R1200ST

[JohnC]

It takes a fair bit of fine tuning to get the suspension working and mine goes very light over crests - good fun though
That screen works really well and I discovered that my S5 wasn't as noisy as I thought it was when I had my 1150GS. The rear seat should sit down really snuggly - the front part was probably not slotted in properly. Feck all space underneath though to fit anything!

I'll have a look at the seat tommorow, as the way it sits atm does seem quite strange.

 

[Rob1200]

12GS vs. the rest of the world

Although I have only just bought my new R1200GS (done some 2000 miles in the first month and a half) and I have never tried the 1200ST, I have had quite a few bikes (VFRs, CBRs, Fazer 1000, Ducati etc.) and my experience is the following:

When you have just ridden a 12GS and jump on a Fazer1000, you wonder "Why does this bike have to be so small, cramped, uncomfortable and totally gutless at low revs?". Then you hit 7000rpm and the thing takes off, you see Porsches at full acceleration disappear in your mirrors like Fiat Pandas, but it still feels uncomfortable and cornering is very hard work.

When you have just ridden a Fazer1000 and jump on a VFR, it's more of the same: "Why is it so small, cramped, uncomfortable and totally gutless at low revs?". Then you find a few corners and realize that at least the steering is sweet and accurate (certainly more than on the Fazer), but you feel even more uncomfortable - and the engine never really takes off.

When you have just ridden a VFR and jump on a CBR, it's more of the same: "Why is it so small, cramped, uncomfortable and totally gutless at low revs?". Then you realize that at least you can corner fast and that, as long as you don't go below 8000 revs, the bike is not slow at all.

My own conclusion: assuming 130mph and 0-60mph in less than 4' is enough, why sacrifice comfort, low-speed grunt and general riding pleasure for a bit of extra performance at high revs and perhaps mid-corner speed? That applies to almost all bikes vs. the 12GS: they're almost all smaller, less comfortable, with revvier engines - except some tourers, which for me are just too big to make sense.

From where I live, it takes me at least 45 minutes to get to some nice windy roads, by which time, after suffering discomfort and low-speed boredom on a sportsbike, I don't feel like playing any more. On the Beemer, I am always playing! And playing does not necessarily involve suicidal speeding, which for me is a big bonus...

Have a nice ride - ride a GS!

Rob1200

 

[dave hendy]

Rob1200 I came to the GS after 3 years and 22K on a Fazer 1000 and have to agree with what you say. The Fazer was great for straight line speed (apart from the wind blast) but in every other way the GS is better and it gives you a grin on your face every time you ride it. We went to the Pyrennes in September and went on a few of the roads we had been on the year before on the Fazer, what a difference. The suspension is so much better, it does not get in a flap on bumpy corners, with or without luggage. I've never had so much fun with my clothes on!!

 

[JohnC]

Although I have only just bought my new R1200GS (done some 2000 miles in the first month and a half) and I have never tried the 1200ST, I have had quite a few bikes (VFRs, CBRs, Fazer 1000, Ducati etc.) and my experience is the following:

When you have just ridden a 12GS and jump on a Fazer1000, you wonder "Why does this bike have to be so small, cramped, uncomfortable and totally gutless at low revs?". Then you hit 7000rpm and the thing takes off, you see Porsches at full acceleration disappear in your mirrors like Fiat Pandas, but it still feels uncomfortable and cornering is very hard work.

When you have just ridden a Fazer1000 and jump on a VFR, it's more of the same: "Why is it so small, cramped, uncomfortable and totally gutless at low revs?". Then you find a few corners and realize that at least the steering is sweet and accurate (certainly more than on the Fazer), but you feel even more uncomfortable - and the engine never really takes off.

When you have just ridden a VFR and jump on a CBR, it's more of the same: "Why is it so small, cramped, uncomfortable and totally gutless at low revs?". Then you realize that at least you can corner fast and that, as long as you don't go below 8000 revs, the bike is not slow at all.

My own conclusion: assuming 130mph and 0-60mph in less than 4' is enough, why sacrifice comfort, low-speed grunt and general riding pleasure for a bit of extra performance at high revs and perhaps mid-corner speed? That applies to almost all bikes vs. the 12GS: they're almost all smaller, less comfortable, with revvier engines - except some tourers, which for me are just too big to make sense.

From where I live, it takes me at least 45 minutes to get to some nice windy roads, by which time, after suffering discomfort and low-speed boredom on a sportsbike, I don't feel like playing any more. On the Beemer, I am always playing! And playing does not necessarily involve suicidal speeding, which for me is a big bonus...

Have a nice ride - ride a GS!

Rob1200

Sure, but I'm talking about owning two bikes, the GS and something else

I feel a second bike purchase coming on

 

[JohnC]

Rob1200 I came to the GS after 3 years and 22K on a Fazer 1000 and have to agree with what you say. The Fazer was great for straight line speed (apart from the wind blast) but in every other way the GS is better and it gives you a grin on your face every time you ride it. We went to the Pyrennes in September and went on a few of the roads we had been on the year before on the Fazer, what a difference. The suspension is so much better, it does not get in a flap on bumpy corners, with or without luggage. I've never had so much fun with my clothes on!!

The BIG problem with the Fazer was budget suspension components, another wasted opportunity to make a good bike great. I'm still loving this ST, I've had it for yet another day. Not too sure about the servo brakes, perhaps that's just due to the scare mongering on here as they seem relatively easy to modulate. If the GS1200 engine is anything like this I'm going for a test ride. Perhaps I wont need two bikes afterall.

 

[Schwarz Baron]

I'm sorry but IMHO this is a thing of beauty, especially in the blue it comes in, you can ditch the can for something nicer, but the riding position is very comfortable, nothing wrong with it, I've seen plenty on the continent

 

[JohnC]

I'm sorry but IMHO this is a thing of beauty, especially in the blue it comes in, you can ditch the can for something nicer, but the riding position is very comfortable, nothing wrong with it, I've seen plenty on the continent

I'd agree, it's just so different from the mainstream UJM's. The headlights are the business, tried them late last night coming home from friends. My loan bike is blue

 

[dave hendy]

The BIG problem with the Fazer was budget suspension components, another wasted opportunity to make a good bike great.

Agreed. I would have loved to have tried a Fazer 1000 with Ohlins to see how much better it was. Not sure about the new one

 

[sjwb]

Jay,
In case you don't receive the email sent to your website, would you be kind enough to contact me? I would like to talk to you about the ST.

 

[SpyInTheCamp]

I tried the VFR800 myself last year, had it for a full day. I thought the VTEC was a bit gimmicy and intrusive at certain speeds, seemed a waste of time tbo. I've heard the new models VTEC will be better. Most owners I've spoken too felt the pre VTEC VFR's were better bikes. The VFR was pretty gutless two up and didnt feel anywhere near as torquey as the RS (54 ft.lb VFR v 85 ft.lb ST says it all). And the VFR (imo) deffo doesnt sound as gutsy or have as much character as the 1200.

John, the VFR that Schtum refers to is an Fi (pre-VTEC 800). I used to have one too.

The '06 VTEC appears to have the fuelling problem sorted (at last). But the general view is that VTEC is a love it or loath it affair.

Kai

 

[NakedRider]

Got Both

I have both - a GS and an ST - here's how I see it:

Comfort - hands down it's the GS. You just sit there and do everything. On the freeway the ST has a better ride, however. It's also got a MUCH better flowing windshield. I can take the GS for a ride all day and feel like I've never left. Comfort is a very personal thing. Everyone likes something a little different including the angle that you sit and how much weight you want on the bars. The ST can run all day as well but the GS is a lot more streatched out.

Turns - It's the ST all the way for high speed sweepers. For lower speed and heavy transition speeds (real tight stuff) it's the GS for sure. The GS also rules the bumpy stuff due to the leverage from the wide bars. The ST can be inconsistant at lower speeds over bumps if you weight the bars. Keep the weight off the front end!!! Stay on the gas and, if anything, weight the inside bar. None of this weighting seems to matter on the GS. Just throw it down. The ST likes body language. The GS....whatever makes you happy with the body.

Wind protection - The ST. Much better air flow. The wind shield on the GS simply sucks. This is one of the most talked about windshields on the internet and it's with good reason. The problem is that the windshield is so far away. Lean in and test it. If it were closer to you it would be much better. The GS has a huge benefit with the hand guards when it's below freezing. I know heated hand grips help both models but the hand guards are really noticeable when it's REAL cold. Lower leg warmth is better on the ST when it's cold outside.

Rain - I'd have to give the nod to the GS. Haven't done a huge amount of rain miles on my ST but the GS is very predictable in the rain. I've done nearly 1,000 miles in the rain on my GS. You always feel completely in control. The bike comes back a mess but...riding it's still fun. I always say if it's raining before I go for a ride I'll stay home. If it starts raining after I leave I still finish my ride.

Lights - Some consider it ugly but the headlight on the ST "outshines" any other bike I've ever ridden.

Bags - The GS's, when expanded, are bigger. When they aren't the ST's are larger. The ST bags mount easier.

Center stand - The GS needs to be lifted a foot (just kidding but it's a lot). The ST goes up pulling with one finger.

Power - It's the ST, sorry guys, by a long shot. You will make a pass on the ST without thinking about it. On the GS you may hold back. At the risk of being flamed here's what I read and what I've experienced. The GS dynos at about 84 at the rear wheel (all magazines, both sides of the pond). The magazines that have tested the ST all get about 104 at the rear. That extra power coupled with being MUCH lower makes the ST accelerate much harder at high speeds. I'm talking high speeds here, at lower speeds it's closer than you would think. I've had my GS an indicated 132 and my ST an indicated 145. The GS was done at that speed, the ST MAY have had a little bit more to go. Both are spot on (1 to 2 MPH) according to my GPS at freeway speeds. BTW my GS has some help. A full Remus and an enhanced intake snorkel and air filter. Just had it (the GS) tested last weekend and it pulled 88.78 on a dynojet - about 5 more than all other GS's tested that day (they also had a Remus for the most part).

Living with it - The ST is easier to clean. The back of the GS, even with a hugger, is a mess after riding on a wet road. Go figure!

Engine and gearbox - The ST is smoother and has more consistant fueling - no flat spots. My GS has a noticeable flat spot arount 5,000. The gearbox on the ST is the best I've ever had from a BMW (I've had plenty).

Gas milage - The ST gets 48-50, the GS between 43-45.

Racing - depends on the road. When in doubt take the GS. If I need major power I take my K1200R!!!

Which do I prefer - depends on my mood. That's why I, like so many others, have multiple bikes. Both of these bikes are outstanding for their intended purpose. The GS gets well deserved press for being so versitle and such a great all-round bike. It is. Period, end of story. To me, the ST is the most underated motorcycle on the market today. If you like the riding position you would be shocked at just how well it does.

My 2 cents.

 

[JohnC]

John, the VFR that Schtum refers to is an Fi (pre-VTEC 800). I used to have one too.

The '06 VTEC appears to have the fuelling problem sorted (at last). But the general view is that VTEC is a love it or loath it affair.

Kai

Oops, showing my VFR ignorance as I though all 800's were VTEC

 

[JohnC]

I have both - a GS and an ST - here's how I see it:

Comfort - hands down it's the GS. You just sit there and do everything. On the freeway the ST has a better ride, however. It's also got a MUCH better flowing windshield. I can take the GS for a ride all day and feel like I've never left. Comfort is a very personal thing. Everyone likes something a little different including the angle that you sit and how much weight you want on the bars. The ST can run all day as well but the GS is a lot more streatched out.

Turns - It's the ST all the way for high speed sweepers. For lower speed and heavy transition speeds (real tight stuff) it's the GS for sure. The GS also rules the bumpy stuff due to the leverage from the wide bars. The ST can be inconsistant at lower speeds over bumps if you weight the bars. Keep the weight off the front end!!! Stay on the gas and, if anything, weight the inside bar. None of this weighting seems to matter on the GS. Just throw it down. The ST likes body language. The GS....whatever makes you happy with the body.

Wind protection - The ST. Much better air flow. The wind shield on the GS simply sucks. This is one of the most talked about windshields on the internet and it's with good reason. The problem is that the windshield is so far away. Lean in and test it. If it were closer to you it would be much better. The GS has a huge benefit with the hand guards when it's below freezing. I know heated hand grips help both models but the hand guards are really noticeable when it's REAL cold. Lower leg warmth is better on the ST when it's cold outside.

Rain - I'd have to give the nod to the GS. Haven't done a huge amount of rain miles on my ST but the GS is very predictable in the rain. I've done nearly 1,000 miles in the rain on my GS. You always feel completely in control. The bike comes back a mess but...riding it's still fun. I always say if it's raining before I go for a ride I'll stay home. If it starts raining after I leave I still finish my ride.

Lights - Some consider it ugly but the headlight on the ST "outshines" any other bike I've ever ridden.

Bags - The GS's, when expanded, are bigger. When they aren't the ST's are larger. The ST bags mount easier.

Center stand - The GS needs to be lifted a foot (just kidding but it's a lot). The ST goes up pulling with one finger.

Power - It's the ST, sorry guys, by a long shot. You will make a pass on the ST without thinking about it. On the GS you may hold back. At the risk of being flamed here's what I read and what I've experienced. The GS dynos at about 84 at the rear wheel (all magazines, both sides of the pond). The magazines that have tested the ST all get about 104 at the rear. That extra power coupled with being MUCH lower makes the ST accelerate much harder at high speeds. I'm talking high speeds here, at lower speeds it's closer than you would think. I've had my GS an indicated 132 and my ST an indicated 145. The GS was done at that speed, the ST MAY have had a little bit more to go. Both are spot on (1 to 2 MPH) according to my GPS at freeway speeds. BTW my GS has some help. A full Remus and an enhanced intake snorkel and air filter. Just had it (the GS) tested last weekend and it pulled 88.78 on a dynojet - about 5 more than all other GS's tested that day (they also had a Remus for the most part).

Living with it - The ST is easier to clean. The back of the GS, even with a hugger, is a mess after riding on a wet road. Go figure!

Engine and gearbox - The ST is smoother and has more consistant fueling - no flat spots. My GS has a noticeable flat spot arount 5,000. The gearbox on the ST is the best I've ever had from a BMW (I've had plenty).

Gas milage - The ST gets 48-50, the GS between 43-45.

Racing - depends on the road. When in doubt take the GS. If I need major power I take my K1200R!!!

Which do I prefer - depends on my mood. That's why I, like so many others, have multiple bikes. Both of these bikes are outstanding for their intended purpose. The GS gets well deserved press for being so versitle and such a great all-round bike. It is. Period, end of story. To me, the ST is the most underated motorcycle on the market today. If you like the riding position you would be shocked at just how well it does.

My 2 cents.

Good write up. I was really sad to see the ST go. Other points I noticed over the week I had the ST, servo brakes, I dont just like them. Much harder to modulate especially in the wet, although I know this is the way with all new BM's. The ST's gearbox while being much smother shifting was like putty, very difficult to know when you've changed gear compared to the clunky but positive 1100 box.

 

[sproggy]

I rode an RT for a day earlier in the week (reading this I wish I'd chosen the ST that was also on offer) while my GS was being serviced. Sounds as if the ST and RT engines are similar to each other but different in character to the GS. The RT had done only 1000 miles from new but the engine was sooooo smooooooth (except at idle) compared to my GS (700 miles) - hard to believe it was a twin. I wish my GS engine was like that. Agree about the gearchange, though - RT not nearly as positive as the GS.

Liked the RT once I got used to the slightly strange-feeling steering - great in pouring rain on the A1(M) but not so fun on back roads.

As someone else said, an ST with more GS-like suspension sounds great. Or, for absolute perfection, a GS with the ST/RT engine, flatter bars, firmer, shorter-travel suspension and a bigger screen....FUN

 

[NakedRider]

I rode an RT for a day earlier in the week (reading this I wish I'd chosen the ST that was also on offer) while my GS was being serviced. Sounds as if the ST and RT engines are similar to each other but different in character to the GS. The RT had done only 1000 miles from new but the engine was sooooo smooooooth (except at idle) compared to my GS (700 miles) - hard to believe it was a twin. I wish my GS engine was like that. Agree about the gearchange, though - RT not nearly as positive as the GS.

Liked the RT once I got used to the slightly strange-feeling steering - great in pouring rain on the A1(M) but not so fun on back roads.

As someone else said, an ST with more GS-like suspension sounds great. Or, for absolute perfection, a GS with the ST/RT engine, flatter bars, firmer, shorter-travel suspension and a bigger screen....FUN

Yes the ST and RT share the same engine. It's only listed at 110HP but it makes much more. I, too, wish I had the ST engine in the GS. That would be near perfection. Of course the available tire sizes still favor the ST when it comes to sticky rubber as well. My ST uses MUCH less oil too. Still haven't figured that one out.

 

[sproggy]

My ST uses MUCH less oil too. Still haven't figured that one out.

My dealer reckons that the GS uses less oil if it's ridden hard from the start - they recommended the first 200 miles below 4000rpm and then hammer it. I opted for 4000rpm to 200 miles, then 5000 to 300, 6000 to 400, then the sky's the limit. It used about 150ml of oil in the 630 miles before service. Time will tell how it'll behave with more miles but I've heard other people recommend 'enthusiastic' use from new as a means to minimise oil consumption.

I've also seen a 7000 mile 1200GS smoking (oil) when started up on the centre-stand - the owner was an elderly gent who claimed never to go much over 3000rpm....... These engines need using properly.

 

[NakedRider]

My dealer reckons that the GS uses less oil if it's ridden hard from the start - they recommended the first 200 miles below 4000rpm and then hammer it. I opted for 4000rpm to 200 miles, then 5000 to 300, 6000 to 400, then the sky's the limit. It used about 150ml of oil in the 630 miles before service. Time will tell how it'll behave with more miles but I've heard other people recommend 'enthusiastic' use from new as a means to minimise oil consumption.

I've also seen a 7000 mile 1200GS smoking (oil) when started up on the centre-stand - the owner was an elderly gent who claimed never to go much over 3000rpm....... These engines need using properly.

I did the break in the same for both bikes. The GS never changed. It used more oil from day one. When I bought the ST I was expecting the same thing. It just doesn't use any where near as much. No smoking from either of them, however. I ride them both REAL hard. Got 17,000 miles on the GS and 6,000 on the ST.