Suzuki SV650 Riders Forum banner

SUZUKI SV650S VS. KATANA 600

26K views 43 replies 22 participants last post by  jbswear 
#1 ·
Hello, I'm a newbie with Suzuki and I'm cuirous to know what's the difference (besides the displacement and the fairings) between the Suzuki sc650s and the Katana. I like both of them and I'm interested in knowing what would make a person choose one over the other besides personal taste.
 
#2 ·
Both are great, reliable bikes. The engines will run just about forever as long as you change the oil at least once a decade.

Yes, both are budget bikes. The suspension on both suck arse compared to other sport bikes, but can be upgraded fairly cheaply.

The SV is better for tearing up curvy roads. The Kat is better for long-distance riding.

The SV is much lighter. But its small seat isn't great for super slab.

Neither is a bad bike, but neither is a perfect, 'great' bike. Depends on what you want, really...What bikes do you have experience with so far? With that info, we might be able to compare them better.

I've been flogging my little SV for 6 years now and absolutely love it. Longest I've ridden it non-stop was 250 miles and my arse was hurting after that. I'm gonna re-upholster the seat soon, though.
 
#4 ·
I'm a new driver, so my first bike is a Kawasaki 250r. I'm a big guy (5'10" 260) and I can bench press the 250r. I bought it because most people to start out slow, but I outgrew it pretty quickly. I've moved out of the city (NY) and I live in a more suburban area now. Most of my travels will be on the highway now, back and forth to work which is about 15 miles each way. I know the Katana is heavy (relativelly speaking) but does that equal to more stability on the road?
 
#5 ·
consider also, the V-strom, power delivery will be similar to the SV, but it will have better long distance comforts, it's heavier than the SV, but I think lighter than the Katana
 
#6 ·
Weight doesn't equate to stability on the highway. I've seen bicyclists do 60mph--and their bikes weighed less than 20#. Other factors affect that, like rake and trail of the stearing, length of the bike, and road surface. These two bikes will be comparable on the highway. You'll probably (I don't have all the specs in front of me) get a bit quicker acceleration on the SV at most road speeds, but I do think the Kat will beat it in top end. Then again, for most sane riders, that isn't an issue at all.

You really can't go wrong with either bike, but they do have very dissimilar feeding habits and quirks. The SV will pull right off idle, while the Kat needs to be spun up a bit higher. These are characteristics inherent in most V's and I4's. If you're looking for a more forgiving bike as your next step up, I recommend the Kat. With the SV, throttle control is a BIG factor in rideability...Closing the throttle abruptly is a lot like hammering on the brakes, as the engine slows down so quickly. Likewise, cracking open the throttle will send the bike screaming forward like a scalded ape.

The Kat's responses to throttle adjustments are softer, which will be much more confidence inspiring.

Now that I've spoked such blasphemy against the minor deities of the SV world, you may soon find me tied to a stake, with flames licking at my legs. As much as I love the SV, in my 23 years of riding and numerous models and brands between my legs, I don't think the SV is the best beginner's bike, nor is it the best bike out there. In your case, from the little that I've gleaned from you, I think the Kat my serve you better. Not a lot better, but just slightly.

Again, either would be good for you.
 
#7 ·
I have to disagree about weight not mattering for highway stability. I'll agree that geometry is what matters for high _speed_ stability, but on the highway you have a big wind factor too, and weight does seem to help with that.

Of course the shape of the bike, any bodywork, and etc. also play a role in this, but, for example, if you keep everything else the same on the SV but add 75 lbs to it somehow (assuming you add it down and toward the front/middle; strapping it onto the rear seat is obviously not the way to go), it will feel more stable in the wind than an unweighted one...at least, that's how it feels to me.
 
#8 ·
rbuzaleski said:
I have to disagree about weight not mattering for highway stability. I'll agree that geometry is what matters for high _speed_ stability, but on the highway you have a big wind factor too, and weight does seem to help with that.

Of course the shape of the bike, any bodywork, and etc. also play a role in this, but, for example, if you keep everything else the same on the SV but add 75 lbs to it somehow (assuming you add it down and toward the front/middle; strapping it onto the rear seat is obviously not the way to go), it will feel more stable in the wind than an unweighted one...at least, that's how it feels to me.

True, after a fashion. But that difference in weight isn't going to be a deal breaker. Wind isn't a constant, so I didn't include it in the reasoning. But again, that isn't affecting highway stability. Also, they are comparable. Yes, the Kat will be a bit more stable at speed (minimally because of the weight), but more so because of the shape of the frame and suspension bits.

And weight still doesn't equate to stability on the highway. Didn't say that it doesn't matter, though. ;)
 
#9 ·
Wind response doesn't depend on weight as much as it depends on aerodynamics and height of the center of gravity. Oddly, the more aerodynamic a bike is (fully faired, for example) the more crosswinds tend to affect it. Some of the big tourers have aerodynamics that are designed to compensate for side loads due to wind.

The higher the center of gravity the higher polar moment of inertia, so the less the bike will be affected by crosswinds. Of course raising the C.G. and making it more massive would make the bike more stable yet. Still, weight has very little to do with it.

Rake, trail, alignment, tire pressure and headset bearing adjustments all contribute to stability (or lack thereof).

I don't find the SV any better or worse than average in terms of wind affect. I do find them very stable on the highway.
 
#10 ·
I think the Katana is longer, has a wider turning radius, is not as manuerverable and is down on power when compared to the SV650.
 
#12 ·
inframarginal said:
I would expect a used Katanna to cost less than a SV650, given less demand for the bike as it really can't hold a candle to the Honda equivalent, the F4i.

If buying new, you could do much better with several other I4s, IMHO.
A beginner buying new is a fool.

Then again, I think that just about anybody buying new is a fool...

And the F4i isn't the equiv to the Kat. The Kat is MUCH older.
 
#16 ·
So It's safe for me to assume that the Katana would be a better progession for me. Since it's has less power, throttle response and a little better on highways, I should go with a Katana and when I grow up go to a sc650s.
 
#17 ·
RandyO said:
aren't kan o tuna's still air cooled ?
Yes, air cooled and carburated. I'm a year-round bike commuter in North Carolina and two of the reasons I chose the SV650 were rideability in extreme cold (thanks to fuel injection) and extreme heat (thanks to liquid cooling).

I had a Katana 750 years ago and while it was great on the highway I found it lacking most everywhere else, especially compared to the SV.
 
#18 ·
DEACON said:
So It's safe for me to assume that the Katana would be a better progession for me. Since it's has less power, throttle response and a little better on highways, I should go with a Katana and when I grow up go to a sc650s.
Either will be just fine. You dont need a Kat as a stepping stone to the SV.
Instead, make your choice depending on the type of ride you want. Comfy and boring, or edgy and fun?
 
#19 ·
DrummerDave said:
Either will be just fine. You dont need a Kat as a stepping stone to the SV.
Instead, make your choice depending on the type of ride you want. Comfy and boring, or edgy and fun?
-1

By no measure is the Katana boring. It's not as crisp as the SV, but then again, the SV isn't as crisp as MANY bikes.

Go with comfy, capable, and fun. I'd get the Katana.
 
#20 ·
I feel the need to mention that the Katana does look like a pile of dog crap. Of course, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I think that the lighter, more dependable, SV would be a better stepping stone. Heavier bikes can be more intimidating to ride. I had YZF600R and then went to an R6 and I felt much more comfortable with the lighter R6. Of course, I only weight a fart over 135 so.....
 
#25 ·
I don't mean that it's going to break down all the time or anything. By reliability I was referring to the fact that it is liquid cooled and fuel injected. If you've ever tried to start a carbuerated bike on a cold morning you come to appreciate fuel injection real quick like. Liquid cooling also comes in handy if you're riding in town a lot.
 
#26 ·
I have both bikes. They're both really good machines and either would be a workable and reasonable step up from an EX250.

The Katana is heavier than the SV, and you feel it a bit in city riding, but other than tight, heavy traffic commuting the weight of the Katana never bothers me compared to the SV. SV is a bit more enjoyable in heavy traffic, but the clutch is a lot heavier, so stop & go is kind of a wash between the two bikes. Also, when the rad fans turn on on the SV, you get a mean (in the summer) or welcome (in the cooler weather) blast of heat.

This "down on power" crap is a bunch of bull for the most part, the Katana's aero gives it a bit higher top speed, and it's more comfortable at speed. I expect that these comments are coming from people who are used to riding a twin and don't know how to get the most from an I4. From a standstill the SV is quicker, but WOT stoplight-to-stoplight riding is really not my concern.

This spring I rode my SV650 (naked) 1000 miles from Toronto, ON to Asheville, NC, then about 500-600 miles in the mountains there, then did a track day at Carolina Motorsports Park, then rode 1000 miles back home. Interestingly, I did exactly the same trip last spring on my Katana, so here are my thoughts:

1) Distance riding: Significant preference for the Katana. The SV is capable on the highway, but you've got better weather protection on the Kat. I have stock seats on both and found the Kat marginally more comfortable in the butt department. Seating position and ergos are almost identical (with the S clip-ons).

2) Mountain twisties: Slight edge to the SV. For really tight technical stuff, the SV has it. For flowing sweepers (which is my favorite), the Katana is at least as good as the SV.

3) Track day: HUGE props to the SV. I had an awesome time on my SV at this track. I can't compare it to the Katana, because I haven't and wouldn't do a track day on the Kat.


I consider the Katana more reliable than the SV, and when it does require maintenance, it's about 100x easier to work on for anything engine-related. On the Katana, you don't have to pull the rad to get at sparkplugs, or remove the shock to change the exhaust. Nor do you have to remove the carbs to connect the vacuum hose to do a carb sync. For chassis/suspension/brakes stuff, the two bikes are the same in terms of maintenance.

RandyO's 135k mile SV is kinda legendary, but nobody would be surprised to see that many miles on one of the Suzuki a/o cooled I4 motors. I genuinely consider this the greatest motorcycle engine ever built. With the Kat 600, you've got ~80hp coming out of an engine architecture and structure that is reliable at 150hp. In the Kat, it's way understressed and it just runs and runs and runs.

Personally I love the looks of the Katana, but that's a purely personal thing, so decide for yourself.

Both bikes have OK brakes but pretty crap-tastic suspension. An aftermarket shock and a set of Race Tech cartridge emulators & springs should be considered absolutely mandatory for either bike. I can not stress enough how important it is to upgrade the front suspension (not just springs, spacers, or an oil change!) to get the most out of either of these bikes!!!

They're both fun, good-looking, fast enough, and cheap bikes. If you enjoy wrenching on your own stuff, the Katana has clear advantages here. If a lighter, narrower bike is more important to you, and you want to do some time on the track, then the SV's your machine.

Really I don't think you can go wrong either way, and you certainly don't have to consider one as a stepping stone to the other.
 
#28 ·
Phil,
I think you hit the nail on the head.... I too own both, with my Kat 600 being an older model. It also has 47,000 hard riden miles and has been wadded up a couple times and STILL runs like a champ. More top end speed that the SV, but the handling most definately goes to the SV. I did two track days on the SV and my son has done one on it and the bike just corners like no one's bizness. Course, I did RaceTech springs are cartridge emulators in the front and a worked Gix shock in the rear, and that made all the difference in the bike!
 
#32 ·
Hey Ron, good to see you signed up, bro!!!

EDIT: Whoops - I forgot what year it is... When I saw your join date I thought you were new here. :)
 
#30 ·
I'm leaning more towards the Katana because it seems to be more of them (in NY), which gives me more options (I only like the sv650s) and because it's more comfortable. Since I'm a newbie, speed is not a huge priority for me (though I don;t want to be left at the light by a Hyundai Excel).

The SV's throttle maybve a little too much for me as well.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top