Suzuki will soon launch the new GSX-S1000 naked along with the faired GSX-S1000F. We do not yet know U.S. pricing, but the pricing released for Europe is quite attractive … below all of the competition. Despite the European pricing, these new Suzukis offer attractive performance and top shelf components. Fully adjustable KYB suspension and Brembo monobloc brake calipers, for example, along with adjustable traction control and ABS (optional on the naked version). The 998 cc inline-four engine is derived from the 2008 GSX-R1000 superbike, but has received revised tuning to move torque and horsepower lower in the rpm range.
Don’t worry about having enough power, however, as internet leaks indicate a claimed 144 hp at 9,500 rpm. This will likely be the lightest naked bike in the Open class, as well. Suzuki indicates the GSX-S1000 naked undercuts the weight of the production superbike.
With a horsepower peak at 9,500 rpm, this bike will be a real torque monster (the torque peak would normally be in the neighborhood of 7,500 rpm), and very quick at road rpm levels. These two videos (they are different, despite the same intro) provide some additional details for you to ponder. We can’t wait to ride these two bikes.
i like it. Definitely a viable alternative to the BMW S1000r and Aprilia Tuono V4 if the price is right. In addition it’s not nearly as maintenance intensive as the aforementioned. Should be a good value for those looking for a performance naked bike.
Superb bleeding-edge chassis & motor + knees bent double back-aching crouch and eye-blurring head buffeting at anything above 25mph. Just what I’m looking for – NOT.
I really like the naked version, and hate the F version. The F version looks like a scooter from the front. Don’t expect to get many returned waves while you’re riding down the road. The tail section doesn’t really bother me.
…..In the eyes of the beholder, as they say.
The S looks like any other of a seeming dozen over-aggressive, overpowered, overly drafty “naked” sport bikes to me. Whose engines and chassis’ write checks their aerodynamics can’t even hope to cover.
The F, particularly in blue, looks the way a Suzuki sports-, not race, bike ought to. But then again, I never did understand why legions of fairly average middle aged men in sedate and peaceful professions, should feel such a need for riding around appearing maximally “aggressive” all the time.
It’s got a B-King look to it. Not the worst thing I’ve seen.
Seems like another great bike. I thought the styling was a bit busy until I watched the video and saw it with a rider and then suddenly the whole design seemed to come together with the rider as a unifying element. The only down side is that I’d have to throw a carpool lane dummy or lingerie mannequin on it to enjoy looking at it in my garage.
You don’t notice the tail section as much with a rider aboard. Begins to make sense when viewed with rider.
The only people who will find this bike attractive are too young to get a license.
NOT.
I’ve been keeping an eye out on the GSX-S1000F (faired) version ever since it was announced, scrounging the internet for any info I can get. The looks are fine with me and, in the black/red livery, quite handsome.
I’m more worried about practical things – gas tank size, fuel range, ergos, vibration and hard luggage mounting. I’m hoping that the F version will be an honest competitor to the Ninja 1000 and, therefore, I am hoping that someone (it does not have to be Suzuki, but would love it to be) introduces hard luggage for the thing.
With ABS, TC, EFI, a real fairing (read: reasonable weather protection), a 32-inch or under seat, under 550 pounds, 115+ HP and good fuel range (hopefully 165+ miles before reserve)…I’m THERE. So many other companies have missed those marks SO OFTEN that I’m desperate for SOMEONE to hit them – it’s not asking too much. You think those targets are indeed asking for too much? One of my prior bikes, the legendary 1984 Ninja 900, hit all those performance marks but didn’t have the modern tech (ABS, TC, EFI). Why do we have excuses as to why they can’t do it all over again?
Remember the zx9 back in … 1999 or 2000? Such an amazing sport touring bike.
I like it and I’m 60 years old, been riding since 1985.
Both models look better in the black and red paint scheme but as of now it looks like blue will be the only option.
If you check the Suzuki USA web site, the black/red combo is shown and therefore should/will be available.
I guess it is just in the Japanese designer DNA, they can’t help it. – great concept, great motor, proven great reliability – and then simply cuts off about half of it’s potential customers by the most hideous of bodywork on the planet. I don’t get it.
…in fact,upon further inspection, I’d be embarrassed to be seen waxing it, let alone riding in broad daylight.
+1
The styling doesnt bother me at all..I actually like it.
Great bikes, just what average Joe needs. To bad they won’t sell in the US.
The KTM,BMW and Aprilia are much better.
And a lot more expensive. Imagine that.
I really like this bike. The styling is meant to be a bird of prey. My only styling problem is that the black piece on the fairing reminds me of the mushrooms from Fantasia. I do wish it had about 15 more hp. Of course it’s hard to call 145 hp boring.
From a motorcycle-designer point of view, I will
try to ‘defend’ the “45-deg.” tail-section (actually it’s 42-43deg.) :
there’s a recent trend to make the swingarms as short as possible,
in order to provide a ‘less-frightening’ handling on power-on
at corner exits (having in mind the monstrous power outputs on
almost all today’s high-capacity bikes).
Visually, a shorter swingarm is not beneficial at all, as the rear wheel
ends-up fully ‘covered’ by the tail, if the ‘design brief’ envisages
at least a decent passenger(sozius) seat.
Therefore, to make the rear-wheel ‘stick-out’ a bit (visually, optically),
you just HAVE NO CHOICE than to go ‘skyhigh’ with the tail section.
(NOTE: another option (employed by Yam on the Fz-07 (MT-07 in Europe) is to make
the seat(tail-section) so physically small (short), and then passenger seat
is practically only an afterthought (not useful at all)).
Now, what happens next: when the styling ‘team’ has to accept that the tail must
be 40+deg.upwards, it inevitably leads to a decision to make the entire styling
‘pointy’, ‘spiky’, ‘anima’-inspired, as if…
This happened at Suz, obviously, judging by this outcome.
Possible ways out of this ‘situation’ (so as to avoid having generically
ugly bikes in the future), is to analyse the following possibilities:
– use of even more advanced TC electronics (so the bikes will be less threatening
with a longer swingarm, having in mind the huge power outputs of today’s bikes).
– use of very different seating position (so risky from a commercial/sales POV!),
that would allow a shorter tank & rider ‘migrating’ forwards, and/or
– examine other possibilities (something I’m currently working on).
Anyway, the above ‘swingarm-length’ styling aspect is slowly beginning
to be a serious burden on the visual outcome on almost all new sportbikes
(and many high-powered nakeds as well).
Al Pinaweiss
Re: “there’s a recent trend to make the swingarms as short as possible,”
I think the opposite has been true, especially in sporting motorcycles. A stacked gearbox and much longer swingarm was one of the game-changing innovations on the original Yamaha R1.
This bike appears to also have a long swingarm. I think this truncated design is just popular these days. Older bikes had enough body overhang that the tail light was at least even with the plane of the rear tire’s edge and there’s no reason that choice couldn’t have been made here.
There isn’t a way out needed, as the opposite is true. The trend on sporting motorcycles has been longer swingarms, not shorter. Shorter was in the early to mid 90’s when they couldn’t build the motors small enough to achieve desired sub-57 inch wheelbases. When that was the case, the only way to get into 55.x territory was to shorten the swingarm. This is no longer the case.
Why can’t Suzuki just take a regular GSX-R1000. strip-off the fairings, add ‘Motocross’ bars and drop pegs a couple inches and boost up low-mid range torque (or just leave as it is, plently of torque already!) and shave off some pounds in the process ala Aprilia Tuono?
BTW, I was expecting to see RECURSION TURBO in 2015 from Suzuki, not this pig… Oh well, dream on… (sigh)… Maybe 2016…?
What pig? You mean all that high RPM GSX-R performance…and, under most conditions, you can’t use on a typical road?
People here are complaining about looks and you want a GSX-R with no fairings; let’s talk about ugly, why don’t we, that’s textbook “Ugly” with a capital “U”.
Stunters do it all the time and call them street fighters. No reason you couldn’t do that as well right now.
Whats with that tail sticking straight up, that is fugly and ruins the whole look of the bike.
So it seems there are three groups of responders here, with my comments:
1. “Bike is crap because it’s a dumbed down version of a full-on sportbike, I want ALL the performance I can get.”
COMMENT: You can’t even use 70% of a full sport bike, quit lying to yourself, you sound silly. If you had a clue you’d realize your faster on a bike with more HP/torque in the rev-range you’d actually use.
2. “Bike is crap because it doesn’t have the means to mount and carry six pairs of boots and a kitchen aid food processor, things I NEED for every ride.”
COMMMENT: Really? Why did you even come here? Wasn’t there enough to whine about at home, work, friend’s house, grocery store,…
3. “Bike is crap because it’s so ugly I’d be embarrassed to be seen in public on it.”
COMMENT: Every now and again there is some insightful comment here. For the love of god, can Suzuki at least make the faired version in all-black to hide those cartoonish lines!?!
Yeah at least ask an ADULT to look at the drawings before you produce the thing. Krikey! I’m not 25 anymore so I guess I would buy it anyway even though the seat and ergos are almost identical to the slightly more impressive KAWI 1K. The seat on the KAWI was also a museum piece that some knadless wonder sat on. Can you say five minutes and I can’t wait to get off (2012 Speed Triple I tested). Hey, swap it or get it recovered yeah. For its intended purpose I am sure it’s a hoot to ride. All opinions aside, nice bike.
So it seems there are three groups of responders here, with my comments:
1. “Bike is crap because it’s a dumbed down version of a full-on sportbike, I want ALL the performance I can get.”
COMMENT: You can’t even use 70% of a full sport bike, quit lying to yourself, you sound silly. If you had a clue you’d realize your faster on a bike with more HP/torque in the rev-range you’d actually use.
2. “Bike is crap because it doesn’t have the means to mount and carry six pairs of boots and a kitchen aid food processor, things I NEED for every ride.”
COMMMENT: Really? Why did you even come here? Wasn’t there enough to whine about at home, work,
speak for yourself
I’m not a lover of inline 4s but this seems like a good effort. I must be in the minority, but after many years of mounting bikes with tent, sleeping bag, or tail trunks mounted on pillion I bend my knee when mounting any bike because I can’t do the rockettes move with straight leg any better at the 5th decade than the 2nd. That tail section meets the US laws (evidently) and will have to be removed to clean it up. Looks like it was made to be removed easily and something minimal mounted, just like every bike made in the last 30 years.
Another single, twin, triple elitist opinion. Inline 4 cylinder engines have dominated everything on asphalt with a very few of exceptions from street riding to racing, for over 40 years now. Stop the madness and keep twins on lawnmowers and tractors where they belong.
That’s what you got out of a paragraph that was almost all about the height of the bike?
There’s tons of non-4 cylinder bikes out there, some of the most desirable bikes in the world, in fact. Last I checked, BMW and HD were among the healthiest moto brands, both committed to twins. Wasn’t long ago that the Japanese makes made twin sport bikes to answer Ducati’s challenge in the market. What has the 4-cylinder “Dominated”, again?
At 0:28 the difference between cowls can be seen, I suspect the intention was to make the bike tail shorter and the only way of preserving “where I seat” space was to make it higher, add to it that as per video has the lowest seat of competitor bikes, yet still the visual effect is “particular”
Also notice on Suzuki website, the GSX 750 and all the GSXR (except Hayabusa) seems to have the
“straight line to sky” design for the tail section, in the thumbnail view of the 1000 SE this is more obvious, heck even the SFV looks similar, maybe it’s the new brand “signature”.
Next thing: brembo? I went to suz USA and even the 600 comes with “radial-mounted, four-piston Brembo monoblock calipers.” maybe dollar-euro-yen exchange rate is behind that.
and last but not least, the weight is below production Superbike (sorry NG I know that word is forbidden), that implies, high quality chassis or that the k5 engine were light compared to the current one.
Someone will kill me… but, 1000cc SB power and all the depiction is on the street city… isn’t way to much?
I am excited about both of these bikes. They look like the real deal. A little late entering the segment for Suzuki, but none the less they seem to be positioning themselves very well. Really looking forward to the reviews MD.
I’m still waiting for the high end superbike with sport touring ergos. No retuned detuned last model year etc motor, all the high end suspension, brakes, and electronics but just comfort seating triangle keep the superbike looks as well. The closest thing in my opinion is the Tuono, specially the new 1100 with its better wind protection but even that is still more of a naked. the dumbed down versions from Kawasaki(ninja 1000) and now Suzuki don’t do it for me.
Yeah, now if they could just have a better dealer network where I could test drive an 1100.
Upon Further Review, Part II…
The GSX-S1000F in the above picture has two exhaust pipes. The bikes in the videos only have one.
Hmmm. Can’t imagine the faired version uses two while the naked has only one, not when they share the same motor and chassis. Wonder what’s up with that?
Good catch. That was a mirror image of one of the bikes. Each bike has just one muffler … on the right side. Uploaded new photos.
Wonder why it has no chain, and I bet you’ll figure it out. 🙂
new Suzuki 1000 uses quantum tunneling effect to drive rear AND front wheels!
I will add my voice to all the people that want that tail to be removed. Just saw it off. Leave nothing but air behind the driver. I know that I can’t lift my leg high enough to throw a leg over that. Unless Suzuki plans on marketing these to high kicking ballerinas, just cut it off.
Is anyone here proficient enough in Photoshop (or equivalent) to replace the arse-end of this bike with something a bit more traditional? For me, ideal comfort and height was an ’85 Honda Sabre, but at 34″ it was a bit too tall for most. I bet this bike will make a great platform for customization, but I don’t want to have to take a Sawzall to a brand new machine.
Okay, upon further review, this paint scheme does it for me. In fact, it almost completely changes my feelings regarding this bike, and now I want one…
http://www.motorcycledaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Suz-top-i.jpg
That is, assuming it’s properly sorted. No first-year FZ-09 throttle issues, please, nor too soft suspenders. If the suspension isn’t too far removed from GSX-R spec, then everything should be fine. The Brembo brakes look the business, so no worries there.
Suzukis are usually engineered well, and I would expect more of the same with this one.
By Suzuki not giving at least the GSX-S1000F (faired version) reasonable pillion accommodations and optional integrated luggage options, this bike is not up to par with its competitors in the Sport-Touring segment, and will likely fail miserably in the market place. It’s high time that Suzuki fire the idiots they’ve got running the design show over there and find someone that actually have a clue of what riders want and what the market demands right now.
I never like to be a naysayer, I prefer to be positive about these sorts of things. But, I must say that I am at a bit of a loss for nice things to say about this bike. It will surely be a great machine to pilot, but I would pick a lesser machine to buy based on the looks. I just couldn’t go out to the garage and be excited about this bike. Sorry Suzuki. I have owned more than a few Zuki’s, and all have been a great experience. This one will be a consideration when the first restyle happens. And that will likely be in about a year. 🙂
this is the first bike I’ve seen from a manufacture in 20 years that I don’t feel the need to change ANYTHING about it. love the design, love the ergos, love the paint color, love they had the presence of mind to go back to the old K5 engine, even love the exhaust…
now that’s a BOLD statement.
I think our beloved Norm G. may have suffered a moto-stroke. No other way to explain it, when an industry veteran can look at this bike’s tail section and still declare his undying love for the basic aesthetic.
🙂
Part of me wants to say OK, different strokes and all that. The other part wants to say he turned troll.
It’s a tough call at this point.
I suspect a very fine sarcasm… so fine that it’s almost impossible to detect, like Monalisa’s smile
Ditto Norm. Agree completely on the engine.
read all comments… and agree, didn’t notice on first sight but the tail is ridiculous.
I find new style weird… what were so wrong with round headlight style and nothing more? looks nice on bandit 1200 and the sv.
Q: “what were so wrong with round headlight style and nothing more?”
A: low sales.
re: “looks nice on bandit 1200 and the sv.”
red ink NEVER looks good on your local dealers income statement. never not ever.
The laws of offer and demand have spoken, the messenger delivered the news: pointing to the sky tails for everyone!!! long live the king (people in the background cheering)
There would then be just as many complaints about Suzuki having “run out of ideas,” and making “the same old thing.” Personally, I own a Bonneville, with the simple, round headlight, and I’d gladly sacrifice a bit of traditional style for better lighting.
I remember those old days when you use to read about motorcycles on dead trees, Sport Rider said that the headlight for one of the Honda Hornets (not sure if the 6 or 9) was surprisingly good.
Of course Eons have passed since those black and white days but I’ll agree with you better lightning should be a major concern for every motorcycle design, I do personally try to avoid riding at night because I find headlight poor (even in my car).
Older bikes use to have double round lights on the front… (YZF 600? some old Katanas) for the same reason.
I haven’t fall on those black holes of time and productivity to check replacement bulb kits for bikes given the power and heat constraints, maybe I’ll just check a little bit…. to the amazon-movil
1. FJ09
2. Ninja 1000
.
.
.
.
.
.
3. GSX-1000
I would love to get any of the naked 1000cc bikes, but they are not affordable to me, so I’m also eyeing the F(Z)-09.
What about the cb1000r? I like that swingarm… and the dealer network. But I guess power is down compared to the others—which is critical for my race times to the office.
I think the CB1000R is a very attractive motorcycle – the best-looking Japanese naked available to my eye. From a performance standpoint, though, it certainly is lagging the competition by a fairly wide margin, now.
It’s the 21st century and some manufacturers still aren’t integrating turn signals, making bikes that look like they came out of the 70s. (sigh)
they’re throwing a bone to Rizoma and your internal desire to “exterior decorate”.
That could be a regulatory concession. Very few of the aftermarket turn signals are DOT legal, it’s just rarely enforced since states have varying laws about signals on motorcycles.
Let’s be honest. They’re doing it because it’s cheap to do. I’m sure they ride fine, but these feel (and look) like parts bin bikes.
Pretty sure it has to do with a minimum width requirement relating to the position of the lens from the center of the bike.
On paper, the GSX-S1000F looks to be an awesome bike. But the fairing is hideous from the front, and the tail section angle just looks ridiculous. This bike has clear sport touring aspirations, but how does one mount any luggage to it?
Sorry Suzuki, you blew it.
They blew it. I’m probably the target market- middle-aged and just sold my Bandit 1200S. Looking for a replacement bike with styling not derived by a tatted bad-boy with a Movawk glued to the top of his helmet.
I’m not crazy about the truncated tail but I don’t get the rest of the comments here. Compared to many well received bikes (Ninja 1000, ZX-14, Hyabusa, other GT’s, etc.), the front fairing design seems pretty “normal” to me.
I like the styling of F version more than naked one. To the contrary, I found the front is perfectly good looking. Afterall, styling is more personal take than functional.
Sorry, the front end of the GSX-S1000F is flat out ugly. There is a reason why Suzuki barely shows the front in its press photos.
https://www.google.com/search?q=gsx1000f&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=s8MSVZraKcGxyATN-YGYAQ&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1360&bih=1098#imgdii=_&imgrc=YrIpzb-VqFVdvM%253A%3BHVZi3asfFnPD5M%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.motomag.com%252FIMG%252Fjpg%252Fnouveaute_moto_2015_suzuki_gsxf_1000_3.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.motomag.com%252FNouveautes-2015-Suzuki-GSX-S-1000-F-pratique-et-ludique.html%3B1024%3B683
What’s an “IKUSUS”?
I like it overall, although the angle of the tailsection seems a little extreme and silly to me – they’ll probably love it in Europe.
Have you seen the tail section on a KTM RC8? Talk about ridiculous.
I would remove the rear pegs since I would never carry a passenger anyway. Then, I would move the license plate holder up under the tailight and trim down that rear fender. I wonder if a pillion cover is available?
Young Japanese designers who have never traveled and who grew up watching Anime cartoons. The Duc looks much better. A good street naked does not have to look like much. Motor. Wheels and something to sit on. Hideous when compared to the MotGP bike.
Thought I liked it until I watched the video. Bland styling, the rear pillion issues and looks really cramped for us taller riders. I’m in agreement with most of the negative comments. Reminds me of the GW250.
Looks like someone just gave up on the rear end design of this thing . it’s a shocker really pig ugly and completely useless .
Agreed, and the probable market for this type of bike is likely to require passenger accomodation. It looks like a particularly cruel passenger seat, but perhaps there are some curves conspiring to deceive. Looks bad, either way.
saw the naked one at bikeweek and its impressive except for a passenger pad thats pretty much worthless.
Sorry Suzuki. For that kind of money, I would rather get a Ducati Monster 1200. Looks MILES better than this… Uh… Monstrosity, sounds exotic (specially w/ Termis), That Mighty Testastretta pulls like a ‘tractor’ down low (only surpassed by the likes of Hayabusa and KTM Super Duke 1.3L excluding cruisers) while screams much like a 4 on top (see dynos), while has a LONG service interval that surpass even some Japanese bikes and MOST IMPORTANTLY its says “DUCATI” on the tank!
Bit biased? yes. But when I’m coughing out 11+ Grands on a “TOY”, I expect 3 B’s: Bling, Bark and Bite…
Yea but what about the other B’s? … dealer network, parts availability, expense of maintenance, reliability? Ok that was 4 and they weren’t really B’s but you get my drift. That’s the thing about wanting something you’ve never owned. Seems really cool until you have to live with one on a daily basis. 696 Monster in our family. We call it our Italian Harley.
My family Doctor who is also a rider just sold his very frustrating Multistrada and bought a Kaw ZX14R. Says all the magazines that hyped how great the Ducati Multistradas were obviously never had one in their garage for over a month.
This is why I buy Japanese instead of Euro bikes. It’s not even about horror stories of reliability and parts availability, it’s about all the positive stories from owners of the Japanese bikes. You’ll rarely be disappointed buying Japanese when it comes to being able to just thumb the starter and ride into the sunset.
I have always preferred the more traditional naked bike lines of the Monsters to the Insecticon Transformer Crouching Fanged Beast look that Japanese designers subscribe to, so I agree the Monster is by far the better looking bike. However, the Monster would look much better to me if it said HondaKawaYamaSuki on the tank instead of Ducati.
I’ve tried bling in many flavors, including Ducati, and they all leave a bitter aftertaste. I can’t promise I won’t buy another Monster one day given how drawn to them I am. If indeed I do, I’d wager right now that the Monster will make me wish I had bought this Suzuki instead.
Yet another doubtless amazing bike plagued by gawdawful styling only a Tupperware Party hostess could love. Between the cat-in-heat tail section, the hideous fairing pieces surrounding the radiator, and the late-’90s Katana 600 decals, this ridiculous design appears to have been ripped straight out of the Hyosung playbook. Go ahead, tell me this thing doesn’t look like a cheap Chinese or South Korean slapdash attempt at a proper Japanese Superbike.
Oh, and in the Department Of Things Absolutely No Rider Has Ever Said, today’s winner has to be, “The ’08 GSX-R1000 wasn’t nearly torquey enough. Nope. No low-end thump at all. Had to piss-wind it just to get it out of its own way. Zero midrange, too. The bloody thing was like a 250 two-stroke. It needs to be neutered…errr…de-tuned…ummm, I mean, tuned for the street! Yeah, that’s it!”
And yet…
“The 998 cc inline-four engine is derived from the 2008 GSX-R1000 superbike, but has received revised tuning to move torque and horsepower lower in the rpm range.”
Still, unless Suzuki’s engineers royally screwed the pooch here, these two bikes can’t help but be stellar rides. And, being Suzukis, you know they will represent class-leading value. I guess your Shoei’s little flip-down smoked visor had just better be dark enough to prevent you from ever getting a good look at what you’re riding.
The tail section looks really silly at a 45 degree angle. I guess Suzuki was following the Euro-squid trend… Ten years ago.
Nice!
Looks like a meager rear subframe not amenable to hard bags or rack for a trunk. Which would make sense for the faired model, as in whats called sports touring but I call NuUJM. Bar mounted mirrors?