Bmw R1200r 0-60

[Jason]

Stillnot seen anything on this but I've heard that both top speed & acceleration are down on the 1200. That said I've had an indicated 150 on the 1250, compared to 145ish on the 1200 IIRC & the 1250 roll on acceleration is pretty much on a par with an H2 SX, so it's no slouch. The 0-60 site I think only has the RT's in both models as a comparison & both the 0-60 & standing quarter has the 1200 as faster, but then with all of these things it's down to the rider, conditions... talking fractions of a second. It'll be interesting if someone does a side by side comparison... anybody with a 1200?

They have the 1200R as 2.8 to 60.

Zitat von Immersion Suit im Beitrag #1Has anyone published a test of the 1250's 0-60 time and quarter mile times?

I think this went out of fashion many years ago.

Magazines, especially the British ones, were heavily criticised for focusing on speed after a series of articles where they espoused tales of speed trials and stunts on French autoroutes.

There was quite a lobby in the EU, stirred up by Martin Bangerman, about restricting motorcycles which led to the media changing their approach. Fortunately he was exposed as a crook, funding his private yacht from EU finds I believe, so things have quietened down but we still have the emissions and noise lobby and bans on roads in Germany & Austria.

0-60 times are something that little boys used to compare bikes. Owners almost never stand at a light and try to get to 60 as quickly as possible, it is a totally useless figure, far more interesting would be 30 to 70 in top gear.

Top speeds are the same, where apart from some places in Germany can you test it on the public road? In the UK it only matters that your bike is capable of the maximum speed allowed on the road, 70 mph. I know we all do a bit more in the UK, but the traffic density does not allow that much quicker for any length of time.

Zitat von himoverthere im Beitrag #40-60 times are something that little boys used to compare bikes. Owners almost never stand at a light and try to get to 60 as quickly as possible, it is a totally useless figure, far more interesting would be 30 to 70 in top gear.

Top speeds are the same, where apart from some places in Germany can you test it on the public road? In the UK it only matters that your bike is capable of the maximum speed allowed on the road, 70 mph. I know we all do a bit more in the UK, but the traffic density does not allow that much quicker for any length of time.

Yeah but it's the standard figure that the car guys quote because in general it takes them so long to get there, whereas you make a tiny mistake & you add 10% to your bike's time... bikes tend to use the standing quarter as more of a bench mark, being around the 10 second mark for most.

I agree with you about the 30 to 70, but I also like a good traffic light GP start & going up through the gears even if you do have to back off after 3 seconds. Fun with the BMW M2/3/4 brigade & the odd supercar where you see them try for the 1st 50 metres & then back off as though they weren't actually trying anyway... I usually give them the jump start too!

Zitat von wessie im Beitrag #3

There was quite a lobby in the EU, stirred up by Martin Bangerman, about restricting motorcycles which led to the media changing their approach. Fortunately he was exposed as a crook, funding his private yacht from EU finds I believe, so things have quietened down but we still have the emissions and noise lobby and bans on roads in Germany & Austria.

Wasn't he the one who tried to enforce the 100 bhp limit for bikes, which the manufacturers briefly followed with their gentleman's agreement until it all blew over. How silly that looks now!

"But he is perhaps best known in Britain as the man who tried to ban prawn cocktail flavoured crisps and the traditional English sausage"... b*$t@Rd!!!

I posited the question just out of curiosity b/c when I talk w/ car guys in real life, they use that figure. The RS has insanely fast acceleration compared to any car, but I never measured it. Where I live people have a bad habit of running red lights because the yellows are too short, so I often am mild on the throttle coming off a light, only opening it up once I clear the intersection.

Car manufacturers and auto reviewers seem to be focused on 0-60 times, at least here in the U.S. However, they never seem to mention 1/4 mile performance or top speeds, at least not for sedans. Perhaps there is a reason for that. One thing is for sure, if there is an open highway in my area, some motorcycle and car drivers are quite willing to exceed 100 mph on a freeway with a 65-mph speed limit, which does tend to keep the Highway Patrol and courts pretty busy collecting fines. You really have to watch your rear view mirrors when changing lanes on a multi-lane highway.

Zitat von wessie im Beitrag #12Zitat von PlacidoD im Beitrag #11The RS, of course, has slightly higher gearing than the GS but I doubt that would make any significant difference to anything reported.

P.S The thought of a range of only 150 miles makes me shudder!! I get something around 60 mpg.

Chris

but the yellow light will come on with another 50 miles to go...

Which is my only real grumble about my 1250RS! On the TFT the message fills a pannicky half the screen. When urban riding you might well pass 50 petrol stations on your way to empty so the alarmist proportions of the message are unnecessary. Even in rural settings or on motorways you don't need such a big brash statement. It annoys me that I have to make the effort to turn it off and niggles me that the tank is not just that bit larger so that I can make 200 miles before the TFT goes into panic mode!

Chris

I have yet to ride a r1200r, did ride the 1200GS and was not all that impressed but do expect the r1200r to be a better ride. I did have the pleasure of riding a Night Rod for twelve miles and liked it. Any insight; or, experience you can share would really help. Cheers, Frank

After 20 years off-bike, I've again been bitten by the bike bug. I blame it in part on some friends of ours, both of whom acquired sportbikes this year. One of them is the head of motorcycle safety for the state; if she sees cycling as relatively 'safe,' who am I to argue? In any case, I've taken out roughly half a dozen bikes to get a sense for what I like. These have included a BMW 2011 R1200R, a 2009 K1300GT, 2014 F800GT, Suzuki SV650S and Honda 2010 VFR1200F. Of all these, the naked BMW 1200 and the 'Veefalo' have felt the best; however, I prefer a faired bike in order to extend my riding season in Wisconsin. The R1200R has few decent aftermarket fairing options, IMO; that leaves the Veefalo and its predecessors.

A bit more: I'm 48, 5'8", 165#. My former ride was a salvage title Suzuki 1981 GS1100E that fell apart one too many times for my liking; losing an oilpan drain plug at 80+ MPH with a pillion onboard tends to make one skittish, especially if one torqued the bolt properly the morning of the ride. I'm also a trauma-certified ED/ICU RN, so I've seen the effects of crashing. Statistically, the greatest risk factors for crashing are 1) drinking and driving, 2) not wearing a helmet, 3) excessive speed, 4) as an older rider, driving too big/fast a bike for my skill set. Risk factors 1) and 2) will never be an issue for me; I don't drink enough to qualify and I just bought a new X-14 (stellar crash ratings and it fit better that anything else in the showroom; go figure). Boots, leathers and gloves are high on my to-do list, as is an airbag vest. I'm reading some awesome books on safe cycling, and will take every safe cycling/handling course I can find. 3) is almost certainly a given on occasion--this is a motorcycle we're talking here, not a moped. 4) is a worry--I wish I liked the F800 or the SV650 for that reason. The F800 is too 'buzzy' a ride; the SV suffers an engine feel/note I dislike and very vague shifting feel. Both are otherwise lovely bikes that sip petrol, are nimble, light and easy to handle. Color me annoyed.

So a bigger bike it is? I tried the K1300GT as substitute for the lighter, more powerful K1300S; the sensitive throttle and unbelievable power of the GT scared the pants off me. No to the I-4 1300, then! Since I'm looking for a generalist bike that can commute, tour, maybe even play in the twisties, a salesperson steered me to a V1200. It felt awesome; the CofG is down low, the throttle relatively gentle until 5K RPM or so, then wickedly fast; handling feels intuitive, braking predictable and easy, with minimal brake dive from 40-mph panic stops. ABS is relatively unobtrusive. Stability is decent at 5 mph and, well...let's just say it has really nice high-speed stability, shall we? I like the gearbox--shifts are very solid and definite, much like my old GS1100. The seat's a bit slippery, and I've read a lot about the subpar suspension, poor fueling in 1st and 2nd, minimal range and anemic exhaust note below 5K. The windshield could be higher, and Wisconsin autumns demand heated grips/seat. That notwithstanding, it felt really good during the twenty minutes or so that I got to ride it.

So why haven't I bought it already? Let's return to the advice I've heard about returning riders, urging them to start on something smaller, something more forgiving. The VFR1200 feels good, but it's 593# and has 174 hp. It's gentle below 5K rpm, but 5-10K rpm are very, very quick indeed. Whether I drop it or an 800 or a 650 in the driveway is moot; all will be faired, all will have sliders everywhere I can put them to mitigate effects of the obligatory drop. That being said, I like the feel of the motor, smooth yet vibey, and the sound it makes once the exhaust valve opens. But is it too much bike for me? Would a 5th-gen VFR800 (still a heavy, fast bike) be a better overall choice for me at this juncture?

Anybody that wants to opine, please chime in. I'm interested to hear from people who ride both these bikes. In the meantime, I'm looking for a 5th-gen VFR to try out.

3a8082e126