phooey
Registered user
At what speed does yours threaten to stall when using 5th and 6th gears ?
Genuine question.
Thanks in advance.
Genuine question.
Thanks in advance.
Question for 1200 ADV WC owners....
- Thread starter phooey
- Start date
patzx12
Registered user
Last time i stalled mine was 2 days ago negotiating a busy roundabout in 4th, it wasn't having it probably 20mph.
They don't like to chug unlike the excellent TC.
They don't like to chug unlike the excellent TC.
phooey
Registered user
Mine is a '13 non-Adventure LC - but this may do for purposes of comparison.
I've noticed that drive torque starts to fall to the lower limit of usability at roughly 1 600 RPM in 3rd gear, 1 800 RPM in 4th and around 2 000 RPM in 5th. Substantially lower revs than that, and she won't pull at all. (Obviously, this is all when feathering the throttle).
I filter between lines of stalled traffic twice a day, every weekday.
CAVEAT: Your results may vary, as I run at Highveld altitudes (varying between 1 300m and 1 700m above sea level).
I'm given to understanding that '14-onward bikes have a heavier 'flywheel', which gives a bit more bottom-end torque.
I've previously owned an '06 GS, two '09 GSAs and a '10 (camhead) GSA. The biggest culture-shock when moving to the LC was the horrible clutch engagement. Because of that stupid slipper clutch, the clutch action is never consistent. (People say that the gearshift quality is horrible on these bikes - it isn't. What you feel is the clutch refusing to disengage properly!)
Some days, I can get the bike away from the lights with zero fuss. Other days, same throttle setting, it's the easiest thing in the world to stall it.
If BMW could give the LC the same clutch action as the older air-cooled bikes, I'm pretty sure we'd have the single-best adventure bike known to man.
I've noticed that drive torque starts to fall to the lower limit of usability at roughly 1 600 RPM in 3rd gear, 1 800 RPM in 4th and around 2 000 RPM in 5th. Substantially lower revs than that, and she won't pull at all. (Obviously, this is all when feathering the throttle).
I filter between lines of stalled traffic twice a day, every weekday.
CAVEAT: Your results may vary, as I run at Highveld altitudes (varying between 1 300m and 1 700m above sea level).
I'm given to understanding that '14-onward bikes have a heavier 'flywheel', which gives a bit more bottom-end torque.
I've previously owned an '06 GS, two '09 GSAs and a '10 (camhead) GSA. The biggest culture-shock when moving to the LC was the horrible clutch engagement. Because of that stupid slipper clutch, the clutch action is never consistent. (People say that the gearshift quality is horrible on these bikes - it isn't. What you feel is the clutch refusing to disengage properly!)
Some days, I can get the bike away from the lights with zero fuss. Other days, same throttle setting, it's the easiest thing in the world to stall it.
If BMW could give the LC the same clutch action as the older air-cooled bikes, I'm pretty sure we'd have the single-best adventure bike known to man.
wierd this clutch biting position thing - always been consistent on my 2013 LC as far as I can tell and I almost never stall it. The new TE I tried a couple of weeks ago did feel a little different, clutch seemed even lighter - if that is possible - and would engage much closer to the bar than my bike.
Still clonks into 1st like a sack of tools tossed into a skip but gear change was a bit slicker than my bike, but to be honest I never has a issue that wasn't easy to ride around with a blip of the throttle.
Still clonks into 1st like a sack of tools tossed into a skip but gear change was a bit slicker than my bike, but to be honest I never has a issue that wasn't easy to ride around with a blip of the throttle.
JimVonBaden
Registered user
I just have to ask why you are lugging the motor to the point of stalling instead of shifting down? 
Jim
Jim
I just have to ask why you are lugging the motor to the point of stalling instead of shifting down?
Jim
Me too
Devonlad
Registered user
Indeed why chug it, but I do agree the clutch bite point io mine is "variable" used to it now but consistency would be great.
Sent using Tapatalk
Sent using Tapatalk
Worst thing you can do. Unnecessarily labour the engine.
phooey
Registered user
I had a client at the weekend and where my bike was perfectly happy and responsive in 6th negotiating the country lanes we were using I noticed he never got above 4th. I suggested using higher gears and he said the bike would start chugging. He was as surprised that I was in 6th as I was he had to use 4th.
I wondered if this was typical of all the WC's.
Thank you for the informative replies.
I wondered if this was typical of all the WC's.
Thank you for the informative replies.
I had a client at the weekend and where my bike was perfectly happy and responsive in 6th negotiating the country lanes we were using I noticed he never got above 4th. I suggested using higher gears and he said the bike would start chugging. He was as surprised that I was in 6th as I was he had to use 4th.
I wondered if this was typical of all the WC's.
Thank you for the informative replies.
What speeds were you doing?
Also, his definition of 'chugging' may not be the same as yours. Who knows? Maybe he's used to a Triumph Rocket III.
phooey
Registered user
Nick, his last 3 bikes have been GS's in various guises. I'd have swapped bikes and both run the route ideally - but it's a client
.Speeds varied from 30 - 60 mph over Circa 6 miles of twisty country lanes.
I think both my WC and I would feel dopey in 6th at those speeds.
What possible advantage is gained from lugging an engine by travelling slowly in a high gear? - is this some sort of nonsense that the IAM or Rospa numpties teach these days - please explain this folly????????
The LC produces 97Nm @ 2,500rpm and 95Nm @ 2,000rpm
The twin cam torque is only specced down to 2500rpm and only produces about 85Nm.
The LC produces more low down grunt than any of the previous 1200s.- simples.
The twin cam torque is only specced down to 2500rpm and only produces about 85Nm.
The LC produces more low down grunt than any of the previous 1200s.- simples.
I have to say, I agree.
Varying between 48 and 96 Km/h... even travelling at human-type speeds, he should have been keeping it between third and fifth.
When you've got open back lanes in front of you, why not?
When I'm lane-splitting, I'm anywhere between second and fourth, rarely letting the revs drop below 2 000. And if I'm revving that low, I'm not using more than about 5% throttle.
But I think that qualifies as a 'special circumstance'. Any more gas and before I know it, I'm doing 90 Km/h between two rows of cars doing 15 Km/h.
On paper, yes. To me, the LC doesn't have anywhere near the grunt, right from idle, that my hexhead and camhead bikes had.
I can clearly feel the extra power from about 3 000 RPM onward. Then, from 4 800, it takes off like an SR-71 being chased by a surface-to-air missile.
phooey
Registered user
Similar threads
- Locked
