0 to 60....Rocket comes in at #3

Should the vmax or diaval even be considered a cruiser?

IMO = NO!
No cruise range with fuel on board and no place for bags if you want them.
One more tid bit . . . I also have owned a Kaw V2K for 11 years and over 80K miles. I personally have greased many Victories, including an 8 ball or two as well as countless V-Twin Harleys; however, the V-Rod (not a V-Twin) was the exception and my R3R handles that task quite nicely!
 
Last edited:
If you look at the Diaval you can get them with stock bags and a trunk as for the Vmax, my son rides a 2012 and in no way is it a cruiser, it was designed for the 1/4 mile.....that's about it, fun to ride.
We have had many discussions on the forum with respect to how to classify the Diaval, to me it's a sports bike with a more neutral riding position with some bags added.

The difference between the three is less than a second and I guess if your on a drag strip that will make a difference but my rocket has something that the other two don't which actually makes it faster.....

240 pounds of ugliness sitting in the saddle that says don't F\€¥ with me.....
Smile and wave boys.....
 
If you increase the rev limiter to 7300rpm then you can hit 60 without changing gear. That should knock a couple of tenths off. However, I did just under 1,000 miles this weekend, and I'm glad that I was on the RIII and not either of the two "cruiser" that beat it to 60.
 
Should the vmax or diaval even be considered a cruiser?

No, I wouldnt consider it one. The vmax has a woefully small tank and the diavel is a stretched version of what ducati make for racing. I think they are really for traffic light drag racing and bar hopping.
I find it annoying in magazine reviews that when they review the R3 it is nearly always compared to bikes like the Vmax and Diavel. It should really be compared against bikes of a similar size like the other big 1800cc+ cruisers.
An R3 fitted with the factory bags and a carrier is not a bad bike for long distances
 
I find it annoying in magazine reviews that when they review the R3 it is nearly always compared to bikes like the Vmax and Diavel.

I agree as well, but why does it have to be compared at all. There are a lot of machines out there that stand well on their own. As far as the Rocket goes, roadster or touring put either one of them in a heard of other machines and it will stand out all on its own, no comparison needed.
 
What Dawg68 said! I've ridden both the VMax and the Diavel and their seating position leaves a lot to be desired once you leave the city limits on a trip. As for the the Rocket...having both the 07 Classic and the 14 Touring versions...they were very agreeable to be on for long trips and did so effortlessly and I usually got easily over 200 miles per tank of gas (228 on the 07 Classic...highest yet on the Touring 214).
 
I don't think I could take a long trip with the foot position of the roadster. Thankfully the cruising pegs let me stretch my legs. And I've never gotten more than 170 miles out of a tank, but by then I have to stop and pee anyway.
 
(at 0-60 in 2.5 seconds, which made it the fastest bike that still makes for good long-range riding.)
ARE YOU KIDDING ME the vemax is not any good for long distance riding if you get 180ks ( 110 miles)out of a tank you would have to be riding very gently indeed with only a 15 liter tank and a engine thirster than an r3, while the r3 will get over 360ks out of a tank
 
I have sat on both and could not see myself ever riding either let alone be interested on riding either for any distance let alone Tour on one.
The Rocket gets my Vote #1 as there is more than just the 1/4 mile in life