The S has a big chunk of extra torque until at the top of the Rev range. In other words the S should always get the hole shot on the R.
Fair comment but the R is faster on track where you don't want huge amounts of torque. The R's power delivery goes on forever in a linear fashion which is want you want to avoid highsides, but the big difference is in the handling. The R is far more communicative and turns far better than the S.
I mean in pure straight line speed over anything else. I’m sure it’s a bit better to ride but it’s not seconds faster round a track in my experience. I think because of the power delivery more people would be quicker on an S until you’re starting to get into very fast lap times. I only do track riding so that’s all I’m comparing with.
I bought my v4s for £15600, 11k miles, 1 owner from new. But was not a fan, so moved it on, sold it for the same, sticking to the twins for the time being. I reckons hold fire and you should get one for £16-16.5k. There are loads at 18k. And they it not much more to the latest model.
I really wanted to get bike with akras . I know I’m not getting a super deal , but I think it’s a lot of bike for the money . I’ve paid deposit and picking up her next weekend
Based on previous comments, it seems the balance is pushed towards extra torque and ease of use. The R probably requires a racer in the sadle, in order to be able to exploit the extra corner speed, brakes and so on. I am with @Porkchop on this one...if one cannot notice a difference between an S and R..probably wasn't pushing enough. (mean no offence)
