Is the 1200 faithful to the GS tradition?

[Warthog]

Before I start, let me make one thing very clear as I don't want to find myself strapped to two or more 1200s pulling in opposite directions...

This is not a dig at the R1200GS or anyone who bought one!!

I like bikes that are good at plenty of things: jacks of all trades and masters of none. Thats why a few years ago, I hankered after the CBR 6 and the VFR 750 when I liked a sporty edge, and that's why I bought the GS, now that top speed is not the first spec I look for in a review.

And this leads to my question to you lot what is in the know, innit:

I was a bit dissappointed when, about 5 years ago, Honda started making the CBR 6 into a more out-and-out sports bike and not the sweet handling, but comfortable and real world bike it had been from its inception in 1987/88. After all, that's what had made it class leader for so long until biking became a more luxury pursuit for those with extra cash.

Now for the GS: Every one agrees that you can commute, go shopping, pop over to Cannes or even visit you gran in deepest Siberia, and the GS would cope with each with respectable degrees of aptitude. I've never ridden the 1200 and it looks in the flesh as impressive as it does on paper, but it looks to me that the sharper handling, seemingly smaller tank and more aggresive power delivery are heading it away from the versatility it has had up until now to a more tarmac orientated bike.
To use an extreme example: if you were to Boorman/McGregor your way around the globe, would you pick an 1150 or the 1200. My gut ( and its not small, so its should be given its say) says I go for the 1150...

Can the 1200 still cover thousands off-road with 300km between petrol stops for 35 octane fuel and still be that much better on the road?
I know RTW trips are not done every fortnight, but I like the feel of riding a bike thats says "I could if I wanted to", to anything I might throw at it.
Before you answer remember line 3 at the top!

(Sorry for the essay, I'm off work with a bad back, I'm bored and this has killed 20 minutes I would have spent groaning on the sofa)

 

[Steve]

petrol stops for 35 octane fuel

My Zippo won't even run on that!!

 

[Warthog]

My Zippo won't even run on that!!

OK, fair point . I was exaggerating for dramatic effect, but that does not make me a drama queen!

 

[Tricky]

Yessssssssssssssssssssss... try one.. (when your backs better... )

 

[Tim Cullis]

You're comparing a 1200 and a 1150 Adventure. At the moment the 1150 Adventure has the better fuel range. The 1200 runs on lower octane fuel than the 1150, though I understand you can get some kind of plug to convert the 1150.

On our Morocco trip this year we had two 1150 Adventures, one 1200 and one 650 GS Dakar. They all performed well but the 650 Dakar is probably the wisest choice for RTW.

Tim

 

[Llama]

As a Land Rover fan I have seen all these same arguments before when they brought out the Discovery.
"Its not a real land rover", "It'll never be as good", "it's only for hairdessers and going to sainsbury's"
Anyone who has heard of the Camel Trophy will know that the discovery more than proved its metal and is fast becoming the vehicle of choice for many off-roaders.
I'm sure the 12 is the same, give it a few years and a bit of track record and only total dinosaurs will still critisise it.
Alternatively we can wait a fews years until BM bring out the 1250 something or other, then everyone will say:
"its not a real GS like the 1200......."

And as for the choice made by messrs macgregor and boorman; if they did their trip next year(ish) I would bet that BMW would put them on 1200 adventures.

 

[nadeem]

the only fair comparison will be next year when the 1200 adventure finally comes out - to compare an ordinary 1200 to the adventure doesn't make sense - the adventure is kitted out ready for a rtw trip...

 

[Deleted account 211025001]

I'm sure the 12 is the same, give it a few years and a bit of track record and only total dinosaurs will still critisise it.
Alternatively we can wait a fews years until BM bring out the 1250 something or other, then everyone will say:
"its not a real GS like the 1200......."

And as for the choice made by messrs macgregor and boorman; if they did their trip next year(ish) I would bet that BMW would put them on 1200 adventures.

Andres

 

[Yellow Peril]

For once I would have to agree Nadeem, you could only fairly compare the 1200 with the standard 1150, not the adventure. If the rumours are true in regards to the new 1200 adv then I think we will have a different beast. The GS12 adv is going to be taller probably 900mm,which the max TUV allows an Enduro typing, it is probably going to take bits of design from the HP2 (why else build it?) and will have a tank of 30-35 litres. Then we are talking about two similar beasts then the comparsion will be more meaningful.

Also it was quite interesting reading the Ride mags article comparing all of the GSs' some of the same comments where made about the other moves from 80 to 100 etc etc.

 

[(RIP) Bin Ridin]

My 12 will do 300kms on a tank.
Are we equating weight with strenght?

 

[blackburnlee]

Surely the point is that BMW looked at how the majority of GSers use their machines (At least 90% road riding and plenty of touring in that), looked at the opposition, and came up with a bike that would take them forward in the minds of those of us who make up the biking public?

The 1200 can't be compared to an 1150 Adv, its a different beast. It's as simple as that. If I'd wanted to emulate Boorman et al I'd have gone for an Adv and probably never used half it's attributes. With the 1200 I can, and do, enjoy the lighter weight, freeer revving motor and in my opinion better looks and gearbox.

I can entirely see why some people will prefer the 1150 and it is a cracking bike but BMW have moved the goalposts with the 1200. It's take-your-pick time.

 

[Piggers]

Boorman and McGregor wanted to do the trip on KTM's due to them being lighter etc, but KTM let them down. The 1150 ADV was their second choice...
Therefore,I suspect if the 1200 had been around at the time they would have chosen it over 1150 on the weight advantage alone and just had bigger tanks fitted....


Piggers

 

[Warthog]

Sooo... looking back at my original question, I'm getting a teeny weeny inkling that the general consensus is "yes it is"....

In my defense, I had no idea there was a 1200 ADV coming out next year and that sounds more up my alley, if I had the money,that is...

 

[rray]

I just traded in my 2002 1150GS with 50,000 miles on the clock for a new 1200. Does it follow the tradition? Mostly yes with a qualified "sort of".

I live in at the foot of the Colorado Rocky Mountains. They draw "dual sport" riders from all of the world. This summer I watched dozens of them bounce and thrash their 1150 Adventures in and out of places that I wouldn't want to ride a motocross bike. It can be done, but I can't imagine why you would want to.

For many, (especially guys on the ADVrider forum), the "Adventure" GS is the ultimate. Low first gear. Big tank. I've never put my bike in a place where I wanted a lower first gear and I've never wanted to be somewhere that doesn't have a gas station every 240 miles or so. The extra weight of all that gas seems like overkill to me.

There is only so much I can ask any one motorcycle to do. If it gets too light, it won't tour comfortably. If it gets too heavy, it won't work in challenging dirt. The new 1200 seems like it leans a bit more toward the road than the 1150 did. That's okay with me. It's where I spend most of my time. It is a better bike in every respect than the 1150 was. At least that's how I feel today.

And yes...it's faithful to the tradition....as the tradition continues to evolve.

Richard Ray
Denver, Colorado
2005 R1200GS
2003 KLR 650

 

[Crazy Horse]

No it's not (faithful to the tradition). I came out of a petrol station on the A3 yesterday just as a 1200 was cruising by. "Ah!" I thought - I'll teach this Johnny-come-lately what a real bike can do (I've got an 1150). No, I didn't. Couldn't catch it. So, it's faster and more agile and lighter and I can't afford one. As Buddhists would say, 'everything changes' - so what is so great about tradition? I've never tried a 1200 (no point in hankering after something that is financially unobtainable) but from what I read here (and from yesterday's experience) it's a big advance.

If the received wisdom is that a 650 would have been better for the McGregor/Boorman trip, I fail to understand why (apart from fuel range) it is still maintained (by some) that an 1150 Adventure is better for RTW. Surely, the 1200 is a move towards the 650 (in weight)? I think the 1150 Adv (I've just got the standard) is one of the best looking bikes ever made but I'd wouldn't buy one: too heavy for me - I'll wait until I can afford the 12.

 

[stinger]

its nothing to do with ability of the bikes but for me the 1150 looks far better than the 12, it just sort of looks more solid

 

[Pint6x]

the 1200 doesn't look like 10 grands worth of bike - it doesn't have the presence IMHO that the 1150 has.

 

[North]

I like the looks of my 1200. To me it looks like a well Engineered and built machine. It looks like it cost a few bucks and it looks like it was built to ride.

The proof of the pudding is in riding it.

It''s a hell of a lot of fun.

(It also looks like it has a lot stuff on it that will cost a fortune to fix. )

North