Aprilia RSV4 Factory E5 vs KTM 1290 Super Adventure S

• Home ››
• Bikes ››
• Bike Comparison ››
• Aprilia RSV4 Factory E5 vs KTM 1290 Super Adventure S

Compare Specifications of RSV4 Factory E5 and 1290 Super Adventure S

Selected Bikes

Aprilia RSV4 Factory E5 Brand: -- Select Brand -- Model: -- Select Model --

KTM 1290 Super Adventure S Brand: -- Select Brand -- / Model: -- Select Model --

Brand: -- Select Brand -- Model: -- Select Model --

Brand: -- Select Brand -- Model: -- Select Model --

Technical Specifications

Fuel	Petrol	Petrol
Engine Displacement	1099.00 cc	1301.00 cc
Engine	Aprilia 4 longitudinal 65° V4 cylinder, 4-strokes, liquid cooling system, double overhead camshaft (DOHC), four valves per cylinder	2-cylinder, 4-stroke, Liquid cooled
Engine Starting	Electric	Electric starter
Engine Lubrication	--	Forced oil lubrication with 3 oil pumps
Clutch	Multi plate wet clutch with mechanical slipper system	PASC (TM) slipper clutch, hydraulically actuated
Fuel System	Airbox with front dynamic air intakes. 4 Marelli 48-mm throttle bodies with 8 injectors and Ride-By-Wire engine management	--
Ignition	--	Twin plug ignition
Cooling System	Liquid Cooled	Liquid cooled
Maximum Power	217 PS @ 13000 RPM	158 bhp
Maximum Torque	125 NM @ 10500 RPM	140 Nm @ 2500 rpm
Transmission	6-speed cassette type gearbox Gear lever with Aprilia Quick Shift electronic system (AQS)	6-speed
Gear Shift Pattern	--	1-N-2-3-4-5-6
Drivetrain	Primary Drive : Straight cut gears and integrated flexible coupling, drive ratio: 73/44 (1,659) Secondary Drive: Chain: Drive ratio: 41/16 (2,562)	--
Display	Digital Display	--
Frame	Aluminium dual beam chassis with pressed and cast sheet elements Available adjustments: headstock position and angle, engine height, swingarm pin height Smart EC 2.0 electronically managed Öhlins steering damper	Chromium-Molybdenum steel trellis frame, powder coated
Headlamp	LED	--
Taillamp	LED	--

Tyres

Front	Radial tubeless. front: 120/70 ZR 17 (alternative: 190/50 ZR 17)	Pirelli Scorpion Trail II 120/70 ZR 19
Rear	Radial tubeless. rear: 200/55 ZR 17 (alternative: 190/55 ZR 17)	Pirelli Scorpion Trail II 170/60 ZR 17
Wheel / RIM	Forged aluminium alloy wheels, completely machined, with 5 split spoke design. Front: 3.5”x17” Rear: 6”x17”	Alloy

Brakes

Front	Dual 330-mm diameter floating stainless steel disc with lightweight stainless steel rotor and aluminium flange with 6 pins. brembo stylema® monobloc radial callipers with 4  30 mm opposing pistons. sintered pads. radial pump and metal braided brake hose	2 x Brembo four-piston radial fixed calliper, brake discs, floating
Rear	220 mm diameter disc; Brembo calliper with two  32 mm separate pistons. Sintered pads. Pump with integrated tank and metal braided hose Bosch ABS with cornering function and 3 map settings, equipped with RLM (Rear wheel Lift-up Mitigation) strategy	Brembo twin-piston fixed calliper, brake disc

Suspension

Front	Smart EC 2.0 electronically managed Öhlins NIX fork.  43 mm stanchions, with TIN surface treatment Aluminium radial calliper mounts, adjustable in hydraulic compression and rebound damping and spring pre-load, 125 mm travel	WP Semi-active suspension USD Ø 48 mm
Rear	Upside-down double braced aluminium swingarm; Öhlins TTX monoshock with Smart EC 2.0 electronically managed piggyback, fully adjustable in: spring pre-load, wheelbase and hydraulic compression and rebound damping. 115 mm travel	WP Semi-active suspension monoshock

Colors Available

Colors

Lava Red Aprilia Black

Black, Orange

Physical Specs

Length	2055 mm	--
Width	735 mm	--
Weight	--	238 kg
Kerb Weight	202	--
Seat Height	845	--
Wheelbase	1435 mm	--
Ground Clearance	--	220 mm
Fuel Tank Capacity	17.9 litres	23 litres

Overview

Features	- APRC system (Aprilia Performance Ride Control) that includes engine maps (AEM) - Engine brake control (AEB) - Traction control (ATC) - Wheelie control(AWC) - Launch control (ALC) - Cruise control (ACC) - Speed limiter (APT)	--
Additional Details	Headstock angle: 24.6° Trail: 104.5 mm Omologation : Euro 5 Consumption: 6.90 litres/100 km Emissions CO2: 160 g/km	--

Which one do you think is better? And why?

Name :

Comment :

2816