Royal Enfield Hunter 350 Vs TVS Ronin: Comparison Review

The love for the single-cylinder modern classic motorcycle seems to have a never-ending appeal. The premise of the modern classic is to offer retro styling, but with modern underpinnings, and easy rideability. The quintessential modern classic motorcycle has a design language with origins in heritage and legacy, with the underpinnings and features of contemporary engineering. 

Also Read: Modern Classic Motorcycles - New Wave Of British Heavy Metal

Both the Royal Enfield Hunter 350 and the TVS Ronin are different bikes in a way, but are targeted at the same customer base, and with prices which are head-to-head.

Also Read: Royal Enfield Hunter 350 Review

And this is where the Royal Enfield Hunter 350 holds its own; it extends Royal Enfield’s 350 cc platform with a compact package, making it the most affordable, accessible and targeting a demographic of new and first-time owners. The TVS Ronin attempts to create something similar but hold its own in this segment. TVS Motor Company describes the new Ronin as a “modern retro”, and the name Ronin, in Japanese, means without a mentor or teacher, a sort of maverick, underscoring the Ronin’s lack of legacy or heritage styling.

Also Read: TVS Ronin Review


Both the RE Hunter 350 and the TVS Ronin offer easy rideability, and are designed for beginners as well as riders upgrading from smaller commuter motorcycles.

Also Read: (Opinion) Is There A Bigger Strategy Behind The TVS Ronin? 

Both the Hunter 350 and the Ronin though target a similar consumer base. So, any of these two motorcycles could be your first motorcycle, an upgrade from a smaller commuter motorcycle, and even targeted at women riders, a demographic, which is slowly but steadily growing. Both bikes offer a compact bike, something easy to ride, and fun! The Royal Enfield Hunter 350 has the bigger engine here, but is also the heavier bike, while the TVS Ronin boasts of better features, lighter weight and more technology.

Watch the Video:

Design & Features

The Hunter 350 has heritage, and comes from a powerhouse brand like Royal Enfield, combining retro inspired modern appeal in a compact package. The Ronin, on the other hand, sits in a unique position, boasting of features and technology, to take a shot at this segment. Although the Ronin has a smaller engine, it’s also a full 20 kg lighter than the Hunter 350.

The Royal Enfield Hunter 350 is the better proportioned bike, combining retro-inspired appeal with Royal Enfield's new J-series 350 cc platform, which is vastly improved over the last generation RE 350 family.           

The Ronin has that easy, relaxed, retro vibe, and up close its fit and finish, build quality, is quite good. The 41 mm upside down forks finished in gold looks good and ooze premium appeal, as does the LED headlight. The full-digital instrument console looks modern and well put together and boasts of connected features. The clutch and brake levers also come with span adjustability on the Ronin, something which the Hunter 350 doesn’t get. Overall quality levels are quite impressive on the Ronin. 

Also Read: Royal Enfield Hunter 350 Vs Rivals Specifications Comparison

The TVS Ronin certainly has its strengths, in terms of quality, fit and finish and features. But in terms of overall design and proportions, it's the Hunter 350 which has stronger appeal.

But when you look at its style and proportions, the Ronin seems to be a big of a mixed bag, with design inspiration taken from different genres of motorcycles, all rolled into one. The front half of the Ronin looks quite nice, giving somewhat of a neo-retro scrambler-ish vibe with the block pattern tyres, LED headlight, and single-pod, round, offset LCD instrument console. 

Also Read: Everything You Need To Know About The TVS Ronin

The Ronin has a nice-looking round LCD instrument console which offers a long list of features, including Bluetooth connectivity, and two ABS modes. 

The big plastic chain guard looks like that of a cruiser, and it’s got forward set rider footpegs, and a 795 mm seat height which makes the riding position, comfortable, and easy. But the tail section somewhat robs the Ronin of aesthetic appeal, although it’s got full-LED lighting.

Also Read: India's Top Motorcycle Brands

The RE Hunter 350 has a more basic, part-analogue, part digital speedometer, and misses out on a rev counter as well.

The Hunter 350, on the other hand, has a much tidier looking tail section. If you look at the overall silhouette, it's also a nicer looking motorcycle, well proportioned, and the seat height of 790 mm is quite low enough for riders of all kinds of height. When you swing a leg over it, first thing you notice is the foot pegs are slightly rear set and the Hunter’s got a sporty and engaging riding position. 

The Ronin also gets better switches, and gets span adjustability on the clutch and brake levers. Besides, the Ronin offers a slip and assist clutch, which offers a light lever feel when you need to work the gears in traffic. 

But how do these bikes compare, riding back-to-back, in terms of performance, dynamics, and ride quality? The basis of this comparison is to choose the better bike of the two. But as we found out, the answer may not be so simple after all!

Engine & Performance

Royal Enfield has always had that lazy long stroke engine with the characteristic thump. And the Hunter 350 has the new J-series 350 cc engine, the same unit used in the Classic 350 and the Meteor 350. It’s a long stroke engine so, it the stroke is longer than the engine’s bore, and it has strong torque. With its 350 cc displacement, it’s the bigger engine of the two bikes. But the Royal Enfield Hunter 350 is also 21 kg heavier than the TVS Ronin.

The Hunter 350's engine is bigger, offers more torque (27 Nm) on paper. But it's also the heavier bike, by as much as 21 kg. And the Hunter 350's long stroke engine has a lower redline.

TVS on the other hand, has taken a completely different approach to engine architecture. Instead of going for a long stroke design, which Honda employed with its H’Ness 350, TVS has taken a perfect square configuration, which is of identical bore and stroke. The characteristic and advantage of a perfect square engine is that it has a good combination of torque and revs. And also, the TVS engine gets a four-valve head, so that makes the engine more refined, although it’s a 225 cc engine. 

The TVS Ronin has a perfect square engine of identical 66 mm bore and stroke. It also has a four-valve head, which makes it more refined, and it's got a higher rev limit, so it revs freer. Combined with its stronger low-end torque, the Ronin feels more tractable at lower speeds in higher gears.  

Both bikes will be used primarily for the daily commute. And on that count, both bikes are light, easy to manoeuvre and make quick work of filtering through traffic. The Hunter has a sporty riding stance; its ergonomics and small 17-inch front wheel gives it the agility needed for quick urban work. 

The Royal Enfield Hunter 350 is agile, and likes to be pushed while filtering through traffic. The rear-set footpegs and slightly angular handlebar gives it a sporty riding position.

The Hunter’s five-speed gearbox is precise, and even though the clutch is all right, it doesn’t get slip and assist, which could have made daily work easier. 80-90 kmph is the Hunter’s sweet spot, but it will happily cruise along at 100 kmph all day if required on a longer outing.

The Ronin may have a more upright riding position with forward-set footpegs, but it's got the more refined engine which has strong low-end torque. So, it requires fewer downshifts than the Hunter 350 in everyday riding conditions.

The Ronin has a more conventional, upright riding stance, with forward-set footpegs. But it’s also got the livelier engine, which revs freeer, and the four-valve unit feels more refined. The Ronin has a unique engine, something which isn’t at all like the Royal Enfield’s, and it also has marginally higher top speed. While the Hunter topped out at a speedo-indicated top speed of 120 kmph, the Ronin manages to nudge 123 kmph with the same rider.

The Ronin also feel more eager in terms of acceleration, and slightly higher top speed than the Hunter 350.

Now, the Ronin also gets very good low-end torque, coupled with shorter gearing. It pulls cleanly from low speeds, and in high gears. So, fifth gear on the Ronin, you can pull cleanly from as low as 35 kmph, whereas on the Hunter 350, you will have to downshift to about fourth or even third. In crawling speeds, the Ronin will pull cleanly from as low as 5 kmph in second and third gear even, but on the Hunter, you will have to go down to first gear. In acceleration too, the Ronin feels more eager, and quicker than the Hunter. With its higher redline, it also feels more eager to get to speed, compared to the Hunter.

Ride & Handling

But engine refinement is one thing, and it finally boils down to overall dynamics and performance. The Ronin’s forward set footpegs and upright riding position robs the Ronin somewhat of being fun and sporty. Comparatively, the Hunter 350 feels more engaging and sportier. But when you hit the rough patches, the Hunter’s slightly stiff ride quality begins to show up. It’s not bone jarring, but the Hunter’s ride quality feels stiffer than even its other 350 cc siblings, the Classic 350 and the Meteor 350. 

The Royal Enfield Hunter 350 has agility, thanks to the sharp steering geometry and the 17-inch front wheel, but its slightly stiff ride quality makes every bump, and pothole felt. It's not outright comfortable, but ride quality is slightly on the stiffer side.

Comparatively, the Ronin just sails over everything you throw at it, and the Ronin’s front end also feels more confident, when taking on a corner. That’s not to say, the Hunter is lacking in agility, but it’s the Ronin which feels more stable, more planted, partly due to the 41 mm front suspension, and partly due to the excellent TVS Eurogrip Remora tyres. Better tyres on the Hunter 350 will certainly make it grip better and offer more stability when leaned over. 

The Ronin offers a plusher ride quality and also offers more confidence when leaned over around a corner.

In the braking department too, it’s the Ronin which offers better bite than the Hunter. The Hunter 350 requires a stronger pull on the front brake lever, and feel is slightly spongy and woody, compared to the Ronin. The TVS also gets two-level ABS, with a more intervening Rain mode for low-traction conditions.

The Hunter 350 is sporty and agile, but it's the Ronin which feels marginally more planted and stable.

The Ronin also has the advantage of better ground clearance (181 mm) when the surface becomes really bad, while you have to be a little careful with the Hunter while taking on broken surfaces and bigger potholes with its less ground clearance of 150.5 mm.

Price & Variants

Eventually, it’s down to the wire to make an objective choice to pick a winner between these two. Both bikes are similarly priced, variant to variant, so they sit bang in the same price bracket. From the entry-level base variants with single-channel ABS, to the top-spec variants, both bikes are priced head-to-head. 

The TVS Ronin also offers better fuel-efficiency figures than the Hunter 350, thanks to its smaller engine and lighter weight.

And if you’re looking for fuel-efficiency figures, during our tests, which included bumper-to-bumper traffic mostly, and some highway riding thrown in, the Hunter 350 returned 34 kmpl, while under the same conditions, the Ronin returned 40 kmpl.

The Royal Enfield Hunter 350 has sportier ergonomics, a characteristic thump of the long-stroke engine and a loud bark from its exhaust. The TVS Ronin has a free revving engine, strong low-end torque and more comfortable ride quality.

Verdict

Eventually, both these bikes are very good products, each with its own strength and character. In fact, you cannot go wrong choosing one product over the other. And in many ways, you could consider this comparison is a tie! However, in terms of performance, ride quality, dynamics and fuel efficiency, it’s the Ronin which has the upper hand. If only it had slightly more aesthetic appeal, this comparison could have well swung in the Ronin’s favour. 

In terms of aesthetic appeal, it's Hunter 350 which will make you take a look back at it more, every time you come back from a ride. So, it's more endearing and feels sportier with its ergonomics, most of all, it's the more appealing bike.

But buying a motorcycle is an emotional, personal choice. And our advice is to test ride both bikes before making a buying decision, if both are under consideration. In terms of aesthetic appeal, riding position and endearment, it’s the Hunter which has stronger appeal. The Ronin offers a more refined engine, better fuel efficiency, better components, and better ride quality and braking. But if it’s real old-school charm in an affordable and accessible modern package one is looking for, the Hunter’s neo-retro appeal just cannot be ignored.

Eventually, both bikes have their own strengths and weaknesses. Buying a motorcycle is also an emotional and personal choice. In terms of engineering and technology, it's the Ronin which has the upper hand, but in pure appeal and aesthetics, it's the Hunter 350 which is more attractive.

Specifications

(Photography: Apoorv Choudhary)