Bajaj Pulsar 200 - Needs a lot of Improvement. Review on Bajaj Pulsar 200

Hope my earlier review about Pulsar 180 UG3 was useful to you. I came up with another review about Pulsar 200

*Looks

*Lowered Cowl, Brighter Head / Pilot lamps, Descented Toe-Only Gear Shifts, Clip-on Handle bars, More featured Instrument panel are definitely a value add when compared to P180 UG3.

I feel the split seat is a blunder in P200. Though it looks sporty, it gives wrong seating posture. Infact P180 UG3 offers better seating position, Suitable for your homely wife / kids as well as Rocking Girl friends but P200 can accomodate only your Girl friends.

Engine

P200 offers 18PS, Torque 17.1 Nm

I would like to say onething to Bajaj Auto. Increasing the Displacement, Torque may improve the Pick-up of the bike but not the throttle response! Throttle response is equally important as the pick-up.

For Example, in Simple words, Pick-up decides how fast your bike could reach 100 KMPH from Zero.

Whereas Throttle response decides how fast your bike could reach 100 KMPH when it is travelling at 60 KMPH.

Many project "Engine noise" in Bajaj Bikes as a major problem. But according to me, The real problem lies in its Throttle Response!.

The Reason is Bajaj Bikes are heavier for its power (Though it gives high speed stability) and its Carburettor is not feeding the right mixture for varying load requirements.

Apache RTR-Fi is superb in Throttle response today. Its Displacement is close to 160 CC but still performs better than P200 in Push. I was stunned about RTR-Fi's linear Adhreline Curve and Maneoverability, climbs steadily to 125 KMPH without stall from any 2 digit speeds.

I expected more throttle response and adhreline rush in P200, it failed to meet due to its heavy structure and bad Fuel-Feed system.

*Mileage

*City Traffic - 35~40 KMPL

Highway - 45+ KMPL

*Reliability

*P200 is good in road Grip, Braking and Stability.

Bajaj Should have provided a Kicker to P200 rather believing only on Push Button Start. This is Sick!

Bajaj Should not try to inherit this concept in foreign bikes. They have higher displacement hence manual cranking is impossible and their batteries are fail-proof. So they have no kicker.

But our case is totally different and 'Push only' mechanism will not work in india.

Our Battery Quality and reliability are Good for Nothing when compared to international standards.

Kicker is mandatory.

*Maneoverability

*Difficult to handle in traffic due to its bulky structure and Design. Hence I wont recommend this product for heavily crowded cities.

Providing a wider rear tyre is another blunder in P200 / 180 UG4. It will ofcourse improve road grip but at the same time it is going to cause excess drag, more fuel consumption, reduced throttle response and Difficult Handling.

Karizma and Apache RTR Ranks Top in Handling, due to its perfect power-to-weight ratio and the right-propotioned rear tyres. Karizma can have its rear tyre little more wider as some complaints about its road grip in 3 digit speeds however all other things are perfectly balanced.

I suggest 100 / 90 X 17, 55P Rear tyre (used in P150 UG3 / P180 UG3 itself is enough for P200).

Current wide-rear tyre is a minus for P200.

*Verdict

P200 **is very good in looks but needs to improve a lot in throttle response, Handling, Engine refinement, power-to-weight ratio, Seating posture and Reliability.

I feel P180 UG3 is better than P200 / P180 UG4 in comfort and Handling.

P200 is very stout and should lose atleast 20 Kgs of its current weight to show a significant performance.

I would appreciate TVS in this regard, in RTR 180, only power is increased! The Kerb weight remains almost same, So better Power-To-Weight is acheived.

Bajaj Parallely increases the weight of the design for its increased power, finally the output remains same or worser than before.

Newly released P180 UG4 is heavier than P180 UG3 by 4 kgs. 1 BHP hike will not going to compensate much in Power-To-Weight.

Bajaj Auto....You must work on Weight Reduction!