Which bike i should buy?

jckson said:

I am still confuse between honda stunner and pulsar
look i need a low maintenance , a bit stylish, and an average bike.
i am a businessmen n i have to run 30-50km per day
my range is not more than 60000/-
if u have any other option please let me know.

Well, this is the wrong Forum, in general ...

BUT, to answer your question, if the engine size is the same (which I presume is 125cc), then when in doubt, buy the Honda ...

Besides, the Stunner is a good looking bike.

FWIW. A long, long time ago, I had a 125cc Gilera (~11 bhp, kick start, 4-stroke) ... it wasn't the fastest bike, but it certainly had more than enough Horsepower to get me from-here-to-there at speeds under 75 kph ... I guess the theoretical top speed on the particular Gilera was about 100+ kph ... a bit pokey for some/most people, I suppose.

I presume the Pulsar has a 2-stroke engine. Is that right?

The 4-stroke engine of the Honda will burn cleaner (i.e., you won't have to worry about latent oil smell on your clothing).

While the 2-stroke engine is an elegant design, I think 4-stroke engines are lower maintenance in the long run ...

BTW. While the bulk of Honda's R&D probably occurred in the early 60s when they were racing in Europe (vs. the large engine racing they are doing now), some of their most impressive technology probably manifested itself in their smaller engines -- e.g., a 5-cylinder 125cc engine (yes, the pistons were very small) to name just one of the engines they raced. A lot of the racing technology has made its way to the their consumer engines, and so I think that Honda's small(er) engine, consumer-level technology is (still) probably superior to that of most of the other engine manufacturers; and so, I would pay the presumably-higher price for the Honda if the price is within your planned budget.