I have a 2012 RS SM5 that had 106hp stock with a bolt on Two Brothers pipe that supposedly adds 4hp. I ride with a club that has mostly Honda's, Suzuki's and Harleys. Several of the guys are of the opinion that Spyders are and have always been "underpowered." I have always been happy with the performance of the Spyder and never rode a two wheeler. On club rides I can stay with the best of them, but can't always corner with the same speeds are bikes that lean. My Spyder can get up over 110 mph with virtually no vibration or shake. I know this is not at all the case for the others.
So do you agree about the general term underpowered?
Given who you said made the statement, their reference to power is directly associated to low-end torque. Spyders do no have it. I dare to say, not even the 1330's compared to a big V-Twin (I know... because I own one and have had many over the years).
Americans, in general, grew up with low-end torque vehicles starting as far back as the steam engine. We are clearly the country that does not generally understand high rev engines. Europe certainly does, and more so who know the great Italian sports cars.
However, the Spyder does have a good amount of power if operated correctly; which is to say, you cannot run it at lower rpm's and get excited about its torque (1330's are an exception to a degree).
So, I have heard what you are saying. Quite a few times from my friends, who I have let ride my '11 RTS SE5, have made the same statement, while I watch them trying to run it below 4,000 rpm's in any gear. Such fools. I wouldn't let them near a Ferrari. I would only let them drive a Detroit car. :roflblack:
I have NEVER EVER had a problem keeping up with Harley's, Victory's, Indian's, Goldwing's, and the like at any time in any situation, to include corners.
The only bikes I cannot "out-do" are sport or racing street bikes -- but then again, they are also high-rev machines on two wheels weighing one-third the weight of my Spyder.
I try to just speak the truth... 
