i've got some money ready to buy myself a secondhand bike. I was pretty sure I was getting a Hyper , either a strada or motard but he since found myself looking at SF's. I just can't seem to make my mind up on which to get. I,ve not ridden a sf so a little blind on these so any advice would be great. I'm 6ft 2 , don't do a huge amount of miles each year and just want a bike that's fun .
SF absolutely. I love my 848. Have had both. Both are great but the SF is more substantial and just as much fun.
Sold the 1098 SF after 5 years of ownership. Bought a 09 hyper 1100. As much as a liked the SF, I prefer the hyper, more hooligan at lower speeds both are excellent bikes, just make a choice.
fun as they are, I can't live with the riding position on any Hyper. I find they're all hard, forward sliding ball-crushers. Either SF is much better over distance IMO though the more aggressive riding position of the 1098 is more tiring on long days than the 848.
And if you think the Hyper is a wheelie machine try my tuned 1098. Its been deliberately set up for punch and its unbelievably potent in the first four gears. Its not really a low speed hooner though. It too aggressive for that. But it lofts the front constantly up to 100mph just by punching around in the lower revs and above 100 mph it will rear up on the top-end power. BUT.. Fun though it is, all that floaty front wheel stuff and popping wheelies out of bends, the new KTM 1290 SDR I've bought is actually faster precisely because it controls the wheelies and allows more of the power to be put down. You can have too much of a good thing. On a smooth road its fantastic but if the going gets bumpy its a proper handful that can slow you down. If you want urban hooliganism, buy the Hyper if you can live with the ergonomics. The 1098 SF is a sports bike. The 848 the same but feels more of a roadster. I've got a steep uphill straight near me. Its open and clear, a quiet road with no side roads or entrances and the top is very steep so you nail it up most of it and slow down quickly before you crest the summit. But there's some big humps half way up. The I can get 120+ up there in the SDR and 110 on the SMT. The best I've managed on the SF is 90. I have to back off over the bumps or it wheelies wildly. If a real hoot but an SMT (or an 848 SF) would probably get past me. Until it smoothed out....
Ive had a 1098 sf , i would say the sf is happier on the bigger more flowing sort of roads , they have a good character , little more of a forward position and weight on wrists but not as bad as a sports bike , sound great with pipes and dry clutch chatter . Ther hyper is more for the back lanes ,sat straight up , superb fun under 100 mph , wheelies over all over the place with the low down torque and the longer travel suspension of the sp soaks up all the bad roads , they do have the ball crushing trait with the seat , it can be made better with other type of seats or just get bigger balls to hold you in place ........Gimlet up there only has small nuts so he has issues ( well this is what it says on the ktm nut house forum anyhow )snigger Both good bikes all depends on where and how you like to ride
Actually my balls are so enormous already I simple cannot afford even the slightest bruise. There really is no slack left in the Gimlet leathers so a Hyper is out of the question. That and the fact that when I bought the SF I was coming from a Speed Triple and I used to slide forward on the seat on that and it really bugged me. The SF seat is very roomy, flat and considering its fairly thin, surprisingly comfortable. It can accommodate with ease the most prodigious cluster without mishap.
I would say this is the definitive answer, depends where you will use it the most. I had a 1098SF and it is just an upright Super bike really, not that thats a bad thing at all. Have found myself looking for another recently, not that i have the cash for it.
I've had to remind myself that when I had mine remapped at CJS it had a slightly softer throttle response down low but was fatter in the middle and up top and smoother everywhere. It was lovely to ride on back roads and other than the weighty clutch no problem at all in town. It was after that when I had the engine blue-printed and tuned that it became much more aggressive everywhere. The standard bike, remapped and properly fuelled is smooth, willing to rev and perfectly happy as a back road blatter. A proper suspension set-up really paid off as well.
I would agree with this as from memory (i only had the bike six months) i seem to remember it didn't handle too well, was quite sluggish to turn. Could be wrong though.
That's what mine was like. Stubborn I'd call it. Hated mid-turn adjustments and had terrible under-steer if you tried to brake in a corner. Having a suspension set-up helped but upgrading the forks with a K-Tech piston kit, fitting an Ohlins TTX on the back and having the whole thing set up from scratch transformed it into a completely different bike. Its glorious now. Steering is light as a feather and no amount of ham-fistedness can upset it or get it wallowing. They need more weight on the front wheel. My forks were lifted 10 mm in the yokes and the suspension shop altered the rear ride height. The change in posture is barely detectable from the saddle but the effect on steering is profound. Even running standard suspension getting the "attitude" set correctly really pays dividends with this bike.
