Maybe they had a low stock level because they usually don't fail......One in stock and two failures doesn't make it a common problem against the number of bikes sold. Thats a stock control issue.
ESA or No ESA is that is the question?
- Thread starter buttyboy
- Start date
Maybe they had a low stock level because they usually don't fail......One in stock and two failures doesn't make it a common problem against the number of bikes sold. Thats a stock control issue.
Precisely - there was bad batch with struts a while ago. Did not affect many (though it did me). But it was nowt to do with the ESA as such; could equally easily have been the non-ESA units.
didn't affect me either 
yeah, right
Just a point of view......
I don't panic that there's an outbreak of foot and mouth just because Tesco's don't have any milk at 3pm on a Sunday afternoon......
Just a point of view......
I don't panic that there's an outbreak of foot and mouth just because Tesco's don't have any milk at 3pm on a Sunday afternoon......
post 39
i've got 2 BMWs. i've had several of them previously, so reliability is clearly not my main concern
me neither
i've given my opinion. don't want an argument, so that's it from me on this thread
GSband
Registered user
Hi, I've copied my contribution from another 'should I buy ESA' thread.
Here goes :
" Hi, here's another one of my long posts. Please bear with me.
It took me a while to completely understand ESA, and then I studied aftermarket shocks. Here's why I decided to go with the latter. I'm not discussing price and value for money, thats' up to each individual.
First : SPRING/DAMPING QUALITY. Buying into the ESA system doesn't mean that you are buying a better spring or damper than standard BMW. It just means that instead of manually changing preload and damping as you can on the standard spring/damper, small motors do it for you at the push of a button. Nobody knows if the spring or damper are of any better quality than the standard BMW suspension.
Then : PRELOAD. BMW has estimated (= scientific guess) how much a solo buyer weighs, and has called this the 'solo' position for ESA. If you are significantly heavier the 'solo' position will give incorrect preload, and you will have to ride around with 'solo+luggage' as a minimum. Which of course implicates that the other settings will not match either. But, if your solo weight is less than the BMW estimate, the 'solo' position of ESA will always be wrong. A rider who weighs 70kg or less will find an ESA equipped bike unpleasant to ride with. This basic error is the reason why the aftermarket is providing systems that match the 'solo' position to your specific weight. Examples : there's WESA by Wilbers, and Ohlins have their TTX electronic suspension that can be adjusted to specific rider weight (the Ducati Mulistrada 1200 offers this adaptability).
But let's assume that the riders' solo weight coincides with BMW's estimate, then there's still the question what to do with additional weight not coinciding with BMW's definition of luggage and pillion. There is a difference between riding solo with topcase loaded, and riding solo with all cases loaded, but that difference isn't considered by ESA. The logical conclusion is that ESA only has rough correctness when it comes to preload.
What about BMW's claim that ESA on the GS allows 15 free choices ?
'On road' the weight on the bike is a GIVEN factor (you decide how much weight you put on the bike) and then you MUST adapt preload to the weight; there isn't really a FREE choice what position you put preload in.*
If you ride offroad the terrain dictates what position you put preload in. Again, a GIVEN factor, there's no free choice. What remains is a free choice between the 3 modes of damping.
*Even when a rider decides to use a different setting than BMW prescibes, he'll still use that same setting for that specific weight. Again, a given.
So let's talk about DAMPING.
First of all, the ESA system doesn't take changing temperatures into account, which means that the damping characteristics of each position (comf/hard/sport, or soft/norm/hard) will change with the change of season, as the oil viscosity of the damper changes.
BMW has chosen these three damping settings with big differences damping wise. The customer really feels the difference and says 'Wow this really works' , which is OK by itself.
The disadvantage of these big differences in damping steps is that some positions don't necessarily please the rider. If you browse through different posts and read comments of owners you'll often find the phrase : 'I don't use the 'X' position, because it's too hard/soft'. Some riders state that they always leave damping in the same position. This indicates that for some owners the choice of damping is limited to 2 positions... or even less. And then you may wonder why you'd spend money on settings or choices you will not or hardly ever use.
Now, there are some clear advantages to ESA :
- userfriendly : at the push of a button
- ease of change : for riders who alter the charge on their bike several times a day, it's heaven being able to adjust preload pushing a button (instead of having to turn a knob)
- changing damping characteristics on the fly : not having to stop to fiddle about with damping when road surface suddenly changes from bad to slick (or vv).
- preload or damping are always adjusted at front and back together, so a rider can't put the bike in a 'bad' setup
In conclusion, the ESA system is an extremely easy to use system with a few shortcomings (preload), and with a limited amount of possibilties (damping).
Compare this to the standard BMW/aftermarket suspensions :
- preload can be set EXACTLY according to charge on bike, even in small increments. Dynamic sag will always be right, be it riding solo, solo + topcase, solo + sidecases, solo +all cases, solo + pillion, solo + pillion + topcase, and so on... The disadvantage being that the rider has to know what he's doing. As preload is always adjusted before take off, there's no real disadvantage in user friendliness.
- damping can be adjusted not in mere 3 steps, but in extremely small steps (Wilbers : 22 steps). The beauty is that while I ride around with damping between positions 11 and 16, the next rider may like positions 14 to 20. Individuality rules. The disadvantage is that you have to stop and get off the bike if you want to change damping somewhere en route.
- damping can be adjusted to change in temperature. I use less damping in winter, compared to summer. That way my bike behaves the same throughout the year.
- most aftermarket shocks are of better-than-BMW-standard-shock quality
You may have guessed : I preferred a quality shock with a wide range of possibilities and some user unfriendliness (Wilbers) over the ease of use with limited possibilities and possible wrong preload (ESA).
Sincerely : I'm happy that so many owners of ESA are satisfied with what they bought. I wouldn't want it any other way. "
End of post. Cheers, GSband
Here goes :
" Hi, here's another one of my long posts. Please bear with me.
It took me a while to completely understand ESA, and then I studied aftermarket shocks. Here's why I decided to go with the latter. I'm not discussing price and value for money, thats' up to each individual.
First : SPRING/DAMPING QUALITY. Buying into the ESA system doesn't mean that you are buying a better spring or damper than standard BMW. It just means that instead of manually changing preload and damping as you can on the standard spring/damper, small motors do it for you at the push of a button. Nobody knows if the spring or damper are of any better quality than the standard BMW suspension.
Then : PRELOAD. BMW has estimated (= scientific guess) how much a solo buyer weighs, and has called this the 'solo' position for ESA. If you are significantly heavier the 'solo' position will give incorrect preload, and you will have to ride around with 'solo+luggage' as a minimum. Which of course implicates that the other settings will not match either. But, if your solo weight is less than the BMW estimate, the 'solo' position of ESA will always be wrong. A rider who weighs 70kg or less will find an ESA equipped bike unpleasant to ride with. This basic error is the reason why the aftermarket is providing systems that match the 'solo' position to your specific weight. Examples : there's WESA by Wilbers, and Ohlins have their TTX electronic suspension that can be adjusted to specific rider weight (the Ducati Mulistrada 1200 offers this adaptability).
But let's assume that the riders' solo weight coincides with BMW's estimate, then there's still the question what to do with additional weight not coinciding with BMW's definition of luggage and pillion. There is a difference between riding solo with topcase loaded, and riding solo with all cases loaded, but that difference isn't considered by ESA. The logical conclusion is that ESA only has rough correctness when it comes to preload.
What about BMW's claim that ESA on the GS allows 15 free choices ?
'On road' the weight on the bike is a GIVEN factor (you decide how much weight you put on the bike) and then you MUST adapt preload to the weight; there isn't really a FREE choice what position you put preload in.*
If you ride offroad the terrain dictates what position you put preload in. Again, a GIVEN factor, there's no free choice. What remains is a free choice between the 3 modes of damping.
*Even when a rider decides to use a different setting than BMW prescibes, he'll still use that same setting for that specific weight. Again, a given.
So let's talk about DAMPING.
First of all, the ESA system doesn't take changing temperatures into account, which means that the damping characteristics of each position (comf/hard/sport, or soft/norm/hard) will change with the change of season, as the oil viscosity of the damper changes.
BMW has chosen these three damping settings with big differences damping wise. The customer really feels the difference and says 'Wow this really works' , which is OK by itself.
The disadvantage of these big differences in damping steps is that some positions don't necessarily please the rider. If you browse through different posts and read comments of owners you'll often find the phrase : 'I don't use the 'X' position, because it's too hard/soft'. Some riders state that they always leave damping in the same position. This indicates that for some owners the choice of damping is limited to 2 positions... or even less. And then you may wonder why you'd spend money on settings or choices you will not or hardly ever use.
Now, there are some clear advantages to ESA :
- userfriendly : at the push of a button
- ease of change : for riders who alter the charge on their bike several times a day, it's heaven being able to adjust preload pushing a button (instead of having to turn a knob)
- changing damping characteristics on the fly : not having to stop to fiddle about with damping when road surface suddenly changes from bad to slick (or vv).
- preload or damping are always adjusted at front and back together, so a rider can't put the bike in a 'bad' setup
In conclusion, the ESA system is an extremely easy to use system with a few shortcomings (preload), and with a limited amount of possibilties (damping).
Compare this to the standard BMW/aftermarket suspensions :
- preload can be set EXACTLY according to charge on bike, even in small increments. Dynamic sag will always be right, be it riding solo, solo + topcase, solo + sidecases, solo +all cases, solo + pillion, solo + pillion + topcase, and so on... The disadvantage being that the rider has to know what he's doing. As preload is always adjusted before take off, there's no real disadvantage in user friendliness.
- damping can be adjusted not in mere 3 steps, but in extremely small steps (Wilbers : 22 steps). The beauty is that while I ride around with damping between positions 11 and 16, the next rider may like positions 14 to 20. Individuality rules. The disadvantage is that you have to stop and get off the bike if you want to change damping somewhere en route.
- damping can be adjusted to change in temperature. I use less damping in winter, compared to summer. That way my bike behaves the same throughout the year.
- most aftermarket shocks are of better-than-BMW-standard-shock quality
You may have guessed : I preferred a quality shock with a wide range of possibilities and some user unfriendliness (Wilbers) over the ease of use with limited possibilities and possible wrong preload (ESA).
Sincerely : I'm happy that so many owners of ESA are satisfied with what they bought. I wouldn't want it any other way. "
End of post. Cheers, GSband
Excellent post. So I assume the WilbursESA option gives you a great shock but the same limitations on set up because it uses the BMW ESA electronics/motors?
Great post.
Great post.
GSband
Registered user
Thanks. I didn't study the W-ESA by Wilbers, but they install the spring according to riders weight and load. Don't know about damping, though. There's more info on Wilbers' website. And there are some posts about W-ESA on here. Seems a bit OTT first paying extra for BMW's ESA, and then pay some more to have it working correctly from new. To each his own, of course.
Cheers,
GSband
Cheers,
GSband
TunturiSport
Registered user
I have a 2006 GSA. In my experience 
the original shock absorbers are of high quality, I mean that they do not break down easily. I have made several long journeys in northern Russia where the roads are the worst possible. Often I have had my woman with me plus full luggage. Even after thousands of kilometers of such abuse the absorbers function well and never have leaked any oil. Do you think the ESA suspension would tolerate such treatment equally well?
the original shock absorbers are of high quality, I mean that they do not break down easily. I have made several long journeys in northern Russia where the roads are the worst possible. Often I have had my woman with me plus full luggage. Even after thousands of kilometers of such abuse the absorbers function well and never have leaked any oil. Do you think the ESA suspension would tolerate such treatment equally well?
snerkler
Registered user
Good post, although stating the obvious at times
I have the ESA and am happy with the settings BMW have preprogrammed. The trouble I have with manually adjusting is that I'm forever fiddling. With the ESA I can just press a button and off I go
snerkler
Registered user
I have a 2006 GSA. In my experience
Why wouldn't they? Aren't the shocks the same it's just that one can be adjusted electronically?
Yep, two up plus cases it is pretty wallowy on stock suspension, even with a mere 6000 miles, this is with pre-load wound right up and damping fully in.
Then it is also vague on fast direction changes on OE suspension, again cured by better quaility kit.
And it is also clunky over bumps compared to better units.
If the BMW OE equipment was so f***** great I am sure Rossi would have fitted some GS shocks to his Ducati and started winning again.
I am not saying it is terrible, just it ain't as good as some of the rather excellent aftermarket kit out there, people don't buy Ohlins / Wilburs etc just to impress the uninitiated (that's what noisy exhausts are for)
I agree entirely with GSBand...
I have found I like the Hi Speed compression backed of 2 clicks from stock (-16) of the 22 clicks on the Wilburs (but the stock GS has no high speed compression damping adjustment)
I also prefer the low speed damping 1 extra click out at -15 turns (again the stock GS has no low speed compression damping adjustment.
I also like -16 turns on the rebound damping - assuming the ESC units had 22 increments I would have a choice of something like 7,14 or 22, no good for my prefeence of 16, and yes 2 clicks is very noticeable!
As for pre-load I wind on 6 turns for me, another 6 for the pillion and another 4-6 for luggage.
Up front I also moved 3 clicks from the standard Wilburs damping setting - again no such adjustment at all provisioned by BMW on stock shocks, yet adjusting the damping up front makes a huge difference to feel and comfort.
Overall I can have handling that is better than the sport setting on the stock GS suspension, yet at the same time similar comfort (if not better) than the Normal setting due to the much better quality damping characteristics of the shock absorbers, the operating range is just so much better there is less requirement to change them, I have a base setting that works on smooth A-Roads and Bumpy B-Roads - no buttons required. And on a hot day perhaps one extra click will compensate - but the top of the range Ohlins have temperature compensation - for £600 more than the Wilburs!
snerkler
Registered user
Why so aggressive and why make assumptions about people you don't know? I'm not a sports bike rider, nor do I ride my GSA like a sports bike, in fact I probably ride more steady than a lot of folk on here. I still have chicken strips and have never had the traction control kick in unlike some on here (except for a couple of times when going over potholes under acceleration. But can I feel the bike wallow under me sometimes when set to comfort? Yep, I sure can. Why is that so unbelievable, and why does this get your back up so much? In fact I didn't buy the 2006 GSA as found this too wallowy, and ESA was not an option. It pogoed all over the place I therefore bought a GS instead. I believe the relative lack of road manners of the 2006 GSA due to the wallowing is one of the reasons the suspension has since been revised.
As for getting a life I could have a field day with this, but will rise above it for now.
I think he has issues.
All I can say is how glad I am that the stock ESA works for me, one up, two up or both with camping gear. Phew, I would not have the patience to try all those settings. Good on ya Rasher for being so patient.
All I can say is how glad I am that the stock ESA works for me, one up, two up or both with camping gear. Phew, I would not have the patience to try all those settings. Good on ya Rasher for being so patient.
Well that's where the ESA really is very good
I do not mind messing with suspension, but have to admit it took a fair few miles and a lot of twidling / note taking to get it where I am very happy and I know many riders would not have the time or inclination to bother.
We seem to have gone from ESA Vs no ESA to ESA Vs Aftermarket shocks, although perhaps the real questions is ESA Vs no ESA Vs Aftermarket shocks
I liked the test bike with ESA, found my bike a joy when I bought it (without ESA) but like it best now with the aftermarket kit. To me there is no wrong answer and most people would be happy with all of the above, but each individual is likely to have a preference, it is easy to test ESA Vs Non-ESA yourself, but pretty hard to line up a test ride with Ohlins / Wilburs.
Often ignorance is bliss, as soon as you perceive a problem with your bike cash starts flowing from your wallet, I reckon 90% of people who find the bike great on standard suspension would prefer one that has been upgraded, but upgrading costs, so if your happy then your quids in
I was not completely happy and knew a bit (Ok a lot) of expenditure would make a good deal of difference - certainly worth the cost to me, but I can understand others who think you must be mad to spend £1200 to improve the suspension.
IMHO Same goes for ESA, £600 to save no more than a few hours (if not minutes) twidling over the life of the bike, plus of course with ESA you tend to swap settings far more often just because you can rather than you need to.
I found the ESA bike I tested wallowed noticeably on normal and comfort and even in comfort still clunked uncomfortably over small bumps, so would have never used anything other than sport, then switched from solo to two-up twenty or thirty times a year - a saving of around 75 minutes over 5 years, that's £480 an hour I am paying myself to manually adjust my suspension.
GSband
Registered user
....
I do not mind messing with suspension, but have to admit it took a fair few miles and a lot of twidling / note taking to get it where I am very happy and I know many riders would not have the time or inclination to bother.
We seem to have gone from ESA Vs no ESA to ESA Vs Aftermarket shocks, although perhaps the real questions is ESA Vs no ESA Vs Aftermarket shocks
...
I was not completely happy and knew a bit (Ok a lot) of expenditure would make a good deal of difference - certainly worth the cost to me, but I can understand others who think you must be mad to spend £1200 to improve the suspension.
IMHO Same goes for ESA, £600 to save no more than a few hours (if not minutes) twidling over the life of the bike, plus of course with ESA you tend to swap settings far more often just because you can rather than you need to.
I found the ESA bike I tested wallowed noticeably on normal and comfort and even in comfort still clunked uncomfortably over small bumps, ...
Same story here.
When the standard BMW shocks on my R12GS started to wallow I read up on the subject.
And I testdrove an R1200RT with ESA, but wasn't happy with the damping settings.
So I decided to go with aftermarket shocks.
It took me half a day riding up and down the same road with varying road surface and some nice twisties to understand what I could get out of the Wilbers suspension - you should have seen the staggered looks on pedestrians' faces !
Cheers,
GSband
FastFred
Registered user
I think it's a great thing. I can tell the difference on all the damping options. I am around 75kg's and find the preload settings perfect for solo and two up with luggage. I just don't personally understand the critics of it. I have raced bikes and can ride the GS pretty fast with the handling and wide bars. I'd go for it. Convenience..
Horse1200
Registered user
Just to add my 2pence worth, if you take a GSA or GS off road. All that electric trickery is not going to thank you for it. 99% of GS riders probably wont venture offroad any more than the odd gravel road. A friend of mine spends a couple of minutes when we go offroad thumbing a multitude of buttons on his gs, abs off traction control off suspension this suspension that, Whats the point, if you are sticking to the black stuff then esa is worth the extra expense. I dont have it and never will, my GSA is bog standard apart from the heavy duty protective gear, and i leave the suspension pretty much set on one setting. It works in all environments. Its all about the rider and what you plan to do with the bike.
Most important thing enjoy your bike.
Most important thing enjoy your bike.
Similar threads
