1/2v)^2 = x*v^2/4 (twin)
            KE = 1/2 * x * v^2 = x*v^2/2 (4 cyl)
            The ratio is exactly 2 (for this example)!

          • bobplugh

            Answer: 15hp or, over 10%more power, which is definitely noticible.

    • toumanbeg

      I already have an anchor for my boat. Why would I need a V-twin> Or any other sort of twin. I-4’s or maybe a V-4 is the only way to fly.

  • Craig Hoffman

    Looks like a decent bike to me, and you know it will be an unfussy unbreakable reliable ride. Not everyone has KTM money to spend. Say hello to your new motorcycle. Spend the savings on an ECU flash, pipe and perhaps some GSXR cams. That would be an interesting bike indeed.

  • Vrooom

    I hope I never get so jaded that I think 140 hp at the crank isn’t enough for me. I have bikes with more power than that, but I don’t ride them any faster than my 130 hp Ducati.

  • JMDGT

    Even at my advanced age I am drawn to this type of bike. Price points are price points and you get what you pay for. Other than a few not quite up to snuff things this bike us a winner in my book. ABS and traction control are worth the extra dough. A bike like this can make a lot of riders happy.

    • Old MOron

      Just a curious, tangential question here. No offense intended:

      You used to be a Scot named JMDONALD. Now it’s Welsh and JMDGT. What gives? Maybe you have ancestry in both countries? Maybe you’re getting ready for RWC 2015?

      Calon lân yn llawn daioni,
      Tecach yw na’r lili dlos:
      Dim ond calon lân all ganu
      Canu’r dydd a chanu’r nos.

      • JMDGT

        I have ancestry in both countries. I changed my avatar because someone else was using it. I changed my screen ID because I wanted to shorten it and make it more non-descript.
        Dw i’n caru Cymru
        Y Ddraig Goch ddyry gychwyn
        ffrind

  • Moto Pumps

    John- How does it compare to your R1? Maybe not fair emotionally, but a pretty reasonable comparison otherwise…

    • john burns

      Ha! better ergos than my 2000 R1 and nicer ride (till it gets bumpy) and close to the same power — but old R1 has smoother power because of its excellent, professionally dialed-in carburetion and complete absence of emissions equipment. If I was going to ride it a lot, I’d take the Suzuki.

      • DickRuble

        The Yamaha competitor would be the FZ1, wouldn’t it?

        • Craig Hoffman

          Yes, I own one. The FZ is well overdue for an update and it will probably be discontinued though, as it is not a big seller and has been basically unchanged since 2006.

          There are hard shopping guys over on the FZ1 board I frequent who have picked new ones up for 7K plus tax. Got mine for 7.9K out the door. The FZ mods up real nice, with 150 at the wheel post ECU flash, full exhaust and Power Commander. Tuners have shown the engine is completely safe to 12,300 rpm (11,750 is the stock rev limit) and it screams like a freaking banshee. Many add Penske shocks and do fork work. The basic handling and geometry of the chassis is very good though.

          Would like to see what this new ‘Zook can do with similarly enthusiastic owner involvement :)

  • supecoop

    Wonder if some aftermarket company like Givi or Hepco & Becker will offer luggage for the 1000F in the future. The same people who trade in their clip-ons for more upright bars might also want to give up their backpacks from time to time. I think Suzuki is missing an opportunity by not having a luggage option but I’m in the “way over 40” demographic.

    • panthalassa

      i read another review where the author expressed surprise that it would not be an option, too, since the “f” version seems like such a natural competitor for the ninja 1000 (z1000sx in europe). i’m paraphrasing a paraphrase here, but he indicated suzuki told him unofficially that, in order to offer factory hard luggage, they would’ve had to strengthen the subframe such that it would’ve negated their cost advantage, as well as adding significant weight. hence they have “don’t call it a sport tourer, call it a comfortable sports bike” marketing. someone will fill the niche, though.

    • Y.A.

      Personally I am glad they did not go the baby-tourer route. There are a lot of those out already. I have been looking for something to move up to from my Ninja 650 and these are perfect. Old N1Ks fit the bill but this seems to have more character and be better sorted. It would be worth the extra money.

    • Vaughan

      Ventura from New Zealand will have pack frames to suit. Great product, well worth the wait.

      • Allison Sullivan

        Agreed. I had their system on a SV650, and have just ordered it for my CB1000. A couple of my friends have it on their Ducatis and love it as well. They’ll have it for this quick smart, I’m sure.

  • VForce

    $9,999 is alot of bang for the buck here. Hell that’s where the Triumph Speed Triple’s price was… in 2007!

  • Fabio Yandell

    This is another failed attempt by Suzuki..The

  • Alexander Pityuk

    This styling though… It’s like a quintessence of “mass production” and “generalization”. An endless well of quotes, like it was drawn by a computer, using all existing models on the market.

    • Ducati Kid

      AP,

      Perhaps a revised SUZUKI ‘GSX-S100F’ Concept might be more to your liking?

      Enjoy ….

      • Ducati Kid

        AP,

        I read then act on responses …

  • Buildercher

    Where is the slipper clutch, steering damper and semi-decent suspension? detuned?. This bike is 8yrs too late and looks dated, Europe is are laughing, what is going on in Suzuki HQ?. Yawn.

  • Gary

    I see what you mean about Angry Birds. Does it automatically veer toward Harleys when you encounter them on the open road?

  • Rob Beck

    When i bought my GSXS-S1000 from a Suzuki dealer, he showed me an offical letter from Suzuki, stating that the quoted figure (145bhp) is at the rear wheel and in fact it makes 160bhp at the crank. Having riden with a friend who has a BMW S1000R there is nothing in it between them. I wish Suzuki would just come out of the closet and say its 160 bhp at the crank!!!

  • Allison Sullivan

    “Shame we couldn’t just keep our ti valves and 185 hp…” Oh, so this. Although without all the trick bits, that would definitely be a handful :-)

    If it’s as pleasant a bike as the CB1000R it will be a good deal indeed. I own the CB, and love its good manners and easy personality. This segment is hotting up nicely .. I’ll have some good choices on the next go-round.

  • DCGULL01

    When is enough- enough? I mean, everyone makes a bike that weighs under 450Lbs, that puts out 150HP & 75Ft./Lbs of torque, whether it’s a twin, inline 3 or 4 cylinder. The battle should be on ergos, weight reduction & ride compliance- and, price. I bet that next year Yamaha will produce a 1,000cc inline 3, on a standard bike- and, sell it for $9,000.00. It will raise the bar for the class, underprice all of the competition, will need suspension modifications from the get go.

    Naked, faired, supersport, adventure- all a click away from ultimate enjoyment for the owner (and, some wrenching time-of course!). Bullet proof, dead bolts reliable and just a few $1,000.00 in modifications away from “best in class”, we have gotten to the point where electronic intervention is the only way to improve the basic bike- no?

    So, the Triumph Street Triple R is becoming a dying breed, what with throttle cables, manually adjustable suspenion and ABS as it’s only electronic intervention. Yet, it’s so good that it can command a price premium of @ $10,000.00, even though on paper it’s under powered with a mere 675cc motor (112 HP & 50 Ft./Lbs torque). But, it’s supremely ‘rideable’, hits way above its class & remains a top seller for the British company.

    All of the also rans (sorry, Suzuki) in the Litre class are fighting on: price, ergos & ride quality, and, none of the leaders, except Ducati, fail on the above. BMW is leading the way on electronics, and, as long as quality control remains high- will remain the target that everyone else is shooting for. $14k to $16k, out the door will get you far more than you will ever need on the street, now the fight is for what you can achieve for ten grand. It’s a great time to be a rider, and, I personally- can’t wait to see what 2016 will bring for us riders with multiple wants and space for only one do everything bike.

  • bobplugh

    I picked up a 2014 Ninja 1000 with OEM Saddlebags for 10,296. That’s a killer deal compared to this bike, plus, near me (NH) all the Suzuki dealers are butt heads that I wouldn’t let feed my dead dog let alone work on my motorcycle.

  • bobplugh

    Why do all the new bikes have the passenger seat a mile higher than the rider? I had a 1976 KZ900. I put a double bucket Corbin Gentry seat on there and both seats were very comfortable but still not a mile high. I also added a nice luggage rack (a useable one, not one that’s 10 cm^2) with sissy bar and backpad for the passenger. The pad had a zipper on the back of it with a removeable bag (very nice and usable).

    Up front I put a Vetter Windhammer SS Fairing… I’m very sorry I ever sold this bike – it was like my station wagon.

  • Phil Klostermen

    I like it but no slipper clutch? Come on Suzuki, bump the price $600 clams and fit the right clutch. Hell, even a Yammie XSR-900 gets one. Kwakasaki ninja 1000 sport tourer gets one also. This class of bike really needs it. Oh and yes the new Fz-10 has a bacon saver clutch too.