Wottan Motor 2022 Storm S 300 vs Yamaha Tricity 300

Compare Specifications of Wottan Motor 2022 Storm S 300 and Yamaha Tricity 300

Selected Bikes

Wottan Motor 2022 Storm S 300
Wottan Motor 2022 Storm S 300

Brand:

Model:

Yamaha Tricity 300
Yamaha Tricity 300

Brand:

Model:

Brand:

Model:

Brand:

Model:

Technical Specifications
Fuel Petrol Petrol
Engine Displacement 300.00 cc 292.00 cc
Engine Single-cylinder, 4-stroke, 4-valve Single cylinder, liquid-cooled, 4-stroke, SOHC, 4-valves
Engine Starting -- Electric
Engine Lubrication -- Wet sump
Fuel System -- Fuel Injection
Ignition -- TCI
Cooling System Water-cooled liquid-cooled
Maximum Power -- 27.6 PS @ 7250 RPM
Maximum Torque -- 29.0 NM @ 5750 RPM
Transmission -- V-Belt Automatic
Headlamp Spectacular LED --
Taillamp Spectacular LED --
Tyres
Front 120/70-15 120/70-14M/C 55P Tubeless
Rear 140/70-14 140/70-14M/C 62P Tubeless
Wheel / RIM -- Alloy
Brakes
Front Discs on both wheels with double piston front caliper Hydraulic disc brake, Ø267 mm
Rear Discs on both wheels with double piston front caliper Hydraulic single disc brake, Ø267 mm
ABS ABS combined braking system --
Suspension
Front Telescopic front fork Double telescopic fork
Rear Double rear shock absorber with independent hydraulic pressure tank Unit Swing
Colors Available
Colors Racing Yellow
Racing Red
Silver
White
Matte Blue
Matt Gray
Nimbus Grey
Tech Kamo
Gunmetal Grey


Physical Specs
Length 2227 mm 2250 mm
Width 786 mm 815 mm
Height 1291 mm 1470 mm
Weight 177 kg 239 kg
Seat Height -- 795
Wheelbase -- 1595 mm
Ground Clearance -- 130 mm
Fuel Tank Capacity 13 litres 13 litres
Overview
Features - Large Storage Capacity
- The huge 5-inch TFT screen and two analog clocks with all the information at a quick glance
- Premium Functionality
- 3-wheel Urban Mobility with Tricity DNA
- Economical and powerful 300cc BLUE CORE engine
- Standing Assist System
- Lightest in class / Autonomy
- Large storage space
- LCD instruments and high-quality finish
- Large diameter disc brakes
Additional Details -- Fuel consumption : 3.3 l / 100 km
CO2 emission : 77g / km
Front travel : 100 mm
Rear travel : 84 mm

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

Comment :

4316