The March issue of BIKE magazine has a comparison of what the potential of the 1098 is to the 916. They also include a few performance tests against an '06 model GSXR1000.
Mark Brewin of BSD (Ducati nut, dyno tester etc. for PB, RIDE and BIKE, and builder of privateer bikes for BSB) felt the 916 was better built. The 1098 motor and frame are well engineered. The chassis can handle the motor as seen by the strengthening gussets at every frame joint. However he feels the assembly is "a bit of an afterthought..." Specifically he compares it to how quickly a 916 is to disassemble compared to the 1098. For example a few quick release fasteners on the 916 removed the fairing while you must remove 11 Allen bolts just to get to the 1098 battery. He felt the level of detail wasn't as good; i.e. cable/zip ties instead of rubber bands as used on the 916. He can disassemble a 916 in 45 mins but the 1098 will take longer.
Brewin also comments on the cambelt tensioner pulleys on the 1098 that are made of plastic as opposed to the steel ones on the 916 and 999. The demo bikes' pulleys were 0.3mm oval, rather than round and had stopped turning altogether. The cambelt was worn flat and this motor, according to Brewin, would not have made it to the next service. Brewin is changing his 1098S pulleys to steel.
They go on to discuss racing success and iconic status, pretty predictable.
1098 v GSXR1000
Top speed: 1098 - 169.3 mph, GSXR - 175.5 mph
0-60 mph: 3.5s, 3.6
SS 1/4 mile: 11.56 @ 134.59 mph, 11.38 @ 137.08 mph
40-120 mph roll on: 13.19s, 11.15s
Power: 148.5 bhp @ 9500 rpm, 164.7 bhp @ 13,100 rpm
Torque: 86.1 lb.ft @ 7900 rpm, 82.6 lb.ft @ 9400 rpm
Practicality compared to a Japanese sportsbike...
I'm a bit jaded here since I cannot see how a Japanese sportsbike, scratch that, how any sportbikes can be considered practical...
However, they did their 440 mile test against the GSXR1000. Compared to the GSXR, the 1098 seat is higher, the pegs are further back, and you lean forward more, putting more weight on the wrists, therefore it is not as comfortable. The 1098 mirrors don't work, low speed tranny lash limits top gear flexibility. The 1098 has better fuel consumption figures but with the 15.5 litre tank they ran into reserve around 80 miles. The screen is lower. Service costs and bodywork replacement costs favour the 1098.
IMO, while it's not a heads up comparison with the entire Japanese contingent it's a good indication of where it's going. I'm certain the 1098 will do well. It won't win the comparison, probably slotting in between 2nd and 4th in class. The performance figures did show that there really was nothing in it in terms of real world riding however. The overall sentiment was that BIKE was very impressed with 150 bhp from a v-twin.
