1200 GS, worth having?

[Cideredup]

All, im looking at selling my 01 1150 GS for a late 1200.
Have had people say the 1150, is the best bike, but why?
which 1200 model would you buy? is the pre 2010 model ok, or is buy the 2010?
any thoughts gratefully received
cheers
Gareth

 

[elevensies]

depends what you want it to do for you.

the 1150 are bulletproof, and are straight forward should anything go wrong,
they hold their value well, and some 1150 are more expensive than some 1200

keep the 1150, and spend the money on tarting it up

or if you have to have a 1200, then there is only the gsa imho.

check out the 800 as well, now they are a nice bike.. and all the tarty bits look good on em too

 

[Deleted account 211025001]

1200's are pants, get an air head

Andres

 

[luckylucian]

I've had both - change and you won't regret it, some 12's go wrong but then my 1150 had rust in the petrol tank seams, oil contaminated clutch from a failed seal, yes the 12 gsa is better but a std 12gs is pretty good

 

[Wrinkly]

I had a 55reg 1150gsa se, I now have a 59reg 1200gs.
Personally I can't see any difference in build quality between the two bikes apart from the brake and clutch fluid reservoir's which are much nicer on the 1150.
There is no doubt in my mind that the 1200 is a far superior bike to ride,it's lighter it handles better it's more responsive and importantly for me it overtakes better when fully loaded and carrying a pillion.
GS v GSA. When I bought mine I considered this for a very long time,in the end it came down to the fact that the only difference between the two bikes is the gsa is heavier it has a larger tank and taller suspension.
I have no desire to travel 300mls without stopping for 10mins and I've only got short legs so it was the gs for me,much nicer looking without all that ugly metal work around the tank anyway.
Which ever you get,enjoy

Steve

 

[Robbo1200ADV]

Had the 1150 GSA x 2 , 2 1200 GSA's now on a 1200SE which I love .Its lighter than the GSA's but looks great with wire wheels and GSA seat .beak and in White. A very usable bike and quick. Loved the look of my last 1150 GSA Se but it was no where near as nimble as my new GS SE ,especially with its HUMVEE Graphics

 

[nedflanders]

I've got an '06 GS, reason I choose this over the GSA was I too don't feel the need to ride 300miles without stopping and I'm rathered challenged on the inside leg measurement side. I could change to a newer bike if I want but really don't think the newer GS's offer that much difference in performance to justify the expense. There are plenty of GS's about only a couple of years old with low mileage's, bargain , then spend the rest on a decent trip round Europe.

 

[haydw]

Got a standard 1150 and a 1200gsa. the engines are like chalk and cheese. The 1150 has more character, but the 1200 motor has way more torque. I Prefered the gsa over the standard one as I am quite large and wanted the bigger fuel tank, plus I prefer the look. Would get rid of neither. I am really lucky to have the choice.

 

[snerkler]

I think it's worth doing, for the looks alone

Other than that I can't comment as never ridden an 1150, but surely the weight loss has got to be favourable.

 

[Shredder]

Get the 1200, you won't regret it.

I brought a 2008 1200gs from a dealer as ex-demo and it was great. I've now traded it and brought a 2010 gs new. Both bike are good, but the new one is better. My legs are too short for a GSA, but the GS is great! All GS's are an evolution, sure the first 1200's had teething problems and other new ones over the years probably did as well. However, if you want to to ride around the world I would get an early GS and not one with Cambus wiring and computers, but if you just intend to go round europe, you can always call BMW assist if it breaks.

 

[AdamA]

I had an 1150GS, which I sold to buy an early 1200GS, and now have a 1200GSA.
The GSA is by far the best of the bunch.

The 1150 in isolation is a great bike, but it's just too (top) heavy and a little down on go.

The 1200 was a revelation for me when it came out, handling brilliantly, with just enough weight shed in the right places to make a real positive difference to the handling, but retaining enough to keep it mostly composed on the rougher roads. Just a shame that as an early adopter I had "a bad'un."

The 1200GSA tho is just the biz. All the plus points of the standard 12, but with even more composure, and whilst just like those that decided against it I too don't plan on riding 300+ miles without stopping. I do love the ability to chose exactly when and where I want to stop within those 300+ miles without having to stop at a petrol station every hour or so...
I am short too, and other than having to think a bit about where I pull up I don't find it's height an issue at all.

 

[Deleted account 190920001]

there are hidden advantages to the GSA in that they have far better weather protection. The wider tank keeps it off your legs, the winglets off the middle and the larger screen of your upper body. I couldnt care less about the extra suspension but the extra fuel is a plus. The looks to me are also far better but that really is subjective.

 

[GSband]

If you're wondering what year R12GS(A) to buy : from 2007 onwards there's no servo assisted braking, from 2008 there's the new design, from 2010 there's the DOHC engine. With each generation the increase in power is combined with shorter gearing. The 04-07 generation consumes least petrol at identical speed/gear.

The discussion GS versus GSA is something else. Emotions run high without reason. Both are excellent at what they do. Very much a personal decision.

It starts with this : if you must have the larger range then the adventure with its' bigger tank is the only way to go; are you OK with the GS's range (>200 miles on 1 tank), then you still have a free choice between the two.

The main difference in riding experience is mere physics :
GS : lighter (esp noticeable at low speeds/manoeuvring), lower, highly flickable, screen causes turbulence on highway, faster acceleration over 60mph.
GSA : heavier (esp noticeable at low speeds/manoeuvring), higher, handles well inspite of its' weight, more 'planted' feel, better windprotection.
If you're worried about windprotection on the GS, there's lots available in the aftermarket, so that's not a dealbreaker.

Finally the design differences : black wheels are only to be had on the adventure; wired wheels are available to the GS, but I'm not sure if an adventure can be ordered with alloys. The luggage systems are available to both, though. The frame, front forks, seats, and fairing have different colours. It's these design differences that often make the decision.

To me, the GSA height, weight and bulkiness is a disadvantage. I don't need the extra range : when I'm out biking with friends, they're always the ones needing petrol before I do. I went with an R12GS (twice BTW), bought a higher screen, and have been happy with my choice for more than 80000miles.

Neither bike is better than the other, just different. Like compairing (let's say) a BMW 3series with a BMW X3 (rear wheel drive only) with identical engine.
They both make their owners happy, just like GS and GSA do.

Good hunting !