Have you seen the Saturday Telegraph review of the new R1200S?.......
OUCH!!
Pauline
Telegraph R1200S review
Moderators: Gromit, Paul, slparry
Telegraph R1200S review
Girls just wanna' have fun!
If memory serves me correctly 
It reads something like>>>>>
Bu66er! I picked the wrong one!
Al
It reads something like>>>>>
Bu66er! I picked the wrong one!
Al
Last edited by Blackal on Sat Apr 22, 2006 12:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
If I am ever on life support - Unplug me......
Then plug me back in..........
See if that works .....
Then plug me back in..........
See if that works .....
Here it is then
The latest incarnation of BMW's S-suffixed boxer twin looks good on paper: a light 419lb dry weight, a strong 83lb ft of torque and the most eye-catching number, 121bhp. This last figure makes the new R1200S the most powerful production BMW boxer twin in the whole range, ever, and teasingly suggests we might have here something of a German Ducati. It's a description that sounds very attractive if you don't look beyond the stereotypes: it would be fast, look good and handle outstandingly (the Italian side), yet it would be reliable and have a top-quality finish (the German bit).
All of which goes to show you should take little notice of counting and clichés. To kick off, Ducati these days is offering the highest-quality finish you'll get on any production bike, European or Japanese, and reliability, while only average, is no longer an issue either. BMW, meanwhile, has consistently ridden on its reputation rather than reality: my experience is that the German bikes have withstood the rigours of winter less well than Japanese rivals, while three of the last four BMWs I've ridden have suffered minor faults, and on the K1200S press launch earlier this year, one bike stopped completely. Many of these are pre-production bike niggles, but customer machines are certainly no better than average - about the same as Ducati, then?
So, with the context clarified, how well does BMW's take on a twin-cylinder sports bike work? The finish is one of the first things you notice, as the stripes on the red and silver model I rode were stuck on unprotected. Devilish fingers could do them damage but, more pragmatically, it makes cleaning the bike more difficult, and looks a bit cheap too. Swing a leg over and impressions don't improve as the sides of the fuel tank (or, more accurately, the bodywork covering the tank) are flimsy - you can easily push them in an inch or so, and this is at one of the more important contact points with the machine, where your knees rest and, in fast cornering, pull against the bike to help heel it down into turns.
Still, once rolling, the S otherwise has a solid, reassuring feel. The riding position is sporty, but resides at the conservative end of that spectrum, which is good for long distance and urban comfort as there's not too much weight on the wrists and your legs aren't too cramped. The seat is comfortable for several hours at a time, and although the fuel capacity isn't especially generous at 3.75 gallons, at least these boxer twins are generally frugal and capable of 50mpg without too much restraint, so the fuel range should be acceptable. I say "should" as bike manufacturers have no obligation to provide economy figures, although, unusually, BMW does and says the 1200S delivers 65mpg and 50mpg respectively at a steady 56mph and 75mph. Not especially realistic, but the numbers give some idea of what you might get.
The motor feels strong on the roads, with plenty of urge at lower revs, although it lacks the punch and crispness of a Ducati. Indeed, the throttle needs to be wound open a long way to find what the engine has to offer. Puzzlingly, this is a deliberate ploy - the alleged virtues of the bike's non-linear throttle action were expounded at length - but in practice it makes the S feel more laboured than necessary. On the track, this becomes an outright nuisance as you have to grab great fistfuls of twistgrip to get the bike moving, on top of which the power seems to roll in lazily regardless of how quickly you snap open the throttle. The aim is make the power easier to control at small throttle openings, but instead it just makes it less accessible. It feels as if the fuelling isn't quite right either, as even when the throttle is snapped open as fast as possible, the power is still reluctant to obey.
It's on the track that you also discover the bike has a very narrow power band, at least as far as the meat of its output is concerned. While there's sufficient torque for reasonably rapid progress across the range, the exciting post-110bhp levels exist only from 7,000rpm to 8,500rpm, and keeping the rev counter pointing at this sweet spot demands dancing on the gearlever like a two-stroke rider. "Sweet spot" is something of a misnomer anyway as, by this point, the engine is vibrating harshly (as it does from 6,000rpm upwards), so much that the pleasure of spinning it up is spoilt by the general unpleasantness of the vibes.
The handling is unsuited to track and fast road riding too. It's a supremely stable bike but utterly anaesthetic, so you're taking its cornering grip on trust rather than tactility. While the Telelever wishbone-and-fork front suspension dives little and allows late braking, any sense of how the front tyre is dealing with what you're dishing out is lost. The back is better, but not much, despite the optional (£445) high-quality Öhlins suspension - put that down to the extra mass of the shaft drive. At least BMW has not fitted its unique power-assisted brakes, which would make matters worse.
If you're looking for a stimulating track-day bike, the retro Ducati GT featured in Motoring last week would be a much better proposition, and quicker despite its 30bhp deficit, or any liquid-cooled V-twin sports bike (an Aprilia RSV Mille is cheaper as well as much faster and better handling). But as a road bike, the R1200S is more acceptable, dealing with poor surfaces very well, especially while braking, thanks to its stability and torque. It's not really a sports bike, though, more a sports tourer with a lean and interesting look. In terms of rider satisfaction, the old R1100S it replaces did a much better job.
BMW R1200S (tech/spec)
Price/availability: £8,955 on the road. On sale May 13.
Contact: BMW (GB), 01344 426565 or www.bmw-motorrad.co.uk.
Engine/transmission: 1170cc, twin-cylinder four-stroke with 8 valves; 121bhp at 8,250rpm, 83lb ft of torque at 6,800rpm. Six-speed gearbox, shaft final drive. Performance: top speed 135mph (est), average fuel consumption 45mpg (est).
We like: Stability, style, comfort.
We don't like: Finish, throttle response, vibration, poor feedback.
Alternatives: Aprilia RSV-R Mille, £8,999. Buell Firebolt, £7,745. Ducati 999, £11,250. Ducati 1000SD, £7,250. Suzuki SV1000SA, £6,049. Triumph 955i Daytona, £7,499.
© Copyright of Telegraph Group Limited 2006
The latest incarnation of BMW's S-suffixed boxer twin looks good on paper: a light 419lb dry weight, a strong 83lb ft of torque and the most eye-catching number, 121bhp. This last figure makes the new R1200S the most powerful production BMW boxer twin in the whole range, ever, and teasingly suggests we might have here something of a German Ducati. It's a description that sounds very attractive if you don't look beyond the stereotypes: it would be fast, look good and handle outstandingly (the Italian side), yet it would be reliable and have a top-quality finish (the German bit).
All of which goes to show you should take little notice of counting and clichés. To kick off, Ducati these days is offering the highest-quality finish you'll get on any production bike, European or Japanese, and reliability, while only average, is no longer an issue either. BMW, meanwhile, has consistently ridden on its reputation rather than reality: my experience is that the German bikes have withstood the rigours of winter less well than Japanese rivals, while three of the last four BMWs I've ridden have suffered minor faults, and on the K1200S press launch earlier this year, one bike stopped completely. Many of these are pre-production bike niggles, but customer machines are certainly no better than average - about the same as Ducati, then?
So, with the context clarified, how well does BMW's take on a twin-cylinder sports bike work? The finish is one of the first things you notice, as the stripes on the red and silver model I rode were stuck on unprotected. Devilish fingers could do them damage but, more pragmatically, it makes cleaning the bike more difficult, and looks a bit cheap too. Swing a leg over and impressions don't improve as the sides of the fuel tank (or, more accurately, the bodywork covering the tank) are flimsy - you can easily push them in an inch or so, and this is at one of the more important contact points with the machine, where your knees rest and, in fast cornering, pull against the bike to help heel it down into turns.
Still, once rolling, the S otherwise has a solid, reassuring feel. The riding position is sporty, but resides at the conservative end of that spectrum, which is good for long distance and urban comfort as there's not too much weight on the wrists and your legs aren't too cramped. The seat is comfortable for several hours at a time, and although the fuel capacity isn't especially generous at 3.75 gallons, at least these boxer twins are generally frugal and capable of 50mpg without too much restraint, so the fuel range should be acceptable. I say "should" as bike manufacturers have no obligation to provide economy figures, although, unusually, BMW does and says the 1200S delivers 65mpg and 50mpg respectively at a steady 56mph and 75mph. Not especially realistic, but the numbers give some idea of what you might get.
The motor feels strong on the roads, with plenty of urge at lower revs, although it lacks the punch and crispness of a Ducati. Indeed, the throttle needs to be wound open a long way to find what the engine has to offer. Puzzlingly, this is a deliberate ploy - the alleged virtues of the bike's non-linear throttle action were expounded at length - but in practice it makes the S feel more laboured than necessary. On the track, this becomes an outright nuisance as you have to grab great fistfuls of twistgrip to get the bike moving, on top of which the power seems to roll in lazily regardless of how quickly you snap open the throttle. The aim is make the power easier to control at small throttle openings, but instead it just makes it less accessible. It feels as if the fuelling isn't quite right either, as even when the throttle is snapped open as fast as possible, the power is still reluctant to obey.
It's on the track that you also discover the bike has a very narrow power band, at least as far as the meat of its output is concerned. While there's sufficient torque for reasonably rapid progress across the range, the exciting post-110bhp levels exist only from 7,000rpm to 8,500rpm, and keeping the rev counter pointing at this sweet spot demands dancing on the gearlever like a two-stroke rider. "Sweet spot" is something of a misnomer anyway as, by this point, the engine is vibrating harshly (as it does from 6,000rpm upwards), so much that the pleasure of spinning it up is spoilt by the general unpleasantness of the vibes.
The handling is unsuited to track and fast road riding too. It's a supremely stable bike but utterly anaesthetic, so you're taking its cornering grip on trust rather than tactility. While the Telelever wishbone-and-fork front suspension dives little and allows late braking, any sense of how the front tyre is dealing with what you're dishing out is lost. The back is better, but not much, despite the optional (£445) high-quality Öhlins suspension - put that down to the extra mass of the shaft drive. At least BMW has not fitted its unique power-assisted brakes, which would make matters worse.
If you're looking for a stimulating track-day bike, the retro Ducati GT featured in Motoring last week would be a much better proposition, and quicker despite its 30bhp deficit, or any liquid-cooled V-twin sports bike (an Aprilia RSV Mille is cheaper as well as much faster and better handling). But as a road bike, the R1200S is more acceptable, dealing with poor surfaces very well, especially while braking, thanks to its stability and torque. It's not really a sports bike, though, more a sports tourer with a lean and interesting look. In terms of rider satisfaction, the old R1100S it replaces did a much better job.
BMW R1200S (tech/spec)
Price/availability: £8,955 on the road. On sale May 13.
Contact: BMW (GB), 01344 426565 or www.bmw-motorrad.co.uk.
Engine/transmission: 1170cc, twin-cylinder four-stroke with 8 valves; 121bhp at 8,250rpm, 83lb ft of torque at 6,800rpm. Six-speed gearbox, shaft final drive. Performance: top speed 135mph (est), average fuel consumption 45mpg (est).
We like: Stability, style, comfort.
We don't like: Finish, throttle response, vibration, poor feedback.
Alternatives: Aprilia RSV-R Mille, £8,999. Buell Firebolt, £7,745. Ducati 999, £11,250. Ducati 1000SD, £7,250. Suzuki SV1000SA, £6,049. Triumph 955i Daytona, £7,499.
© Copyright of Telegraph Group Limited 2006
no doubt a chip and pipe will go some way to sort out fueling issues... but you'd expect better as stock given the price - I wouldn't be wanting to drop a grand on top of an expensive purchase.
Is this something to do with BMW's commendable but unhelpful desire to reduce emissions by running lean?
Noticed the flimsy bodywork at Ally Pally...
R12S the bike we love to hate...
Ade
Is this something to do with BMW's commendable but unhelpful desire to reduce emissions by running lean?
Noticed the flimsy bodywork at Ally Pally...
R12S the bike we love to hate...
Ade
2000 R1100S Sport
1980 Vespa P125X
1980 Vespa P125X
I read this with a bit of caution. We all know that some bikeres would never want a BMW whatever power output it had. Myself, I would not want another Jap bike because after a few years most of them end up very tatty whereas my wifes 2000 model looks as good as my 2004 model, Where is the poor quality finish there? It may look better on a new Ducati then a new BMW but the second hand prices don't tell me that is so.
The best bit is where he says "an Aprilia RSV Mille is cheaper " and then you see at the end of the report that according to his figures it is in fact £4 more expensive. well £4 is still not cheaper!
The best bit is where he says "an Aprilia RSV Mille is cheaper " and then you see at the end of the report that according to his figures it is in fact £4 more expensive. well £4 is still not cheaper!
2004 Silver (mine)
2001 Silver/Manderin (hers)
Visiting France? Read my blog on http://bikesindordogne.blogspot.com
2001 Silver/Manderin (hers)
Visiting France? Read my blog on http://bikesindordogne.blogspot.com
Kevin Ash indeed. That man writes utter tosh about anything that's not a Yamazukda with Harris rearsets and an Akrapovic. And he's even worse in the Telegraph than he is in MCN. Remarkable how easy it is to make money writing garbage. 80% of his Telegraph review talks about it's suitability on the track. Who the hell buys a BMW "sports" bike for hardcore track use ?!
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 132 guests