Bajaj Pulsar 400 CS vs Benelli Imperiale 400 BS6

Compare Specifications of Pulsar 400 CS and Imperiale 400 BS6

Selected Bikes

Bajaj Pulsar 400 CS
Bajaj Pulsar 400 CS

Brand:

Model:

Benelli Imperiale 400 BS6
Benelli Imperiale 400 BS6

Brand:

Model:

Brand:

Model:

Brand:

Model:

Technical Specifications
Fuel Petrol Petrol
Engine Displacement 375.00 cc 374.00 cc
Engine 4 valve, triple spark with fuel injection Single-cylinder, Air-cooled, 4-valves/cylinder, SOHC
Engine Starting -- ELECTRIC
Engine Lubrication -- Forced lubrication with wet sump
Clutch -- Multidisc wet clutch
Fuel System -- Fuel-Injection
Ignition -- ECU – DELPHI MT05
Cooling System Liquid Cooled Air-cooled
Maximum Power -- 21 PS @ 6000 rpm
Maximum Torque -- 29 Nm @ 3500 rpm
Transmission 6 speed 5-speed
Top Speed -- 120 kmph
Frame -- Double cradle with steel tubes and plates
Mileage
Overall Mileage -- 30 kmpl
Tyres
Front -- 100/90 - 19
Rear -- 130/80 - 18
Wheel / RIM -- Spoked rim
Brakes
Front -- 300 mm single disc (ABS)
Rear -- 240 mm single disc (ABS)
Suspension
Front -- 41 mm Telescopic
Rear -- Pre-load adjustable
Colors Available
Colors -- Red
Black
Silver


Physical Specs
Length -- 2170 mm
Width -- 820 mm
Height -- 1120 mm
Weight -- 205 kg
Seat Height -- 780
Wheelbase -- 1440 mm
Ground Clearance -- 165 mm
Fuel Tank Capacity -- 12 litres
Overview
About CS stands for Cruiser Sport Read More The Benelli Imperiale 400 BS6 is a certified motorcycle with an impressive engine displacement Read More
Features ABS Equipped Brakes Asymmetrically Shaped and Thin-film-transistor LCD Display
Retro Round Front Headlight

Benelli Imperiale 400 Bs6
Exhaust

Benelli Imperiale 400 Bs6
Tail Lamp & Indicators

Benelli Imperiale 400 Bs6
LCD Display
Additional Details -- EXHAUST SYSTEM : With catalytic converter and oxygen sensors
FINAL DRIVE : Chain
SPARK PLUG : NGK BR7ES
FUEL CONSUMPTION : 3.2 l/100 km
CO2 emissions: 70 g/km
Pros and Cons
Pros -- - Strong and robust build quality.
- Retro styling combined with modern features.
- Air-cooled engine that offers good performance.
- Reliable braking system with ABS.
- Comfortable seating and suspension setup for long rides.
Cons -- - On the heavier side with a weight of 205 kg, affecting maneuverability in traffic.
- Limited tank capacity of 12 litres may require more frequent refueling on long trips.
- Slightly higher CO2 emissions at 70 g/km.
- No liquid-cooling system, which may be a factor in extreme weather conditions.

Which one do you think is better? And why?
Name :

Comment :

8195