Does Brutus define a new genre of motorcycle?

Now here's a motorcycle with a difference. Alessandro Tartarini, son of Italjet founder Leopoldo Tartarini, this week used the EICMA motorcycle show to present a new motorcycle concept.

The aptly named Brutus (not to be confused with the existing Brutus electric motorcycle), is billed as "the SUV of motorcycles," and runs a single cylinder, 45 bhp, DOHC, four-valve, liquid-cooled 750cc engine with electronic fuel injection and "two-speed" CVT with optional reverse gear.

Alessandro has not yet declared how much Brutus weighs, but highly-regarded Italian motorcycle magazine Motociclismo reports that it is "less than 220 kg," which we take to mean somewhere in the vicinity of 220 kg (485 lbs).

That weight would put Brutus in the same weight category as the 1000cc adventure tourers such as the Ducati Multistrada and BMW 1200 GS.

Now there are some significant points to be made here and the first is that the adventure tourers are built for dirt roads, not for serious off-road conditions. The reason they cannot be taken truly "off road" is that they are FAR TOO HEAVY.

So as a serious off-road motorcycle, Brutus is morbidly obese, and I simply cannot imagine how the manufacturers could consider making claims such as it being the only two-wheeled vehicle "at home in any conditions" and "a valid work tool for going where other vehicles cannot", because the specifications suggest exactly the opposite.

One of the other aspects of Brutus that is worrying is its lack of suspension travel – 80mm at the front and 100mm at the rear – that's approximately half the wheel travel of the adventure tourers and indicates to me that Brutus is unlikely to be capable of any speed off-road.

The most obvious difference to existing motorcycles are the rims and tires – six inches wide at the front and seven inches wide at the rear – dimensions normally associated with sports car tires. In some circumstances, perhaps snow or deep sand, balloon tires of this magnitude might be helpful, but at the same time, much of the advantage in terms of traction will be lost through the bike's weight. In all other circumstances, I find it hard to believe they will offer any advantage.

The press release for Brutus suggests it has been designed "outside the box and beyond fashion and sterile market analyses" – in my opinion it seems to have been built without sufficient thought and diligence to create a viable usable motorcycle.

Brutus will be available, according to the press release, with a range of accessories and customizable add-ons, including a sidecar version, a winch, a fire-prevention kit, a generator, and a "snow kit" which is pictured above.

So does this two-wheeled SUV (or perhaps monster truck) genuinely represent a new genre of motorcycle? Let us know your thoughts in the comments.

2013 Kawasaki ZX-6R vs. 2012 Suzuki GSX-R750 vs. 2012 Triumph Daytona 675R

In 2011 we pitted the Ducati 848 EVO, Suzuki GSX-R750 and Triumph Daytona 675R against each other both on the track and street to find the king of the middleweight sportbike category. By the numbers, Suzuki’s GSX-R750 emerged the winner in both arenas, but the Triumph tugged at our heartstrings throughout. Oddly, despite having the largest displacement, Ducati’s 848 EVO simply couldn’t hang with its Japanese and British competition.

When Kawasaki re-introduced the ZX-6R with its 636cc engine this year, suddenly the oddball middleweight sportbike wars are back on, and who better to wage this war than us? The natural competitor to the Kawi is the GSX-R750, the winner of this test in 2011. But we have such a soft spot for the Triumph Daytona 675R we decided to bring it along as well.

We flogged each bike at the track and on the street to see if Kawasaki could usurp the crown from Suzuki and its category-bending middleweight. The 848 EVO didn’t make the cut this time around.

 

Bang for the Buck

Each engine sports an inline arrangement, though the Triumph is notably missing a cylinder compared to its four-piston Japanese counterparts. The Kawi and Trumpet have identical wheelbases of 54.9 inches, with the Suzuki 0.2 inches shorter.

Seat heights are also similar. The Suzuki’s hovers a smidge under 32 inches, while the Kawi and Daytona sit 32.7 inches above ground. As we’ve noted over the years, ergonomically, the Suzuki places the rider low and “in” the bike, whereas the Triumph pilot is perched high and atop the machine. Conveniently, the 636 strikes a balance between the two – a rider is perched higher than the Gixxer, but lower than the Daytona.

Oddly, with engine capacities ranging greatly between the three contestants, power output is closer than we expected. Naturally, with the largest displacement the Suzuki wins the power contest at 121.2 hp and 52.8 ft.-lb. After that, Kawasaki’s 113.3 hp edges the somewhat dated Triumph’s 110.8 horses, but the Trumpet refuses to go down without a fight, winning the torque battle with 48.8 ft.-lb. compared to the Kawi’s 46.7 ft.-lb.

However, in perhaps the most important category, price, the new ZX-6R comes away the clear winner. Coming in at $11,699 for non-ABS models (add another grand for ABS), the 636 is $500 and $1000 cheaper than the Suzuki and Triumph, respectively.

The Triumph deserves an asterisk though, as the standard 2012 Daytona’s $10,999 price tag would have given it the nod in this category. Still, the base version of the 2013 Triumph Daytona 675R I raved about a few weeks ago comes in $100 less than the Kawi. So the 636 wins on a technicality.

Here, then, in alphabetical order are our takes on each bike.