F2 vs RX

From BikeNomads

Author : Kailas Shastry

I had second thought about writing this because it is simply unfair to compare these two. They are from different eras. represent different philosophies and made very very differently. But there are many people who would wonder how different two (good) bikes can be. How would it feel to shift from one kind of a bike to another...?

Will give my first impressions (its been 7 weeks of owning the RX) and the very apparent differences between the F2 and the RX. Will get out of the Digit writer mood and just put in thoughts as they come with not much beauty treatment.

While the F2 is the relaxed, no sound, no vibs, no fuss fuel efficient city bike the RX is a no holds barred city rip bike. And ripping with fun! The sound is extremly sporty (I think amongst the stock bikes, the RX 100 has THE BEST exhaust, followed by the Shogan / Shaolin and RX 135s) and tempts you to go on without changing gears. As you rev, the fun only increases. I dont know the torque curve of the RX, but surely there is a lot more of the torque at higher revs. Surprisingly, the low is not bad either. I can comfortable hold 35kmph and start pulling with ease in 5th gear. Not bad at all for an engine that is esentially high revving.

Yes, the F2 can pull right from 25kmph with ease in 4th gear; and makes hardly any sound even when she maxes at 105 speedo. Ideal if you are worried abt job at hand and dont want teh bike sound / noise to be an irritant; or if you are on a tour and wish to take in the ambient sounds rather than the constant noise from the exhaust. Yes, it is a different bike. Not everyone like such levels of refinement.

If you ask an experienced rider what he thinks must be the most important attribute of a bike, he would say handling (ability to easily take turns, braking confidence, stability against cross winds at higher speeds...). The RX, for all the power it packs in, simply does not have the works in this department. The very same light weight that makes it a drag machine that is still to be reconked with (even with much higher capacity engines that are modern. Yes, someone, mostly Gliff will say thats the diff bet 2 and 4 st; but then consider the time that the 4st has has to evolve), gives the bike a nerveousness at higher speeds, plus a scare everytime you let the clutch go a little (very little), too early. The frontend tends to look high (literally). This happens on the F2 only with a really heavy pillion). But thankfully the RX has a progressive clutch. If it had been anything like the pul clutch, it would have been a killer machine (literally). Too much power that cant be controlled is not a good thing.

The F2 is easier on turns requiring far less input from the rider, probably owing to its long wheelbase and more weight. But it too gets nervous at high speeds, courtesy of those very same shocks that make it one of the most comfortable bikes to use (change to a CBZ shock and that problem is also solved).

The M word: which manufacturer can survive in India without it? The F2 can return upto 60 if you are not a throttle happy dude. The RX under same riding gives me 38. Not too bad again - it is a 2st. When ripped F2 can go as low as 40 or maybe less. With the RX, I have not yet checked, but am told I can expect mileage in the 20s also if ripping is all that I do.

In the area of gear shifting the F2 (if chain aint too tight or lose) is a darling, the RX is a slightly lesser darling. But then it is a 1 down rest up pattern which is inherently a little less smooth than the all up / all down boxes. Finding neutral is needs some getting used to - but still not as easy as it is in the F2 (all u need to do is move the shifter upwards and u'll hit neutral).

So what now? Well, if am going from home to office and back it could be the RX or F2; If it is a long ride, it is the F2 without doubt.