Jason Voorhees
Professor-Forum User of the Year 2024
- Joined
- May 15, 2020
- Posts
- 47,466
- Reputation
- 125,789
400+ cc single-cylinder bikes often struggle with reliability and smooth performance. Many of them face issues like incomplete torque bands, excessive vibrations, poor mileage, and stalling. The larger displacement combined with a 4-valve setup doesn't seem to make sense. Wouldn't it be better to cap it at 250cc or move to a twin 300/400cc setup?
A practical comparison would be the Ninja 300 vs. KTM RC390, where the twin-cylinder design clearly outshines the single. And this isn't even about power-to-displacement ratios—it's purely about refinement and reliability. So why do companies keep pushing single-cylinder engines in this range despite these recurring issues? The only argument I can think of is that using a counter balancer rod is easier in a single cylinder than a a multi and it being easier to maintain. That's about it. Any mechanical engineers or fellow bike enthusiasts can explain this to me?
A practical comparison would be the Ninja 300 vs. KTM RC390, where the twin-cylinder design clearly outshines the single. And this isn't even about power-to-displacement ratios—it's purely about refinement and reliability. So why do companies keep pushing single-cylinder engines in this range despite these recurring issues? The only argument I can think of is that using a counter balancer rod is easier in a single cylinder than a a multi and it being easier to maintain. That's about it. Any mechanical engineers or fellow bike enthusiasts can explain this to me?