But it shows a pattern of regular failures, I bet if I ran a similar poll on the ZZR1400 site about replacing chains there would be less - and they're a cnsumable item, a shaft drive should not be!
Bet if you asked how many had thrown a rod / melted a piston / bent a valve the results would be very different.
This is (or was) a "sealed for life" unit, not something you would expect even 1 in 20 owners to have had fail.
Simple poll, simple result - it is a weakness in design and more than likely gonna cost every long term owner at some point.
It doesn't show any regular pattern at all. It simply shows:
(1) The number of UKGSers that have replied to the poll
(2) The number within that number who have had an explosion
(3) The number within that number who have not had an explosion
For all you know all of the people who have not replied have had no explosion but you have found all the exploded ones. Which, as BuMW have sold several thousand 1200's would bring the ratio not to your satisfactory 1:20 but to an incredibly satisfying 15:1,000's.
To compound the problem the word you chose 'explosion' can mean just about anything. Mine on my GSA has failed twice but the cause and end result of each were very different. For all you know, someone has voted yes when it was nothing more than the outer oil seal failing, the rest of the internal mechanicals being fine.
Then you get the statistical problem of factoring in no failures on one bike whilst in ownership but a failure on another. My first 1200 of the 05 vanilla variety clocked up 22,000 in 18 months with no problems. I could vote no. My second GSA (Adventure 06 variety) has had two rear drive problems, both repaired under either the OM warranty or under an extended warranty without too much drama in 53,000 miles. Do I vote yes, twice? What if I now sell the GSA to someone who has no problems, do they vote no? I might of course conclude that the vanilla bike is much better than the adventure, simply as one failed twice and the other didn't.
Rather like the calculation that you have owned 12 bikes over 20 years, clocking up 100,000 miles, meaning that:
(a) You have an annual average mileage of 5,000 per bike
(b) You keep each bike for 18 months
(c) Each bike therefore averages 7,500 miles whilst in your hands
(d) As the service interval on 1200's is definitely 6,000 miles or one year you will be seeing the dealer once for its 600 mile service and then just once again before you sell the bike on.
You can make limited information mean and read anything you like.
Of course it is annoying to some degree or another when a component fails on any vehicle. When there is regular and prolonged failures on the same vehicle for one owner that is increasingly frustrating, of course. That will happen simply down to bad luck and the law of large numbers. Where the tipping point is between random failures (or problems with) the final drive and a complete acceptance that each and every one WILL fail, you are no closer to knowing today than when you started looking a few weeks ago. From my limited experience I could well say, yes there will be a problem at 22,00 and 46,000 miles as these were near enough the mileages when my own drive problems manifested themselves. Others will say that that is bollocks.
====
Anyway that is all as maybe. For whatever reasons, your 1400 Kwacka is now up for sale. The money is burning a hole in your pocket rapidly (we can all relate to that feeling, I am sure) and a 1200 vanilla is now top of your shopping list, despite it being only just powerful and quick enough for you.
What made you decide finally on a 1200 over the Triumph Tiger or say, the new Ducatti Multistrada, or the new Yamaha 'adventure' bike?