Dilemma

[Ric]

Hiya

New to this forum so I'll start my first post with a hello

I currently have a Triumph Tiger 1050, which is a great bike. But I've always wanted a BMW GS and so I've decided that come the new year it's got to happen.

I've been reading all the experiences on this site as have OCD when it comes to research

Now I was all for getting a used 2013 WC GS TE but the gearbox talk and other issues are putting me off a little. I also appreciate others have had no problems.

So I started to look at the 2013 GSA Triple black which you can get fully kitted out with Top box, panniers etc for around 12.5k. Good deals as the new one is coming 2014, but much lower price and more kit than a used WC GS TE

Saw a couple of GSA parked up in Spain when I was out there 2 up touring on the Tiger. It's a monster of a bike but looked awesome.

Do I go for the older GSA or the WC GS TE ?!

Anyone had both like to comment............................

Ric

 

[Timolgra]

Go for the older twin cam, much nicer bike

 

[autogs]

ive ridden both and the tc gsa wins for me

 

[jonnyp]

Don't believe all you read here the WC is a fantastic bike and very few have actual problems. If you go for a second hand one just make sure you get it's full history!!!!!

A 1200TC will be good but I think you'll regret it getting off a 1050, you'll need the WC motor to maintain the same level of performance.

 

[autogs]

a gs isnt about performance only though is it?,to me its more about the feel of the whole thing,the wc maybe more like the 1050,but then thats why he should try the tc.

 

[Flipfly]

Go for the older twin cam, much nicer bike

+1 older 1200 is a GS, new one is a characterless bag of dynamism. If you want fast, buy the new one, if you want a GS, buy the older one. It'll feel a bit alien, but when you master it, then you have a chance of "getting it". A GS should suprise, the new one is too upright sportsbike to suprise anyone. Not sure what the traction control is like on the tc, but if it's anything like the toilet, I'd avoid it like the plague. The new bikes electronics are an after thought and thoroughly shit! Too intrusive, as rough as a cats tongue when they cut in and they spoil the ride completely. Test ride a tc and make sure they aren't the same, if they are then try to find one without it.

 

[Wapping]

Feck me, a bloke from Yorkshire who is unsure of his own mind. Things have come to a sorry state.

 

[stevemersey]

I came to a 2011 R1200GS from two Tiger1050's, a 2008 and a 2010. I can't say which is the better of the two BM's but I can say that the oil head will be a step up from the Tiger. The WC may well be even better. Dynamically my BMW is far better on slower twistier roads when you are on and off the throttle tha the Triumph. It is also better at steady speeds on the motorway. The gap is closer on smoother sweepers. The BMW feels relaxed rather than quick and yet I can ride the BMW quicker A to B than the Triumph and still feel safe and enjoy myself. That said, I have a lot of fondness for the Triumphs which I feel were better painted and finished than the BMW, but the fact, is i find myself doing more miles on the BMW because it is more fun.

 

[Deleted account 251212001]

Ric i havent got both but ive ridden both, only you can decide. For me (owning a gsa twin cam), its a big heavy bike (with a full tank of fuel its really heavy), goes a long way on a tank in a lot of comfort, and its got enough poke to get a proper shift on, but the watercooled is a bike you can really hustle.

Each has its own merits but the newer bike is a cracker, although the gearbox was crap, crunchy etc on the one i tried, but so what, it was just so good overall.

I got back on my 2012 gsa twin cam after a four hour test ride on a wc and it initially felt like the brakes were jammed on. Madness but just goes to show what a livewire the watercooled is, and an absolute blast. Take a chance you wont be disappointed imo.

 

[Flipfly]

Ric i havent got both but ive ridden both, only you can decide. For me (owning a gsa twin cam), its a big heavy bike (with a full tank of fuel its really heavy), goes a long way on a tank in a lot of comfort, and its got enough poke to get a proper shift on, but the watercooled is a bike you can really hustle.

Each has its own merits but the newer bike is a cracker, although the gearbox was crap, crunchy etc on the one i tried, but so what, it was just so good overall.

I got back on my 2012 gsa twin cam after a four hour test ride on a wc and it initially felt like the brakes were jammed on. Madness but just goes to show what a livewire the watercooled is, and an absolute blast. Take a chance you wont be disappointed imo.

Like a supermoto though, great for a blast but it soon gets tiring and it's highly strung for long journeys compared to the old bike.

 

[jtb]

Like a supermoto though, great for a blast but it soon gets tiring and it's highly strung for long journeys compared to the old bike.

I had a TC GSA before the current LC, and although I found the GSA the more generally relaxing ride of the two, I don't find that the LC is bad for distance at all. I had a 1200 Multistrada before the GSA, and that _was_ a pita for anything other than hooning about on.

Incidentally I completely agree your other comment about about the crap traction control on the LC, it's waaay too sensitive, comes in too early, and too fiercely.

Cheers
Jimmy

 

[Deleted account 251212001]

Like a supermoto though, great for a blast but it soon gets tiring and it's highly strung for long journeys compared to the old bike.

Yeah probably some truth to that, i was tanking down roads like a dick compared to how i ride mine and i feel i dont hang about, the twin cam is more of a trundler and just eats up the miles. I did briefly stick the wc in rain mode and it was good as gold definately calms it all down if you want a more relaxing ride. kept bike in road mode for the most. I like the wc, exciting, build quality a slight dip. As an out and out mile muncher the current gsa is hard to beat.

 

[stubox]

I've had the GSA TC and now a WC.
If you like plodding along and occasionally feeling asthmatic (like some of the riders) then get the GSA TC. They're nice bikes, and I liked mine , but other than being able to go a long way on one fill up I've not missed it.
There's a lot of old bollocks spouted by the old guard on here about 'getting it' etc which seems to translate into some intangible feeling about the old bike, however just ride both, see which you prefer, buy it.
Then come back on here and you'll either be telling people you 'get it' while smelling of wee, talking some soapbox politics and never ever ever cleaning your bike or moaning about your gearbox, always cleaning it and finally rejecting it because it looked at you a bit funny last night.

Either way it's better than the piece of shite you ride currently welcome to one of the more interesting motorbike forums.

 

[REGS12]

I graduated from a 2004 1200 GS to a 2013 LC. there is a significant difference in the two bikes, the main being the athleticism of the LC. The new engine seems to take away the weight of the bike and make it feel like a small lively little bike. That may be a poor description, but that is the way it feels to me.
I've just returned from a 4 day high country ride with friends, on a variety of bikes and the LC was always able to acquit itself well. The 1098 S and the Multi were more powerful but less comfortable and bugger- all faster. I have a Powerbronze screen that is excellent and sure helps on the long hauls. Cruise control helps retain your licence and makes travel far more relaxing, allowing the rider to think about riding rather than revenue raising.
In answering the question, the LC is a definite upgrade on the oilhead, but is a different beast. If ultimate speed is not your thing, then the saving of a heap of money makes sense.

 

[Eunuch]

I've had the GSA TC and now a WC.
If you like plodding along and occasionally feeling asthmatic (like some of the riders) then get the GSA TC. They're nice bikes, and I liked mine , but other than being able to go a long way on one fill up I've not missed it.
There's a lot of old bollocks spouted by the old guard on here about 'getting it' etc which seems to translate into some intangible feeling about the old bike, however just ride both, see which you prefer, buy it.
Then come back on here and you'll either be telling people you 'get it' while smelling of wee, talking some soapbox politics and never ever ever cleaning your bike or moaning about your gearbox, always cleaning it and finally rejecting it because it looked at you a bit funny last night.

Either way it's better than the piece of shite you ride currently welcome to one of the more interesting motorbike forums.

Haha. I needed an early morning pick-me-up.

Good and honest summary, especially the stinking of pee bit .

Thanks Stubby .

I've never owned a GSA though always wanted one because of the tonker toy look and I know they are 'handy'. I tried it back to back with an oilhead and apart from the height combined with extra fuel weight which bothers a shortarse like me at 5' 8", I was aware of the additional weight on the go and it wasn't. They were both good but for me the standard bike was easily better.

Roll on a bunch of years and a few GS's later and trying the LC back to back with the oilhead was the same leap ahead. The LC was a jump ahead I really wanted. It gave it the naughtiness I felt it never had before. It's very good and more engaging than it's ever been in the past. For me.

As suggested, try it and buy the one that works for you/floats your boat. Just don't wet yourself

 

[Nutty]

Like a supermoto though, great for a blast but it soon gets tiring and it's highly strung for long journeys compared to the old bike.

Absolute nonsense.

 

[Timolgra]

I've had the GSA TC and now a WC.
If you like plodding along and occasionally feeling asthmatic (like some of the riders) then get the GSA TC. They're nice bikes, and I liked mine , but other than being able to go a long way on one fill up I've not missed it.
There's a lot of old bollocks spouted by the old guard on here about 'getting it' etc which seems to translate into some intangible feeling about the old bike, however just ride both, see which you prefer, buy it.
Then come back on here and you'll either be telling people you 'get it' while smelling of wee, talking some soapbox politics and never ever ever cleaning your bike or moaning about your gearbox, always cleaning it and finally rejecting it because it looked at you a bit funny last night.

Either way it's better than the piece of shite you ride currently welcome to one of the more interesting motorbike forums.

What a load of shite, come back with an opinion when it's rooted in reality

 

[Paul G (BHT)]

Like a supermoto though, great for a blast but it soon gets tiring and it's highly strung for long journeys compared to the old bike.

Having ridden a LC for a fair few prolonged days on both motorway, 'A' roads and twisties, I can confirm that the above post is complete bollocks

What are you basing your 'findings' on.... a two hour test ride maybe

Edit, Nutty beat me to it

 

[stubox]

What a load of shite, come back with an opinion when it's rooted in reality

It is. Mine, based on owning the bikes.

The droning of the boxer lump is only matched by those that equally drone on and on about how great the older boxer is/was and how shite the new one is. Tedious really. I prefer the new one over the old because while I appear to have mastered the deft touch of clutch control that enables me to clank through the gearbox with relative ease as I could with the old boxer, the new one spins up so much better when making progress. Something the old lump couldn't do ( though a Hilltop tuned bike seems too).

Still I'm happy in my reality, you're hopefully happy in yours, and maybe the OP will test one or the other and be happy in his.

 

[mcinlb]

Had a 2010 TC GS , now on a 2013 LC -

TC is a great bike and when I got it sorted for my own comfort, even better i.e. Sargent seat, I found the standard was good for 100mls or so but Sargent good all day long.
Also the TC screen was replaced with a GSA screen / bar. This was perfect for me as a touring set up.
TC was also very good in the switchbacks in the Alps etc. - engine characteristics

The LC is quicker , smoother, more responsive etc,etc.
Standard seat is better than the TC IMO though not up to Sargent comfort, standard screen is ok, but the NN higher / wider screnn is better at motorway speeds.

I also like the cruise control, never though it would be much use on the bike but as mentioned above, it adds another plus it rider relaxation when covering motorway miles.
Basically liked the TC , love the LC (inspite of the 1st gear clunks)