Originally Posted by NMEXPAT
To be completely serious, the MTS1200 was never intended to be a bike to lug around at low rpms. The basis for the engine was originally WSBK racing (tuned differently of course).
I can see that. No problem. Don't get me wrong here: my criticism is based on the first models that hit the States, the first fuel map that arrived here where lots of people said the engine is lagging, hacking, unhappy in that rev range.
On the other hand, the Multi is marketed as bike that is meant also for urban traffic which might include stop and go and super slow rolling and also enduro style riding which means often enough slowly and carefully chugging through difficult passages. The Multi I rode didn't like those two things at all. Flowing with the traffic at 15mph was very, very uncomfortable, it was hacking, slapping the chain, vibrating and so on. Totally possible that a newer map corrected that, I never tested one again. The R1200GS I could ride at 5mph without any trouble. And YES, I understand that these are totally different bikes.
What you don't seem to understand is that I'm not "nitpicking" the Multi, I'm saying what I didn't like when I rode it. I wrote a blog entry shortly after I rode one and had a few things that really annoyed me on that test ride. Interesting enough all these things were addressed in the 2011 and 2012 models. Being that the short rider seat space, the uneven fueling at steady speed, the luggage where you could look through the manufacturing gaps, I even read that the centerstand was slightly altered so that you don't get your heel on it all the time, though I cannot really confirm that as test sitting on a 2012 model felt the same for me with regard to that. I don't own a Multi, I test rode one twice and that were the results. If I owned one, I might start with the real problems but I never got that far as I disliked it already during the test ride enough so that the telepathic handling, the insane power, the unbelievably good brakes, and the really, really nice riding position couldn't make me buy one. And believe me - I was in the market.
When I'm ready for my next bike I will ride one again and see whether the things I didn't like and that were supposedly addressed did something that makes it better for me, because from my perspective all these things are so unnecessary. Not certain about the low speed manners, as that might just be engine characteristic, but the rest was probably easily dealt with and some of it shouldn't have happened in the first place (luggage, and imho centerstand).
But you know what - I didn't like the Multi enough to buy one, you did, so where's the problem? I'm not addressing anybody here personally (other than now ignoring some people), I'm saying what my impression of the bike was when I test rode it.