Suzuki V-Strom 800 vs Honda Transalp 750 – ADV Comparison Test | DM Ride & Review

Product reviewed

A comparison of two mid-size adventure motorcycles:

• Suzuki V-Strom 800DE (2023/24)
• Honda Transalp 750 (referred to as “Transelp/Transelp 750”)

Key similarities mentioned

• Both use 270° parallel-twin engines
• Similar horsepower figures (speaker notes they appear nearly identical “on paper”)
• Both feature ride modes and electronics such as:
  • Traction control
  • ABS
  • Power/engine braking adjustments
• Both use TFT/digital instrumentation, with extra UI features:
  • Suzuki described as having an analog-style tach element

Main differences highlighted (what matters most)

Suzuki V-Strom 800DE

What it’s like / key features

• Feels more premium, more substantial, and more “grown up”
• Heavier overall feel; weight is carried higher (around ~500 lb mentioned)
• 21-inch front wheel, with generally upright stability
• More advanced suspension feel, especially off-road compliance:
  • Clicker adjustable rear shock with lots of adjustability
  • Off-road: described as better bump soaking vs Honda
• Wider cockpit:
  • Handlebar width measured ~37 inches (vs Honda ~33)
  • Makes lane filtering/splitting and tight maneuvering harder
• Adjustable windshield (3 levels), but:
  • Not tool-on-the-go friendly (requires an Allen key not supplied)
  • No on-bike tool storage for adjustment
  • Still gets wind buffeting even at the highest setting
• Ride mode behavior:
  • Prefers Power mode B: more natural/linear
  • Finds Power mode C too aggressive/snatchy
• Quickshifter:
  • Described as very smooth
  • Works well in both directions and across gears
  • Possible “weirdness” if shifting with the clutch while quickshifter is enabled
• Engine character:
  • Feels powerful/aggressive, but engine note is subdued
  • Speaker wants an aftermarket exhaust
• Extra info feature:
  • Includes ambient air temperature readout (Honda apparently lacks it)
• Off-road aids (described as making low-speed control easier):
  • Stall assist
  • One-touch start
• No cruise control (explicitly called out)

Pros (as stated)

• Premium feel and comfort over longer rides; mature refinement
• Better off-road compliance and suspension soaking
• Excellent quickshifter smoothness
• Better for long-haul / multi-day trips (speaker calls it a “no-brainer”)
• Stall assist / one-touch start help in slow sections
• Ambient temperature display

Cons (as stated)

• Heavier feel + weight carried high
• Harder to lane split/filter due to wide bars/overall width
• Windshield adjustment is inconvenient; windshield still buffers
• Engine sound lacks character; desire for aftermarket exhaust
• No cruise control
• Occasional throttle “jumpy/artificial” sensation at higher rev/throttle moments (noted while comparing modes)

---

Honda Transalp 750

What it’s like / key features

• Feels lighter, more compact, and more “dirt-bike-like”
• Easier to carve and transition side-to-side
• Lower seat height allows the rider to flat-foot
• Less sophisticated suspension:
  • Rear preload described as not clickable (less adjustability)
  • Front also less adjustable; ride becomes firmer once off-road
• Quickshifter:
  • Works, but speaker reports stuttering at times
  • Especially in softer quickshifter settings on Honda
• Engine character:
  • Much more guttural/exciting exhaust note from the factory
  • Intake/exhaust sound likened to a higher-cylinder “howl”
  • Feels more lively
• Ride modes:
  • Sport, Standard, Rain, Gravel, and User
  • User mode allows adjusting:
    • Traction control
    • ABS
    • Power
    • Engine braking
  • Quickshifter aggression adjustable: hard / medium / soft
  • Speaker prefers soft most of the time, and calls medium the sweet spot
• Self-cancelling turn signals
• Heated grips included (with a programmable function button)
• Wind protection:
  • Not adjustable (speaker says), but still feels slightly better width-wise
• Off-road behavior:
  • Clutch is lighter so walking it down needs more care
  • No stall assist; described as more effort/less forgiving at very low speeds
  • Gravel/traction behavior feels less natural than Suzuki (Suzuki “gives” more)

Pros (as stated)

• More fun/engaging personality due to engine/exhaust note
• Better for commuting, shorter rides, and general fun riding
• Easier lane splitting/filtering:
  • Handlebar width ~33 inches (vs Suzuki ~37)
• Better for shorter riders due to lower seat
• Self-cancelling turn signals and heated grips
• Brakes and quickshifter generally usable (not as smooth as Suzuki)
• Smoother/less vibration; comfortable highway cruise

Cons (as stated)

• Less off-road compliance: more firmness and more bump transfer
• Less suspension adjustability when loaded with gear/passenger
• Gravel traction/ABS-off behavior described as less natural than Suzuki
• No cruise control
• Missing ambient air temperature readout
• Quickshifter can stutter (depending on mode)

User experience / ride impressions (directly mentioned)

• Suzuki: relaxed comfort, upright feel, higher weight feeling, wide bars impact filtering, windshield buffeting, smooth quickshifter, subdued exhaust note.
• Honda: more lively sound/feel, “perched/happier to carve,” comfortable with less noise/vibration described, more commuter-friendly due to width and fun character, heated grips, self-cancelling signals.

Fuel economy numbers mentioned (commuter test)

• Suzuki: about 48 mpg
• Honda: about 50 mpg

Context:

• Suzuki tested with bags
• Honda tested without bags

Speaker notes it’s somewhat surprising the difference is small given weight/power expectations.

Other explicit “lack” / wish list

• Both bikes lack cruise control, called “pretty lame” and noted as a common rider request.
• Suggests aftermarket throttle locks exist, but wants factory cruise.
• Both benefit from windshields and tires changes.

Overall verdict / recommendation (from the video)

• Honda Transalp 750 is recommended for riders prioritizing:

  • Fun
  • Lighter feel
  • Commuter use
  • Easier lane filtering
  • Engine character and lively sound

• Suzuki V-Strom 800DE is recommended for riders prioritizing:

  • A more premium
  • More capable long-haul adventure setup
  • Multi-day trips
  • Better off-road suspension compliance

Bottom line: “You can’t go wrong—both are fantastic,” but it comes down to riding preference:

• Long-haul / multi-day touring: Suzuki
• Fun / commuting / shorter rides: Honda

Unique points list (deduplicated)

1. Both bikes: 270° parallel-twin, similar horsepower, ride modes with adjustability.
2. Suzuki: heavier (~500 lb), weight carried high.
3. Honda: lighter, feels more compact and agile.
4. Suzuki: clicker adjustable rear shock with more suspension adjustability.
5. Honda: more basic suspension (less preload adjustability; rear preload not clickable).
6. Suzuki includes crash bars; Honda does not.
7. Suzuki demo included side cases; removed for fairness.
8. Both have optional metal skid plates.
9. Suzuki: adjustable windshield (3 levels) but inconvenient to adjust; still causes wind buffeting.
10. Honda lacks ambient air temperature display; Suzuki has it.
11. Quickshifter: Suzuki smooth; Honda sometimes stutters (mode-dependent).
12. Suzuki quickshifter works well in all gears and both throttle directions; Honda differs.
13. Suzuki throttle modes: B preferred (linear), C too snatchy/aggressive.
14. Honda ride modes: Sport/Standard/Rain/Gravel/User with User adjust; quickshifter aggression hard/medium/soft.
15. Honda: heated grips and self-cancelling turn signals.
16. Suzuki engine note subdued; speaker wants aftermarket exhaust.
17. Honda engine/exhaust note described as more lively/vocal (“cool howl”).
18. Suzuki windshield considered “not very significant” by the speaker.
19. Lane splitting/filtering: Suzuki harder due to wider bars (~37 in) vs Honda (~33 in).
20. Seat height: Honda rider can flat-foot; Suzuki higher seat requires more careful low-speed control.
21. Off-road: Suzuki stall assist + one-touch start helps low-speed sections.
22. Honda: lacks stall assist; requires more careful walking control.
23. Off-road traction/ABS: Suzuki feels more natural; Honda kills traction quicker/feels less natural.
24. Off-road bump compliance: Suzuki soaks more; Honda feels firmer and transfers more bumps.
25. Highway: both lack cruise control.
26. Wind protection: Honda slightly better width-wise; both hit helmet around similar spots.
27. Fuel economy test: Suzuki ~48 mpg, Honda ~50 mpg (Suzuki with bags; Honda without).
28. Brake feel: Suzuki described as more modulatable; Honda feels more on/off.
29. Comfort: Suzuki more forward; may cause back soreness after hours; Honda better for smaller torso riders.

Speakers / viewpoints

• Main reviewer (Charlie, Daily Motor) provides essentially all observations and comparisons; no other speakers are present in the provided subtitles.