Upon our initial ride of the new Honda Hornet 2.0, we were impressed enough to declare that it was worthy of being compared to its more potent competitors from TVS and Bajaj.
Here, we have the Hornet facing off against the TVS Apache RTR 200 4V and the Bajaj Pulsar NS200. Why, then, are we contrasting 180cc and 200cc Honda engines?
The goal here is to determine whether this bike is truly punching above its weight or if this is just another example of overly optimistic pricing because Honda has priced it right up there with these 200s.
Bajaj Pulsar NS200 Vs Honda Hornet 2.0 Vs TVS Apache RTR 200 4V
Style
One thing Honda has going for it is a sleek and attractive look, especially up front. Compared to the original Hornet, the bike has more muscular bodywork, which complements the massive new USD fork—a segment first. The clean shape of an engine cowl further enhances the athletic motif.
The Hornet adopts a more recognizable appearance from the side and back, with the back end bearing a striking resemblance to the previous model. A straightforward and organized negative LCD provides information to the rider. This device features two trip meters, a battery voltage meter, five brightness settings, and a gear position indicator. The Hornet has a 12-liter fuel tank, just like the other two, but the key now inserts slightly forward of the fuel tank rather than at the customary location.
The Bajaj bike is unquestionably the oldest design in this group, even if the Honda has the newest. Even though little has changed in the nine years since the NS200 first made headlines, we still believe this is a really attractive motorcycle.
Given that a European developed the NS, its sleek, athletic, and distinctly European lines are not shocking. The bike we’re riding has white wheels and a white frame, and the new color options for 2021 are sure to draw attention. We find it a bit too loud, but that’s a very subjective opinion.
The instrument console is one area where the NS feels its age; although being lit, the switches have a poor appearance and feel. But without a doubt, this bike is the largest and most roomy one here, which taller riders will value.
| SPECIFICATIONS | BAJAJ PULSAR NS200 | HONDA HORNET 2.0 | TVS APACHE RTR 200 4V |
|---|---|---|---|
| DISPLACEMENT | 199.5 cc | 184.4 cc | 197.75 cc |
| POWER | 24.13 bhp @9750rpm | 17.03 bhp @8500rpm | 20.54 bhp @9000rpm |
| TORQUE | 18.74 Nm @8000rpm | 15.9 Nm @6000 rpm | 17.25 Nm @7250 rpm |
| TRANSMISSION | 6 Speed Manual | 5 Speed Manual | 5 Speed Manual |
| FUEL TANK CAPACITY | 12L | 12L | 12L |
| WHEELBASE | 1363 mm | 1355 mm | 1353 mm |
| GROUND CLEARANCE | 168 mm | 167 mm | 180 mm |
| KERB WEIGHT | 159.5 kg | 142 kg | 152 kg |
Apart from following government-mandated procedures, Bajaj still needs to update the NS, but TVS bikes in India have been working diligently on the RTR. The bike now has a face that I just can’t get used to, but it also has a lot of additional functions (more on them later) that I can get used to. Except for its LED lights, which give it the appearance of a scared Pokémon, the RTR is still a stylish motorcycle with sleek lines. It does feel like a small one, though.
The foot pegs on the RTR are quite high-set, which restricts the riding position, but the clip-on handlebars are still plenty tall for comfort. Without a doubt, the high footpegs provide greater room for corners than the other two, but my 6′ 1″ frame has never been able to remain comfortable on this bike for extended periods. The TVS is the one bike in this lineup that is best suited to shorter riders.
Tall or short, you can’t help but be impressed by the TVS’s premium-feeling switchgear, adjustable levers, and LCD’s appearance and wealth of information. The RTR is also the best one here in terms of overall quality and finish impression.
Performance And Engine
In this comparison, each bike can compete visually, but the contrasts between them intensify significantly when it comes to the engines. Here, you have three quite distinct methods of dealing with engines. Honda’s air-cooled, two-valve engine produces just over 17 horsepower. With its four-valve head and oil cooler, the RTR has a more advanced design and produces close to 21 horsepower.
The NS200 is the last model, and strangely enough, it boasts the most advanced drivetrain. The NS’s liquid-cooled, four-valve engine produces a powerful 24.5 horsepower. Additionally, only this one has a 6-speed transmission.
It should come as no surprise that the Honda is the slowest-accelerating bike and the Pulsar is the fastest, but the differential is less than you might think. The Honda bike is only 0.4 seconds slower than the NS on the 0–60 kph run, but the difference widens to around 3 seconds at the 100 kph point. But these engines are much more than just a collection of acceleration statistics.
The Hornet is consistently in the lead when it comes to in-gear roll-on figures—in fact, in one test, it was the fastest. This is due to a few different factors. To begin with, the Hornet weighs 10 kg less than the RTR and 14 kg less than the NS.
The Honda’s more densely packed gear ratios also contribute to its pleasantly punchy low and midrange. This is fortunate, as the Hornet engine produces a rough, strained sound when it is revved.
The NS is a whole distinct entity. This engine is all about the revs—it has a larger rpm limit than the other two, and it will reward you more for your efforts to get it to sing. The NS features densely packed ratios with its 6-speed transmission as well, although riding at higher levels at city speeds feels rather boring because the power lives up high. However, the RTR can reach roughly 120 kph without too much difficulty, while the Hornet starts to struggle at approximately 110 kph. The Pulsar, on the other hand, has the highest peak speed here, coming in just over the indicated 130 kph.
The RTR strikes a balance when it comes to in-gear acceleration as well as top speed and acceleration. It’s not as tractable and responsive as the Hornet in slower urban environments, but it’s also not as lazy as the NS. Technology is a great feature that allows the bike to smoothly move along in heavy traffic without requiring the rider to depress the throttle. The motor is kept at just above idle. On paper, this seems frightening, but in practice, it feels really normal, and you won’t even realize it.
Three power modes are also available on the RTR: Sport, Urban, and Rain. The bottom two limit power to 17.3 horsepower, which halves the 0-100 time by 4 seconds and adds roughly 2 kilowatt-hours of additional economy. At this price range, riding modes are unique, but the smoothness area is where the RTR really shines. Not only is this engine the most sophisticated one here, but it also has a pleasingly rich exhaust noise. The Hornet never sounds more intriguing than a typical commuter, but the thrashy-sounding Pulsar has its allure at high RPMs.
Mileage And Fuel Economy
While performance is vital, efficiency is also crucial in this class of motorcycle, especially considering how much we now have to spend on these things. In this category, the Hornet is the clear winner, followed closely by the RTR, and the NS only returns 40 kmpl in both urban and rural areas.
Customers in this market group typically anticipate pretty much everything about these motorcycles, so efficiency isn’t the only thing that matters. They must be sporty and captivating, of course, but they also need to be cozy and useful. The riding positions have already been covered, but what about the pillion seats? It’s smaller than the Hornet, but it’s still not bad. The NS and RTR are both rather comfy.
They’re all quite adequate in terms of suspension comfort, but the RTR is notably softer. An additional feature of the RTR is that the front fork has preload adjustability, which is excellent for adjusting suspension sag according to rider weight. The Honda has maybe the firmest suspension in this comparison, with the Pulsar’s being a tad firmer. Still, it’s not uncomfortable or rigid; it just won’t glide past broken sections with the same snobbery.
Handling
When you want to take on a twisty road, the benefit of the RTR’s riding position becomes apparent. All three of these handlers are enjoyable and engaging, but the RTR is superior. It is engaging yet grounded and self-assured due to its harmony between stability and fast reactions. The RTR is a lot of fun, especially when you consider its power and braking capabilities, as well as its grippy and feel-good TVS Eurogrip tyres.
Particularly when it comes to raw chassis capabilities, the Hornet is close. It also exhibits an amazing readiness to plunge into a corner with an excellent feel from the front end. The motor’s incapacity to deliver 200cc levels of zeal and speed when you truly wring it out is what finally lets this bike down.
The NS seems to have the most potential in terms of its engine and chassis, but if you lean the bike over, the scraping main stand may give you a nasty shock. Additionally, we discovered that the rear mono-shock is very supple when pushed to its maximum, which further erodes the rider’s confidence.
Features
We have now discussed comfort, practicality, efficiency, and performance. However, there is still one crucial point to discuss: features and value! Not surprisingly, this oldest bike has the fewest accessories. Although the Pulsar’s technical specs are undoubtedly the most interesting, the list of features is rather short. It is the only one here with halogen headlights, and ABS only functions on the front wheel.
The instrument console is devoid of both a trip computer and a gear position indicator. Positively, although the Pulsar’s analog rev counter is from a bygone era, it’s still fun to have. Additionally, the side-stand engine kill feature is unique to this bike.
The Hornet performs slightly better because it is the only vehicle with danger lights and LED illumination throughout. Other than that, it seems Honda decided to concentrate on the USD fork, as the Hornet lacks any other noteworthy characteristics.
When it comes to the sheer quantity of kit you get, the RTR completely outclasses the others. Its dashboard provides you with a tonne of information, including lap times and 0-60 kph, in a classic TVS manner. Then, there are riding modes, which alter the ABS’s sensitivity and provide two distinct power levels. About that, the RTR is the only vehicle that offers dual-channel ABS.
Bluetooth connectivity of the RTR is another party trick. This opens up capabilities like call notifications, crash alerts, and turn-by-turn navigation assistance when used with the TVS SmartXConnect app. A wealth of motorbike telemetry data is also available to curious riders, including average speed, lean angle, G-force, highest speed reached, and speed and RPM statistics.
Considerations such as the slipper clutch, adjustable levers, preload adjustable front fork, and radial back tyre make it evident that the RTR 200 offers excellent features not just in the class but especially when compared to bikes that are far more expensive. For roughly Rs 5,000 less, you can also get the RTR 200 with all the same capabilities in single-channel ABS form.
Conclusion
This company reflects the age of the Pulsar. Although it has good performance on paper, you have to rev it out to reach it, which makes it less convenient to use daily than the other two. However, the Rs 1.67 lakh (ex-showroom) NS is still your best bet at this price if you appreciate that revvy nature and consider an enjoyable sporty engine and pure performance to be your top requirements.
It would have been a different story if the Honda had been between Rs 5,000 and Rs 7,000 less expensive, but as it stands, the TVS is still leading the 200cc bike segment. The TVS is undoubtedly the best-equipped bike here, costing almost the same (ex-showroom) as the Bajaj, but it goes beyond that. In addition, it boasts the smoothest engine, powerful performance, respectable efficiency, and, most of all, it is an excellent smile-maker. This bike is the greatest all-arounder here when you take into account everything it has to offer.
