The All New LIQUID COOLED R1200GS threadfest

What engine design?? Sounds to me like you really want a KTM 990 Adventure but actually need a CRF230L. I'd be willing to bet that von Kuenheim and Robb would spank your happy little butt in riding, designing or marketing BMWs. By the way, at one of the press junkets a female marketing manager was chasing down wayward journalists on an S1000RR. So, yeah, they ride.

All interesting takes. I wanted to go on record that I love technology when it works for me. Water cooling for example, HUGE step forward on two strokes!! Except for vintage's sake, I couldn't see myself NOT riding a water cooled two stroke. CRF's and the like? Same story I think but I expect a rocket ship to take off like a rocket ship! On the other hand, I love riding slow bikes fast on the street because you are on the street and what else can you do if you want to live and/or keep your license but dirt bikes in general and two strokes in general are a different story. They have performance I expect to use!

Water cooled four stroke street bikes? Most all of them are hotter than hell to ride in the heat for a lot of reasons that I rarely get into. YZF? I wouldn't have them air cooled. KLR? I would rather have an air cooled DR.

I am not asking anyone to agree with me but I do hope you get an understanding of where I am coming from.

I'd gladly let the female marketing manager do the spanking!

By all accounts KTM are real heart breakers. Equal amounts of passion and disappointment.

The GS does it all for me and I love it. Because I love it I want it to be better! If it's the embodiment of perfection from the factory, why all the farkles? Is it a crime to want improvement? Obviously I'm not their target demographic. Even if they wanted to leave the boxer behind, the marketing department will not allow it.

Ironically the 50+ crowd who demands continuity of dated GS design elements are the same people driving I-Drive 7 Series with Blackberry's and satellite television. Might even own a gps too..

Now, where's my brick-phone and what do we need this internet thing for??

I do tend to agree with you. Especially the part about heat on water cooled street bikes.

Man! I thought there was going to be thousands of our kind jumping on this!

I keep coming back to this post hoping to hear some FACTS about the new water or air cooled GS. But in reality BMW has a proven history of keeping new models off the radar until they’re ready to hit the show room floor.

What I do find comforting (based on the recent comparo from Fast Bikes) is that the current 2011 GSA, which is basically a 5+ old design, but with HP2 heads bested the latest/greatest offerings from Ducati and YAM (both have more power/water cooled). Fast Bikes even went further and said that if it was a 2009 GS, the results would still be the same, wow!

I’m confident that BMW will make further improvements with the new, yet to be released GS/GSA. As for me, I’m not so concerned if the new GS will be water cooled or have 10 to 40 more h.p., but rather improvements/changes such as weight, suspension, braking, handling, ASC and xenon/adjustable headlights – to name a few.

Mike K.
Dana Point, CA

Je suis d'accord.

I don't thimk anyone has mentioned the absence of an oil pan. This is a drysump engine, thus lowering the engine in the chassis by 3-4 inches. The extra room in the cam drive gallery of the heads could be for variable valve timing apparatus which was mentioned in the BMW Motorcycle Magazine interview about the new boxer about a year ago. Notice the watercooling passages bypass the cylinders and only supply water cooling for the heads, thus air/oil would still provide cooling for the cylinder walls and the pistons. As mentioned by others here the lower front portion of the crankcase should provide for a stator and alternator windings possibly imbalanced to provide part of the balance shaft of the engine. With the wet clutch we finally have a single oil crancase for the engine, transmission and alternator with the subsequent minimum number of shaft oil seals involved similiar to any modern engine/transmission now available. Reliability should likely rise in accordance. My $.02.

All I understood from the picture was that the engine is missing some parts

Dry sump is a biggie , I have herd that one reason that the boxer is limited is crank case pressure. I remember reading about such things as reed valves to allow the crank case to breath better in Racing BMW's. I would think if more power it would mean more rev's and more heat then there are a few issues that would need looking at.

I had never thought about that issue. There must be some significant pressure fluctuations with both piston compressing then expanding at the same time. Dry sump could definitely help eliminate the headache.

Lowering the CG is a huge benefit if what you described is true.

The other point I'm curious about is 'if' the water cooling is only for the heads, does that mean a smaller water circuit (hence less mass/volume added)? It sounds like its designed to eliminate redundant mass (the common oil volume for one example), and with newer casting techniques the overall engine weight may be comparable to the current model. (Ducati 1098 and 848 castings as one example of thinner wall castings and weight being minimized).

I have to say that I think the existing engine is under-stressed. Meaning that it's robust enough for future power increases as witnessed in the HP2s and R1200S. I really don't want to see the added complexity of a water circuit and all the BS that goes with it.

BUT. One thing I loathe on the existing boxer is the resonating feeling of that engine at 70-85 mph. If this architecture has better power flexibility, better (lower) CG and buttery smooth power at highway speeds, it may not be all bad.

I still think the HP2 MM and HP2e should have a place in the lineup though.

C'mon, that Fastbikes comparo was a joke - as are most of the tests coming out of Brit rags of its ilk (Bike etc.) They never took the bikes off road at all, yet were of the opinion that the GS was the best off-road. Give me a break...

They also mention a bunch of "niggles" about the Super Tenere that no other testers - or owners - have. bad seat? poor fuel economy? excessive oil consumption? No owner has mentioned these as issues in the year the S10 has been available - in fact they've said the opposite.

True it's overpriced in the UK (though not by as much as the FB boys reckon) but I think it compares very favourably with the GS in the US market.

Trevor

I don't believe this is a dry sump engine. Dry sump engines have a greater tendency to pump oil into the airbox in general and my K12 does it at high revs so much that BMW included a drain hose. The higher pressures of the boxer engine would make this even worse unless BMW came up with a better air/oil separator than they currently have. Also, lowering the engine very much would take away lean angle and not necessarily help the handling. Dropping the crankshaft 4 inches would relegate you to parade duty next to the Harleys. Honda found out that lowering the CG even an inch changes the handling/steering characteristics of a motorcycle for the worse. I'm actually trying to raise the CG of my K12 to see if I can get it to steer as easily as my GSA. Also, on the 2006 CBR1000RR the bike handles a lot better when you put on a bigger 190/55 rear tire and push the forks down in the top bridge. Water cooling the heads makes the most sense though, probably with an electric water pump like they do on their cars

Not sure where you got this from? I know they had problems with CG being too low in the 80's, when they ran fuel tanks under the engine of the NSR500 grand prix bikes. Even then, I don't think it was solely a problem of the CG being too low - it was to do with being unable to set up the bike (and rider) to adapt to a CHANGING CG as the fuel load lightened.

Current Honda motoGP bikes have fuel under the seat, where it's relatively low and has less effect on handling as fuel is used up.

Trevor

You're going to be hard pressed to find many who like the adventure bike just as it is; tinkering seems to be inherent in the design.

Sure improve where marketable or required, they are trying to make a profit afterall and allow the aftermarket to provide the less than cost-effective changes.

KTM, take what you see on OC with a grain of salt; same advice ehre for FD threads. For every thread with someone posting a real issues, there are 5 just discussing or ranting over it without having experienced it.

3 of my riding buddies have or had owned the 950 and all 3 love it. 2 have had no issues and 1 within the 1st 10,000 km of his ownership had to replace the waterpump. All still love the bikes. Issues yes but perhaps not as prevalent as seen here. There's a lot of whining on these threads by people about stuff that has not happened to them. I'm all for improving awareness but sometimes these are not beneficial.

You want to talk issues, hit the Ducati forum for the Desmosedici... :eek1 I was seriously considering a used one until I started seeing the repairs, teardowns and rebuilds and weeks in the shops threads with none of them over 40,000 kms. Again, I'm having to waft through a lot of rantings to get to the facts but considering the low production numbers - under 2,000 - the # of threads discussing these issues are more significant than the avg. bike forum.

Joke or reality riding? 99% of big bore advriders don't take their bikes off-road. Just like 99% of sportbike riders don't ever touch racetrack tarmac. Some tests do go the extra mile and take them off-road in varying levels of difficulty but the majority of KTM, Vstrom, GS, etc. and KLR, DL to a lesser extent, I see are never on the trails where I ride but on the roads I take to get there. They are simply appealing to and addressing the real world where these bikes, for the most part, will thrive.

My local dealers sells out of GS and KLR every season and I never seen more than 1 or 2 on the trails and I'm on them every weekend of the summer - all day.

You've got to appeal to the masses in these reviews to get the sales. That is why I think BIKE has moved away from trackday tests to the BIKE route (road riding) test.

In the '80s the VFR750 handled very well, Honda believing a lower CG was better lowered the VFR1000 and it never came up to the same level. More recently Max Biaggi was having difficulty finishing his turns on the RSV4 in WSBK so his crew raised the motor a bit. It helped the turning of the bike but created some braking instability.

Dcstrom……

I find that Fast Bike/Brit mags “typically” tell like it is. Having owned various Triumph’s, Aprilia’s and BMW’s – I’ve found the Brit review’s are spot on and accurately describe “my” experience with the same model bike they’ve tested and because of that “value” there opinion.

Also, what I like about Brit review’s is that they usually beat the heck out of the bikes they test and aren’t afraid to say what they’ve found, even if it offends (which has been me on occasion- hey, sometimes the truth hurts).

Anyway, Dcstrom in the end its Burger King – have it your way.

Mike K.
Dana Point, CA

I have to agree that usually I can understand how magazines like "Bike" came to their conclusions. They often have problems with Adventure bikes because they don't always ride them off road and have complained at times about things like "excessive" suspension movement for on road use.

However to be fair most of them have been better with this lately.

In summary ... most of the time I find them pretty fair, accurate and useful. If you don't like what they say, well ....