It is...but I do remember looking for hotels on Euro tours and it being hot and having to keep changing down to first too often. A real pain.
Both are great engines, different but equally impressive. I liked the rawness of the 1260, but I’m quicker on the V4.
It took me awhile to build this table although a torque version would be nice but the spoiler alert is that the 1260 V2 87 ft-lb torque just tramples the V4's 77 ft-lb anywhere along its curve as to be expected from a twin. RS dyno'd torque figures are unfortunately nowhere to be found.
Agree with that the V4 is a superb engine and run it well it just gives and gives , the chassis and the suspension make up for the so called lower torque and create a very fast and capable bike .
Unfortunately, the torque data was not available from BHPUK which is where I extracted the HP figures for all three bikes. What's important is using the same dyno for comparative purposes. There's always discrepancies between dynos in absolute terms. I'm not disputing any other dyno figures which may yield higher numbers but all three bikes (1260, V4, RS) must be tested using the same machine. Consequently for torque, (using the same dyno) we can observe the torque difference of (about 10 ft-lb) in relative terms produced by Cycle World. The 1260 V2 numbers are absent from Captain's post. However, we can reasonably infer the following torque figures using the dyno he presented as follows: V2 @ 98 ft-lb, V4 @ 88 ft-lb, RS @ 80 ft-lb
Back to the OP. I had a V4S and went to a PP. My choice was a lot to do with aesthetics and not much else. But honestly, I preferred the 'Sky hook' to the Ohlins. Just my opinion as unpopular as that may be. If I could have 2 multis I'd have the V4S and an RS but the PP is the best of both. Picking up the '25 PP this month after turning down the RS at the end of last year. Possibly one of the first bikes in a long time that I am genuinely excited for.
With you 100 % on the Skyhook , out performs the Ohlins , not an unpopular comment at all to me. My issue is tyre wear on the PP , as run the M9RR on my V4s , just managed 1500 miles before they went off. Shame as a great set . Just come back from a 400 mile ride around Wales and the 19 front was a god send with the roads as they are at the moment and add the Skyhook and TA3 , brilliant . Do like the look of the new PP tho.
Back to the OP. I'm not going to debate the Ohlins vs Skyhook as that horse has been beaten to death. IMHO, the biggest advantage of the V4 PP over the V4S are the light forged wheels.
The V4 is a much more flexible engine. It doesn’t have the thump of the V2 admittedly but I think you will use the gearbox more on the V2 than the V4.
I personally think it's the other way around. The V2's torque will pull you through without having to downshift.
The V 4 is more refined and allows more carry speed , as mentioned before add this to a great chassis .
Having owned both my personal theory is that the V4 was much more flexible. The torque line on the V2 is not as flat as the V4 and the flat line is what makes it flexible. Look at the Triumph triples, they have a very flat torque curve and you hardly need the gears at all on those once moving. The V2 was a lovely engine and I have now gone back to a V2, albeit a 950, but that was more to do with wanting to try something very different in the Desert X.
With all due respect, why don't you look at the torque curve comparison in post #48 and then tell me which is flatter.
