The All New LIQUID COOLED R1200GS threadfest

The comments about a shorter wheelbase got me wondering whether the Boxer platform might become more modular. So a GS or RT might use a long swing arm, whereas an S might lose a few inches from this.

I suspect that the air-cooled bikes will retain a following. The last of the air-cooled 911 (993) models are holding their value, and a 2010 / 2011 GS or HP2 Sport might be similar.

Personally, I'd be open to a Wasserboxer. Particularly if the threatened S model tips up.

Here's the new 1200



Given the F8 sounds and feels almost identical to a boxer.

it looks like the cylinder heads are there just not to clear, but I can see a joint between the engine case and the heads.

<BR>

Thanks for the scans Emoto! Here are some observations of the new Waterhead.

Cam drive remains on the back side of the cylinders. The cam chain still looks like it's driven from an aux shaft below the crank.

Multiplate wet clutch is driven directly off the crank. In the top picture it's the uppermost round area on the back of the case.

The gearbox input shaft is gear driven from the front side of the clutch pack. This allows the gear shafts sit under the clutch pack, not behind it. That saves a lot of overall motor/gearbox length.

I'm thinking that the plain bearing journal below the crank is for a gear-driven-from-the-crank, counter-rotating balance shaft.

There's quite a bit of room around that lower shaft area. Enough room for an Integrated Starter Alternator (ISA).

The hole up top looks like it might be for a crank-driven oil pump, given the direction of the nearby cast-in oil galleys, and the bore plugs.

But it also might be the impeller housing for the water pump. I can't tell if the flanking water ports connect to what may be the impeller area on the crank-driven water pump.

<BR>

<BR>There's a lot of room aft of the cam journals in the head.

It might be one chain driving a gear, which then drives the cams. That way the 2:1 crank:cam reduction can be located in the head, and the aux/balance shaft can turn at crankshaft speed.

Heck, they might even be short, single-lobe cams. With one lobe driving 2 buckets.

<BR>

Probably why they didn't ask you to engineer it!! That was meant as a small poke, not trying to piss off anyone.

Give it a couple of years in the wild, buy the third revision and I bet it'll be a great bike.........if not the other manufactures are catching up!! I'm sure they'll be a lot of cool bikes to choose from if you don't like the wet-boxer.

I agree Jim,

There is reason to doubt its validity. There have been many "spy" photos of motors in the past versus artistic renderings or conceptual designs that have never borne fruit. BMW, among others, is quite tight lipped about photos being released esp. on this scale of detail. Time will tell.

I don't see those disadvantages in a Dualsport motorcycle where the bars are wider than the engine. Plus, I kind of like the idea of the cylinders hitting the tree before my leg does. In a sportbike, yeah sure the width would be a problem, but I really like the telelever front end and you couldn't really package it too much more efficiently with 10 gallons of fuel and it certainly steers more easily at speed than my K12S which has its main masses much lower and is 25lbs lighter. It's also much easier to control at low speeds. Port shape would only be very important when you're trying to make maximum power. After seeing those drawings I still don't think BMW is going to go with the unit crankcase & cylinder block. They could go with water cooled heads to maintain combustion stability and still air cool the bores without affecting the emissions too much because they stand alone. Most of your heat is rejected through the head. That would keep the radiator and volume of fluid small. And, yeah, I have seen the competition but I have to turn off the G4 so I don't hear all the whining.

I'm not so certain low CoG is bad for motorcycles, central CoG may be better yes but mainly in race applications. The inherent benefits are not going to be significant on road applications. Is the pursuit of centralizing CoG on road applications really a good business decision to drop your top selling line?

Mind your heritage, it's your past and your future.

Many have argued against the BMW boxer as being an archaic design. Many have said the Porsche configuration is too tail-happy in nature. BMW addressed these issues through continual refinement and improvement of the motor producing class competitive performance. Porsche addressed this with better technology to counteract what some enthusiasts consider a poor design. Porsche didn't abandon what worked for them, neither should BMW.

The motor is literally the soul of the bike or car. You change that you risk a lot. A Porsche isn't a "real" Porsche unless it runs a boxer. A Mazda RX isn't a RX without a rotary. BMW learned that when they tried to walk away from the boxer motor.

The motor is an emotive factor in purchasing. Otherwise we'd all be on 600 cc I4s, arguably the best bang for the buck out there, for manufacturer and consumer. Peopel are looking for more than just CoG. There's an appeal to the motor, that's why people by HD, Ducati, Honda VTEC, Mazda rotaries etc. - there;s an appeal in the motor. There's appeal in the boxer. Otherwise it wouldn't sell the way it does. There's no arguing that.

Just read in German "Motorrad" that a BMW engineer said that you will hardly notice the water cooling, R 1250 GS DOHC LC with 130-135hp however it seems to be unclear as to when this be introduced, depends on what Triumph is doing and how successful Multistrada will be...

A link to this would be great!

Until you:
- Pay more money for the new model
- Work on it
- Pay someone else to work on it ($$$)
- lose water and it overheats
- fall and tear the plumbing out

Give me my air/oil boxer. Don't need 135hp, don't want to be a multistrada. Simplify what is already there, make it as bulletproof as possible while lightening it up. That will generate more sales IMHO. I choose to ignore the argument that it needs to be done for emissions reasons. Just because I enjoy putting my head in the sand once in a while...

The Motorrad article also said that one of the two main reasons why the LC boxer would be required in the future doesn't really exist anymore: Noise. The new European regulations do not require lower noise levels so basically BMW wants to be able to react quickly to the new more powerful bikes from Triumph, Ducati, Honda...just as they did with the DOHC engine ready in time for the arrival of the Yahama XT1200Z...

The reality from BMW is simply this.....based on their own words from their own magazine......"the current generation boxer is as evolved as it could be, it will not see another revision. A new water-air cooled boxer is being developed/tested to meet Euro 3 and eventually Euro 5 smog certification."

I say debate all you want, but let the reality set in!

A new engine sounds good to me but the current engine thats been paid for sounds better!! Still, I'll love seeming the engineering behind the new motor along with appreciating the simplicity of where things started.

Seriously to all who are concerned about a price increase, its going to go up no matter what. It always will weather its air cooled or water cooled that doesn't matter. So the proof will be when you ride the new bike and see how nice it is. Motorcross bikes, enduro bikes they are all water cooled for a reason, it just plain works. I would imagine BMW will do everything possible to keep the plumbing well protected on bike of its nature. Who knows though, I am open to the new motor so long as the bike sticks to its heritage and is a boxer twin.

Ah, all the speculation and anticipation regarding the &#8220;new &#8220;GS/GSA is kind of fun. Will it have a 1250 or 1300 water cooled engine? Will it be more expensive? Who really knows for sure!?

In a recent Fast Bikes comparo of the 2011 GSA, compared to the approximate $20K 1200 Ducati Multistrada and very expensive YAM Tenere, the least expensive GSA came out on top, they even said that if it was an 09 version, the results would still be same (Yea, I know the test/compare did not cover off road use, or have a VStrom, KTM, or Triumph Tiger in the mix, but none the less it shows that BMW&#8217;s 5 to 6 year old design which has evolved over 30 years, bested the latest and greatest from Duc. and Yam - for those that disagree, read the full report then take it up with Fast Bikes).

IMHO, the price will probably go up like most other things, but I&#8217;m confident that the &#8220;new&#8221; GS/GSA will be &#8220;better&#8221;, just as the 2010/11 is better than my 09, because of BMW&#8217;s history of making positive/useful changes and improvements. As for those, who may not like it, I&#8217;m also confident that they will be able to find plenty of used 2011&#8217;s - 10&#8217;s &#8211; 09&#8217;s &#8211; 08&#8217;s etc. in the used marketplace.

Anyway, it will be interesting to see what the &#8220;new&#8221; GS/GSA will be like and I look forward to its arrival.

Mike K.
Dana Point, CA.

I don't post much but I'll throw in my .02 here. I have a 2008 GSA that I ride on everything from expressway to single track and while I have fallen deeply in love with it, I scratch my head on every ride wondering what the BMW engineers were thinking.

Vertical intake and exhaust? My scarred up shins have been begging for it. How many times do I need to slice my leg open on the f-ing throttle position sensor? (I know, there's a farkle for that right?)

Water cooled? How many times have I had to shut off the engine while stuck in traffic because it's overheating. (living near the equator)

Stranded in the jungle with fuel pump failure (only 1500 miles since new). Yep, that's me!

Too tall 1st gear, too short 6th gear, dry clutch... Do the engineers even ride these things??

The disappointing thing for me is that it's emissions or the competition who has forced BMW to advance (even if only slightly) their design, not the desire to improve or admit that there has been some engine development in the last 50 years. As another poster pointed out, with water cooling we can lose the boxer and it's wacky power curve (please!) and make the ol' girl a bit thinner.

I'll qualify my remarks by stating I'm a 30-something who holds more regard for a better product than I do for nostalgia. I want Motorrad to be all it can be. I love my GS! I love the solid feel of quality. I'm not bashing the bike (just the designers, sorry BMW lovers!) but because I love it I feel more than just physical pain when it bites me.

When the Japanese figure out how to make their new "adventure" bikes (will they be nuclear powered now? Too soon? ) feel a little less like Toyotas and a little more like Mercedes it will spell real trouble for Motorrad. Unfortunately it's unlikely as it would require a cultural (read: impossible) shift in Japanese engineering. The Japanese prefer to imitate (they call it "benchmarking") rather than lead.

Sorry, it was more like 10 cents..

Amen Please next time give us a Whole Dollar

I hear ya, and I am a realist. I know that my view doesn't mean squat to BMW and it looks like in this thread most are supportive of the water boxer. Its just as an individual I really like the bike I have now and don't think water cooling will be that much of a positive to me.

I'm not anti change, I just think that the GS concept originally was simple, practical, go anywhere fix anywhere kind of a motorcycle. That is what attracted me to it. Thats why I say focus on reliability, lower weight and performance without making the bike less reliable. With every electronic farkle and do-dad it moves farther away from that concept. I understand why, they have to sell motorcycles and many of the GS's that are sold never see the dirt or travel long distances so many owners don't care. This isn't a BMW thing, how many great cars have you seen over the years go from great to benign because they keep bloating them with luxury items, more room etc. (Datsun 240 Z is a good example, though Nissan came back to the cars roots with the 350Z and even more so with the 370Z, which I drive)

I'm not riding around the world, but I ride off-road and I take longer trips. If something goes wrong I want to be able to fix it myself if at all possible.

This change will happen, I understand that, but right now I plan on upgrading to the last non-wet boxer thats made. That might be a while though as I love my Adventure.

Good point! Me too I like the first 1980 R80G/S, it evolved into something else over the next 30 years, something different not better or worse.