Bennetts GS comparison bike review

[littleade]

He probably thought shafting you would be enough

 

[littleade]

I know but I am 55 and don't want to get to old before my next one

Too late...…..

 

[yofi]

Really interesting vid, and they chose the best looking 1200 (though got the price wrong).

I'd be tempted if it weren't for the colourways, and so may well have to wait for the new model.

 

[Boshman]

So where the 1200 is lacking is due to the bad fueling around 5-6K. with a Hilltop or AF-XIED fitted I think they would be a lot closer!

It's a shame as that discussion has changed my thoughts on bahnstomer always thought what a great company to do a deal with but hay how many bmw dealers are their in the uk so on to the next one

Their Service and parts departments are top notch. but sadly if you want a good sales deal, go to NOG!

 

[Warlord]

Whats really interesting is this....

- Fuel consumption is worse on the new R1250 (On a full tank, that's 9.5 miles less than the R1200 and every 34 fill-ups the R1200 owner gets a tank full for free in comparison)

- Acceleration from 0 to 60mph is worse on the new R1250 (but to be fair, nothing in it.. you sneeze or blink and you lose)

- Acceleration from 0 to 100mph again, there is nothing in it between both bikes (and that was comparing a poorly fuelled R1200 to a perfectly fuelled R1250)... you sneeze or blink and you lose.

- Braking from 70mph to 0.. is worse on the new R1250 (and 3 meters worse will slam you right into the Costa Seating area ... and that test was with lightweight riders, anybody over 14 stone should worry as it'll be more than 3 meters for you )

- Weight of bike is worse on the new R1250 (11kg more which is about the weight of carrying 6 growling Chihuahua's)

At this point, wouldn't you just lose interest?

If you've ever walked a 1/4 mile... it's a fair distance. So both bikes racing and the new R1250 reaching a speed of 118.4 mph is still only 0.34 seconds in the lead....

0.34 seconds at nearly 120 mph.... haha

That is absolutely nothing. Even if both riders carried on and rode at top speed for another hour non-stop. The R1250 rider would have only 1 minute 10 seconds to compose his pack of Chihuahua's (if his brakes managed to stop him in time, or it didn't run out of fuel) before his R1200 mate arrived

Haha

 

[Warlord]

For the sake of yours truly, the most interesting part was the one not relevant to this particular post, and I might start a shit storm saying so. I'm talking about the dyno chart.

The 1200 was rated to 119 rear wheel hp.... ( I will not take it any further)

Well I don't mind mentioning it because yet again, on someone elses Dyno, a standard R1200 made 119 BHP at the wheel.... and this power was still made and considered to have poor fuelling.

But yet looking at a recent Hilltop Voodoo Chart..... his only made that AFTER the exorcism. £350 for absolutely NOTHING except a smoother power curve?

http://www.ukgser.com/forums/showth...-Euro-4-bike?p=5213196&viewfull=1#post5213196

You might want to bang on about engines running lean and all that bollox.... but NO ENGINES FAIL because of it, and that's assuming it's the truth!

The key part here is are you being lied to about your power increase? ... and is that voodoo chart actually worth the paper it's written on?