When I got serious about riding (after a year and 4k miles on a little 200 cc dualsport) two motorcycles seemed worthy of attention. Suzuki's sv650, and Honda's vfr800. My interest was transport more than pure sport, so performance, by itself, wasn't a big issue. Comfort, agility and convenience were very big issues.
At the time, early 2000, sv's were scarce on the used market, and a very nice '98 vfr800 fell into my hands. After a year I began to appreciate the vfr, but after two years and 30k miles I still wished for something lighter. The vfr taught me the virtues of fairings and fairing-mounted lights. And smooth engines. But the weight of a vfr800 is a real handicap in awkward quarters and something of a showstopper when things go wrong. Eventually I found an '01 sv650s with 2k miles.
It's been a surprisingly bumpy road since. Granted, comparing the svs to a vfr priced half again as much is not really fair. But, life's not fair, and vfr's are going now for the price of a used svs.
The svs is small, light and quick. All to the good. Not so good is the sv's lack of refinement. It's taken a year to sort out why the clutch is sensitive to steering (misrouted cable, fixed by adding an extra bend). The rear brake is so sensitive as to be a menace in an emergency stop and very difficult to modulate gently in trailbraking for slow-speed maneuvers. The front brake is no 2-finger deal; in fact it's very nearly a four-finger squeeze despite those very impressive-looking front disks. The fairing on the svs provides some but not enough wind protection for freeway rides. And, a 90 degree v-twin is buzzy compared to a v-4.
The stock 60 series mez4 front tire on the svs made for onerous steering. Raising the forks six millimeters helped a little and using a 70 series Michelin Pilot Road on the front made the bike turn easily. It's now _almost_ as nimble as my vfr with a stock 70 series mez4 (and stock fork tube position).
In one way the sv surpasses the vfr; the electrical system seems to be much better designed than that of the vfr. The battery has a dedicated circuit for charging, not the daisy-chain of connectors and fuses which causes so much trouble on the vfr. Adding cornering lights and hotgrips was relatively easy, there seems to be adequate power and the regulator/rectifier has given zero problems. Suzuki beats Honda on that round.
[added 1/9/20] Alas, the SV has now tied with the VFR for electrical trouble, at only slightly higher mileage. The stator shorted to ground around 27k miles. A new one is over $300. So far I _think_ the RR is ok, but it bears close watching. Some details and postmortem on the stator are included in the link.
It's been observed that the sv is "a racebike with lights" and I agree. It responds best to brisk riding. "Gas it and go!" suits the bike's temperment perfectly. A gravelly hairpin turn up a steep grade is easier on a quarter-ton of vfr. Once a foot goes down, however, the extra weight of the vfr (~100 lbs) becomes a very serious handicap.
On balance it's a tossup; the two bikes are designed for different purposes. Both machines are silly fast, the vfr more than the svs. I'd rate the vfr more controllable, despite a slightly tricky throttle. The grabby rear brake and clutch/steering crosstalk of the sv make it a real handful in slow, parking-lot maneuvers, even though the throttle reponse is close to perfect.
Folks who ride briskly will enjoy the sv's rewards and overlook its limitations. Those of more deliberate habits (such as myself) will favor the sv when size and weight take precedence.
Here are some second thoughts provoked by a stint of freeway riding on the SVS.