Bajaj Pulsar RS200 vs Suzuki Intruder Comparison
Bajaj Pulsar RS200 vs Suzuki Intruder
Bajaj Pulsar RS200 Price starts at Rs. 1.42 lakh which is Rs. 40,570 costlier than Suzuki Intruder priced at Rs. 1.01 lakh. The claimed mileage for the Bajaj Pulsar RS200 is 35 kmpl where as the claimed mileage for Suzuki Intruder is 47.6 kmpl. In technical specifications, Bajaj Pulsar RS200 is powered by 199.5 cc engine where as Suzuki Intruder is powered by 154.9 cc engine. Bajaj Pulsar RS200 is available in 7 different colours while Suzuki Intruder comes with 1 colours. 70% users have chosen Bajaj Pulsar RS200 over Suzuki Intruder in a survey being conducted on zigwheels.com. Compare Bajaj Pulsar RS200 vs Suzuki Intruder on the basis of price, specifications & other features.
Pulsar RS200 vs Intruder Specs Overview
| Specs/Features | Pulsar RS200 Dual ABS | Intruder Fi |
|---|---|---|
| Price | Rs. 1.43 lakh | Rs. 1.08 lakh |
| Engine Type | Single Cylinder, 4-Valve, Triple Spark, DTS-i Engine, liquid Cooled | 4-stroke, 1-cylinder, Air-cooled |
| Engine Displacement (CC) | 199.5 cc | 154.9 cc |
| Power (PS@rpm) | 24.5 PS @ 9750 rpm | 14.8 PS @ 8000 rpm |
| Fuel Type | Petrol | Petrol |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Brakes Front | Disc | Disc |
| Brakes Rear | Disc | Disc |
| 0-60 kmph (sec) | ... | 5.53s |
| Mileage (ARAI) kmpl | 35 kmpl | ... |
| Wheel Size | Front :-431.8 mm,Rear :-431.8 mm | Front :-431.8 mm,Rear :-431.8 mm |
| Wheels Type (Pressed Steel/ Alloy) | Alloy | Cast |
| ABS | Dual Channel | Single Channel |
| Starting | Self Start Only | Self Start Only |
| Speedometer | Digital | Digital |
Engine
| Engine Type | Single Cylinder, 4-Valve, Triple Spark, DTS-i Engine, liquid Cooled | 4-stroke, 1-cylinder, Air-cooled |
| Engine Displacement (CC) | 199.5 cc | 154.9 cc |
| Power (PS@rpm) | 24.5 PS @ 9750 rpm | 14.8 PS @ 8000 rpm |
| Torque (Nm@rpm) | 18.6 Nm @ 8000 rpm | 14 Nm @ 6000 rpm |
| Emission Type | bs4 | bs4 |
| Bore | ... | 56 mm |
| Stroke | ... | 62.9 mm |
| No Of Cylinders | 1 | 1 |
| Drive Type | Chain Drive | Chain Drive |
| Valve Per Cylinder | 4 | 2 |
| Fuel Type | Petrol | Petrol |
| Compression Ratio | 11.2:1 | ... |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| No Of Gears | 6 Speed | 5 Speed |
Brakes
| Brakes Front | Disc | Disc |
| Brakes Rear | Disc | Disc |
Performance
| 0-60 kmph (sec) | ... | 5.53s |
| Quarter Mile | ... | 20.01 s @ 102.55 kmph |
| Mileage (City) | ... | 50 kmpl |
| Mileage (Highway) | ... | 57.8 kmpl |
| Mileage (Overall) | ... | 52 kmpl |
| Mileage (ARAI) kmpl | 35 kmpl | ... |
| 0-100 kmph (sec) | ... | 18.42s |
Suspension
| Suspension-Front | Telescopic With Anti Friction Bush | Telescopic |
| Chassis | Perimeter Frame | ... |
| Suspension-Rear | Nitrox Mono Shock Absorber with Canister | Swing Arm Type |
Tyres
| Tyre Size | Front :-100/80-17, Rear :-130/70-17 | Front :-100/80-17 Rear :-140/60-17 |
| Wheel Size | Front :-431.8 mm,Rear :-431.8 mm | Front :-431.8 mm,Rear :-431.8 mm |
| Tyre Type | Tubeless | Tubeless |
| Radial Tyre | ... | |
| Wheels Type (Pressed Steel/ Alloy) | Alloy | Cast |
| Optimum Tyre pressure (Rider) | 25 psi | ... |
Dimensions
| Length*Width*Height | 1999*765*1114 | 2130*805*1095 |
| Wheelbase(mm) | 1345 mm | 1405 mm |
| Length | 1999 mm | 2130 mm |
| Ground Clearance (mm) | 157 mm | 170 mm |
| Height | 1114 mm | 1095 mm |
| Seat Height | 800 mm | 740 mm |
| Width | 765 mm | 805 mm |
| Fuel Capacity (Litres) | 13 L | 11 L |
| Tail Light | LED | LED |
| Front Brake Diameter | 300 mm | ... |
| Rear Brake Diameter | 230 mm | ... |
Electricals
| Battery Type | DC MF | Maintenance Free |
| Pilot Lamps | ... | |
| LED tail lights | ||
| Turn Signal Lamp | LED | Bulb |
Features
| ABS | Dual Channel | Single Channel |
| Body Type | Sports Bikes | Cruiser Bikes |
| Body Graphics | ... | |
| Starting | Self Start Only | Self Start Only |
| Seat Type | Split | Split |
| Pass Switch | ||
| Speedometer | Digital | Digital |
| Tachometer | Analogue | ... |
| Trip Meter | Digital | Digital |
| Low Fuel Warning Lamp | ... | |
| Clock | ||
| Low Battery Indicator | ... | |
| Stepup Seat | ||
| Low Oil Indicator | ... | |
| Passenger Footrest | ||
| Projector Headlights | Dual Projector | |
| Passenger Backrest | ... | |
| Cooling System | Liquid Cooled | Air Cooled |
| Console | Digital | Digital |
| Odometer | Digital | Digital |
Warranty
| Standard Warranty (Years) | 2 | ... |
| Standard Warranty (kilometers) | 24000 | ... |
Also Read Comparison Reviews of :
Recently Asked User Questions
Q. Which is best pulsar ns200 or rs200?
- The TVS Apache RTR 200 4V is a comfortable city bike with plenty of grunt and agility for a quick race off the traffic lights and to tackle some twisties as well. But the engine feels too strained out on the highway. Also, ergonomically, with the high-set footpegs it’s a tight spot for someone taller than 5 feet 10 inches. Even the brakes fail to inspire confidence under hard braking. Luckily though, TVS does offer ABS as an option. But then, the Bajaj Pulsar NS200 also gets ABS, a single-channel unit. Apart from that, the Bajaj is also a more well rounded motorcycle that does everything just right. The ride quality too is better on the Bajaj. So, if your daily riding consists more of city commutes, the TVS Apache RTR 200 4V is the way to go. But if you are looking to ride your bike out on the highway as well, the Bajaj Pulsar NS200 is a more potent tool to opt for.
- The Pulsar RS200 has proved to be a masterstroke for the Chakan-based manufacturer. It is a well-rounded package with a good balance of performance and handling without compromising on comfort. What sweetens the deal further is the added safety net of ABS, the fresh design update, and the competitive pricing. On the other hand, Pulsar NS200 comes across as a well-rounded package that can efficiently take on almost every kind of task required. Be it charging into corners, riding flat out on highways or manage daily chores with ease, the Bajaj Pulsar NS 200 makes a strong case for itself. It offers good grunt, stopping power and well-balanced ergonomics which makes it an all-rounder. Click on the link to compare them: https://bit.ly/2zT6uqV
- RS 200 makes very high frequency vibration but it looks super. RS 200's engine is better than NS200 . I'm don't recommend to buy NS or RS. If your budget is low than you can buy it. I'm recommend to buy Duke 200 or Dominar 400 Both are best for tour and very comfortable. Upgrade your budget up-to 2lacks and buy DUKE 200 or DOMINAR 400
Q. Which is more attractive, comfortable and afforable for daily use?? Pulsar RS200 or ROYAL ENFIELD classic 350??
- Both the segments are different don't go on Engine Capacity. RS200 is designed for performing well on both race track and for daily commute. RE classic 350 is a tourer/cruiser which has a steady pickup.
- Why do people always compare two different kinda bikes !?? ...don't compare sports bike with re classic 350 !! sports are meant for speed n power !! if you are a re lover go for it ...when it comes to speed , performance , comfortable long rides , maintenance , daily use go for rs200 !! decent mileage and performance !!
- Enfield is more comfortable and it depends on the person on attractive perspectives and Enfield is more comfortable for daily ise
Q. I have doubt between RS 200 and 220F, please choose one.
- When it comes to straight line acceleration only. Then 220f will stay at the back wheel of rs until 110 Then RS will shine. Others terms like stability , sound, top speed RS shines. Overall rs is best.
- Well its upon ur choice and depends on usage of bike.... if u need comfort and sports look i will suggest you 220f... and if u need style and performance u can go for rs200.....
- RS 200 is better as it has better performance, power, milage is also good as you would expect in a sports bike, better braking system and it's also more fun to ride.
Top Commuters Comparisons
Top Cruisers Comparisons
Top Sports Comparisons
