So it's finally happeneded.... we finally managed to get a Revmx and a Cini on the same patch of dirt to run some back to back testing... 
There's been a lot of interest in both the Revmx and the Cini over recent months on the forum, and until last weekend, we hadnt actually been able to get both bikes side by side to do some testing and comparisons...
These two bikes are without doubt probably the biggest ''waves'' to ripple the scene since the introduction of the Pitster Pro LXR to Australian tracks, are a big step forwards in what we have had in the way of choices, and naturally there is a lot of curiosity in regards to what they're like, and which one is the better bike...
So what did we find??
Read on...
Just for Looks:
Going over both bikes, straight away you notice the similarities.... and the differences... both run the Medina style frame, both run the TTR-style plastics and the same swingarm.. That's about as far as the identical similarities go though...
The Cini runs ASV copy levers, the Revmx runs normal alloy style levers, albeit with an on-the-fly clutch...
Both bikes run alloy 1/4 turn throttles, and Fatbars, but the Cini has CNC billet triples where the Revmx runs cast items....
The Cini has a few more obvious bling items, but mainly becuase the Cini has red bits, the Revmx has blue shiny parts...
The Cini runs shiny alloy rims (well, Ando's does, Rach88's runs black rims) with Red CNC hubs, whereas the Revmx runs steel rims and blue CNC hubs...
Oh, and in case you hadn't noticed, the Cini is red. lots of red. and some black. but lots of red. and has stars on it....
The revmx is white with a bit of blue thrown in for good measure, and let's just say is the more "subtle' of the two...
Basic Differences:
In the case of this comparison test, i kinda cheated, as my bike has the 175z motor fitted... the Stock Revmx comes with a 155z/160HO motor... so while this levels the playing field engine wise on test day, generally one could expect the TTR155z to be a tad slower... but i digress..
The Revmx runs DNM suspension front and back, whilst the Cini runs Weston forks, and a fast ace rear... The Revmx runs a 350lb spring, where the Cini runs a 400lb spring.. Both bikes run the same roller bearing linkage set up...
Both run supposedly the same braking setup, but big differences were noticed on the day...
The Cini runs a Molkt 26mm carby, where the Revmx runs the OKO 26mm Flatslide.
Whilst my bike is fitted with a D-section muffler, the standard versions run the identical pipe setup to the Cini....
That more or less wraps up the main differences, as well as the afore mentioned difference in triple clamps...
Ergos:
Surprisingly, for two nearly identical bikes, they feel quite different to sit on...
I felt the Revmx had a slightly softer seat, and it was pretty much agreed unanimously by all three testers on the day (myself, Ando and Rach88) that the Revmx, whilst ''only" having cast triples, has the more comfortable bar/triples setup.
The Revmx triples set the bars a little further forwards, and a little higher than the Cini, and this seemed to make quite a bit of difference to cockpit comfiness, and was most noticeable when lil Rach88 threw a leg over the Revmx, and looked far more comfortable than she did on the Cini. Body Language was better, she found it easier to move around on, corner on, and surprisingly, was much quicker on the track on the Revmx than she was on her own Cini... but a bit more on that later...
The rest of the ergos ratings came down to personal preference.... I ride the back of the bike, Ando rides more centrally, and Rach rides the front, so each bike had a different feel to each rider. Ando admitted sheepishly that the triples set-up on my bike felt more natural, but neither Ando nor Rach liked my lever set up... i've got big hands, so the levers are set waaaaaay out from the bars... The two Cinis ran the lever gaps quite close to the bars, which i found to be a bit weird, and i was constantly having to remove and replace fingers when using the levers... Brake and gear lever heights are also a personal thing, mine are set quite high, Ando's were set pretty low.. consequently we both missed a few gear changes and Ando found himself locking the rear on the Revmx pretty easily, but aside from the differences mentioned above, it's hard to pick the bikes apart...
Engines:
As already mentioned, i cheated, cause i already have the 175 installed in my bike.. But given there is more interest in the new version of the Revmx with the 175, it's fitted in well with the test...
Sadly i got a bit lazy, and spent a lot of time tinkering with the carby on the Revmx throughout the day, when i should have done the valve clearances straight off the bat.. when we finally did them, we literally found a 3.0mm gap on both valves... Oops.. so with the valves finally set, we could see the 175 running properly... Both of em.. heh heh..
the 175's in both bikes are supposedly identical... I'm not quite so convinced, as the Revmx 175 appears to have a HEAP more compression when kicking the bike past TDC... i feel there may be a difference in cam profiles... The Cini feels like it has a decomp cam... The Revmx most certainly does not feel like it has a decomp cam... and we found a lot of kicking was done throughout the day with stalled bikes... (user error).. so either of these bikes would highly benefit from a manual decomp setup of some sort.... put it this way, if you race either of these bikes, and stall in a race, you can kiss the podium goodbye, cuase they're slow to restart... with the Cinin being a little bit more co-operative...
BUT, when it comes to performance, they're very different animals... and suit two different types of rider.
I've got mine jetted pretty close to perfection, if a little on the lean side... So it's very responsive.... think of it as a light switch... power goes on, power goes off.
The Cini, which appeared to be jetted quite well, offered a much "softer" power delivery, but both bikes appear similar in output, and at the end of the day, we conceded that the Revmx has quite an edge in both power and acceleration, particularly once the OKO Flatslide nature comes into play up top, but at a price... The Revmx, being very, very snappy compared to the Cini, is hard on the body, and requires a bit more care when it comes to clutchwork out of corners, and on flat corners...
This is most certainly not to say the Cini is a slow engine.. It's bloody fast, but is much more manageable in delivery compared to the Revmx...
Putting it as simply as possible, The OKO equipped Revmx is probably the better "race" engine, the Cini is the better "trail" engine... Both produce similar power, but the Revmx is far more brutal in the way it goes about it.. Oddly, Rach being the smallest, lightest and least experienced of the three of us, found the Revmx to be the better engine to ride.... so it really is horses for courses...

There's been a lot of interest in both the Revmx and the Cini over recent months on the forum, and until last weekend, we hadnt actually been able to get both bikes side by side to do some testing and comparisons...
These two bikes are without doubt probably the biggest ''waves'' to ripple the scene since the introduction of the Pitster Pro LXR to Australian tracks, are a big step forwards in what we have had in the way of choices, and naturally there is a lot of curiosity in regards to what they're like, and which one is the better bike...
So what did we find??
Read on...
Just for Looks:
Going over both bikes, straight away you notice the similarities.... and the differences... both run the Medina style frame, both run the TTR-style plastics and the same swingarm.. That's about as far as the identical similarities go though...
The Cini runs ASV copy levers, the Revmx runs normal alloy style levers, albeit with an on-the-fly clutch...
Both bikes run alloy 1/4 turn throttles, and Fatbars, but the Cini has CNC billet triples where the Revmx runs cast items....
The Cini has a few more obvious bling items, but mainly becuase the Cini has red bits, the Revmx has blue shiny parts...
The Cini runs shiny alloy rims (well, Ando's does, Rach88's runs black rims) with Red CNC hubs, whereas the Revmx runs steel rims and blue CNC hubs...
Oh, and in case you hadn't noticed, the Cini is red. lots of red. and some black. but lots of red. and has stars on it....
The revmx is white with a bit of blue thrown in for good measure, and let's just say is the more "subtle' of the two...


Basic Differences:
In the case of this comparison test, i kinda cheated, as my bike has the 175z motor fitted... the Stock Revmx comes with a 155z/160HO motor... so while this levels the playing field engine wise on test day, generally one could expect the TTR155z to be a tad slower... but i digress..
The Revmx runs DNM suspension front and back, whilst the Cini runs Weston forks, and a fast ace rear... The Revmx runs a 350lb spring, where the Cini runs a 400lb spring.. Both bikes run the same roller bearing linkage set up...
Both run supposedly the same braking setup, but big differences were noticed on the day...
The Cini runs a Molkt 26mm carby, where the Revmx runs the OKO 26mm Flatslide.
Whilst my bike is fitted with a D-section muffler, the standard versions run the identical pipe setup to the Cini....
That more or less wraps up the main differences, as well as the afore mentioned difference in triple clamps...
Ergos:
Surprisingly, for two nearly identical bikes, they feel quite different to sit on...
I felt the Revmx had a slightly softer seat, and it was pretty much agreed unanimously by all three testers on the day (myself, Ando and Rach88) that the Revmx, whilst ''only" having cast triples, has the more comfortable bar/triples setup.
The Revmx triples set the bars a little further forwards, and a little higher than the Cini, and this seemed to make quite a bit of difference to cockpit comfiness, and was most noticeable when lil Rach88 threw a leg over the Revmx, and looked far more comfortable than she did on the Cini. Body Language was better, she found it easier to move around on, corner on, and surprisingly, was much quicker on the track on the Revmx than she was on her own Cini... but a bit more on that later...
The rest of the ergos ratings came down to personal preference.... I ride the back of the bike, Ando rides more centrally, and Rach rides the front, so each bike had a different feel to each rider. Ando admitted sheepishly that the triples set-up on my bike felt more natural, but neither Ando nor Rach liked my lever set up... i've got big hands, so the levers are set waaaaaay out from the bars... The two Cinis ran the lever gaps quite close to the bars, which i found to be a bit weird, and i was constantly having to remove and replace fingers when using the levers... Brake and gear lever heights are also a personal thing, mine are set quite high, Ando's were set pretty low.. consequently we both missed a few gear changes and Ando found himself locking the rear on the Revmx pretty easily, but aside from the differences mentioned above, it's hard to pick the bikes apart...
Engines:
As already mentioned, i cheated, cause i already have the 175 installed in my bike.. But given there is more interest in the new version of the Revmx with the 175, it's fitted in well with the test...
Sadly i got a bit lazy, and spent a lot of time tinkering with the carby on the Revmx throughout the day, when i should have done the valve clearances straight off the bat.. when we finally did them, we literally found a 3.0mm gap on both valves... Oops.. so with the valves finally set, we could see the 175 running properly... Both of em.. heh heh..
the 175's in both bikes are supposedly identical... I'm not quite so convinced, as the Revmx 175 appears to have a HEAP more compression when kicking the bike past TDC... i feel there may be a difference in cam profiles... The Cini feels like it has a decomp cam... The Revmx most certainly does not feel like it has a decomp cam... and we found a lot of kicking was done throughout the day with stalled bikes... (user error).. so either of these bikes would highly benefit from a manual decomp setup of some sort.... put it this way, if you race either of these bikes, and stall in a race, you can kiss the podium goodbye, cuase they're slow to restart... with the Cinin being a little bit more co-operative...
BUT, when it comes to performance, they're very different animals... and suit two different types of rider.
I've got mine jetted pretty close to perfection, if a little on the lean side... So it's very responsive.... think of it as a light switch... power goes on, power goes off.
The Cini, which appeared to be jetted quite well, offered a much "softer" power delivery, but both bikes appear similar in output, and at the end of the day, we conceded that the Revmx has quite an edge in both power and acceleration, particularly once the OKO Flatslide nature comes into play up top, but at a price... The Revmx, being very, very snappy compared to the Cini, is hard on the body, and requires a bit more care when it comes to clutchwork out of corners, and on flat corners...
This is most certainly not to say the Cini is a slow engine.. It's bloody fast, but is much more manageable in delivery compared to the Revmx...
Putting it as simply as possible, The OKO equipped Revmx is probably the better "race" engine, the Cini is the better "trail" engine... Both produce similar power, but the Revmx is far more brutal in the way it goes about it.. Oddly, Rach being the smallest, lightest and least experienced of the three of us, found the Revmx to be the better engine to ride.... so it really is horses for courses...