R1250GS vs R1250R

[Boxerlust]

I had 4 BMW roadsters over the years and always liked them kind of like 50 lbs lighter GS' with 17 inch front wheels...Except for the R Nine T a bike I still like a lot except for the missing T-L these 1200 R's all had T-L
The R1250R of course has a conventional fork but at least ESA and 20mm more travel than the standard 120mm forks commonly used but still no T-L . But 50 lbs lighter than a GS and 17 inch front wheel which gives you more tire options. Anyways anyone here who has changed from a GS to a R or from a R to a GS !?
I rode these bikes back to back a couple years ago as 1200's and also a XR but bought a GS-ADV then because I liked the T-L front the best...But still would have picked the R over the XR because it was not that much slower but had boxer and driveshaft if I remember right... The reason I started thinking about the 1250R because they have 0% financing on remaining 2020 EU-4 models and new 2021 are EU-5 and might be not as strong if 2016 EU-3 vs 2017/18 EU-4 are an indication...Brexit and with that the end of the EU and their stupid regulations can't come early enough !

 

[fred_jb]

I've changed from GS to 1250 RS which is essentially the faired version of the R, and have no regrets. I find the RS to be a much more engaging bike to ride than the GS, and as I am not the last of the late brakers I don't find fork dive on braking to be an issue compared with the Telelever equipped GS, and in any case this is mitigated by ESA on bikes so equipped, as mine is. I also like the fact that the RS is not so common on UK and European roads as the GS.

Speaking of Europe, if you think that the UK can in future demand that manufacturers make special, more polluting versions of their vehicles, solely for use in the UK (they wouldn't be allowed to be used within the EU) then I'm afraid you are deluding yourself. Even the UK based manufacturers have to sell to the EU and will have to meet EU regulations, just as US companies have to meet the stringent environmental requirements of the massive California market, even if other US states have lower standards.

 

[Winjar]

I find, 1200 rs or 1250 rs not good for tall riders, knees to bend, GS gives good position.

 

[B15ape1981]

I got given the the R1250R as a loaner as they serviced my 1250 adventure last month... Sorry to rock the boat but i thought it was shite, it made me want to piss myself every time i went over anything the size of a pebble...the suspension was bone hard and uncomfortable, the only good thing it had going for it was the engine

 

[fred_jb]

I got given the the R1250R as a loaner as they serviced my 1250 adventure last month... Sorry to rock the boat but i thought it was shite, it made me want to piss myself every time i went over anything the size of a pebble...the suspension was bone hard and uncomfortable, the only good thing it had going for it was the engine

Maybe there is a suspension difference between the RS and the R, but I have found the RS to be perfectly comfortable, as has my wife when riding pillion, and she would be the first to complain if she found the RS less comfortable than the GS. Having average 31" legs and a long torso, I find my legs are fine, but have had to fit bar risers and and a taller screen to make my upper body comfortable.

 

[peter56]

Never understand the GS for road use. The R1250R or RS is lighter more agile and ,choose the right seat and it can fit anybody.

 

[stick]

I got given the the R1250R as a loaner as they serviced my 1250 adventure last month... Sorry to rock the boat but i thought it was shite, it made me want to piss myself every time i went over anything the size of a pebble...the suspension was bone hard and uncomfortable, the only good thing it had going for it was the engine

With you on that one , horrible bikes , had a loaner for 2 days took it around Wales for the day . Christ it was hard work , glad when I took it back and it stayed in the garage the second day . Okay on your smooth stuff but challenge it and it folds Sorry
Plus the fact it’s ugly

 

[Troppo]

I rode these bikes back to back a couple years ago as 1200's and also a XR but bought a GS-ADV then because I liked the T-L front the best...But still would have picked the R over the XR because it was not that much slower

You are dreaming - as an XR owner, and one who has had a couple of hrs on a 1250R, let me tell you that the XR EATS the R.

I, too, wanted to like the R...but it was awful - as others have said, rock hard suspension and awful looks.

 

[sven]

I had a 2018 R1200RS for a while last year and the rock hard suspension actually made it slower on bumpy back roads than a GS. The pillion position was very exposed too.

It was great on a smooth twisty road, but nowhere near as versatile as a GS anywhere else

 

[peter56]

Each to there own and all that. Not interested in going off road so RS for me. And i think it looks a lot better than a GS It probably handles better for me cos I am only 67kg

 

[stick]

Each to there own and all that. Not interested in going off road so RS for me. And i think it looks a lot better than a GS It probably handles better for me cos I am only 67kg

As you say each to there own and a fair comment , the GS however morphs in one hell of a road bike as well as off road , luggage hauler , people mover and excels at all, but it would be boring world if we all liked the same .

 

[fred_jb]

As you say each to there own and a fair comment , the GS however morphs in one hell of a road bike as well as off road , luggage hauler , people mover and excels at all, but it would be boring world if we all liked the same .

Agreed, and as the GS and RS/R are probably 90% identical and have all the same tech options on this iteration (not true on the previous version RS) then it is very much a case of personal preference. Having owned the 1250 versions of both bikes I'm happier with the RS. I use the same luggage as I had on my GS, now colour matched to the RS, it works just as well when loaded up with a pillion, and I just like the feel of it better. Risky to say this on the GS forum, but to me as a bonus it looks better too!

 

[peter56]

I like the fact that the RS is less popular It gets lots positive comments and attention . I use it manly for touring two up totally under rated in my humble opinion. Not going to be popular on a GS forum

 

[Spareparts]

Agreed, and as the GS and RS/R are probably 90% identical and have all the same tech options on this iteration (not true on the previous version RS) then it is very much a case of personal preference. Having owned the 1250 versions of both bikes I'm happier with the RS. I use the same luggage as I had on my GS, now colour matched to the RS, it works just as well when loaded up with a pillion, and I just like the feel of it better. Risky to say this on the GS forum, but to me as a bonus it looks better too!

You had spent money trying to turn your GS into an RS, so it is no surprise that you prefer the RS.

I like the fact that the RS is less popular It gets lots positive comments and attention . I use it manly for touring two up totally under rated in my humble opinion. Not going to be popular on a GS forum

RS is a fine bike on its own. It is not underrated imho. But I'm not sure the expectation for RS popularity should be high on a GS forum? I am sure there will be plenty of fanfare for the RS on www.R1200RSforum.com.

===

Bottom line: the GS is designed for both on-road and off-road mixed road adventures. The hint is in the name "Gelande Strasse". It is ridiculous and boring to hear tarmac-only riders bleat on about wanting to turn the GS into an XR or RS, both of which are designed for tarmac-focused use. If one likes tarmac only riding, and prefer the features of an RS or XR as such, then people should go buy one instead of the GS? But to pontificate on a GS forum how the GS is found wanting because it lacks the features an RS/XR have given their tarmac-focus, seems a bit... stupid?

The GS is superb at what it does and goes places the XR and RS can only dream of. So for its multifaceted purposes, it is brilliant. BMW product development and marketing know a thing or two, and glad they have some product separation in their range.

 

[peter56]

You had spent money trying to turn your GS into an RS, so it is no surprise that you prefer the RS.



RS is a fine bike on its own. It is not underrated imho. But I'm not sure the expectation for RS popularity should be high on a GS forum? I am sure there will be plenty of fanfare for the RS on www.R1200RSforum.com.

===

Bottom line: the GS is designed for both on-road and off-road mixed road adventures. The hint is in the name "Gelande Strasse". It is ridiculous and boring to hear tarmac-only riders bleat on about wanting to turn the GS into an XR or RS, both of which are designed for tarmac-focused use. If one likes tarmac only riding, and prefer the features of an RS or XR as such, then people should go buy one instead of the GS? But to pontificate on a GS forum how the GS is found wanting because it lacks the features an RS/XR have given their tarmac-focus, seems a bit... stupid?

The GS is superb at what it does and goes places the XR and RS can only dream of. So for its multifaceted purposes, it is brilliant. BMW product development and marketing know a thing or two, and glad they have some product separation in their range.

Yep all got for what they are deigned .The GS is popular for a reason.

 

[Blackal]

This will run for pages....................

This fella seemed to like the R1200R, which should basically be the same bar the engine??

Tune in next week for R1100s / R1200s

 

[fred_jb]

You had spent money trying to turn your GS into an RS, so it is no surprise that you prefer the RS.



RS is a fine bike on its own. It is not underrated imho. But I'm not sure the expectation for RS popularity should be high on a GS forum? I am sure there will be plenty of fanfare for the RS on www.R1200RSforum.com.

===

Bottom line: the GS is designed for both on-road and off-road mixed road adventures. The hint is in the name "Gelande Strasse". It is ridiculous and boring to hear tarmac-only riders bleat on about wanting to turn the GS into an XR or RS, both of which are designed for tarmac-focused use. If one likes tarmac only riding, and prefer the features of an RS or XR as such, then people should go buy one instead of the GS? But to pontificate on a GS forum how the GS is found wanting because it lacks the features an RS/XR have given their tarmac-focus, seems a bit... stupid?

The GS is superb at what it does and goes places the XR and RS can only dream of. So for its multifaceted purposes, it is brilliant. BMW product development and marketing know a thing or two, and glad they have some product separation in their range.

I don't disagree. I originally bought a GS because it had the best technology, in particular the auto preload and associated automatic damping adjustment, which makes frequent switching between solo and two-up riding seamless, with surprisingly little impact on the handling when fully loaded. However I am a tarmac only rider, so didn't need the off road capabilities and the height of the GS, so when the latest iteration of the RS got the latest ESA system I changed and am very happy. I am sure the GS is the more versatile bike, especially if you actually intend to use the off-road capability, or even if you don't but just like the off-road image. I also don't really understand people who want to put 17" front wheels on the GS and pretend it is a sports bike. Surely it is a case of horses for courses, and you choose the bike which best meets your riding requirements and satisfies your aesthetic sensibilities?

 

[littleade]

I had 4 BMW roadsters over the years and always liked them kind of like 50 lbs lighter GS' with 17 inch front wheels...Except for the R Nine T a bike I still like a lot except for the missing T-L these 1200 R's all had T-L
The R1250R of course has a conventional fork but at least ESA and 20mm more travel than the standard 120mm forks commonly used but still no T-L . But 50 lbs lighter than a GS and 17 inch front wheel which gives you more tire options. Anyways anyone here who has changed from a GS to a R or from a R to a GS !?
I rode these bikes back to back a couple years ago as 1200's and also a XR but bought a GS-ADV then because I liked the T-L front the best...But still would have picked the R over the XR because it was not that much slower but had boxer and driveshaft if I remember right... The reason I started thinking about the 1250R because they have 0% financing on remaining 2020 EU-4 models and new 2021 are EU-5 and might be not as strong if 2016 EU-3 vs 2017/18 EU-4 are an indication...Brexit and with that the end of the EU and their stupid regulations can't come early enough !

According to BMW's website there's only 10kg difference between the R and GS now 239 vs 249 and the RS sits roughly in the middle at 243 so the weight savings arn't that great with the LCs

 

[r1happy]

The reason some people buy a GS is for better comfort than previous tourers, helped by the increased distance between the bars, seat & pegs. I have never taken any of my GS’s off road and never will. I sold a K1300GT for my first GS because my previous bike to the K13, a 2010 Multi, was comfier but Ducati reliability was crap.

I love the GS engine and the telelever but I wanted a 17” front wheel to have quicker steering and grippy sports tyres. I don’t want KTM level of power as my 1250 has now enough for me, (after Geoff sorted it), It’s brilliant fun and part of riding a bike for me has always been about not all wanting the same thing. I have what I set out to achieve when I first ordered my 1250, a Supermoto GS. Each to their own.

 

[peter56]

According to BMW's website there's only 10kg difference between the R and GS now 239 vs 249 and the RS sits roughly in the middle at 243 so the weight savings arn't that great with the LCs

I have the r1200rs so a bit less weight than a 1250. On a side note its about time BMW tried and shed some weight. Even the new f900xr is 219 kg and its supposed to be a middle weight