[Ginger]

German chancellor of all things Moto, Motorrad Magazine, is reporting that the accidentally released and redacted power and torque figures for the GSX-S1000 and F were the result of a web glitch.

As we've known since early January, courtesy of Suzuki UK (and @dekker for finding and relaying the info), the GSX-S1000 and GSX-S1000F will both make 143.49 hp @10,000 RPM and 78 lb-ft of torque @ 9,500 RPM from the K5 GSXR engine (2005-2008). In case you were curious Suzuki chose the K5 as a result of its longer stroke, which lends itself better to the low and mid range environment that streetfighters thrive in.

So to round out the specs

Displacement: 999cc
Bore x Stroke: 73.4mm x 59.0mm
Compression ratio: 12.2 : 1
Max Power: 143.49 hp @10,000 RPM
Max torque: 78 lb-ft of torque @ 9,500 RPM

 

[dekker]

Well spotted Ginger

Thank goodness for that, I was beginning to think I had dreamt it.

I notified Motorcycle News (UK) but have had no response ?

 

[dekker]

Here's a bit more news Suzuki GSX-S1000 India-bound | Shifting-Gears

Naked motorcycles in the litre-class segment are gaining popularity, and fast. While other manufacturers had already made their presence felt sometime ago, Suzuki has finally entered the segment with the GSX-S1000. Revealed at the 2014 INTERMOT, the naked superbike offering from Suzuki is expected to hit the Indian streets towards the end of 2015.
The GSX-S1000 is powered by a 999cc, 4-stroke, 4-cylinder, liquid-cooled, DOHC petrol motor producing 143 BHP of power @ 10,000 RPM and 106 Nm of torque @ 8,500 RPM mated to a 6-speed gearbox. At 209 kg, the bike is at bar in terms of weight by segment competitors.

Mmmmmm more confusion ? although max torque @ 8500 sounds more like it.

 

[Ginger]

Here's a bit more news Suzuki GSX-S1000 India-bound | Shifting-Gears



Mmmmmm more confusion ? although max torque @ 8500 sounds more like it.

Certainly, especially with suzukis story, "revised for low down"

 

[Roadster]

Weak Numbers

As Ginger reported, a Suzuki site briefly published a 145 HP spec. This number is disappointing. At Intermot the Suzuki PR types were talking about more than 160. In deed, the K5 Gixxer was rated at 162 so the number was not unreasonable.


I don't claim to know how Suzuki Marketing works, but could this brief "mistake" have been a trial balloon to see have the prospective buyers would respond. If so the experts along with the entire user community failed miserably.


There should have been a line of angry zuki fans with torches and pitch forks marching toward the Suzuki Headquarters. The highest priced dealer principle in each town should have been tarred and feathered and rode out of town on a splintered rail.


Instead, the experts make whinny comments like "145 isn't too bad", "that is a reasonably competitive number", " nobody needs more than 145", etc. You can still read these comments on the web.


I had a K3 Gixxer that had a wonderful motor. The K5 was supposedly better still. I want that motor; all of it. Whether I have the nads to use it is my problem.


Please people. Make some noise.

 

[2Wheelin]

it's quite possible that they're also giving themselves some easy wins for future year models for when the time comes that they need it.

 

[chr1s]

As Ginger reported, a Suzuki site briefly published a 145 HP spec. This number is disappointing. At Intermot the Suzuki PR types were talking about more than 160. In deed, the K5 Gixxer was rated at 162 so the number was not unreasonable.


I don't claim to know how Suzuki Marketing works, but could this brief "mistake" have been a trial balloon to see have the prospective buyers would respond. If so the experts along with the entire user community failed miserably.


There should have been a line of angry zuki fans with torches and pitch forks marching toward the Suzuki Headquarters. The highest priced dealer principle in each town should have been tarred and feathered and rode out of town on a splintered rail.


Instead, the experts make whinny comments like "145 isn't too bad", "that is a reasonably competitive number", " nobody needs more than 145", etc. You can still read these comments on the web.


I had a K3 Gixxer that had a wonderful motor. The K5 was supposedly better still. I want that motor; all of it. Whether I have the nads to use it is my problem.


Please people. Make some noise.

I agree in that I was disappointed with the quoted figures. But, I fully expected it from our friends in the East...they always seem to dumb down the nakeds...I've just come from a S1000R and need the same or bigger buzz from the GSX...I'll need a test ride before buying but have a feeling it'll be lacking. That said though, If I can get a standard, non DDC, S1000R then I'll be a happy chappy.

 

[999]

Unfortunately it seems like the lack of models to test will be the case, unless you're patient and willing to wait.. which could pay off!

 

[Ginger]

I'm hopeful they make it up in torque... unlikely, but the raw number isn't indicative of the riding experience. We'll need to understand the gearing better before its a yay nay situation IMO...

 

[dekker]

I notice that most quotes seem to be repeating the Motorrad magazine figures of max power at 9500rpm.
This is not what I saw on the Suzuki UK site ie 145.5hp @ 10,000 rpm
torque 78lb/ft @ 9,500 rpm.

 

[999]

I notice that most quotes seem to be repeating the Motorrad magazine figures of max power at 9500rpm.
This is not what I saw on the Suzuki UK site ie 145.5hp @ 10,000 rpm
torque 78lb/ft @ 9,500 rpm.

Interesting find,
no sure who is indeed right on the ball but looks like we'll just have to wait on Suzuki to report official numbers if they're not available already.