AJS Cadwell 125 vs KR Motors Aquila 125

Compare Specifications of AJS Cadwell 125 and KR Motors Aquila 125

Selected Bikes

AJS Cadwell 125
AJS Cadwell 125

Brand:

Model:

KR Motors Aquila 125
KR Motors Aquila 125

Brand:

Model:

Brand:

Model:

Brand:

Model:

Technical Specifications
Fuel Petrol Petrol
Engine Displacement 125.00 cc 124.70 cc
Engine 4-stroke, OHC, air cooled, single cylinder Liquid cooled SOHC 6-valve 60° V-twin
Engine Starting Electric and kick --
Engine Lubrication -- Wet sump
Clutch -- Wet, Multiplate
Fuel System Fuel type : Unleaded or E5 petrol --
Maximum Power 11 Ps @ 9000 rpm 13.9 Ps @ 10000 Rpm
Maximum Torque 10 Nm @ 6500 rpm 10.2 Nm @ 9250 Rpm
Load Carrying Capacity -- Vehicle Capacity : 165 kg
Transmission Five speed, chain drive --
Top Speed 97 kmph --
Battery 12v 9Ah --
Gear -- Constant Mesh 5-speed (1down 4up)
Sprocket Front sprocket : 428 14T
Rear Sprocket : 428 45T
--
Tyres
Front 110/70-17 120/80-16 60P
Rear 130/70-17 150/80-15 70P
Wheel / RIM Front rim : 17 x MT2.5
Rear rim : 17 x MT3.50
--
Brakes
Front 300 mm Single disc (Combined Braking System) 300 Ø Single disc, Pin slide 3 pistons caliper (CBS)
Rear 210 mm disc (Combined Braking System) 250 Ø Single disc, Opposed 2 pistons caliper (CBS)
Suspension
Front -- Conventional Telescopic
Rear -- Steel Dual Side Swingarm with Hydraulic Double shock absorber (5 Steps Preload adjustable)
Colors Available
Colors Black
Grey
--


Physical Specs
Length 2040 mm 2085 mm
Width 720 mm 760 mm
Height 1060 mm 1050 mm
Weight 113 kg --
Seat Height 740 710
Wheelbase 1330 mm --
Ground Clearance -- 150 mm
Fuel Tank Capacity 11 litres 12 litres
Overview
Features - Odometer
- Speedometer
- Instrument Panel
- Step Pad
Additional Details Bore x Stroke : 54 x 54 mm
Max laden mass : 274 kg
Max load : 150 kg
Generator nominal output : 100VA
Fuel consumption : (as recorded on the COC) 118 mpg
Power transmission method : Chain (428)
Form : Steel Tubular semi double cradle frame & Separable tail frame
Shaft distance (mm) : 1430 mm
Slope (mm) : 29°
Trail : 103.6 mm

Which one do you think is better? And why?
Name :

Comment :

3606