View Single Post
Old 08-13-2011, 08:14 AM   #97
Beastly Adventurer
itsatdm's Avatar
Joined: Jun 2004
Location: Nor Ca.
Oddometer: 5,002
Here is a synopsis from the Bike test that I plagiarized from another post:
"The general consensus was that the GS was better off-road, but that the Tiger had a peach of an engine. Bike Dyno'd both bikes, and the results are quite surprising. The Tiger makes 3bhp more than the GS, but only makes those extra ponies above 8500rpm. At every other point in the rev range the GS is ahead, often way head. At 5500 revs the Tiger makes 50bhp, the GS makes 60bhp. All the tests and reports comment on the Tigers creamy torque, however at no point in the rev range does the Tiger even get close to the GS. The GS makes 55 lb.ft against 49 lb.ft.

Side by side roll on shows both bikes equal at 30mph in third, and again equal from 40mph in both third gear and top gear. Anything above 60mph in top, and the GS has the edge. Obviously the twin isn't as refined as the triple, which feels happier above 90mph. Over 90 miles of motorway riding at 90mph the GS did 66mpg, whereas the Tiger did 51mpg (29% more fuel used".

Which bike you prefer, obviously depends how much pavement you pound. Lets not get caught up in semantics and trying to define an adventure bike into some niche that mirrors where you ride.

The short comings of the BMW have been expressed early and often, by some of us who believed the bikes could go anywhere, like they were advertised. I expect to see something similar from the Triumph buyers when they attempt to do the same.
BMW Motorrad USA customer service: "We make superior motorcycles and continue to improve them."
itsatdm is offline   Reply With Quote