R 1150 GSA vs. R1200 GSA?

[Deleted account 190209001]

In order to make a choice you should ride both bikes the same day on the same roads and see what you like best. What works for you may not work for another. Personally I did not care for the way the 1200 moved about on a windy day on the highway. I let myself being passed by trucks and got blown around quite a bit more than on the 1150. The looks are subjective but the ride and buffeting can't be denied.

I test rode both bikes a year ago and after 15K miles on my 06 1150 GSAdv, I have no regrets. I like the gearing on the 1150 better as the 1st & 6th gears are lower.
The handling off-road is good too and although I did drop it once on a very rough piece of track in CO this summer, I was amazed at what this bike can do. Being 6'2" 210 LBS does help I must admit
A thumper the GS is not, but what other bike can take you 6K miles around the country and do a little off roading too in comfort?? I did ride over 1K miles off-road this summer
The choice between the two should also be based on serviceability. I don't have a CAN-BUS reader and if something happens I can at least fix the cause of a blown fuse on my 1150. The rest of the bikes are equal in oil changes and valve adj.
Either bike is a good choice nevertheless. Just my 0.03 cts .YMMV

 

[Global Rider]

I like the gearing on the 1150 better as the 1st & 6th gears are lower.

I'd like to know BMW's reasoning as to why one model with a low 1st should also need a low 6th and another with a tall 1st should also need a tall 6th. What does 1st gear have to do with 6th?

If BMW did it right, it would have a low 1st for stop 'n go city driving and the Alps and a tall 6th for the autobahn. If 6th is too tall for backroads, 5th will work just fine.

 

[BBB61]

0.3% And you confirmed this how?

With the GPS.

 

[BBB61]

Why are you having so much trouble accepting published data from a company that would have it in THEIR interest to have good looking numbers.

Because I have my own data obtained in real world conditions, not on a rolling road in a laboratory to obtain figures to satisfy the European Union. And that data shows the 1200 is more economical than the 1150. Perhaps one day you will buy a 1200 and find out for yourself.

I wonder why BMW AG wouldn't take advantage of your knowledge and post better looking fuel consumption figures?

I work in a standards lab and one thing I've learned over the years, people are sloppy making measurements.

Ah, if the shouting about your own figures doesn't work, just suggest that the other person doesn't take their figures correctly in an attempt to make your own argument stronger. Face facts. You only have an 1150 and you have no data of your own which backs up your argument that the 1150 is no more or no less economical than the 1200. What's keeping you going on this one, your ego?

 

[Dahoum]

With the GPS.

That's interesting Bob because riding my 12GS the GPS shows the bike's speedometer at upto 10% out (slower)

 

[Global Rider]

Ah, if the shouting about your own figures doesn't work, just suggest that the other person doesn't take their figures correctly in an attempt to make your own argument stronger. Face facts. You only have an 1150 and you have no data of your own which backs up your argument that the 1150 is no more or no less economical than the 1200. What's keeping you going on this one, your ego?

This coming from a so-called expert that relies on a "fuel low" light on his dash to come up with quantitative measurements. LOL x 10.

Strange how you would probably believe BMW specifications as long as they are what you want to believe in. So if their specs are wrong, then you bike must really weigh 700 pounds.

Bob, lets leave it at that. You believe what you want to believe. I tell you what. Since you aere absolutely right, go and tell BMW they are dead wrong. they may ven give you another fuel efficient bike for free.

 

[Zwerver]

The range of an R1150 GS Adventure if you ran the gas tank dry based on a 30 liter gas tank and 4.5 and 5.7 l/100 km:

At 90 km/hr (55.9 mph): 666 km or 414 miles.
At 120 km/hr (74.5 mph): 526 km or 327 miles.

Nice figures... But in 82.000km with a 2003 1150GSA I only once managed to
get more then 520km on a full tank, getting a bit more then 30l in the tank
afterwards.

Commuting twice a week for several years now, 130km single way, I have the habit of filling up on my second trip home, which is after 410 to 420km.

With the 1150gsa, I used to get 26 to 28 liters in.
Average, 15,5km per liter, or 6,45l per 100km.

After parking the 1150 in a SUV last winter I bought the 12GSA this spring, and it's now on 14.000km
Still fueling up every second trip home, after 410 to 420 km, I get 23,5 to 24,5 liters in.
Average, 17,5km per liter, or 5,71l per 100km.

So so far it look to me that the fuel consumption on my 1200GSA is a bit better that it was on my1150GSA ....

 

[BBB61]

This coming from a so-called expert that relies on a "fuel low" light on his dash to come up with quantitative measurements. LOL x 10.

Quantative measurements? No, not what I said, but comparing one bike with a 25 litre tank capacity (4 litre reserve) with another with a 20 litre tank capacity (4 litre reserve) and then seeing what mileage both achieve before the appearance of the low fuel light gives a good indication that one is more fuel efficient than the other.

Strange how you would probably believe BMW specifications as long as they are what you want to believe in. So if their specs are wrong, then you bike must really weigh 700 pounds.

I've never relied on BMW's figures, just the data that I have acquired from running the 1150 and 1200.

Bob, lets leave it at that. You believe what you want to believe. I tell you what. Since you aere absolutely right, go and tell BMW they are dead wrong. they may ven give you another fuel efficient bike for free.

Oh dear, no need to get the hump over the deficiencies in your arguments. You were always on to a loser from the start, what with only having your own data for the 1150 and not the 1200. As I said before, when you get the 1200 and accumulate your own data you will be in a much stronger position to make valid comparisons between 2 motorcycles. But not before.

Looking at Zwervers data, it only confirms what most people have found when they have switched from the 1150 to the 1200 - that the 1200 is more fuel efficient than the 1150. It seems you are having great difficulty in accepting this.

 

[Global Rider]

Nice figures... But in 82.000km with a 2003 1150GSA I only once managed to get more then 520km on a full tank, getting a bit more then 30l in the tank afterwards.

Filled up last weekend: 20.2 liters, 402 kms...so simple math (30/20.2) * 402 = 597 kms or 371 miles. Cruising speed was 110 km/hr give or take. I had my GPS along. Hey, maybe the gas pumps were wrong...must be that!

That sort of very closely matches BMW's claimed fuel consumption; what I've claimed all along.

I hope the newer bike gets better mileage...far better mileage. It should considering better metering (dual 02 sensors). I tend to believe BMW's numbers though...I don't run my bike on a test bed and I meet or beat those numbers.

 

[BBB61]

So, 20.2 litres for 402km. From your earlier posts it would appear you are running the standard BMW speedo drive with the built-in 10% over read. So your 402km is actually a true 361.8km.

30/20.2 x 361.8 = 537.3km or just a touch under 335 miles.

Your figures once corrected work out at an average of 51.2mpg (imperial) or thereabouts. Uncorrected they come in at 56.9mpg. That's quite a difference!

PS I thought you had finished with this thread?

 

[bonox]

speedos tend to be off as much as 10%

odometers seem to be much closer to the mark though.

 

[Global Rider]

So, 20.2 litres for 402km. From your earlier posts it would appear you are running the standard BMW speedo drive with the built-in 10% over read. So your 402km is actually a true 361.8km.

30/20.2 x 361.8 = 537.3km or just a touch under 335 miles.

Your figures once corrected work out at an average of 51.2mpg (imperial) or thereabouts. Uncorrected they come in at 56.9mpg. That's quite a difference!

PS I thought you had finished with this thread?

READ...I used my GPS...just like you did.

No, I got to keep on coming back to educate you. No charge and a pleasure.

 

[BBB61]

READ...I used my GPS...just like you did.

No, I got to keep on coming back to educate you. No charge and a pleasure.

No, you said "I had my GPS along". Go back and read it yourself if you don't believe me You didn't say you were using it for recording your distances between fuel stops. Perhaps you should make these things clearer when you post.

PS Your efforts to educate me are to be applauded but don't forget to educate yourself first before you start on the rest of us. Such as the basic rule when making the comparisons - have your own figures for the 1150 and also your own figures from the 1200 so that you can make a valid comparison

 

[Global Rider]

No, you said "I had my GPS along".

Well duuuhhh, Bob. If I have it along, did you think I had it shut off?

PS Your efforts to educate me are to be applauded but don't forget to educate yourself first before you start on the rest of us.

Not the "rest of us", just you Bob.

You're probably not riding as smoothly as possible. Your roads (luckily) don't go on forever in straight lines as ours do, even back roads. I keep steady speeds and don't jack rabbit between one turn and the next (any yahoo can go fast in a straight line...no art to it). That the reason I've always met and most of the time exceeded any fuel numbers, even those published by our government agency.

Now go and have a warm beer and simmer down.

 

[The Other PaulG]

Good, so Captain America I'm sure you're crystal clear now on which one to buy...

 

[BBB61]

Well duuuhhh, Bob. If I have it along, did you think I had it shut off?

Well duuuuhhhhhhh, most people use their GPS for navigation purposes, not for measuring the distance between each fuel stop Are you saying that since you have bought the bike that you have used the GPS exclusively for maintaining your records of the bikes mileage and fuel consumption?

Not the "rest of us", just you Bob.

You're probably not riding as smoothly as possible. Your roads (luckily) don't go on forever in straight lines as ours do, even back roads. I keep steady speeds and don't jack rabbit between one turn and the next (any yahoo can go fast in a straight line...no art to it). That the reason I've always met and most of the time exceeded any fuel numbers, even those published by our government agency.

Now go and have a warm beer and simmer down.

Nice try at diverting this away from your original stance in this thread, which was in relation to the 1200Adv being less economical than your 1150Adv. Lets get back on track shall we. This is what you said originally:-

"More advanced? How it is more advanced? Why is it the new GS Adv gets worse gas mileage? 6.1 vs 5.7 l/100 kms at 120 kph."

Remember that? Then when a few people with 1200's added their contributions to this thread, you got on your high horse and did your best to belittle their own experiences of getting better fuel consumption from the 1200 than the 1150.

You have consistently stated that the 1200 is not more fuel efficient than the 1150, despite the number of contributors in this thread who have found this not to be the case. You only have figures for your 1150, and there is the flaw in your arguments - no personal data for the 1200. I can see why you have tried to divert the issue on to the difference in the roads that you ride compared to the rest of us, rather than sticking to your original point. Of course that has been totally discredited now, which no doubt explains your sarcastic comments in response to posts from others Usually an admission that your argument is not up to much!

 

[Alphason]

The 1200 is without doubt more efficient than the 1150 Nothing more to add really. It's not complicated or difficult to understand, just fact

 

[Slim Shadies Back]

Pd vs 1150 and GS1200

The 1200 is without doubt more efficient than the 1150 Nothing more to add really. It's not complicated or difficult to understand, just fact

Yes but what about the PD100 ...........I have found ........
Actually lads this was great stuff and now I dont even have to check if the B*****d 1200 is better consumption wise than the 1150 , all that money has been well spent on a truely "green" and mean machine, sure you d have to buy one is nt it more ecconomical than the Old one.....

 

[jon b]

I had a 1150GSA for about 12K miles, after also test riding the standard 1200GS,I found I prefered the 1150 heavy feel and size compared to the light flickable performance of the 1200.
I`ve recently changed to the 1200GSA and find it a perfect middle ground between the 1150GSA and the standard 12.
I would best describe the new 12GSA as an 1150GSA after a heavy dose of steroids.Its got the same large bike feel but just feels much faster and more powerfull. The lights are much better, and the seat and footpegs feels more comfortable to me.One of the things I`m not as keen on with the new bike is the amount of plastic panels,I used to enjoy getting a good polish on the large 1150GSA`s metal tank!
I spent about a week on the new bike being ruled by my heart and longing after my old 1150 and its tough character, but my head was telling me the 12GSA was the better bike in almost all departments.
If I had the choice of the 2 bikes,not having owned either and money was no option I`d always go for the 12GSA. Having owned an 1150GSA there`s more of an emotional choice to be made,but I`d still go for the 12!

 

[Micky]

I had a 1150GSA for about 12K miles, after also test riding the standard 1200GS,I found I prefered the 1150 heavy feel and size compared to the light flickable performance of the 1200.
I`ve recently changed to the 1200GSA and find it a perfect middle ground between the 1150GSA and the standard 12.
I would best describe the new 12GSA as an 1150GSA after a heavy dose of steroids.Its got the same large bike feel but just feels much faster and more powerfull. The lights are much better, and the seat and footpegs feels more comfortable to me.One of the things I`m not as keen on with the new bike is the amount of plastic panels,I used to enjoy getting a good polish on the large 1150GSA`s metal tank!
I spent about a week on the new bike being ruled by my heart and longing after my old 1150 and its tough character, but my head was telling me the 12GSA was the better bike in almost all departments.
If I had the choice of the 2 bikes,not having owned either and money was no option I`d always go for the 12GSA. Having owned an 1150GSA there`s more of an emotional choice to be made,but I`d still go for the 12!

A very good summary jon b and I totally agree, even down to polishing the 1150GS-A's tank... mine had a lovely sheen to it

Just sold my 1200GS-A after a totally trouble free 14,500 miles

So I'm off for a week to Wunderbar Deutschland on Monday, the Eifels and then the Black Forest... just tossing it off for a few days R & R... great roads, excellent accommodation, food and bier...

... and I'm going on the 650 Dakar



www.adventure.gs