• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

Those new R1200GS look kinda cool.....

raven09 said:
i would prefer riding one of these:

BMWMI_master_360degree_652x489_2.jpg
Click to expand...

In 2017 it will be this baby, a Multistrada or a R1200GS.
 
Top gear rollons are a somewhat worthless measure of performance, unless you're riding around with a broken left leg. .1 second in the quarter is down the rider's ability to launch the bike, as they say in the video.

The 1190 engine is definitely more a rev happy bike than you might expect, given the displacement. Likes to be stuck in the top end of the rev range and kept there, as evidenced by the higher top speed.

I'd imagine the engine tuning was done to keep the 1190 somewhat sane offroad, you can idle the thing around and it still goes just fine, open it up and shit's getting real. GS is more road oriented meaning a lower biased torque spread. All the more reason it should have a 17 front, as it's designed for street use. :twofinger
 
Z3n said:
:laughing

See earlier comment about speed on the street being directly related to risk appetite. The bigger wheels aren't enough of a handicap to physically stop the bike from being ridden at a stupid pace on the street. They're just getting you way closer to the limits of traction than you need to be.

But then again, you're the guy who argued that drum brakes are just as good as discs, so :laughing

Obligatory:
142935830_kod3s-XL-3.jpg
Click to expand...
Im not even going to go through and explain to you why that was the dumbest response Ive read on barf.

Lets try this again. I just told you that the 990 ADV is the bike you can ride the fastest on normal roads, largely because of its bigger wheels are more suited to "real road conditions" like gravel, damp roads, tar snakes, potholes, etc. As in: bigger wheels add stability in low traction.

Your response why 17" wheels are still better is: ?

Inappropriate responses:
- Well people who ride bikes that have 17" wheels ride more within their limits.
- Well I lacked reading comprehension regarding something you wrote once about brakes, which is a completely unrelated topic.
- You're wrong because I jumped an R1 once.


What you have to understand is that 17" wheels dont tip in quicker because of weight. I'll bet you that those budget tri spokes on the yamaha weigh the same as the spoked steel 21"er on 990's. The real reason 17" tip in quicker is because of gyroscopic precession. Look it up and maybe you'll understand why taller wheels on bikes designed for lower traction surfaces makes a lot of sense, and continues to make sense on real road conditions. Your sportbike tips in quicker because there's less gyroscopic force keeping it upright. Tip-in is not a valuable commodity outside of a racetrack. Stability for dirt or roads is more important.
 
Last edited:
I'm in the camp that doesn't see much downside to the 19" front. At any sane street pace it gives up very little safety / performance margin vs. a 17". I don't think twice about this when riding my GS vs. my Multi.

But on torn up goat trails I appreciate the comfort of a 19" front, which is true on rock-strewn unpaved roads too.

On the other hand, why not offer the GS with a choice 17, 19 or 21" fronts? They did sell that megamoto with a 17.

I guess they have the S1000XR for that now...
 
Last edited:
Tharkûn said:
I find the wind protection better on the RT
Click to expand...

True, but for me the windshield was the only part that was lacking. I can fix that easily. The rest wasn't a concern and for me, the riding position/seat was far more comfortable on the GS as opposed to the RT.
 
Z3n said:
Fast street riding is about risk appetite, not skill to any real degree. The thing is, when I'm riding fun pace, if I can be at 85% of the limit by having the right equipment for the situation rather than 95% of the limit, that's "better". The 19 inch front, with it's heavier weight, smaller contact patch while leaned over, and more inertia, doesn't make me want to go out and buy one when there are better options available. I'm also not interested in compromising the geometry, stability, TC, and ABS by swapping shit around.

It's a fine point to make, perhaps, but if you're going to drop a pile of money on a new bike, buying a bike that has made those compromises doesn't make much sense to me.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but I think this is just nonsense. The compromises you speak of aren't even going to be noticeable by the typical rider, and will be meaningless to the more experienced rider. Have you actually even ridden the new GS yet? Mine handled every bit as good as my '11 Multistrada and did everything else (other than the 1/4 mile) better. The motor was more tractable, the suspension was light years better, it was way more comfortable and it actually had great wind management and didn't give me tinnitus every time I rode it.

The choice between any of these liter plus Adv bikes really comes down to personal preferences. They're all awesome, they'll all go down a twisty paved road better than 99% of street riders are capable of, and they're all not really hard core off road bikes.
 
Ant said:
Not the one with spokes but this one:

P90154911-lowRes.jpg



Dumb idea to buy one with zero intent of going off road? Are they comfy and handle well in twisties??

Just thinking out loud.
Click to expand...

They are a fine road bike in terms of utility and handling.

I, however, will likely stick with Non-BMW bikes as an owner as they've been troublesome for me. Surging, bits and pieces falling off, high cost of dealer servicing in my area, catastrophic failure because of simple servicing mistakes.

I will continue to rent on trips.
 
boney said:
PR3 and PR4 are available in 19 inch sizes. They call them the trail and the only difference is the width of the rubber compounds. So don't use that as an excuse to have not bought a bike. Besides, I've seen guys scrape their boxes in corners with TKC-80's mounted. It's not the tire, its the rider.
Click to expand...

this was the one thing i genuinely liked about my r1200gsa. very good on-road handling, very comfortable on its side, such that i actually did scratch up my luggage with tkc80s (and then later, did the same with shinko 805 mounted, just to make sure).


but then i did the same on an 1190 adventure. and it's a lot more fun on the 1190 adventure. the feedback, the sounds, the sense of control and connection, the lightness (all relative, of course). truly at the top of genuine first world problems, going from an r1200gs to an 1190 is like upgrading from aerostich to klim - i wondered why i was making it so "hard" on myself this whole time.

other parallels: the aerostich is simple, much like the bmw is a simple choice - it's well marketed, so the compliment seekers will get all kinds of attention, and you'll see more r1200gs bikes around. even the maintenance is simple on the bmw (if often) for the DIY type, and i understand the attraction to that. but like testing the waterproofness of the main zip on a 'stich, i don't trust bmw. ref: final drive.

the klim, like the 1190, is more capable in every respect, and requires more involvement (and a little more so for the 990). things like feeling the fork compress, and having components where the feedback is so high fidelity that you can feel what is happening, and it intuitively comes together to actually take advantage of the transient geometry to turn in a touch later than the r1200gs. or maybe you screw up the turn, but it's on you bro - the ktm is a lot more honest. whereas the bmw feels vague, not just in the front end, but in general. that's part of the reward of the ktm over the bmw, and for me, the ktm is totally worth the extra trouble in maintenance (the 1190 has longer intervals, but requires removing more things at maintenance time).
 
The KTM is certainly more raw.

If I had 25k to spend right now, I'd 100% buy the KTM 1290 super Adventure.

My next bike will be a KTM.
 
For on road I'd choose BMW over KTM any day. I'd also choose Aerostich over Klim even if price were no object. Guess I'm just a loser.

For an ADV bike, I find myself looking more for a KTM 950 than any of the newer, bigger ones. Seems like it's a more capable off road bike. My next upgrade is likely going to be my KLR into something a little nicer, but I plan to ride a lot of dirt with it. I'm on the fence for the GS vs KTM debate and if I had the money for something fancy and new I'd have to probably rent them both and see what I like. Upside to BMW is I can handle all maintenance myself and I already know I like the engine.

My road machine will remain a BMW boxer for the foreseeable future. My RT is the best freeway bike I've ever been on and commuting 600 miles a week requires something of that caliber. It's a bonus that it's also perfectly fun and capable in the twisties and even on dirt.
 
danate said:
For on road I'd choose BMW over KTM any day. I'd also choose Aerostich over Klim even if price were no object. Guess I'm just a loser.
Click to expand...

that's the thing, neither is a loser per se. it's just what matters to you as a rider. if slabbing supremacy on 280 is the most important thing going, the r1200gs is a better choice. if you like to hoon in the twisties, urban, and/or dirt, and will trade a minor amount of slabbing, then the ktm is clearly the choice.

if my descriptions make you feel like a loser over your choices, that is not my intent. but my descriptions definitely reflect how i felt doing those things on on those bikes, and i won't apologize for that.
 
cleverusername said:
that's the thing, neither is a loser per se. it's just what matters to you as a rider. if slabbing supremacy on 280 is the most important thing going, the r1200gs is a better choice. if you like to hoon in the twisties, urban, and/or dirt, and will trade a minor amount of slabbing, then the ktm is clearly the choice.

if my descriptions make you feel like a loser over your choices, that is not my intent. but my descriptions definitely reflect how i felt doing those things on on those bikes, and i won't apologize for that.
Click to expand...

I am just being dramatic for internet forum effect. I still disagree that the KTM is better in the twisties in any "clear" fashion. My RT is a surprising beast in the twisties and I'm sure the GS is the same. Plus, doing a day with over 400 miles of aggressive twisties (such as my 2 day Susanville loop), ask me what bike I'd rather be on :laughing.

Don't get me wrong, I love KTM as well (and hope to have one shortly), but just because you didn't like the feel of the GS doesn't make it a less capable bike. I haven't seen any shootouts where the KTMs leave the GSes in the dust in any fashion. In fact, most find them pretty evenly matched, the GS being a little more "refined" while the KTM is more "raw." The KTM usually has the edge in the dirt while the GS has it on the street.
 
danate said:
The KTM usually has the edge in the dirt while the GS has it on the street.
Click to expand...

for slabbing, yes. for getting after it, no.

the bmw's generic feel prevent it from being the better rider's bike, even if test numbers show parity in some places. the harder the ride (dirt or twisties), the more the ktm shines. it's the sort of thing you have to try for yourself.
 
I too love KTMs. My 950SM was the most fun bike I ever owned. Such a rowdy motor, lively chassis and monster brakes. Riding that bike was like cheating: the road felt 50% wider and the steering telepathic. And in town it definitely encouraged me to ride like a jackass.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top