The All New LIQUID COOLED R1200GS threadfest

Discussion in 'GS Boxers' started by Dorsicano, Feb 3, 2011.

  1. oz97tj

    oz97tj Been here awhile

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2012
    Oddometer:
    846
    Location:
    Fenton, MI
    Well, as I stated already I have tried enduro pro yet, but I don't see much benefit on pavement with road rubber. Dynamic mode would be more aggressive on the pavement. The big difference is ABS being shut off to the rear wheel. As for the traction conrol, other than for wheelies, it wouldn't really be kicking in anyway.

    The saving the settings is kind of nice, but the reality is it only takes about 2 seconds to switch the suspension settings and to shut off ABS and ASC so unless you prefer them off all the time I don't see a huge benefit there. The only real time I want to kill ASC is when I plan on being a bit of a hooligan. ABS, I really never shut it off on my old GS, and this one kicks in far less than he old model so I doubt I'll even have a reason to shut it off.
  2. Moronic

    Moronic Long timer

    Joined:
    May 16, 2006
    Oddometer:
    1,775
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    Motorrad has posted online an article comparing the waterboxer with the 2012 GS, reporting on a side-by-side ride and various performance and static measurements.

    Article begins here, with the ride report. For those who do not read German, Google Translate will help.

    There is a measurements page here, which includes dyno curves.

    A couple of interesting results:

    - measured full-tank weights old and new were identical at 246kg (542lbs).

    - the new model was quicker in all single-gear roll-on acceleration tests (e.g. 100-140km/h 3.8 sec v 4.2 sec).

    - fuel economy was slightly better on the new model (by 0.2L/100km or US 2mpg).
  3. EJ_92606

    EJ_92606 Rider

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2007
    Oddometer:
    1,779
    Thanks for posting...the Google translate is not so great, but I can at least comprehend parts of it and the stats of course. Was surprised that the 0-100km/h speed was only faster than the camhead by 0.1 seconds. During the test ride the bike felt much faster than that, but then again I suspect the massive thrust that is felt is based on some artificial throttle mapping as opposed to a substantial increase in power. The Motorrad test seems to confirm this.
  4. cug

    cug --

    Joined:
    May 31, 2009
    Oddometer:
    5,093
    Location:
    Sunny California
    What I found more interesting is that the braking distance from 100km/h (62mph) was longer on the new model. Only in Enduro mode it got kind of close. New one is said to be more stable while braking, but needs longer distance.
  5. GrahamD

    GrahamD Long timer

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2009
    Oddometer:
    5,426
    Location:
    Blue Mnts Ozstralia
    Yes, just like the Tenere, Strom, etc. Less freak but a low speed impact at the end. Pros and Cons. Swings and roundabouts. Like to see an update of Motorrads ABS tests with the new gen ABS systems. But you knew that already.

    Probably better off road than the older system if the S10 is anything to go by.
  6. EJ_92606

    EJ_92606 Rider

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2007
    Oddometer:
    1,779
    and despite the larger contact patch of the bigger tires....looks like 9% longer stopping distance on asphalt with sand surface and 2.3% worse on asphalt.
  7. NLS

    NLS My bike needs washing...

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Oddometer:
    3,203
    Location:
    GREECE!
    A wise statement.

    As it should be. I am sure they'll fine-tune it with future software updates though.

    BTW love the avatar...

    Wouldn't this mess with what the software expects?
  8. fennel

    fennel Adventurer

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2007
    Oddometer:
    25
    The metal bar has two bolts at the inner sides of the beak.

    Sent from my GT-P7500 using Tapatalk HD
  9. NLS

    NLS My bike needs washing...

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Oddometer:
    3,203
    Location:
    GREECE!
    Very interesting, thank you.
    (btw below you will realize that I don't work for BMW - as some people seem to hate I defend the new model all the time)

    Things I find interesting:

    - Worse braking performance. Not in a critical level (as you said, where the '12 stops, the '13 makes a low speed bump), but this is a definite NEGATIVE to me. Hope they can improve with software, as (shown by enduro mode) the physical part is definitely able to perform at least same as previous version.

    - Reports seem to agree that HP is spot-on and plus (whereas most vendors inc. BMW cheat). Good for people that care in such numbers.

    - Speedometer seems to cheat a bit more. Not good. The difference @100Km is the difference I get at top speed.

    - Real v-max not impressive. They could do much better. I will say again: 6th should be longer or consumer bike vendors should start thinking about 7th gear (overdrive with slow "pick up" for bikes like GS, "real" for bikes like S1000RR).

    - Strange that dynamic mode (hope they indeed tested dynamic mode) can just chop 0.1sec over the last version. I would expect closer to 0.2-0.3.

    - Seeing side-by-side photos, new bike indeed shows more fresh.

    - The test verifies what everybody seems to fail to understand. New version is about same price. Extras are more. You want them I know, you don't HAVE to get them though.

    So to sum up. Motorrad seems to find new GS as a "revolution" over previous.
    Mechanically this is definitely true.
    In practice I would say "evolution" is as far as you can go.

    Given the differences and similarities, we definitely have a GS here. The new bike looks cool (way more cool than last), will perform better in real-life (rolling accelleration, ability to turn and follow terrain) both on and off tarmac.
    We definitely already see what can be further improved for first face-lift in 2-3 years. :evil
  10. mkletecka

    mkletecka Been here awhile

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
    Oddometer:
    286
    Location:
    dana point, ca.
    My only question is this. Does the new WC handle any better through the canyons than the previous AC (I'm talking about fully leaned over, scraping parts/no chicken stripes compared to the previous AC). If none have done this with their new WC's, no need to reply to my question.

    BTW, I think the new WC looks great, has a lot of new goodies etc. and for those who got one, congratulations!!!!!!!!!!!!
  11. Japanviking

    Japanviking Adventurer

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2007
    Oddometer:
    95
    Yes it handles better when ridden aggressively. Turns in quicker and I thought it felt very stable leaned over.
  12. NLS

    NLS My bike needs washing...

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Oddometer:
    3,203
    Location:
    GREECE!
    Yes but have you tested and compared the two models THROUGH THE CANYONS? Because else you shouldn't reply. :D
  13. MaxReving

    MaxReving Been here awhile

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Oddometer:
    257
    Location:
    On The Twisty Roads
    Yes

    [​IMG]
  14. oz97tj

    oz97tj Been here awhile

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2012
    Oddometer:
    846
    Location:
    Fenton, MI
    Im glad im not the only one who laughed at the arrogance in that statement.
  15. MaxReving

    MaxReving Been here awhile

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Oddometer:
    257
    Location:
    On The Twisty Roads
    Ahhh, this type of side-by-side test is always a bit tricky. I have a few questions for the people at the magazine "Motorrad":

    Regarding performance. Did both bikes run on the same fuel? The new 1200GS LC can handle octane 95 but the camhead have been known to be better of with octane 98. They also write that in the review. Both bikes have to be tested with octane 98.

    Breaks. The new 1200GS LC was fitted with the new Metzeler Tourance Next and the camhead with the Metzeler Tourance EXP. Tons of tests shows that different tires have different breaking distances. How would the figures look if both bikes were on the same tire (but different size of cause) ?

    How are the breaking tests done and how have you measured the acceleration figures? Number of times the breaking and acceleration test was done. Are the figures the best out of a number of tests or is it average figures? Was it the same rider on both bikes? Details are missing.

    Engine performance illustrated by the torque and power curves have been made on a dyno, so those figures should be comparable. However, I will like to know what the milage were on both bikes when they were tested.

    However, if you add up all the figures in this test then you will see that the new 1200GS LC is 3.2674% better than the camhead, including the seat which alone is 5.3863% better :rofl

    Max :-)
  16. MaxReving

    MaxReving Been here awhile

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Oddometer:
    257
    Location:
    On The Twisty Roads
    MCN vid

    <object width="640" height="360"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/_6UFBKftOWg?version=3&amp;hl=da_DK&amp;rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/_6UFBKftOWg?version=3&amp;hl=da_DK&amp;rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="640" height="360" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

    Max :-)
  17. NLS

    NLS My bike needs washing...

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Oddometer:
    3,203
    Location:
    GREECE!
    Good points all.
    Especially about tires, they COULD (and should) use Next on both bikes.
    (Next is already available in "old" GS sizes - I've seen it in tire shops)

    Only objection about the fuel.
    '13 GS manual specifically mentions 95 octane fuel. There is no mention of being better with 98.
    In contrast, '12 GS requires 98 octane and 95 octane limits its capabilities. This is because of the different engine characteristics in latest oilhead model (DOHC etc.).

    (also to mention, OLDER 12GS models - like mine, again specified 95 octane fuel except that of course they could handle lower and higher octanes because of the knock sensor)

    So they should compare (as they should I think) both with the "factory suggested" fuel.
  18. avalher

    avalher Life is Good.

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2013
    Oddometer:
    108
    Location:
    Baja
    Arrogant, to say the least!
  19. avalher

    avalher Life is Good.

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2013
    Oddometer:
    108
    Location:
    Baja
    You, sir ARE WRONG!! The seat is actually 5.3864% better!
  20. Montauk

    Montauk Been here awhile

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2007
    Oddometer:
    280
    Location:
    Fruit County in Golden State, USA
    I am impressed on 5 digit accuracy. :freaky