1500 Classic vs. 1600 Classic

Azleite · 08-25-2005

I was making a lift station run today & snuck into the Kawi dealer for a few minutes.I sat on a 1600 Classic & kinda liked it.My '03 1500 Classic is very loved,so....my question:any real diference in handling,power etc. from anyone who has ridden both.Thanks!

NH1500Classic · 08-26-2005

I just bought my 1500 Classic recently and went back and forth between the 1600 and 1500. The only difference I noticed in riding them was the better braking of the 1600. With dual discs up front it stops better than the 1500.

In terms of handling it was a push between the two. Power is a bit better with the 1600 but not overwhelmingly so.

For me it came down to whether the extra brake up front was worth the extra money. Given that the brakes on the 1500 work fine I opted to go with it.

**2WheelFun** · 08-26-2005

I really like my 03 1500 also and don't see where the big difference would be trading for a 1600...UNLESS...it was fully decked out and needed no extras on it for a decent price. Everyone wants a good deal now and then.

1400pilot · 08-26-2005

I just love the styling of the 1600, the big gas tank and the lines of the tank, seems to me that you sit alittle lower on the 1600 also.

the overall design and looks of the bike is why I bought it over the 1500.

I think the 1500 handles alittle better being lighter and having a shorter wheel base, at least a lower parking lot speeds, but on the highway the 1600 is as smooth as glass, with lots of power to pull out and pass, can feel the torque at all speeds when you roll on the throttle.

1400pilot · 08-26-2005

Hopefully spok will come on here and let you know, he rode my bike up in Montana!!

**Spok** · 08-26-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1600pilot

Hopefully spok will come on here and let you know, he rode my bike up in Montana!!

WHAT A DOG, smooth? sheesh, thought my fillings were going to fall out, power, where?

ok, seriously on topic.

I found the 1600 to be a much bigger bike in its fit and feel over my 1500. The bars are wider, I had to reach further for the foot controls and I didn't think I was sitting all that much lower. I do have short stubby legs.

the power was there obviously and to me it seemed to be a smoother acceleration over my 1500 but in my opinion my 1500 pulled harder in 2nd and 3rd, no disrepsect there deron.

I did sense that there was more top end on the 1600 over my 1500 but my quick run down the road and back couldn't verify that.

how was that big guy?

1400pilot · 08-26-2005

Thats ok Dave, I really cant see as there would be that much difference in power either, 100cc is not much and the 1600 weighs more, so would take more HP/torque to start and keep the heavier mass moving, even with me not on it.heeheehee.
I still think it all comes down to styling and design, its all in what you like in looks, not engine size!!!

*ispeed77* · 08-26-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by NH1500Classic

I just bought my 1500 Classic recently and went back and forth between the 1600 and 1500. The only difference I noticed in riding them was the better braking of the 1600. With dual discs up front it stops better than the 1500.

In terms of handling it was a push between the two. Power is a bit better with the 1600 but not overwhelmingly so.

For me it came down to whether the extra brake up front was worth the extra money. Given that the brakes on the 1500 work fine I opted to go with it.

first off, welcome to the forum. where in Southern NH are you located ?
second, the 1500 Classic does not come with dual disc in the front ? my Nomad has it so i just assumed.

*ispeed77* · 08-26-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azleite

I was making a lift station run today & snuck into the Kawi dealer for a few minutes.I sat on a 1600 Classic & kinda liked it.My '03 1500 Classic is very loved,so....my question:any real diference in handling,power etc. from anyone who has ridden both.Thanks!

i'm gonna have to agree with most on here. if you already have the 1500, there is probably not enough justification to make the small jump. that is unless you really prefer the 1600 feel and look, cause there is a significant difference.

wf1600rdr · 08-26-2005

I just bought my first bike 2 weeks ago it was a 05 1600 classic. I chose it because of my size. Im 6'6" and 340lbs. The wider stance and larger design fit me more comfortably. The dealer told me that there wasn't a whole lot of diff in the two bikes.

1400pilot · 08-26-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by wf1600rdr

I just bought my first bike 2 weeks ago it was a 05 1600 classic. I chose it because of my size. Im 6'6" and 340lbs. The wider stance and larger design fit me more comfortably. The dealer told me that there wasn't a whole lot of diff in the two bikes.

welcome wf1600, it does fit us larger guys better, thats one of the reasons I went with it, its all about comfort when riding, I just like to be able to strech out

*ispeed77* · 08-26-2005

welcome to the forum wf, be careful on that big bike !

Phatboy · 08-26-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1600pilot

I still think it all comes down to styling and design, its all in what you like in looks, not engine size!!!

Same here. I liked the tank and wheels on the 1600 over the 1500. And they had a black 1600 sitting there- what can I say- I couldn't say no

wf1600rdr · 08-26-2005

Thanks ispeed. Im trying so far in two weeks I havent dropped it yet. I know have a much better appriciation for all riders.

NH1500Classic · 08-26-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by ispeed77

first off, welcome to the forum. where in Southern NH are you located ?
second, the 1500 Classic does not come with dual disc in the front ? my Nomad has it so i just assumed.

Nope, the 1500 Classic is single front disc. The Nomad has it because of the added weight but the Classic doesn't.

I'm in a little town called Hampstead just over the border from MA.

*ispeed77* · 08-26-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by NH1500Classic

Nope, the 1500 Classic is single front disc. The Nomad has it because of the added weight but the Classic doesn't.

I'm in a little town called Hampstead just over the border from MA.

good to know. yeah, i've heard of Hampstead. i might actually be in Atkinson in a couple weeks, family getogether.

NH1500Classic · 08-26-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by ispeed77

good to know. yeah, i've heard of Hampstead. i might actually be in Atkinson in a couple weeks, family getogether.

Atkinson is just south of me. Lemme know when you're up this way, if you've got time we can grab a cup of coffee or I could show you some back roads up this way on the bikes.

T-man · 08-26-2005

I'll weigh in although I have owned ONLY the 1500 and a V2K. The V2K has dual stoppers up front. My ONLY gripe about the 1500 is the single brake disc. I can stop a whole lot faster on my heavy V2K than on the 1500. And when you need to stop, you need the brake to do it. For that reason, I would opt for the 1600 as the bike. I have needed more brake, particularly when 2-up, on the 1500 and it's not there...can get a little squirrelly at times!

robrider · 08-26-2005

I spent lots of time deciding between the 2 and came down to the 1600 not being worth the extra $1000 for me, even though I love the lines of the 1600 better. The 1600 lines just seem to flow better. When I went to the dealer to buy an '05 1500, he had a really nice white '04 1600 that he offered for about $200 more than the '05 1500. That made up my mind. I never rode the 1500, so I can't actualy give you a comparison, and I sure I would have loved it too, but, I do love my 1600!

pms07 · 08-27-2005

You notice the 1600 "feels" bigger (it is) and the longer wheelbase probably is why, for the most part. The 1500 seems a bit more nimble because of that and lower weight....especially at low speeds. You won't notice a huge increase in power with the 1600...but you will notice a difference. The heavier 1600 does not accelerate appreciably faster...and I've seen a 1500 beat a 1600 (both basically stock except pipes and fuel management I believe) on a 1/4 mile track once. The 1600 seems to have more torque available...regardless of the gear and rpms...but especially when you get up at interstate speeds.

There are other obvious differences besides the front brakes...you can read about features though on the K website. For most it comes down to styling and the small added features why I chose the 1600...not performance so much. Still, the 1500 is a great bike, great value and has more accesories available than the 1600. Some predicted the 1500 would be phased out after the 1600 was on the market for a year or so...NOT!

08-25-2005	#1 (permalink)
Azleite Newbie Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 8	1500 Classic vs. 1600 Classic I was making a lift station run today & snuck into the Kawi dealer for a few minutes.I sat on a 1600 Classic & kinda liked it.My '03 1500 Classic is very loved,so....my question:any real diference in handling,power etc. from anyone who has ridden both.Thanks!

08-26-2005	#3 (permalink)
2WheelFun the "fun" guy Extreme Forum Supporter Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Albion, Washington "Pacific Northwest" Posts: 32,670	I really like my 03 1500 also and don't see where the big difference would be trading for a 1600...UNLESS...it was fully decked out and needed no extras on it for a decent price. Everyone wants a good deal now and then. __________________ *KING KAHUNA* *2007 V2K LT* ****PICS** 2007 Brute Force 650i **PICS** I love the smell of SeaFoam in the morning**

08-26-2005	#4 (permalink)
1400pilot UBER CLUB MEMBER #2 Forum Supporter Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Holdrege, Nebraska Posts: 13,839	I just love the styling of the 1600, the big gas tank and the lines of the tank, seems to me that you sit alittle lower on the 1600 also. the overall design and looks of the bike is why I bought it over the 1500. I think the 1500 handles alittle better being lighter and having a shorter wheel base, at least a lower parking lot speeds, but on the highway the 1600 is as smooth as glass, with lots of power to pull out and pass, can feel the torque at all speeds when you roll on the throttle. __________________ Click for a map of the states I've ridden in 08 ZG1400 Concours 06 KDX200 04KX65

08-26-2005	#5 (permalink)
1400pilot UBER CLUB MEMBER #2 Forum Supporter Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Holdrege, Nebraska Posts: 13,839	Hopefully spok will come on here and let you know, he rode my bike up in Montana!! __________________ Click for a map of the states I've ridden in 08 ZG1400 Concours 06 KDX200 04KX65

08-26-2005	#7 (permalink)
1400pilot UBER CLUB MEMBER #2 Forum Supporter Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Holdrege, Nebraska Posts: 13,839	Thats ok Dave, I really cant see as there would be that much difference in power either, 100cc is not much and the 1600 weighs more, so would take more HP/torque to start and keep the heavier mass moving, even with me not on it.heeheehee. I still think it all comes down to styling and design, its all in what you like in looks, not engine size!!! __________________ Click for a map of the states I've ridden in 08 ZG1400 Concours 06 KDX200 04KX65

08-26-2005	#2 (permalink)
NH1500Classic Newbie Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Southern NH Posts: 4	I just bought my 1500 Classic recently and went back and forth between the 1600 and 1500. The only difference I noticed in riding them was the better braking of the 1600. With dual discs up front it stops better than the 1500. In terms of handling it was a push between the two. Power is a bit better with the 1600 but not overwhelmingly so. For me it came down to whether the extra brake up front was worth the extra money. Given that the brakes on the 1500 work fine I opted to go with it.

08-26-2005	#10 (permalink)
wf1600rdr Newbie Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Wake Forest Posts: 7	I just bought my first bike 2 weeks ago it was a 05 1600 classic. I chose it because of my size. Im 6'6" and 340lbs. The wider stance and larger design fit me more comfortably. The dealer told me that there wasn't a whole lot of diff in the two bikes.

08-26-2005	#12 (permalink)
ispeed77 RIP Deron Harden :-( Extreme Forum Supporter Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Gardner, MA Posts: 32,523	welcome to the forum wf, be careful on that big bike ! __________________ David - Moderator 2002 Suzuki DRZ400 2003 1500 Meanie, scraping pipes and frame :-) In loving memory of Deron Harden, forever in our thoughts :-(

08-26-2005	#14 (permalink)
wf1600rdr Newbie Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Wake Forest Posts: 7	Thanks ispeed. Im trying so far in two weeks I havent dropped it yet. I know have a much better appriciation for all riders. __________________ 05 1600 Classic Black Stock for now.

08-26-2005	#18 (permalink)
T-man Deerslayer & BTK Expert Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Maryville, TN Posts: 1,266	I'll weigh in although I have owned ONLY the 1500 and a V2K. The V2K has dual stoppers up front. My ONLY gripe about the 1500 is the single brake disc. I can stop a whole lot faster on my heavy V2K than on the 1500. And when you need to stop, you need the brake to do it. For that reason, I would opt for the 1600 as the bike. I have needed more brake, particularly when 2-up, on the 1500 and it's not there...can get a little squirrelly at times! __________________ T-man VROC #12333 2005 V2K Ltd 2001 1500 Classic FI http://www.geocities.com/tensman_99/mcpics.html

08-26-2005	#19 (permalink)
robrider Clutch Cadet BTK Expert Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Northern NJ (Passaic County) Posts: 393	I spent lots of time deciding between the 2 and came down to the 1600 not being worth the extra $1000 for me, even though I love the lines of the 1600 better. The 1600 lines just seem to flow better. When I went to the dealer to buy an '05 1500, he had a really nice white '04 1600 that he offered for about $200 more than the '05 1500. That made up my mind. I never rode the 1500, so I can't actualy give you a comparison, and I sure I would have loved it too, but, I do love my 1600!

08-27-2005	#20 (permalink)
pms07 Finally Got Into First Gear BTK Beginner Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Illinois Posts: 69	You notice the 1600 "feels" bigger (it is) and the longer wheelbase probably is why, for the most part. The 1500 seems a bit more nimble because of that and lower weight....especially at low speeds. You won't notice a huge increase in power with the 1600...but you will notice a difference. The heavier 1600 does not accelerate appreciably faster...and I've seen a 1500 beat a 1600 (both basically stock except pipes and fuel management I believe) on a 1/4 mile track once. The 1600 seems to have more torque available...regardless of the gear and rpms...but especially when you get up at interstate speeds. There are other obvious differences besides the front brakes...you can read about features though on the K website. For most it comes down to styling and the small added features why I chose the 1600...not performance so much. Still, the 1500 is a great bike, great value and has more accesories available than the 1600. Some predicted the 1500 would be phased out after the 1600 was on the market for a year or so...NOT!

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)