BMW R1200R Forum banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,470 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Well I finally managed to get out on the 1250 yesterday and I have to say it was a little bit of a disappointment, let me explain.

Initially I was playing with the impressive display settings to really notice if the bike was any different, I know I should have done this before riding off but I just wanted to get out and about. So after settling in and leaving the display alone I just started to ride the bike. I was expecting to notice the difference in power and torque but I really couldn't, everything just felt much the same and very familiar although I did think the quick shifter was a bit smoother on gear change and on a steady throttle in town (30mph) its better as mine seems to hunt a bit but apart from that it was no better than my two year old 1200. Handling and braking were the same even though the suspension setting were different, I think they are auto settings available now so have more variation.

I am not a great fan of revs (I have big bike so I don't need revs to get anywhere), hardly ever going above 5000 revs and tend to short shift into a higher gear as quickly as possible. That means that I probably never had the shift cam operate during my ride so never got into the full power and torque band, I may have noticed the difference if I had but I ride demo bikes as if they were mine and don't treat them any different so I get to know how it would be to own. Half way round I stopped and had a walk around and a play with the menus and found that the display was very clear but one thing I noticed was that there is no permanent fuel gauge, this has to selected as an option along with the trip meter 1, trip meter 2, fuel consumption, time of journey etc. They can be changed in a sub menu but I would have preferred more information without having to trawl through a menu system. Yes I know everything is not constantly displayed on my 1200 but at least I can have the fuel gauge, a trip and another option on display all the time (a bit picky I know) and it would only take a little time to get used to it.

So for me it's a no, the bike itself is fine and I did really like the hill start function but not enough of an improvement to justify spending an additional £4k on (the approx. cost to change), there are better options for me out there so I will be hanging onto my 1200. For anyone out there that has bought one enjoy it but as the differences don't seem to be all that apparent (to me) at lower revs it's not the bike for me. I hope this does not put anyone off trying one, it might suit you better so all I can say is try it for yourself, it might just the right bike for you.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,034 Posts
I felt similarly when I test rode one a while back, Mick, although I didn't delve into the dash menus. I am aware though, in addition to your commentary, BMW's connectivity app isn't yet mature and has been problematic for many riders (I expect current owners can expect a firmware upgrade in due course).

Objectively the 1250 is quicker, even before the second cam lobes kick in (quite a lot more low down torque than the 1200 LC) but I found the softer throttle response made it actually feel slower off zero throttle. Where that power would come into its own is at high speeds when loaded up touring or two-up riding. I've found in these situations (say >130 km/h) throttle response on my 1200 lacks a hit in the back. The 1250 would be a lot stronger.

But for regular riding, I came to the same conclusion as you - new owners will love their 1250, and in a roll-on drag race would walk away from a 1200, but for regular riding, I'm therefore not tempted to trade up. In fact after three weeks away from my bike, having been on a non-biking holiday, the punchiness of the engine brought a huge grin to my face this morning.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
69 Posts
It’s good to hear what you two have just posted not being value for money as the 1250 might be only a 5% improvement over an approx 40-50% increase in purchase price v age of the 1200.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
542 Posts
Great write up. :iagree:

Haven’t test rode one, but your insight is consistent with what others have said....new version is nicer, but nothing too remarkable. I’m sure the TFT will be/is a game changer as it eliminates the need for the Nav system to get the options the Nav system added (detailed bike info at-a-glance, phone, music and navigation) and lets you install a much cheaper GPS if you still want one.

I don’t sweat the need to tweak the display. The ones on the 1200 R/RS are God awful from the factory, and it took me HOURS to navigate all the options and settings to set it up the way I liked it. Lots of default readouts I had no use for and items I wanted had to be found and turned on. Heck...my “fuel consumption” reading is still the wrong one (two are averages and a third is real time IIRC) and needs to be corrected. At least with the TFT it’s easier and more intuitive. You don’t need the manual to explain what each abbreviation means. :nerd:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,470 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Got another chance to ride the 1250 again the other day and I have not changed my opinion. Yes it is very slightly better in some ways but overall not worth a trade up. I though that I might notice some improvement over my 1200 as I just rode this bike and did not try to "play " with settings and displays but very little difference from my point of view. I will be looking elsewhere for my next bike.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Curious, that I feel the same way about my '11 GSA vs the newer 1200/1250 GSA's. They're prettier, and the 1250 GS/A is supposed to be a beast, but I don't want them badly enough to sell my '11. I did, however, buy the 1250R when previous versions of the 1200 didn't impress me during test rides. I've owned almost 50 bikes over the years, and after spending a lot of time and money trying to buy the "right" bike, I finally realized it's all about personal preference. Wish I'd known that about 45 bikes ago, LOL.



Rick
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
639 Posts
....
But for regular riding, I came to the same conclusion as you - new owners will love their 1250, and in a roll-on drag race would walk away from a 1200, but for regular riding, I'm therefore not tempted to trade up. In fact after three weeks away from my bike, having been on a non-biking holiday, the punchiness of the engine brought a huge grin to my face this morning.
If I were in that kind of a hurry to get to Starbucks, this is what I'd be riding.


But seriously, if those are the only metrics for getting a new bike, I can think of about 150 others that are quicker "off the line".

For some of us, a successful launch is not as important as just staying upright and getting to our destination. :)
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,034 Posts
But seriously, if those are the only metrics for getting a new bike, I can think of about 150 others that are quicker "off the line".

For some of us, a successful launch is not as important as just staying upright and getting to our destination. :)
Moto, I was in no way suggesting off-the-line launch was a criteria for trading up to the 1250. We all love our Roadsters for what they are as a whole bike, and for me, nothing else on the market fits as well, regardless of how quick it is off the line. I was just recognising the 1250’s significantly stronger roll-on acceleration, which enhances its sporting abilities as well as rideability when fully loaded.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
639 Posts
.Panz , sorry, I guess I was just trying to get in the spirit.



This guy is , too...



All things considered, though, I am the guy who slows down on straights, and speeds up in corners. I do like to loft the occasional front tire, though, but not on the R12...
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top