Welcome to our one-stop article for everything relating to the 2021 Suzuki Hayabusa. We’ll be updating the page throughout the year beginning with a detailed feature following our trip to Suzuki GB HQ to see and touch the new machine. We whip the fairings off and even speak to Suzuki GB Director, Paul de Lusignan, asking him the pertinent questions about the third generation ‘busa. We’ll then have the first ride review here and we’ll also be running the bike as a long-termer this year so Simon Hargreaves will be at your beck and call.
Up close as the fairings come off the new GSX1300R plus we interview Suzuki GB Director, Paul de Lusignan
What Have Suzuki Done To The Hayabusa?
Normally when announcing an updated bike, especially one that’s taken at least seven years too long, the very least we’ve come to expect is more power and torque. It’s vanishingly rare to hear of a bike with less engine performance than the previous model – not because we’re all speed freaks (although some of us are, ahem), but because, for better or worse, performance is regarded as a measure of progress. Even when all bikes are limited to a self-imposed 186mph top speed limit, that’s not the point – when was the last time you heard anyone declare proudly: “Here’s my new bike, updated and improved over the old one, and guess what: it makes less power!”
In 1999 Suzuki’s Hayabusa – free of top speed limitations for a glorious first 12 months – set a new benchmark of production bike engine performance. With a measured 155bhp at the wheel, which was easily pushed above 160bhp with a full system, it was the fastest, thrustiest, most powerful bike on the roads. And even if we didn’t use all of it in day-to-day riding (ahem), it was a hell of thing to know what superpower could be unleashed within a short twist of our right wrist. And, with its distinctive melted wind-tunnel styling, everyone else knew it too. And boy, did that feel good. It was boss; Busa owners of either gender had an inch on everyone – and I don’t mean in height.
This was the archetypal Hayabusa experience; it was the essence of the bike. And while, in later years, the Busa’s innate exceptionalism declined slightly with speed limits and emissions regs (not to mention superior stock performance from Kawasaki’s ZZR1400 and H2 SX SE), it was still an underpinning characteristic of the machine. Yes, plenty of Busa owners went touring and plenty used it for gentle Sunday ride-outs – but they knew and we knew what the Hayabusa name meant and what it stood for.
So since Suzuki finally revealed the third generation updates to the GSX1300R, 13 years since the last overhaul that saw it big-bored to 1340cc, enthusiasm has been muted in some quarters of existing Hayabusa ownership. It’s neither the bike’s looks, nor its price, nor its sophisticated line-up of engine management and rider aids that cause murmurs of discontent. It’s the new bike’s power and torque figures: the previous Hayabusa made a claimed 195bhp, which worked out to around 180bhp at the wheel, and a claimed peak 113 lb.ft. Suzuki say the new Hayabusa makes 187bhp – that’s 8 bhp less – so it’ll actually make around low 170s on a dyno; getting close to a first generation Busa with an Akrapovic on. And the new bike makes claimed peak of 111 lb.ft. Gearing has remained the same between the two bikes.
Now, Suzuki – probably truthfully – say the missing top end performance is redistributed throughout low- to mid-range revs and makes the new Hayabusa faster and more satisfying in real world riding conditions. But for some existing owners that’s beside the point – there’s certainly a level of collective disappointment and, “I’ll keep the old one, thanks.” That 8bhp might not be what owners use, or what they need – but in a modern motorcycling world in which plenty of sports 1000s and hypernaked bikes make 170bhp at the back wheel for breakfast, and which some adventure bikes are getting pretty close to – is less really more for the 2021 Hayabusa? Or is it just, well… less?
And it’s not just owners – at the launch of the previous Hayabusa at Austria’s intimidating Salzburgring in 2008, the Hayabusa’s designer, Koji Yoshiura, said, “The new Hayabusa could not maintain the original concept of Hayabusa without increasing power.”
So what are Suzuki thinking?
The 2021 Hayabusa: what’s new?
To try and understand Suzuki’s new Busa, and why increasing (or even maintaining) its peak engine performance figures wasn’t a priority, we need to start with what Suzuki have actually done. And although there’s much that’s familiar under the new bike’s skin, there are a lot of updates and changes too:
First off, the engine is the same basic architecture as the old bike – fundamentally the same water-cooled, 16v, 1340cc inline four, rightly famed for its tremendous midrange heft and bullet-proof durability. There’s no variable valve timing, no funny firing intervals, no forced induction. Suzuki claim they looked at alternative engine configurations – and I’m sure they’ve built them in the past – but to be frank, it’s unlikely any other engine configuration found its way off a drawing board and into a Hayabusa chassis for a live dynamic test. The claim is much more likely to be at the ‘just talking about it’ end of ‘looking at’.
Suzuki say the design targets for the 2021 engine were:
Better durability
Updated electronics
“Achieve greater power and torque with smoother delivery throughout the low- to mid-speed range”
Meet Euro 5 emission regs without sacrificing top speed
Taking these one by one…
Design target 1: Better durability
Sounds reasonable, but this is actually a weird thing to claim; manufacturers almost never talk about reliability unless it’s in terms of extended service intervals (which the Busa hasn’t got, so it can’t be that much more durable). That Suzuki have made it point number one with a bike as already reliable as the Hayabusa is possibly a distraction from -8bhp’s worth of something else.
Anyway, the Busa’s engine has a well-deserved reputation as bomb-proof – that’s why engine tuners love them; they’re tuned, supercharged, turbocharged and modified by people like Big CC, Holeshot Racing and Radical – if there’s a world wheelie speed record, or a land speed record, a Hayabusa engine probably holds it.
But nonetheless, Suzuki say they improved the durability of the new Busa with:
revised oil passageways feeding the crank with 54% better oil supply
pistons and rods are a cumulative 116g lighter, but redesigned to be stronger
detail changes to bearing specs in the transmission and production methods for engine assembly
Design target 2: Updated electronics
In terms of electronics, in 2008 the Gen 2 Busa got a three-way power mode selector switch and ABS in 2013 – so, not a lot of sophistication going on. It’s pretty basic – which some riders prefer. Don’t ask me why.
Apart from styling, electronics are by far the most significant change to the new Busa – and stop me if you’ve read all this before: We have:
a 6-axis IMU, which informs the bike’s ECU of its dynamic condition, and allows for lots of electronic systems including,
10-level traction control
10 levels of anti-wheelie
three-way power mode selector
engine brake control with three settings – in conjunction with a new slipper clutch
up and down quickshifter, with three modes, including off
All these settings are pre-programmed into three fixed rider modes – Active, Basic and Comfort – plus three customisable setting so you can programme your own Wet Mode, or Silverstone Mode, or B660 Mode etc.
But wait, there’s more! We also have:
launch control with three different rev limits
cruise control – which is handy for setting a fixed speed in speed limits…
a speed limiter – also handy for setting a fixed speed in speed limits…
rear while lift control under downhill braking
… and Cornering ABS and Hill Hold Control
What we don’t get is heated grips, except as an option. Which means they aren’t integrated. I would happily trade most of the above for warm hands.
All this also means the Busa is now ride-by-wire, as per the V-Strom 1050 and GSX-R1000R – but unlike the Strom, the GSX-R and Busa’s throttle sensors are still cable-actuated for a more natural twistgrip feel.
And unlike the trend for modern bikes to sprout buttons to manage all their electronic options, the Hayabusa’s are controlled via Suzuki’s simple two-way rocker and mode switch – stepping through each setting might not be the fastest way to access them, but it’s so intuitive and uncomplicated you save time simply because it’s hard to get it wrong. Literally, a thumbs up.
The clocks have retained the old Busa-style analogue dials with electronics displayed on a central TFT section – which also includes a lean angle display and G-force indicator. It’s hard to criticise Suzuki for not going down the full TFT route when the clocks look this good. Another thumbs up.
Funnily enough, Suzuki don’t claim new styling as a design target – but it’s clearly all new, from the pointier nose to the rear spoiler. It’s a sharper, sleeker, more modern look – but still very much a Hayabusa. Again, plaudits to Suzuki – the Busa looks quality: indicators integrated into the running lights at the front and brake lights at the rear, the chrome panel trim really pings, a new anti-vibration top yoke looks nice as do the mirrors, and now the bars are 12mm closer to the rider – so although the Busa is still a sporty riding position with er, compact leg room, the top half isn’t as stretched out as the Gen 1 and Gen 2. It’s not as dripping with quality as a modern Triumph, or as tech-loaded as a Ducati or BMW – no semi-active suspension, no push-button ignition, no backlit switches, no Bluetooth connectivity or media management, no heated grips… hang on, I already said that.
The frame and swingarm are pretty much identical to both previous Busas – KYB suspension front and rear is updated for smoother performance (and because anyway, that’s how KYB is making them now), and brakes are uprated with Brembo Stylema calipers and 320mm discs (up from 310m). Busa brakes – especially the first Gen’s six-pots – were always criticised for a lack of power. Kerb weight is up a couple of kilos to a claimed 264kg; it’s not a light bike, but it’s not unwieldy.
Design Targets 3 & 4: Greater power and torque with smoother delivery throughout the low to mid speed range, and meet Euro 5 without sacrificing top speed
Ah, there’s an elephant in the room and we need to talk about it.
The established method many manufacturers use to get their engines to meet E5 without losing performance is to make them bigger – it’s called upsizing. This is because making an engine bigger – very generally – means (among many other things) a) it works less hard for a given level (say, a Euro 5 emissions test) so it’s cleaner, and b) it has better thermal efficiency – it gets more performance bang for its fuelling buck. And of course, it has the added advantage of at least matching its previous, smaller engine’s power output, and usually exceeding it slightly.
That’s (partly) why a long list of bike engines keep getting bigger: BMW’s R1200 is now a 1250, Honda Africa Twin 1000 is now an 1100, Triumph’s Tiger 800 is now a 900 and Yamaha’s MT-09 is now 889cc, not 847cc.
So, as a manufacturer striving to meet Euro 5, you have a choice:
Make your engine bigger and make the same, or slightly more peak power and torque, or
Keep your engine the same size and make less peak power and torque
Suzuki have gone with option b) – on the face of it, a curious choice given a significant part of the point of the Hayabusa is all that ‘peak performance’ stuff. The 2021 Busa makes a claimed 187bhp at 9500rpm against the previous bike’ claimed 195bhp at 9700rpm, and 111 lb.ft at 7000rpm against 113 lb.ft at 7200rpm.
So that’s 8bhp lower peak power and down on peak torque too. If we look at what Suzuki have done to get the existing motor through Euro 5, turns out that’s about par for the course.
Cleanliness starts inside the combustion chamber. Suzuki have altered cam timing to reduce valve overlap – the period in the engine cycle when inlet and exhaust valves are open at the same time. Generally speaking, this has the potential to make an engine a) cleaner but b) make less peak power. This is because a wider period of valve overlap is good for shifting gas through your engine, especially at higher revs – so it can rev harder and make more power – but it’s also dirty because some fresh fuel coming into the chamber can go straight out the exhaust. In the old days, you’d compensate by just chucking more fuel in and damn the emissions. But do that now and your engine will fail Euro 5. And 4, and maybe even 3.
In order to burn as much fuel as possible, Suzuki have gas-flowed the cylinder head, machining around the valve area to encourage the mixture to swirl – Suzuki have been putting TSCC (Twin Swirl Combustion Chamber) in their brochures for decades: you’d think the design would be optimised years ago.
The fuel injection system is refined to suit the new demands on pumping air through a now slightly more strangled engine – the ram air system is more efficient, the airbox is a litre larger (taking a litre out of fuel tank space – more on that later) and the throttle bodies are taller and narrower (because a narrower tube increases air velocity, but not volume). This is a classic detuning/retuning process used ever since manufacturers started putting ex-sportsbike engines in sports tourers and the like; reduce overlap, narrow the throttle bodies, and you’ll take off revs, peak power, and redistribute it through the midrange (although no-one could ever tell).
Suzuki have also tweaked the fuel injection, angling the second injector and firing it into a static plate instead of a secondary butterfly valve. Suzuki say it atomises the fuel better; it also looks like a much cheaper assembly (no secondary valves, no servos etc). I’m sure that’s a coincidence.
To get the gas out the other end of the motor, the Busa’s exhaust is redesigned with an extra link pipe across the headers, a catalyst in the collector box and one in each end can – basically, a bigger cork. Despite this, Suzuki say a redesign has made the cans shorter, smaller and lighter than before. Sacking that lot off and fitting a race system, with a suitable re-map, could well liberate, say, 8bhp.
Anyway, the result of all this retuning/detuning is to get a piece of paper with Euro5 stamped on it. But it also means less peak performance. Suzuki say that missing top end performance is indeed redistributed at lower rpm: “While peak output is marginally lower than on the second-generation model, the new Hayabusa’s broad power curve produces equivalent or greater overall output when measuring the total value across the range of low through high engine speeds.”
On the road, on a new bike, the chances of anyone noticing the missing top end are minimal. For a start, you’d need a very long, quiet road to find out. And there’s a much greater chance of noticing extra midrange, if there is indeed any – that’s where most of us ride most of the time. Suzuki themselves say the new bike is a tenth of a second quicker 0-60 (what, even with launch control? Can’t be very good then) and has the same limited 186mph top speed.
But on the road is one thing; that cuts no ice when the 2021 Hayabusa is stood next to a 2008 Busa taking a leak at the urinals and cops a look over… the old one is… well, it’s bigger. And bigger is, if not the whole point, then at least a substantial Hayabusa pillar.
And in one of those logic-defying twists of ‘green’ hypocrisy, the result of choking up the Busa’s engine is an increase in fuel consumption – remember the thing about bigger engines having to work less hard? The 2021 bike, according to Suzuki’s own figures, is 15% more thirsty than the previous bike – from a claimed 50mpg to 42mpg.
At the same time, the extra litre in the airbox has robbed a litre from the fuel tank, 5% smaller than before, at 20 litres.
The old Busa wasn’t exactly a 200-mile range bike; 150 more like, 130 if you had flappy waterproofs on and were in a bit of a hurry. If the new bike’s engine is used a bit, I wouldn’t be surprised to see the fuel light on at under 120 miles, which is a real shame and, for many potential owners, will be much more of a pain in the arse than a few missing bhp at the top end.
So why have Suzuki gone down this route?
Finally we come to the heart of the matter – why didn’t Suzuki just make the Hayabusa’s engine 100cc bigger and meet Euro 5 and maintain performance, especially given it’s so important to the brand?
As a rebuttal, Suzuki GB make several points which, while true, don’t explain Suzuki’s rationale. They claim the world is a different place and the whole ‘peak performance’ thing is less relevant today than 1999. That’s true. They also suggest bike owners now are less interested in outright performance and are looking for a more sophisticated riding experience – which is also possibly true.
But the real reason Suzuki haven’t made the Busa’s engine bigger is because they can’t without a more significant architectural engine redesign – the original 1299cc Hayabusa had an 81mm x 63mm bore and stroke. The Gen 2 bike took stroke out to 65mm for 1340cc, but kept the same bore. A quick glance at various tuning specs shows the maximum overbore for a Hayabusa block is 84mm – that would give 1440cc, which would, even with Euro 5, put the Busa comfortably up around the 200bhp mark. But an aftermarket overbore is one thing; doing it with all the constraints of production reliability and durability is a different matter – and perhaps Suzuki don’t consider it a viable production option without that big engine redesign. Which, in addition to all the other changes, would then price the bike above its £16,500 price target.
And that’s the nub of it: Suzuki have struck a balance between the cost of a new engine, the price of the bike, the number of people Suzuki want to sell it to, its reputation for reliability, the cost and level of electronic sophistication, and the relative risk of alienating a few existing owners because it’s lost 8bhp. Now, it’s easy (and true) to say other manufacturers make a different call, make the motor bigger, maintain performance, and don’t drive the price through the roof. But they can spread the cost of doing that – Honda’s Africa Twin motor pops up in a four-wheel buggy in the US; BMW’s 1250 flat twin goes in multiple models across their range etc. Suzuki’s Busa motor goes in one, relatively low-volume bike; too low to recoup what would be even greater R&D costs.
Conclusion
So after all this we have, on the plus side, a new, 2021 Hayabusa with:
a successful styling refresh and perceptible increase in perceived build quality
a complete update of electronic systems with a restrained and uncomplicated user interface, lovely clocks and simple switchgear
an improved riding position
updated suspension and brakes
more claimed midrange engine performance
same top speed
On the downside, it:
makes less peak power and torque
is thirstier and will have less tank range
isn’t quite the last word in technology; no semi-active suspension etc
Is that enough to put us off? Time will tell – Suzuki say they’ve already sold over half the 2021 allocation of bikes.
2021 Suzuki Hayabusa Launch Review
Welcome, speed freaks (and everyone else) to the UK launch of the 2021 Suzuki GSX1300R Hayabusa. We’re parked at the far end of the 0.8-mile runway at Sywell Aerodrome in Northamptonshire, with ace performance tester Bruce Dunn and a 2D GPS datalogger (as used in MotoGP).
Bruce launches the Suzuki up the runway in a snarling flurry of revs. He crosses the 60mph mark in 2.69 seconds.
2.49 seconds later (5.18 seconds from standstill) he’s doing 100mph.
5.53 seconds after that, 10.71 seconds from standstill, Bruce and the Hayabusa are creasing physics at 150mph. Let that sink in – just over 10 seconds to hit a ton and half.
And a mere 16.35 seconds from standstill, Bruce and the Suzuki are doing 169.49mph – in fifth, with one more gear to go.
For Bruce, timing is – literally – everything: the end of the runway is approaching at the rate of 76 metres per second. Bruce shuts off and brakes with 300 metres and four seconds of concrete left. His margin for error timing his braking is around half a second. At nearly 170mph that, I would say, takes a fair pair of spuds.
The Suzuki’s new Brembo Stylema radial calipers and enlarged 320mm discs plough a concrete furrow as revised 42mm KYB forks and new front Bridgestone B22 eat into the runway. Newly-sophisticated ABS balances-in a bit of rear brake and sets off brake hazard warning lights, in case anything is coming up fast behind (although what Suzuki expect to keep up with an unleashed Hayabusa is moot), as the Hayabusa kills speed like a Hamamatsu-sized anchor.
And that, ladies and gents, is the fastest-accelerating stock production bike Bruce has measured in over 30 years of professional performance testing. Faster than any litre sportsbike, either Gen1 or Gen2 Hayabusas, faster than any ZZR1400 and faster than an H2 SX SE.
It’s official, kinda: the 2021 Hayabusa is still the boss.
Now, more sober readers might wonder what the point of all this speedgasm is – and I can offer no further justification other than it is and always has been a large part of the sales pitch for the Hayabusa, and Suzuki have brought us to a runway as part of the launch so it’s clearly a bit of fun. But, also, it’s a handy way of measuring the effects of the Euro 5 changes to the 2021 Hayabusa, somewhat exhaustively listed and described above.
But before we hit the runway, we also take the Hayabusa out for a road ride too. And turns out it’s pretty handy in the real world, too.
For and against
Engine – just classic, old-school stomp. Get it while you can
Suspension – it’s not the magic carpet of an adventure bike, but it’s good
Clocks – genuinely a cracking view from the seat, nice mix of old and new
Absurd speed – who doesn’t love the potential for misbehaviour?
130-mile tank range – has the potential to be a deal braker for my bike choice, but won’t bother many people half as much
First Ride Review and Runway Launch
Join Simon Hargreaves and Bruce Dunn as they test the 2021 Hayabusa on the UK roads and runway for the first time.
Suzuki GSX1300R Hayabusa (2021) price and availability
The Hayabusa is available from dealers right now, but availability is limited – the first batch has already sold out, so you’ll be registering a bike for the next batch (and at time of writing, no-one’s sure when that will be).
Suzuki say demand is so high even demo bikes and test rides will be limited, so if you decide you need a 2021 Hayabusa in your life – and read on, to find out if you think you do – get in the queue now to avoid disappointment when you only get your new bike just as the summer is ending.
PCP details*
*assuming a deposit of £4500, such as trade-in on existing bike
Cash price
Deposit
36 monthly
Total payable
Final payment
APR
£16,547
£4500
£142.18
£18,515.48
£8897.00
5.9%
Power and torque (all figures claimed)
Suzuki Hayabusa Gen3
Suzuki Hayabusa Gen2
Kawasaki ZZR1400
Kawasaki H2 SX SE+
187bhp at 9500rpm
195bhp at 9700rpm
197bhp @ 10,000rpm
197bhp @ 11,000rpm
111 lb.ft at 7000rpm
113 lb.ft at 7200rpm
117 lb.ft @ 7500rpm
102 lb.ft @ 9500rpm
Suzuki claim lower peak power and torque for the new Hayabusa than for the previous generation. In broad terms (again, see this feature for more details <link again?>), the motor is the same size, but has more restrictions to allow it to pass Euro 5 emissions regs. Normally, manufacturers will increase engine capacity slightly to compensate for the loss in performance – so you get the same, or a bit more, performance yet still meet emissions regs.
Suzuki haven’t done this, probably because the second generation Hayabusa engine is too close to the limit of capacity in its current design for Suzuki to be comfortable with its long-term durability were they to increase it further without a major redesign and re-tooling – with all the cost implications. The Hayabusa motor isn’t used in any other platform by Suzuki, so they can’t spread the cost; it’s a relatively small-volume (boom-tish) seller.
As a result, we have Hayabusa engine doing the unthinkable – being, on paper, less potent than before. There are three things to add though: 1) if any bike has potency to spare, it’s the Hayabusa, 2) Suzuki have done a pretty good job of minimizing the losses, claiming they’re retuned the motor to add a bit more midrange, and 3) judging by Bruce’s speed testing figures, it’s worked.
So let’s talk about what the bike feels like, instead.
Engine feel and performance
The headline is that, on the road, the engine feels as potent and beefy as the Hayabusa always has. As we pull out onto the road away from Sywell Aerodrome and an unexpected and welcome spring sun burns the morning dew off the tarmac, the loss of a few bhp at the top end and a few lb.ft at peak torque is, to my bum dyno, unnoticeable – the bike still pulls from nothing like a rampant elephant slipping a fresh silk cover onto a king-size duvet, still has a bulging crescent of midrange like a rampant elephant getting increasingly frustrated by the reluctance of the silk cover and king-size duvet to come to an equitable arrangement, and still revs out to its 11,000rpm redline like a enraged elephant who’s had enough of the sodding silk cover and king-size duvet and stomped them into atoms.
And the engine still has a Hayabusa’s character, too – it’s a very conventional, very muscular, normally aspirated motor (tempted to say it’s so strong in the midrange it feels ab-normally aspirated). It hasn’t got the classic ZZR1400 feeling of infinite revs – the Kawasaki accelerates with a long, gathering tide of power that’s equally impressive but has a more cosmic origin – as if it gathers itself up before launching into hyperdrive. The Hayabusa’s acceleration is a more earth-bound sensation, bludgeoning into tomorrow with an instantaneous burst of sheer blunt force trauma. The Kawasaki vrooms, the Busa grunts.
And anyway, it’s hardly a surprise the new Hayabusa feels like the old Hayabusa, as the engine is basically the same; milder cam timing, altered breathing capacity and three Euro 5 bungs in the exhaust instead of one might have robbed a few bhp on torques on paper, but on the road it’s not readily apparent – at least to me; a couple of colleagues familiar with riding faster bikes than I said they thought the bike felt a bit less heady at the top end, which they may have been able to detect. I couldn’t – and I really, really tried to find it.
And to an extent the point was rendered moot at the runway later in the day when, in Bruce Dunn’s hands, the Suzuki motored from 0-60, through the standing quarter, and up to 150mph faster than any stock production bike he’s ever tested. Only the length of the runway prevented the Hayabusa from reaching its 186mph limited top speed.
This graph is a comparison of a top gear roll-on, 40-100mph, of the new Hayabusa (red) against a 2016 ZZR1400 (green; test conducted on a different day). And it’s clear to see that side-by-side, the new Hayabusa (which is running the same gearing as the previous model) has the edge over the ZZR between 40mph and 85mph – after which presumably the Kawasaki’s superior horsepower sees it begin to pull the Suzuki back (although bear in mind because the Kawasaki is effectively behind at this point, the advantage the Hayabusa has gained will take the ZZR well over 100mph to claw back in front).
Here’s a comparison of a standing start run (same bikes, same colours, different days). The Suzuki’s advantage over the ZZR1400 is again clear-cut in the early part of the run up to 140mph. Bruce says the difference is simply the ease of getting the Hayabusa off the line and the immediacy of its low-down shove – neither the Suzuki nor the Kawasaki are hard to launch because they’re long and low, so catching the perfect drive between wheelie and wheel spin is easier than managing a feisty, short-wheelbase litre sportsbike.
Again, the ZZR starts to reel the Hayabusa at the top end – if the runway was longer, extrapolating the Hayabusa’s curve would match the shape of the ZZR’s, probably lagging slightly below it.
But on the road, the new Hayabusa will never be found lacking any more than the previous bike would be. It’s got plenty, everywhere.
Gearbox and exhaust
Suzuki say they beefed up the Hayabusa’s transmission input shaft bearings, which is good news for folks who tune up Hayabusa motors and pop them in cars – it’s one of the engine’s weak spots (the other is not over-boring Gen2 cylinder blocks, because they can crack, which ties up with Suzuki’s reluctance to do the same).
Suzuki have also added an up and down quickshifter, with two modes (a normal mode and a more leisurely shift) which is flawless – not a single missed gear all day, which is a rarity for me! Bruce turned the system off while he was speed testing – like most road electronics, a good rider can change gear quicker with it off (if not quite as smoothly).
The Hayabusa’s exhaust is also new – it’s not as vast as it looks in the pictures, and Suzuki claim it’s lighter and smaller than the previous model’s. It’s certainly fairly quiet. Hayabusa owners are already getting rid them – Bike Social reader Simon Worrall has just collected his new Gen3 Hayabusa and took no time in taking the Yoshi cans off his Gen2 and putting on the Gen3 – the result isn’t perfect (they tilt up a fair bit) and Simon had to make a small adjustment to the Yoshi link pipe to get them together. But it sounds nicer and, more importantly, removes two of the three catalysts in the Gen3’s pipes, and saves around 3kg each side.
Fuel economy
Suzuki themselves claim the new Hayabusa’ s fuel economy is worse than the Gen2 model: – from a claimed 50mpg to 42mpg, a 15% reduction, along with a litre less in the tank thanks to making room for a bigger airbox. This is all Euro 5 – taking an engine and effectively stuffing a cork up its exhaust means it has to work harder to achieve its performance – and an engine working harder will use more fuel – while at the same time burning it more efficiently. It’s a green hypocrisy.
The old bike would do around 140-160 miles before the fuel light came on, depending on rider and conditions. The new bike manages 135 miles on the road, showing an average of 41.1mpg. That suggests it has four litres left, and another 30 miles to empty. It’s disappointing – a fractional drop in peak power is easily compensated for by skipping breakfast – and I suppose the same argument could be made for improving tank range (become a bit more aerodynamic by going on a diet!). But in practical, day-to-day riding, it’s always nice to have at least 150 miles free-riding without having to plan a fuel stop.
I have a pet conspiracy theory that the reason manufacturers are making tanks smaller and fuel ranges less impressive is so when they’re all forced to build electric bikes, the lack of range won’t feel so bad.
Be careful on the NC500!
Handling: frame, suspension and weight
There’s a lot in the new Hayabusa that’s familiar – and the general feel and handling of the bike is certainly like being at home for riders of previous models. This partly because the frame is essentially the same massive twin spar mix of extrusions and castings – part numbers are different because some minor changes are made to accept the new bike’s dash, bodywork, etc. The Hayabusa’s swingarm is also common between the two – aftermarket rear huggers are swappable! Subframe is different though – which means any hard luggage fitments will have to be re-engineered (top tip if you’re trading in an old Hayabusa for the new one – make sure you keep the small ally bungee points from the old bike and fit blanking bolts; the new bike doesn’t come with them and they’re a £22 accessory! Each!).
Suspension is also similar – still 43mm KYB forks and KYB shock, all fully adjustable, but with a re-valve and new springs to being the ride quality up to date. A steering damper still sits down by the bottom yoke, and kerb weight is said to be a couple of kilos up.
But the over-arching feel is pure Hayabusa. Stability is the key; agility is a luxury. I’ve spent so long flicking about on adventure bikes with 21in front wheels and wide bars I think I’ve forgotten how direct and weighty big bike steering is – and initially it’s a shock to lumber the Suzuki around at low speed. It actually feels more manoeuvrable with the engine off.
But it’s not biased steering; you don’t need to lean on the bars to turn the bike; you kinda steer it with your knees as much as your hands. Steering is treacly in town and low speed traffic, and only when the road opens out and pace increases does it all start to make sense – and the faster you go, the more sense it makes. Stick the Suzuki into a long bend and it tracks the line like a bloodhound on the scent, hunkering down and feeding back a wonderful glued, smooth, tractive feel from the Bridgestone B22s. It lends itself to a fluid, rhythmic riding style, – just like the previous Hayabusas. It’s easy lose yourself in a kind of sci-fi anime motorcycle fantasy, carving through the countryside like a low-level alien visitor whose spaceship, by complete coincidence, happens to be perfectly designed to navigate the B660.
Good ride quality too, from the re-worked suspension – the top end of bumps are smoothed and damped by the first few millimetres of spring travel; there’s no pattering or crunching over potholes.
Wheels, tyres and brakes
We have new cast wheels, new Bridgestone S22 tyres specially produced to suit the bike (it’s rare to go on the launch of a new model and find the tyres aren’t claimed to be specially developed; I think they all must be), and the brakes are Brembo Stylema radial calipers gripping newly enlarged 320mm discs. It’s obviously not a huge leap to overwhelm the tyres with a big handful, but few hoops could withstand so much aggravation – and on the greasy, dusty roads we’re faced with this spring, the S22s find good grip. At the runway, on its purpose-built surface, grip is so insane you can almost hear the rear Bridgestone’s carcass deforming like a crisp packet as the Hayabusa launches up the strip. Doesn’t spin out though – it’s a good tyre.
At the other end, the Brembos are great; I never had a huge problem with well-maintained brakes on all previous Hayabusas (I’d read the reviews and wonder what I was doing wrong – I even remember testing PFM six-pots on a Hayabusa in 2000 and not being all that bothered when I had to take them off again). Bruce records some fairly standard braking figures at the runway, stopping from 70mph to 0mph in 3.57 seconds and covering 52.5 metres to standstill. ABS isn’t switchable, but it’s so good these days you really don’t need to turn it off – Bruce says he could probably stop the Hayabusa quicker if he had a few goes – but in a momentary one-off on a random wet road? No chance.
Equipment, styling, ergonomics and comfort
It’s taken us a long time to get to what are the biggest changes to the 2021 Hayabusa – and it’s all good stuff. The clocks are a small work of genius – I’m not sure part of the reason Suzuki stuck with big analogue style dials and a general Hayabusa layout is cost-cutting – I wouldn’t be surprised if adapting the old clocks to the new layout is more expensive than just chucking them out and fitting an off-the-shelf TFT dash. Or maybe not.
Anyway, they look great, pleasing old-time reactionaries who like things the way they used to be – even down to the speedo needle needing a couple of glances to put a number on the actual speed – but also with enough modern TFT action in the centre to keep geeks happy.
The TFT, and Suzuki’s implementation of its electronics package, is impressive. The functions up for customising are flagship-spec: traction control and anti-wheelie get 10 levels, there are three power modes (full, reduced curve to full, and reduced curve to partial throttle), adjustable engine braking, launch control (in three steps: low revs, mid and high rpm) and quickshifter cut speed. The bike also gets cornering ABS and hill hold control, plus cruise control and a speed limiter.
There’s no Bluetooth multimedia bobbins, but I’m very much in the ‘who cares?’ camp with that gimmick.
So with so many things to customise, you’d expect a bar cluster of switches? No, Suzuki stick with the (undoubtedly cheap) simple rocker and push button to manage the whole lot. And it’s great – all it requires is you set-up the way you want before you ride – three set modes, three User modes – and you’re done. From then on you just flick between the modes, the way most of us probably do, and have less switchgear to faff about with on the move. Nice. You also get room on the clip-on to mount a sat nav U-bolt.
The actual TFT display is great too – one ‘screen’ shows left/right lean angles in real time (and saves the highest angle per ride) which is always fun – and alongside are bar graphs showing throttle position on the left and front/rear brake on the right. It’s not unique, but it’s still kinda fun. Average fuel consumption, tank range, temperature etc are all present and correct. Cruise control does what it should – but the speed limiter is a bit odd; it doesn’t deactivate by rolling the throttle against the stop (as does, say, cruise control); you have to push a button to do it. Hm.
The final change (other than styling, which is personal; I like it, but it’s not as distinctive as the Gen1 or Gen2 bikes, for better or worse) is to the Hayabusa’s riding position – it’s only subtle, but the bars are 12mm closer to the rider. It makes it a more compact riding position because the pegs to seat is still a fairly tight knee angle – so now the Hayabusa is, if anything, more sporty than before. And it’s very much at the sporty end of the sports touring range (just as well, with that tank). But it’s not uncomfortable with a 60mph wind flow supporting knees and wrists – and there’s plenty of that too because the screen is very low; I suspect a double bubble will be more protective but possible less comfortable! It’s not the immediate ‘showroom’ comfort of an adventure bike, but I like it.
2021 Suzuki Hayabusa: VERDICT
It’s easy to get drawn into a conversation about why Suzuki have made the choices they’ve made with the new Hayabusa – but to a degree, that’s their business (literally) and if they’ve sold their initial allocation of Hayabusas in the UK, then presumably it’s hit its targets and everyone in the company is happy. I think part of the reason we make such a fuss about what Suzuki are doing is because we care about the company; plenty of folk are anti-Honda, anti-Kawasaki, anti-BMW etc – but nobody doesn’t like Suzuki. We all want them to succeed.
So whatever their reasons for making the 2021 Hayabusa the way they have, what really matters is what the bike is like to ride. And the answer is it’s retained all the old features and feelings of the previous bikes, then added a few layers of refinements and improvements – and one big negative.
The motor is pure Hayabusa and if it’s lacking, I can’t easily tell – and neither can the datalogger. The chassis is also classic long, low Hayabusa – but now with a lovely extra veneer of ride quality and braking stability. Steering is a bit weighty, but improves with pace.
The big bonus is a full arsenal of electronics – whether you like them or not, they won’t get in the way (unless you’re speed testing) but instead open the bike up to even more levels of safety or, if you want, crazier riding.
And finally there’s the price. £16,500 is a big wedge more than the last time the Gen2 was on sale – your new electronics, suspension, emissions control, fuel consumption and styling has cost over four grand. Cynics would also say this is really an update Suzuki should’ve made to the bike five years ago – when a trade in would have made more of a difference between prices.
But the Hayabusa is, for the time being (when and if there’s a new H2 SX SE), the only hypersports game in town.
As the gen 3 version of the Hayabusa this bike has everything. Full of rider aid's the bike is so very easy to ride. Excellent lights (led). The bike seems to be more precise when riding it, strange because the chassis is the same as the previous version. I find the windshield to be less effective than before, even an aftermarket taller one hasn’t fixed it. No centre stand is a pain as the side stand is rather touch and go on even the smallest slope. Brakes are really good indeed.
Matt, 51, from South Wales
Owned it for: 3 months (2022 model: Gen 3), it was 18 months old when I bought it but only had 9 miles on the clock!
Riding for: 8 years
Any modifications: SWMotech street rack and Givi top box for weekends away.
I've got a Gen 3 Hayabusa and I chose it because it had always been a dream of mine to own one. So far I've covered 2250 trouble free miles but I've only had the bike for 3 months. My favourite ride so far has to be from home in South Wales to Holywell, staying overnight then coming home following the whole of the A470 North to South with 5 friends. The tyres are the standard Bridgestone S22 as supplied but I have found them really good for feel, road holding and wear rate. The reason I bought one was, that it was always an ambition of mine, the reputation of Hayabusas from my younger days, coupled with the improvements over the years made it my dream bike. It is more comfortable, manageable and reliable than people expect, it averages approximately 46mpg and can accelerate in all gears with ease, it does everything that I could possibly want and I love riding it as much as possible.
Long Term Test Review
My name is Simon Hargreaves and I’m addicted to Hayabusas.
Part One: A Personal History
Me and Suzuki’s Hayabusa go way back, like a pair of old drinking buddies propping up the bar telling tall stories. We first met 20 years ago and in a whirlwind 18 months together we travelled more than 10,000 miles for that Performance Bikes magazine they had back then, including a few trips to exotic, far-flung places such as the South of France and Corby. The bike belonged to Fowlers of Bristol, who kindly loaned it to the magazine expecting it to get a few miles put on it. Ah, yes, about that...
The bike gained a few modifications along the way – a full Akrapovic system and Power Commander raised its game from a stock 151bhp to 160bhp (which was a lot in those days) but didn’t make it any faster at the top end because it was limited, like all Busas after the first year, to 186mph. And this one only ever did 182mph, anyway. Then we added a Renthal rear sprocket (and a longer chain), so it got even slower, at least at the top end – but it increased rear wheel thrust to almost 1000lb in first gear, which was very excellent for monowheel overtakes and effectively made top gear feel like fifth. And made the speedo over-read by 15mph. So, it sure as hell felt faster.
Above: The Gen 1 Busa on stock gearing is in blue, the short geared Busa is in red. Road speed is on the X-axis, the Y-axis is rear wheel thrust (the force you feel driving you along the road – it’s the engine’s torque multiplied by its gearing).
The six pairs of lines are the Busa’s gears; first gear obviously produces maximum thrust, which diminishes through taller gears as road speed increases, into top gear. You can see the trade-off – shorter gearing gives more thrust in every gear, but you have to change gear sooner to optimise acceleration. So, for example, if you wanted the best 0-100mph time, you might be better off with the standard geared Busa because you’d only have to change gear twice to get there; the lower geared Busa might need three shifts (which loses time on a conventional gearbox). Also, 1000lbs of thrust makes the bike more prone to wheelie, which can make it harder to get off the line cleanly. And finally, you can see how the geared-down Busa’s top gear almost exactly matches the stock Busa’s fifth gear – which makes motorway cruising a bit more hectic (although the stock bike is a bit overgeared anyway, so it’s not that bad).
It grew a Pyramid Plastics touring screen because, as you can see from the pics, I was too fat to get my head under the standard screen (no change there then) – and the Busa’s bum sprouted a pair of big, blue throwovers from Oxford Products’ Lifetime Luggage range (won’t be calling Trading Standards anytime soon because I still have them, and still use them on the 2021 Hayabusa. Old habits).
In its life with me, the Gen 1 Busa wore through eight pairs of tyres, three sets of brake pads, a chain, wheel bearings, a fuel filter, a burned-out injector and survived an experiment with PFM six-pot calipers and iron discs. According to my notes it used 774 gallons of unleaded which, back then, cost £2705 (hmm, my inflation calculator says that should be £4500... and today’s actual cost is £4008 – so fuel is cheaper today folks, than 20 years ago).
I chiefly remember three things: a 930-mile overnight dash home from the Gorges du Verdon in Provence – holding 120mph on the Autoroute (back when it was kinda okay to do that) through rain and dark, filling up every hour or so, counting down the stops to Calais. That made an impression. I also remember how it back-fired beautifully on the overrun, popping like a Group B Audi Quattro – at night, I kept thinking I was being tailed by the police; it was the blue flame crackling from the end of the exhaust.
The most abiding memory is of frequent 2.00am runs home from the Performance Bikes office after another late one finishing the mag, covering ground across the silent Fens at such a full-throttle rate the speedo was literally off the scale for most of it – which it would’ve been anyway, seeing as the bike was geared down. It’s probably also why that injector holding coil burned out. Ah, happy, but incredibly irresponsible, days. Good job we’ve all calmed down now, eh?
In 2008 I was jammy enough to wangle onto the launch of the Gen 2 Hayabusa for Bike magazine, at the Salzburgring in Austria. It’s a magnificent circuit, mostly high-speeds and Armco fencing set against mountains and pine forests. It was dropped from the Grand Prix calendar in 1995 for being too spectacular, sorry, dangerous.
And what a full-on launch – the flat-out climb from the bottom hairpin, through a succession of full-bore lefts and rights, snaking up to the top of the hill and the blind righthand crest taken on the stop in fifth... makes me shiver even now. The Busa was imperial; enlarged motor with longer stroke deployed more grunt everywhere, revised brakes sharpened the stopping, new bodywork looked even more funky than the original. But, underneath, it was still a Hayabusa; same chassis, same riding position, same potent, über-fast vibe.
Over the next few years the Busa took me to a few more places – it tore up the B500 in Germany, laying down great streaks of rubber on the Black Forest asphalt, and when I realised another Suzuki had a similar engine – the 1254cc inline four in the Suzuki Swift – it seemed like a good idea to race one. So I did, over a 400-mile road route. The bike won.
My last hurrah with the Gen 2 was in 2019 for RiDE magazine, and a winter dash around Wales. It was supposed to be a farewell tour – with no Euro 5 version on the horizon, it looked like curtains for the Busa. By now the bike was an anachronism; no heated grips, no quickshifter, no cruise control, no traction control or cornering ABS, no USB or 12v sockets, no fuel range figure, and an archaic riding position that made sense when you could legally do 140mph on British roads back when we were in our thirties, but didn’t now we can’t and aren’t (it’s health and safety gone mad!). Still, it was good fun, even in the cold and wet. I enjoyed writing the feature, too: “I’ve ridden Busas tens of thousands of miles, from Cornwall to the Côte d’Azur. Christ, I wish I could’ve bottled it. Often did, come to think of it. You can’t jump on a Hayabusa and expect it to wipe your bum – it’s engineered to have the opposite effect.”
Then, early this year and much to no-one’s surprise, a new Hayabusa appeared (Suzuki had rumoured as such). The engine was the same size 1340cc, the frame the same massive aluminium twin spar, and the riding position was the same long, low, stretched out affair. Swoopy styling was new, a swathe of electronics added spec gloss, suspension and brakes were uprated, and the motor was made Euro 5-compliant which shifted peak power and lower down the revs at the expense of a bit of top end.
When the Gen 3 Busa’s engine specs and the extent of the modifications to get it through Euro 5 were revealed, a few sharp intakes of breath and a fair bit of teeth-sucking could be heard. Suzuki’s peak power and torque figures were indeed lower than the previous model’s: a claimed 187bhp at 9500rpm against the Gen 2’s claimed 195bhp at 9700rpm, and 111 lb.ft at 7000rpm against 113 lb.ft at 7200rpm. That’s eight horsepower and two pound-feet of torque, all 200rpm lower than before.
So what, say you, and well you might. The reasons for the changes in peak engine performance are entirely explained by the reengineering needed to pass Euro 5. A full breakdown of the changes between the previous Hayabusa and the 2021 bike can be found here. But the bottom line is, according to Suzuki’s own figures, the new bike makes less power and less torque than the previous one. And that, at a marketing level at least, is a problem because what is a Hayabusa about if it’s not headline performance figures? Obviously there’s more to a bike than just engine numbers – but when it comes to a Hayabusa, it’s also very much about engine numbers.
The launch event, held at a runway in the UK, gave us a chance to measure the new Hayabusa’s actual performance – at least on acceleration, if not top speed (the runway was too short). And it seemed as if Suzuki’s apparently less powerful Hayabusa motor was, on the tarmac, actually quicker than before – in ideal conditions, the bike recorded a 0-60mph in 2.69 seconds – the fastest time our professional performance tester had ever set in 30 years of speed testing. This was backed up by a standing quarter mile in 9.89s @ 146.3mph and a top speed of 169.5mph in 0.52 miles. Pretty good going for a bike with less power.
ABOVE: This is an overlay of two standing start runs, comparing the 2008 Gen 2 Hayabusa with the 2021 Gen 3 Busa.
The graphs were made almost exactly 13 years apart, at different test tracks. The only commonality is they were set by the same rider, Bruce Dunn. How’s that for consistency? You can see the new bike just eke out a fractionally better 0-60mph time – it’s got its nose (and it is a matter of inches, not feet) in front up to around 100mph, but then it’s neck and neck – the older bike takes the lead over 150mph, but this is much more likely to be down to a different headwind 13 years apart than any difference in engine performance. You can clearly see how a quickshifter smooths out gearchanges though.
So what about these power claims, then? Obviously the first thing we do when the BikeSocial Hayabusa rolls up is slap it on the dyno, with the help of Iain Rhodes at RPM Bikes in Northampton (www.rpmbikes.co.uk, 01604 583350).
Iain’s workshop is an Aladdin’s Cave of fascinating bikes in for work – everything from broken obscure Italian machinery to mainstream manufacturers, of any age. There aren’t many areas of bike spannering he can’t cover, from full custom builds to race prep, standard repair to servicing. We strap the 2021 Busa down, and Iain turns off all its electronics. Several runs later, and the numbers are in...
So what we have here is my 2002 Gen 1 Busa in standard trim (black lines), versus a 2019 Gen 2 model Iain had on his dyno a while ago (blue lines), versus the 2021 Euro 5 bike (red lines). The Gen 1 bike had the original 1299cc motor; the Gen 2 was enlarged with longer stroke to 1340cc, and that’s the same size motor as the Gen 3 bike.
Clearly the Gen 1 bike – so astonishingly potent back in the day, able to warp time, bend space and crease trousers all at once – is well and truly stomped all over by the bigger engines. The fact it looks entirely unremarkable today says a lot about how our expectations have changed over the last 20 years.
The two 1340cc engines are interesting to compare – considering the dramatic cut in emissions demanded by Euro 5, and the reengineering required to achieve it, it’s astonishing Suzuki have not only managed to almost entirely retain the engine’s peak performance (ok, it’s not quite as fizzy at the top end) but have actually improved it, significantly, from 4000rpm right up to 8000rpm. Normally, that’s the kind of effect you’d expect from part of the Hayabusa’s engine changes – less overlap, narrower throttle bodies and lower revs all tend to favour midrange at the expense of top end. But the thing you would expect to stifle the Busa’s motor – an extra cork in the exhaust – seems to have almost no effect.
So – in short – it turns out Suzuki were actually overstating the loss in the 2021 Busa’s power figures. Remember, they claimed the Gen 2 Busa made 195bhp; it actually makes 180bhp – 15bhp is a lot to lose in translation from crank to dyno drum, but it’s around 8% and that’s pretty good. You should see what shaft drive steals in horsepower. But the 2021 Busa, with a claimed 187bhp, actually makes 178.5bhp – under 5% lost in the transmission between crank and wheel. That’s very, very unlikely to be the case, and the dyno isn’t fibbing... so Suzuki must be downplaying the Busa’s actual engine performance, for some reason.
Anyway, next update, we’ll stop talking about history and numbers, and actually get down to some riding.
Photos: Jason Critchell (Suzuki GB), David ‘Chippy’ Wood, Simon Hargreaves and Suzuki
Video: Motion Films (Suzuki GB)
What is MCIA Secured?
MCIA Secured gives bike buyers the chance to see just how much work a manufacturer has put into making their new investment as resistant to theft as possible.
MCIA Secured gives motorcycles a rating out of five stars, based on the following being fitted to a new bike as standard:
A steering lock that meets the UNECE 62 standard
An ignition immobiliser system
A vehicle marking system
An alarm system
A vehicle tracking system with subscription
The higher the star rating, the better the security, so always ask your dealer what rating your bike has, and compare it to other machines on your shortlist.
