TVS Apache RTR 160 4V vs UM Falcon 150

Compare Specifications of Apache RTR 160 4V and Falcon 150

Selected Bikes

TVS Apache RTR 160 4V
TVS Apache RTR 160 4V

Brand:

Model:

UM Falcon 150
UM Falcon 150

Brand:

Model:

Brand:

Model:

Brand:

Model:

Technical Specifications
Fuel Petrol Petrol
Engine Displacement 159.70 cc 150.00 cc
Engine SI, 4 stroke, Oil cooled 1 Cylinder, 4 Stroke
Engine Starting Electric and Kick Start Electric / Kick
Engine Lubrication Forced wet sump --
Clutch Wet multi plate 5 Speed With Clutch
Fuel System Fuel Injection: Bosch- Closed loop / Carb: UCAL/ Keihin VE CT6[A] Carburator
Ignition Mapped ignition system / TCI - Transistor Controlled Ignition CDI
Cooling System Oil cooler with Ram air assist AIR
Maximum Power 16.8 Ps @ 8000 rpm --
Maximum Torque 14.8 Nm @ 6500 rpm --
Transmission 5-Speed --
Gear Shift Pattern 1-N-2-3-4-5 --
Battery 12V, 9Ah --
Frame Double cradle Split Synchro STIFF --
Headlamp AHO 12V, 60/55W H4 bulb, with all-time ON LED position lamp --
Taillamp LED --
Tyres
Front 90/90-17 49P Tubeless --
Rear 130/70-17 M/C 62P Tubeless --
Wheel / RIM Alloy --
Brakes
Front Disc (270 mm Petal type) Disc
Rear Drum (130 mm)/ Disc (200 mm Petal type) Drum
Suspension
Front Telescopic Forks Hydraulic Telescopic
Rear Monoshox Dual Spiral Shock
Colors Available
Colors Red, Black and Blue Red, Black, Blue


Physical Specs
Length 2050 mm 2000 mm
Width 790 mm 710 mm
Height 1050 mm 1130 mm
Weight 147 kg 110 kg
Wheelbase 1357 mm 1260 mm
Ground Clearance 180 mm --
Fuel Tank Capacity 12 litres --
Overview
About Apache RTR 160 4V is the upgraded version of the original Apache RTR 160. From head to tail, th Read More --
Features -- --
Pros and Cons
Pros - Powerful engine with mapped ignition system
- Stylish design and LED lighting
- Comfortable suspension system
- Good fuel efficiency
- Great value for money
--
Cons - Slightly heavier than other bikes in its segment
- Non-ABS variant could be a drawback for some
- The seat could be more comfortable for long rides.
--

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

Comment :

6020