I have an April 2013 R1200GS LC. A great bike, which I have really enjoyed riding, and at the end of March'15 I took it to the (in)famous Geoff at Hilltop. Why,especially as I have already said that I think it is a fantastic bike?
Certainly because I wanted/needed more power. Circa 100hp at the back wheel is certainly enough for most,excuding the "power,more power!!" brigade. That 100hp allows me to run two up, with panniers at 170/175 km/hr (that equates to 105/110 mph in Imperial units) here in Germany, and I have never been disappointed with the acceleration.
But what I was disappointed with was the low speed running around town. Find yourself it too high a gear, at too low a speed, and the engine/drivetrain chunters away until you drop a gear. Certainly not smooth progress and, as I have to have a run into Cologne main station on many Sundays to buy my dose of the Sunday Times, it nagged. So that is why I took myself to Hilltop when I had the opportunity.
The initial dyno run certainly made interesting viewing/ready. max power at the back wheel was 97 bhp at 7648rpm and max torque was 73 ftlb at 5900 rpm - nothing to complain about there. But looking at the lower reaches of the power and torque curves highlighted why I was standing there watching my bike on Geoff's dyno: below 4000 rpm the curves looked like the back of a particularly nasty crocodile and were clearly the cause of the uneven running that I hoped to improve on or correct. To be honest, I am amazed that a bike manufacturer could release a bike with such power delivery.
Anyway, Geoff's computer software sets to and analyses the dyno run and some 20 minutes later it has produced a map to improve things. I ended up with lovely smooth power and torque curves (and, btw, a max power of 114bhp at 7470 rpm and max torque of 90 ftlb at 6120 rpm).
So, all seemed well and I had a ride through the Peak District up to Manchester to test it out. Fantastic. None of that snatching and chuntering at lowers/high gear. A lovely smooth delivery of power and torque.
Am I happy? You bet. Was it worth it? You bet. Would I recommend it to others? Absolutely.
Certainly because I wanted/needed more power. Circa 100hp at the back wheel is certainly enough for most,excuding the "power,more power!!" brigade. That 100hp allows me to run two up, with panniers at 170/175 km/hr (that equates to 105/110 mph in Imperial units) here in Germany, and I have never been disappointed with the acceleration.
But what I was disappointed with was the low speed running around town. Find yourself it too high a gear, at too low a speed, and the engine/drivetrain chunters away until you drop a gear. Certainly not smooth progress and, as I have to have a run into Cologne main station on many Sundays to buy my dose of the Sunday Times, it nagged. So that is why I took myself to Hilltop when I had the opportunity.
The initial dyno run certainly made interesting viewing/ready. max power at the back wheel was 97 bhp at 7648rpm and max torque was 73 ftlb at 5900 rpm - nothing to complain about there. But looking at the lower reaches of the power and torque curves highlighted why I was standing there watching my bike on Geoff's dyno: below 4000 rpm the curves looked like the back of a particularly nasty crocodile and were clearly the cause of the uneven running that I hoped to improve on or correct. To be honest, I am amazed that a bike manufacturer could release a bike with such power delivery.
Anyway, Geoff's computer software sets to and analyses the dyno run and some 20 minutes later it has produced a map to improve things. I ended up with lovely smooth power and torque curves (and, btw, a max power of 114bhp at 7470 rpm and max torque of 90 ftlb at 6120 rpm).
So, all seemed well and I had a ride through the Peak District up to Manchester to test it out. Fantastic. None of that snatching and chuntering at lowers/high gear. A lovely smooth delivery of power and torque.
Am I happy? You bet. Was it worth it? You bet. Would I recommend it to others? Absolutely.
