KTM Duke 125 vs Yamaha R15 V3 Comparison
KTM Duke 125 vs Yamaha R15 V3
Yamaha YZF R15 V3 Price starts at Rs. 1.41 lakh which is Rs. 8,380 costlier than KTM 125 Duke priced at Rs. 1.33 lakh. The claimed mileage for the KTM 125 Duke is 46.9 kmpl where as the claimed mileage for Yamaha YZF R15 V3 is 48.8 kmpl. In technical specifications, KTM 125 Duke is powered by 124.7 cc engine where as Yamaha YZF R15 V3 is powered by 155 cc engine. KTM 125 Duke is available in 1 different colours while Yamaha YZF R15 V3 comes with 1 colours. 55% users have chosen KTM 125 Duke over Yamaha YZF R15 V3 in a survey being conducted on zigwheels.com. Compare KTM 125 Duke vs Yamaha YZF R15 V3 on the basis of price, specifications & other features.
125 Duke vs YZF R15 V3 Specs Overview
| Specs/Features | 125 Duke BS6 | YZF R15 V3 Moto GP Limited Edition |
|---|---|---|
| Price | Rs. 1.38 lakh | Rs. 1.43 lakh |
| Engine Type | Single Cylinder, 4 Valve, Liquid Cooled, FI, DOHC | Single Cylinder, 4-Stroke, 4-Valve, SOHC |
| Engine Displacement (CC) | 124.7 cc | 155 cc |
| Power (PS@rpm) | 14.5 PS @ 9250 rpm | 19.3 PS @ 10000 rpm |
| Fuel Type | Petrol | Petrol |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Brakes Front | Disc | Disc |
| Brakes Rear | Disc | Disc |
| 0-60 kmph (sec) | ... | 3.40s |
| Wheel Size | Front :-431.8 mm,Rear :-431.8 mm | Front :-431.8 mm,Rear :-431.8 mm |
| Wheels Type (Pressed Steel/ Alloy) | Alloy | Alloy |
| ABS | Single Channel | Dual Channel |
| Starting | Self Start Only | Self Start Only |
| Speedometer | Digital | Digital |
Engine
| Engine Type | Single Cylinder, 4 Valve, Liquid Cooled, FI, DOHC | Single Cylinder, 4-Stroke, 4-Valve, SOHC |
| Engine Displacement (CC) | 124.7 cc | 155 cc |
| Power (PS@rpm) | 14.5 PS @ 9250 rpm | 19.3 PS @ 10000 rpm |
| Torque (Nm@rpm) | 12 Nm @ 8000 rpm | 14.7 Nm @ 8500 rpm |
| Emission Type | bs6 | bs4 |
| Bore | 58 mm | 58 mm |
| Stroke | 47.2 mm | 58.7 mm |
| No Of Cylinders | 1 | 1 |
| Drive Type | Chain Drive | Chain Drive |
| Valve Per Cylinder | 4 | 4 |
| Fuel Type | Petrol | Petrol |
| Ignition | ... | TCI (Transistor controlled ignition) |
| Compression Ratio | ... | 11.6:1 |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| No Of Gears | 6-Speed | 6-Speed |
Brakes
| Brakes Front | Disc | Disc |
| Brakes Rear | Disc | Disc |
Performance
| 0-60 kmph (sec) | ... | 3.40s |
| Quarter Mile | ... | 17.37s@118.83kmph |
| Braking (60-0 kmph) | ... | 19.93 mm |
| Braking (80-0 kmph) | ... | 34.15 mm |
| Braking (100-0 kmph) | ... | 51.67 mm |
| Mileage (City) | ... | 48.75 kmpl |
| Mileage (Highway) | ... | 47.92 kmpl |
| Mileage (Overall) | ... | 45 kmpl |
| 0-100 kmph (sec) | ... | 11.42s |
| Braking 60-0 km/h | ... | 19.93 mm |
Suspension
| Suspension-Front | WP-USD Ø 43 mm | Telescopic Fork |
| Chassis | Steel Trellis Frame | Delta Box |
| Suspension-Rear | WP-Monoshock | Swingarm |
Tyres
| Tyre Size | Front :-110/70-R17, Rear :- 150/60-R17 | Front :-100/80-17 Rear :-140/70-17 |
| 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 | Alloy |
Dimensions
| Dry Weight | 141.4 kg | ... |
| Length*Width*Height | 1993*789*1083 | 1990*725*1135 |
| Wheelbase(mm) | ... | 1325 mm |
| Length | 1993 mm | 1990 mm |
| Ground Clearance (mm) | 175 mm | 170 mm |
| Height | 1083 mm | 1135 mm |
| Seat Height | 818 mm | 815 mm |
| Width | 789 mm | 725 mm |
| Fuel Capacity (Litres) | 10.5 L | 11 L |
| Tail Light | LED | LED |
| Front Brake Diameter | 300 mm | 282 mm |
| Rear Brake Diameter | 230 mm | 220 mm |
Electricals
| Battery Type | ... | ETZ-5 |
| LED tail lights | ||
| Turn Signal Lamp | LED | Bulb |
Features
| ABS | Single Channel | Dual Channel |
| Body Type | Sports Naked Bikes | Sports Bikes |
| Body Graphics | ||
| Starting | Self Start Only | Self Start Only |
| Seat Type | Split | Split |
| Pass Switch | ||
| Speedometer | Digital | Digital |
| Trip Meter | Digital | Digital |
| Low Fuel Warning Lamp | ... | |
| Clock | ||
| Low Battery Indicator | ... | |
| Stepup Seat | ||
| Low Oil Indicator | ... | |
| Passenger Footrest | ||
| Cooling System | Liquid Cooled | Liquid Cooled |
| Console | Digital | Digital |
| Odometer | Digital | Digital |
| Mobile Connectivity | ... |
Also Read Comparison Reviews of :
Recently Asked User Questions
Q. Is KTM 125 better than Apache RTR 160 4V and Yamaha R15 V3 - Duke 125?
- Well the 125 gives u less power but I think is good for long periods and distance coverage
- R15 v3 is better
Q. Which one is better between R15 V3 and RS200?
- We rode the new R15 v3.0 on both the racetrack and in the real world. While the R15 has grown larger and more powerful, it needs a certain level of expertise to tame. The more committed ergonomics make for an uncomfortable ride in the city. If you are looking for a dynamically competent bike that you’d like to hone your riding skills on and don't mind the committed riding position, the Yamaha R15 v 3.0 is the one to go for. It's a bike we'd love to have in our garage but its ergonomics limit its practicality. On the other hand, the Bajaj Pulsar RS200 certainly scores a few brownie points when it comes to engine refinement and performance. It is also well loaded with nifty features such as projector headlamps with LED DRLs, a backlit semi-digital instrument console and ABS. All in all, those looking for an affordable, fully-faired bike with sporty characteristics, the RS200 is certainly an attractive buy. Read More: - Yamaha R15 v3.0 Road Test Review: https://www.zigwheels.com/reviews-advice/reviews/yamaha-r15-v30-road-test-review/30566 - 2017 Bajaj Pulsar RS 200: First Ride Review: https://www.zigwheels.com/reviews-advice/reviews/2017-bajaj-pulsar-rs-200-first-ride-review/27398
- Now r15 v3 it has the race DNA and track ergonomics.Yamaha this time didnt compromise performance for looks as in a v2.Its the best in 150 cc segment..Rc 200 is a track oriented race machine if you are a beginner go for r15.rv is a great choice which can be compared to Apache rtr or cbr 350 or rr 310 from the.
- If you want more aggressive riding posture and you are corner enthusiastic then you should go for r15 v3 and you can also do weekend rides on it if you want want to go for long rides without taking many stops then rs200 is a good option
Q. Which is better bike Duke 200 or Duke 125?
- KTM Duke 200 is in the market since so long and it is now available with ABS as will whereas the baby duke is a new newbie in 125 cc segment and It is one of the quickest accelerating 125cc motorcycle in the world. If you are looking for a motorcycle to use in the city traffic for daily commuting (Ground Clearance Duke 125 – 175mm) with more mileage for suggest you go for baby Duke Whereas if you needed daily commuting for a long ride or more on highways (top speed – 138 kmph) with more power and pickup suggest you go for KTM Duke 200. To know more about this we suggest you take a test ride of the vehicle and then decide the comfort and ergonomics of the vehicle. Click the below link and select you respected city to know your nearest dealer.KTM Duke 125 vs KTM 200 Duke Comparison:- https://www.zigwheels.com/bike-comparison/ktm-125-duke-vs-ktm-duke-200
- Both are completely different from each other.. As they both built on same platform and use of same parts the handling is similar.. If need power blindly go for duke 200 it is the best revving engine in the low end... Need a mileage with ktm looks then go for Duke 125... If your on budget & planning for duke 125 instead go for the Pulsar 200 NS it makes more sense then buying of same priced duke 125
- Duke 200 is the best if you need the power.. duke 125 isn't the best in performance ... to make it simple Duke 200 gives you good low end power with avg mileage of 28-33 kmpl sometimes 35kmpl if you are not hard on throttle... Duke 125 doesn't have such power but has the ktm DNA and dynamics as it was built on same duke 200 platform but due to high low cc you'll getting a good mileage of 45kmpl
Top Commuters Comparisons
Top Cruisers Comparisons
Top Sports Comparisons
