KTM 790 Duke

I've lost interest in the Missenden Flyer recently. I find his reviews ok, but generally find a lot of the content - and him sometimes - a bit dull. I'm not sure if I'm alone, but generally his videos only get viewed by around 20% of the number of his subscribers. I think others have switched off a bit too. I used to watch every video, but now I'll just watch one that might be interesting specifically for me.

I'm not too fussed about reviews not having taken the bike on a track. I don't' take mine on a track, and generally don't ride it like I would if I did. I understand that pushing the bike to its limits on a track will yield back some handling characteristics of how it behaves on the road, but I don't think it is essential.

I agree on MSN though. They're a slave to the advertisers, and always will be when the primary source of revenue is the manufacturers rather than their actual consumers - the readers.
 
arfoll said:
Sadly i think that's even more true with the small vloggers/reviewers. To grow their channel they need manufacturers to help them with loaners meaning they can't annoy them too much. Smaller they are, the more they need them :/
Click to expand...

When I used to make videos I could only publish a review if it was approved by the company offering the product. This meant I never lied but products I wasn't very positive about never got their review published.
 
Freeman said:
Is it me or do we never get bad reviews on bikes these days from big companies like MCN? Every single bike they review is 'the best yet' or everything on the bike is absolutely amazing. Whether it's a sports bike or something like Triumphs new Bobber.
I find I have to go to smaller channels from people that have been lent or are testing riding the bike. 44teeth used to be good for that but they seem to be as generic as every other mainstream reviewer these days.
Anyone else find that?
Click to expand...
I think it's mainly that there really aren't many/any 'bad' bikes about now - yeah there's some nit picky stuff on some bikes, but generally if you're reviewing a bike on how it handles/stops/goes and the kit it comes with you're spoiled for choice currently!
 
Kreeeee said:
When I used to make videos I could only publish a review if it was approved by the company offering the product. This meant I never lied but products I wasn't very positive about never got their review published.
Click to expand...
Was there a lot of products that you reviewed and they never made it to YouTube?
 
Great review, I can see me having one of these if I want a change from my Tuono, especially if they make an R version.

Kreeee - you'll buy one within 2 years, mark my words :D Fagan isn't a small bloke (15 stone) and he races/raced in the ducati tri options cup so knows a thing, he said the suspension is very good.
 
What's the point making an R version when they've made the standard version fully specced out? I wouldn't pay £1000 more for an R version just for adjustable suspension, let's be honest, that's the only thing they can add to make it worthy over the standard bike. Unless they put the akra exhaust and powerparts as standard on the R version which i can't see happening unless they charge over £10k for the bike.

Then that asks another question, why would you then not go for one of the big litre bikes if you are spending 10k?
 
arfoll said:
They put brembos M50s, adjustable suspension and charge 10K - it's exactly what the competition are doing (see street triple RS).
Click to expand...
Actually riding the bike, what difference are you going to notice when braking using the M50's? Or is it just to make you feel better knowing you've spent £10k on a bike for slightly better brakes?
 
Yep, fully adjustable WP suspension, brembo M50s, akra as standard and maybe 10bhp more on the R model. £9499-9999.

Yeah sure, you can buy a 1000c bike for around £10k - GSX-S1000 for £9700 or MT10 for £11k, but they don't come with all the electronics that the KTM does. And some people want handling over 160bhp.

Fagan said the standard 790 brakes lacked a bit of bite and stopping power, M50's would solve that. And he also said the suspension got out of depth on the track, better adjustable suspension would also solve that. The R model would be for those who ride hard and want the better brakes and suspension. Just because you wouldn't pay for the R model, it would sell loads. Just look at the street triple RS. Why buy the RS when the base/S model is 80% as good? :D

Also, in 18 months there'll be £500-1000 difference between the non R and R model used.
 
arfoll said:
Surely you of all people would understand why people would pay more for the shiniest bits? Personally of course I wouldn't feel the difference, I'm about as close to being a racer as I am to being an astronaut, I got a helmet :D
Click to expand...

Ooh Shiny!



Guilty. I'd be all over the R model given the choice :D
 
Clov!s said:
What's the point making an R version when they've made the standard version fully specced out? I wouldn't pay £1000 more for an R version just for adjustable suspension, let's be honest, that's the only thing they can add to make it worthy over the standard bike. Unless they put the akra exhaust and powerparts as standard on the R version which i can't see happening unless they charge over £10k for the bike.

Then that asks another question, why would you then not go for one of the big litre bikes if you are spending 10k?
Click to expand...

They said they would also bump the power to around 125hp too. They already said they want to make an r version which really put me off getting a new standard one.

I will be very keen when the r is down to sub £7k like the mt10 I bought.
 
Trying to book a test ride on one - sat on it in Fowlers, felt bloody lovely.

Might chop the Hyperstrada in for one :D
 
Anyone got out on one yet?

Going to see if I can slope off to a KTM dealer over the weekend. Just have to give Mrs Jigger the slip.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom