2020 KTM 1290 Superduke vs 2019 1250 GS-HP

[tanneman]

Tannemann...Of course a rev limiter cuts ingnition/fuel off to prevent the engine from damage through over-rev...But if he bikes makes peak power at 10000 rpm and at 10100 or so it shuts off it is useless on the track and you have to short shift at probably 9500 not to run into the limiter...

You don't really rev an engine to the rev limiter as this will slow you down when you are trying to measure performance ie acceleration, lap times etc... . You shift gear at about peak power so that the revs fall back to above the torque curve in the rev range to start building up to peak power, ie chasing acceleration you need revs. Each engine design will have different personalities if I can call it that and has to be used how it performs best. So iaw if you hit the rev limiter trying to go fast it is rider error unless you managed to spin the rear up and that is where the soft limiter saves the engine, not you.

 

[Boxerlust]

...except the 1290SDR hits its top hp at 10000rpm and then the rev-limiter cuts in...hard ! Th GS for instance hits top-hp at or slightly below 8000 rpm and you can shift without hitting the limiter because you have 1000 rpm over-rev when it finally cuts in at 9000rpm...The GS 1250 has more power and torque than the KTM up to 7000 rpm...The meat of the powerband is between 4-8000 rpm where it is strong without a explosive top-end to describe it best.The KTM is strong between 7-10000rpm but it cuts out abrupt and hard then without any warning/over-rev...Not good but I still would like the additional pull between 8-10000 rpm on the GS
Then it would be the perfect motorcycle powerplant !
Of course high speed stability would have to be improved too without losing any of it's nimbleness in the twisties...
I have hig hopes/expectations for the M1300GS...
Like Arsey would say...170hp and 17" wheels !
Even if he is obviously afraid of donkeys...

 

[dean0n0]

How did we manage before electronic interference?

 

[Arsey]

No.

It’s you that say 170 bhp and 17” wheels and we just take the piss .

 

[tanneman]

...except the ..............

I don't think you understand what I'm saying. You are not suppose to hit the rev limiter and on the GS it is useless as the power tails off after peak power so no need to rev past it.

For the KTM it means that you have an extra 3k revs than the GS where it builds power. Torque matters when you have to get an object moving ie make it move or change the rate at which it is moving. The KTM lump is quicker revving than the GS flat twin and to get it moving might lag behind a bit on throttle opening but it will soon win it back when the revs build and it requires less gear changes for the same speed range than the GS. Flat twin lumps like the GS has never been build for engine revs. It will require a considerable investment in engineering to get it up to or past 10k rpm. Just look at the effort Porsche has put in the get a GT3 flat 6 to 9k rpm. But that engine is designed for a totally different application. The GS has been designed for user friendliness, from suspension to the power characteristics of the engine. It needs to tour and be predictable. Increasing the flat twin capacity will make a marked improvement on the torque but because the revs will be lower there won't be much improvement in power (see the torque and power calculation equations). Any bike will rag around a track, some will be better designed for it than others. There is no way a SDR would be slower than the GS around the track with higher power output, lighter construction, wider tyres, better ground clearance unless the wind is too bloody uncomfortable down the straight.

As I said before. It is only your perspective. A mediocre rider that has become used to how a GS rides and handles.

 

[Boxerlust]

Torque matters and that is why I say the new GS probably gets 160 hp and that would be good enough for upright road applications because anything would be taken off by the electronics anyways...And of course on smooth track with longer straights a 1290SDR would be faster than a GS.But I did not talk about the track but twisty roads with less than perfect pavement.Here the GS makes mincemeat out of the KTM.That was my whole point.The top end of the KTM is wasted on wheelies and not acceleration as real superbikes will leave the KTM in the dust.As also the handling of the KTM is twitchy at low speeds and slow at higher speeds.The worst of both worlds...Twitchy and slow steering like the Buell-junk years ago...On the track the KTM sees only rear-lights too because of these issues that is neither rails nor can accelerate as hard on the straights because it does not get the power down in gears 1,2,3,4...If you are a good enough rider to ride it W,F.O. you will find out very quick what I was talking about if you don't crash...
And an enginetht makes top hp at 10K rpm where it also shuts off hard 100-200 rpms later is useless for riding hard on the track because you have to short shift it in order not to load the front and upset the bike when it happens...By the way the KTM needs more gear changes than the BMW because the BMW's power band is wider than the KTM's and the gearing is shorter.The KTM's top gears are so tall that they are almost useless but KTM had to do it because the V-twin only revs 10000 rpm while the 4 cylinders pack up to 5000 rpm on top of it.(M1000RR) And despite that the KTM's top-speed is still 30 mph lower.Same reason why the KTM is not any faster than a BMW S1000R or XR and in roll-on even slower.The BMW's are much shorter geared than the KTM because they rev higher and thus make up for the power and torque deficit...The GS has even more torque than the KTM and even more power up to 7000 rpm...All what is missing is 2000 rpm/20-30 hp on top to make it the perfect powerplant for fast road-riding...The XR has the top-end but not the torque and thus needs rpm's and needs to be shifted.
The M1300GS will take care of these problems... I hope...

 

[Arsey]

Change the fucking record.

 

[knutk]

I know how it works. I work with traction control systems. The question is bit rhetorical if BL complains about a rev limiter doing its job.

Sorry for my misunderstanding.

It will happen again

 

[Boxerlust]

About he misconception some people have here about flat-twin or boxer engines...The only drawback of this engine configuration is the less than ideal position of the intake runners...A Porsche 911 GT3 engine or 1250 GS engine are both technologically on the same level except that the Porsche has slightly more stroke that favors torque and not top end power due to higher piston speed at high rpm.So when you take a naturally aspirated 911 GT3 engine and cut 4 cylinders off and tune them the same way as in making torque at the same rpm level which they already do 911 and 1250 GS nake max torque at 6250 rpm and raise the GS breathing capability on the intake (runners and cam) and raise this ceiling by 600 rpm from 7800 to 8400 where the Porsche makes his top hp which is easy & realistic to do as the 1250 revs like the 911 9000 rpm max , you would end up with a R 1330 with 173 hp / 8400 rpm and 157 nm torque at 6250 rpm !
That would be perfect as for people who think this would be too much the 2021 already has the ECO/pussy mode...
As for the 17" front wheel that theoreticaaly builds up less gyro at higher speeds there are a lot of "Reggies" out there who make the 17" conversion but unfortunately is is more for looks because the geometry gets less stable at high speeds due to the shortened trail and you loose about 1 cm of ground clearance due to the smaller front wheel.The factory could do this much better without these disadvantages.But with Metzeler Sportec M9RR coming next year in GS sizes at least we can get good rubber now for the current configuration...And 136 hp with KTM 1290 and Ducati v-4 beating 143 NM torque of the current 1250 is nothing to snicker at either...

 

[Arsey]

Good analogy.
Only difference is I’d quite happily blat around in a 911GT3 but, as I don’t yet stink of piss, do not want to ride an old man’s 1250.....
Now go get off to school,or you’ll be late

 

[knutk]

About he misconception some people have here about flat-twin or boxer engines...The only drawback of this engine configuration is the less than ideal position of the intake runners...A Porsche 911 GT3 engine or 1250 GS engine are both technologically on the same level except that the Porsche has slightly more stroke that favors torque and not top end power due to higher piston speed at high rpm.So when you take a naturally aspirated 911 GT3 engine and cut 4 cylinders off and tune them the same way as in making torque at the same rpm level which they already do 911 and 1250 GS nake max torque at 6250 rpm and raise the GS breathing capability on the intake (runners and cam) and raise this ceiling by 600 rpm from 7800 to 8400 where the Porsche makes his top hp which is easy & realistic to do as the 1250 revs like the 911 9000 rpm max , you would end up with a R 1330 with 173 hp / 8400 rpm and 157 nm torque at 6250 rpm !
That would be perfect as for people who think this would be too much the 2021 already has the ECO/pussy mode...
.........
:

There is one big catch to your Porsche analogy, as pointed out by @Micko123 in post #308.

The Porsche has 6 cylinders, hence no breathing problem in the crank-case.
There is no easy way around it for a boxer twin as well as for a 360 degree crank parallel twin like in the F800. When reaching RPM above 6500 the engine simply loose so much torque, so there is no way the boxer twin will reach 150 + hp without rising the torque substantially.
Let's say you managed to get max hp at 7500 rpm (with the torque curve already pointing the wrong direction): to reach 160Hp at 7600 rpm the required torque at this rpm will be: 160hp x 7127/7600rpm = 150 Nm. As the torque will be in a declining curve at this rpm (for a twin boxer), let's assume the maximum torque at 6000 + rpm would be 160Nm. If we assume that the engine is able to produce the 1250 torque equivalent of 11,1 Nm/100cc, (Which is dam good) this means the engine needs to increase size to 160/11,1 x 100cc = 1440 cc.
Increasing the boxer to 1440 cc is of course doable, but it means larger airbox, stronger frame etc etc. Yes, it will be a powertrain, but a fat and not desirable one. Ref the 1800cc boxer launched this fall... Extra weight is the least a boxer GS/GSA needs.

Let's face the facts, the boxer is a great engine that is good at what it does best, delivering masses of torque within the rpm range most riders do at their every day riding. But a boxer twin will not ever be a high rpm performer when compared to V-twins and parallel twins with a 2707450 degrees crank. Now, going to a flat four or six would be a game changer when it comes to power output, but then we are talking Goldwing....

 

[stanley]

Knutk talking sense again, but I don't think BL will have any of it. He just doesn't get the concepts that you have previously described.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

 

[Boxerlust]

The times of the crankcase-breather problems with oil in the airbox/intake runners are long gone...That was true with the old 2-V twins or if you overfilled the first 4-V boxers more than 25 years ago...The current 1250 boxer is already good for 9000 rpm max like a 911GT3.All it needs added displacement like the Porsche has 4 mm more stroke which would translate to 1332 ccm and intake runners,valve sizes and cam lobes to flow additional air.Shift-Cam is perfect for this because it could come without the penalty of loss of torque in the low and mid range...
If they wanted to go 10000 rpm to get even more top end hp I don't think it would be necessary for a R-GS or R-XR application but could be fun if they ever decide to bring another S-Boxer with Tele-lever
But here their would be so much flex on the crankshaft and probably wear on the engine case that they would have to design an all new engine with a 3rd bearing in the center of the crankshaft like it is wasted on the low revving,low hp R18...
We will see what they will do as competition improves the breed and Ducati setting the bar higher with their 170 hp / 60K ilometers valve adjustment interval new Volkswagen/Ducati V-4 Mutistrada that looks unfortunately everything but sexy and sounds worse than my blender in the kitchen set on high speed...
A GS 1250 with Akra-EU3 slip-on sounds glorious in comparison...How times have changed !
Even a KTM 1290 has a very insipid exhaust note sounding more like a Cheshire cat than a Beast...

 

[Arsey]

We will see what they will do as competition improves the breed and Ducati setting the bar higher with their 170 hp / 60K ilometers valve adjustment interval new Volkswagen/Ducati V-4 Mutistrada that looks unfortunately everything but sexy and sounds worse than my blender in the kitchen set on high speed...
A GS 1250 with Akra-EU3 slip-on sounds glorious in comparison...How times have changed !
Even a KTM 1290 has a very insipid exhaust note sounding more like a Cheshire cat than a Beast...

So you think the current GS is sexy looking ?
I’m not totally struck on the Multi V4 but it looks a damn sight more integrated than the GS which is now just a mess of stuck on bits and mis-matched plastics.
And as for the sound-I’m sorry but a V4 will piss all over a Boxer twin all day long.
You really are more deluded than I thought

 

[RedRick Esq.]

...except the 1290SDR hits its top hp at 10000rpm and then the rev-limiter cuts in...hard ! Th GS for instance hits top-hp at or slightly below 8000 rpm and you can shift without hitting the limiter because you have 1000 rpm over-rev when it finally cuts in at 9000rpm...The GS 1250 has more power and torque than the KTM up to 7000 rpm...The meat of the powerband is between 4-8000 rpm where it is strong without a explosive top-end to describe it best.The KTM is strong between 7-10000rpm but it cuts out abrupt and hard then without any warning/over-rev...Not good but I still would like the additional pull between 8-10000 rpm on the GS
Then it would be the perfect motorcycle powerplant !
Of course high speed stability would have to be improved too without losing any of it's nimbleness in the twisties...
I have hig hopes/expectations for the M1300GS...
Like Arsey would say...170hp and 17" wheels !
Even if he is obviously afraid of donkeys...

You do know that you can adjust where the rev limiter cuts in dont you and a KTM1290SDR peak power is before 10k revs

Actually 180BHP at 9500 and peak torque 103 Ft pounds at 8000 revs

The SDR is so much lighter than a GS with a 17 inch front wheel shorter wheelbase etc etc

You are a afucking idiot to suggest that a GS is the faster bike and I think you should go away and not come back until you can be sensible failing that just go away

 

[johnnyboy]

You do know that you can adjust where the rev limiter cuts in dont you and a KTM1290SDR peak power is before 10k revs

Actually 180BHP at 9500 and peak torque 103 Ft pounds at 8000 revs

The SDR is so much lighter than a GS with a 17 inch front wheel shorter wheelbase etc etc

You are a afucking idiot to suggest that a GS is the faster bike and I think you should go away and not come back until you can be sensible failing that just go away

He would go away if folk stopped reacting to the utter shite he consistently writes.........................

Sent from my SM-G970F using Tapatalk

 

[spoonz]

You do know that you can adjust where the rev limiter cuts in dont you and a KTM1290SDR peak power is before 10k revs

That’s just a shift light is it not, no bearing on the Rev limiter itself ?

 

[RedRick Esq.]

That’s just a shift light is it not, no bearing on the Rev limiter itself ?

Ah ok maybe I adjusted my shift light to the same as the rev limiter

Nonethe less the man is still a buffoon

Rides it for a few miles and declares it slower than a GS

 

[Boxerlust]

Arsey the new M-S looks horrible as also kills the whole Ducati mantra about how superior the trellis frame and desmo valves are...Like KTM's Ready to Race which could not be further from the truth the Ducati MS and soon monster too has a cast aluminum frame and conventional valve springs...The power of marketing propaganda...They just killed their own religion...As for looks the bend tank,duck beak and swing arm with canti-lever shocks looks cheap and awful.The GS that is now 8 years old still looks sharper and more modern than the Ducati.And the the political correct sound to appease the Dictators in Brussels is just as embarrassing as the sound of the M-G 85 TT where the whine of the prary drive is louder than what comes out of the exhaust...horrible especially considering how good Guuzi or Ducati V-twins used to sound.But I applaud Ducati ditching the expensive belt-driven desmo cams in favor of 60K kilometer valve adjustment intervals
As the V-4 pissing over the 1250 boxer Arsey you are deluded again.The rider is pissing all over the other rider not the bike.Top speed on the Autobahn the M-S for sure will win over the GS.But on a twisty mountain road the GS will make 143 nm Torque at 6250 rpm while the Ducati won't accelerate as hard needing another 2000 rpm to make 125 nm max...You need to shift and keep the rpm up on the Duc and pay for it in gas.If I did not want a GS for whatever reason I rather save 5 grand and buy a 2021 S1000XR in M-colors insyead of the V-4 MS.The XR looks better,is cheaper,has more dealers to service it and handles better due to the 17" front wheel !And is less complicated and more reliable,too.A V-4 means nothing to me and reminds me of these crappy 1700 ccm Ford V-4's they used to put into Saabs to replace their ancient two-strokes...
And cruise control radar is one gadget gone too far as I have never used cruise control or even shift-assist or hill hold on my GS...I like fuel injection,ABS and GPS though...Keyless is another feature I can do without !
Like you said , less is often more...

 

[Arsey]

Now you’re being stupid !
How can the GS be more reliable than an unreleased bike ? The V4 motor is all new . Who knows what it will be like , but I doubt owners will need engine changes in less than 12 months !
You really need to remove the BMW blinkers . It’s embarrassing.