The new F800S BMW....official pic.

Topics related to the ownership, maintenance, equipping, operation, and riding of the R1150R.

Moderator: Moderators

arkline
Quadruple Lifer
Posts: 720
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 5:51 pm
Donating Member #: 0
Location: Seattle, WA
Contact:

Post by arkline »

Does sound like a bit of a stone doesn't it?
I guess this isn't what I had in mind. The early imaginary "photos" had a bike that was styled much more like the F650CS. (Which gets a lot of looks from the younger set). I was kinda hoping for that sort of distinctive look, not another "what kinda bike" is that look. I'm altogether disappointed. Especially if it comes in at around 10K. Seems there is a lot of price competition for a mid-sized bike like this. And a lot more performance per quarter stuck in the slot.

The numbers are nice, if not impressive, but not enough to get me to plunk down hard cash just for the roundel.
arkline #27
not THE Ron Kline

"No matter where you go, there you are."
guest too

Post by guest too »

i'm sorry,but... nothing is better than the new ducati sport 1000... only question is black or yellow... and how much i can get for my '04rr
Deans BMW
Honorary Lifer
Posts: 1933
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 5:48 pm
Donating Member #: 0
Location: Show Low,Az.

Post by Deans BMW »

Image

Image
Dean-O
Member #33
darthrider
Basic User
Posts: 1794
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 3:31 pm
Donating Member #: 0
Location: Keller, TX
Contact:

Post by darthrider »

Pat -
I agree...performance numbers and power to weight ratios are not everything.
But they're sure something, especially for one with "the need for speed", as you may recall!
And just because it's fast doesn't mean we have to ride it fast (this is pure theory, but I read it on the internet so it must be so).
To me it's just a matter of getting more bang, or even potential bang, for the buck.
Some of us were getting excited about the performance for this new bike. May be a real sweet bike, probably is. But performance...nah.
I am getting such a "refresher course" in that, keeping both the 50R and new Speed Triple excercised. I stiil love the 50R and it is a keeper (for sport touring) but "Performance with a capital P"? Hardly. We know how the 50R's run & handle. The S3 has been an eye opening experience. I've owned & ridden a lot of "fast bikes" in the past but these new breed big-bore fuelie sports/performance bikes are in a different universe.
to check out the new "Baby Daytona" 675 Triple, see:
http://www.triumph.co.uk/uk/3932.aspx

Take a peek at the new "Steve McQueen Scrambler" while you're there! Ah yes..."Cowtrailers".
Dave
#226

I've spent most of my life on motorcycles, the rest I've just wasted...
Pat
Honorary Lifer
Posts: 990
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2005 10:40 pm
Donating Member #: 0
Location: The Central Valley of California, Stockton

Post by Pat »

Dave,
I was checking out that "Scrambler"..... dare I say it, reminds me of my Honda CL360. In fact, the Bonnie' reminds me of my 360.

Why am I excited about the Beemer 800?
It's narrow. I'm short with an even shorter inseam. 'Narrow' is good!
Belt drive. I didn't have to do a DANM thing to the belt drive on my Sportster during the 35,000 miles I had it. I couldn't make the same claim about my Roadster....
Liquid cooled. What more need be said?
Sub' 900cc's. Insurance; too bad it's got those body panels....
Parallel twin. I can't even understand my new found appreciation for these things!?!
It's a modern Beemer with ABS, heated grips, and a user friendly suspension, not to mention a Rotax engine!!!

It may look like a swoopy doopy bike, but I don't think BMW is trying to push it off as a replacement for the Boxer Sport, or offer it up as super motard entry. It is what it is, and I LIKES IT! It had danm well better be competitively priced....... yeah, roiight.
Member #31
arkline
Quadruple Lifer
Posts: 720
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 5:51 pm
Donating Member #: 0
Location: Seattle, WA
Contact:

Post by arkline »

Deano,

Now that is what I was looking for. Something very un-run-of-the-mill.

Interesting that they'd go for a 180 crank and a counter-balancer. No rocking couple? We'll see. Of course, they'd have to reinvent the Isolastic mounts and headsteady if it was a 360...And that compression ratio is gonna cost over the long haul.

Is the Bonnie a 360 degree crank, I wonder.
arkline #27
not THE Ron Kline

"No matter where you go, there you are."
chibbert1

Post by chibbert1 »

I have a question to pose though

If it's 100 lbs less than the r1150r
350 cc's less in displacement
and puts out nearly the same horses

doesn't that mean it won't last for poo?

I've always understood that if a japanse manufacturer can pump 115 hp out of a 600 cc engine - it won't last long and that's why they have crappy warranties.

Am I wrong?
Deans BMW
Honorary Lifer
Posts: 1933
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 5:48 pm
Donating Member #: 0
Location: Show Low,Az.

Post by Deans BMW »

The upcomming 675 Triumph Tripple has 12.75 to 1 compression ratio.

chibbert1, It does not necessarily follow that that a higher HP per displacement engine has a shorter life. The quality of the design, materials, etc has a larger bearing, all other things equal.
Dean-O
Member #33
User avatar
collyers
Basic User
Posts: 338
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 9:32 am
Donating Member #: 0
Location: 1423 & counting...Dallas, Texas

Post by collyers »

I agree w/ Pat's opinion on "power delivery", this is why a twin is so desirable for road-going bikes. V-twin & opposed twin is really nice in power delivery. Power-to-weight ratio is EXACTLY the point here, as a lighter bike needs less HP to accelerate both in a straight line & out of a corner. A lighter bike is ultimately safer, more flickable, easier to ride, suspend, stop, everything. Imagine a R1150R that weighed 200lbs less. How much more fun would it be? A stopping/wheelie/carving monster. At 325lbs, who needs more than 80hp? My KTM Duke II weighs 320lbs and has maybe 55hp, and it is like a mountian bike with a motor. Lighter is always better. Heavier is always harder to move/stop/turn/park/pick-up/accelerate. I vote for Carbon Fiber, Boron, and Titanium.
The problem with the gene pool is that there is no lifeguard.
Shaman
Honorary Lifer
Posts: 1001
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 5:03 pm
Donating Member #: 0
Location: Maine, USA
Contact:

Post by Shaman »

Pat wrote:
"...the new Triumph"Baby Daytona" 675cc Triple...363 lbs., 123 HP, 52 ft. lbs.
Where have I been?
I've heard mention of the new Triumph, but I didn't know that it was/is a triple!!! My God, that weight, the horsepower, cool torque! I could find myself in a world of trouble on that diminutive monster.
Image


http://www.motorcycle-usa.com/Article_P ... 519&Page=1

Well, gang, we've now seen it, touched it and sat on it, and from what we can tell so far, Triumph's new Daytona 675 Triple could be the most interesting new offering of 2006...........

In person, the Daytona looks bad-ass, with its projector beam headlights, lovely frame, underseat exhaust and rakish stance. However, those latter two items also force a seat height that will discourage shorter riders; my 31-inch inseam wasn't enough for me to touch flat-footed.
User avatar
bakernks
Basic User
Posts: 380
Joined: Thu May 12, 2005 3:41 pm

F800S

Post by bakernks »

Put that motor in my F650GS and I'd take a look at it. I think however this bike is going to be priced well above the 10K mark; time will tell. Buying that engine from Rotax is probably going to do the same thing as it did on my 650, give you a good, tough engine at a high initial buy-in.
Styling wise, it looks like the twin brother to the Kawasaki Z750S, it's uncanny.
I have the bases covered with the '04 R1150R and the '05 F650GS, still. So far, only the electric shift FJR1300 is calling my name, and it really does offer more than my 50R, namely full weather protection and 145 hp. And now shifter paddles, how zoot. But if there's a nasty, lurchy, turbo laglike driveline snatch to the electric shift, it would kill it utterly. Somehow, I bet Yamaha got it right. For over $15 large, they'd better have.
boxermania
Quadruple Lifer
Posts: 3644
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:37 pm
Donating Member #: 312
Location: Baton Rouge, LA.....aproaching retirement

Post by boxermania »

Technically speaking.......it looks like the current breed of 600's......440 lbs for a twin is a bit porky......440/80= 5.5 hp/lbs

That is an 11 sec/115+ quarter.......

The question is if it will come in below the MSRP of the 650GS
Member #312
06 Suzuki Burgman 650 "state of flux"
79 CBX
boxermania
Quadruple Lifer
Posts: 3644
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:37 pm
Donating Member #: 312
Location: Baton Rouge, LA.....aproaching retirement

Post by boxermania »

Point of clarification on compression ratios......

First rule, generally speaking

An increase of 1 point in compression = 4% increase in HP

Second rule

Manufacturers have shied away from high compression ratios because of two things, A) KISS engineering and B) The common use of regular or 87 octane gas

Current Efforts

The race now is to get major horspower out of small displacement engines. For example: 100 HP/liter was, a few years back a very respectable figure. For comparison the most powerful Chevy 350 engine was rated at 370 HP, that calculates to 5.3l/370 HP = ~ 70 HP/l, certainly not a high figure by the then standards. Today, most of the 600 cc bikes put out 110 HP and that calculates to ~ 183 HP/liter !!!!!

Of course to get that kind of output everything has to be optimized and high compression is one of the parameters.

The problems with high compression are varied, sealing (not a major obstacle with today's hard coatings and ring designs), temperature (better design of the water jackes and higher capacity cooling) along with squish and swirl of the fuel mixture.....here is where major gains can be made.

Combustion chamber design is a major engineering exercise considering that the bikes intended for public sale are not like race bikes that will have the engine torn down after three or four races.

So, in closing, cheap HP can be made with increased compression. as such cyclinder head design to manage and improve mixture squish and swirl are at the forefront of today's engine design. :roll: :roll:
Member #312
06 Suzuki Burgman 650 "state of flux"
79 CBX
arkline
Quadruple Lifer
Posts: 720
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 5:51 pm
Donating Member #: 0
Location: Seattle, WA
Contact:

Post by arkline »

My comment on the compression ratio had solely to do with the cost of "higher" octane gasoline. Premium gets a premium price, although I've heard that Consumer Reports says that at many stations, you could pick any hose and get about the same octane. I have no doubts about the engineering and manufacturing capabilities of Rotax or any other modern engineering company. We're into 21st century engineering and materials after all. Rotax is known for hard to break engines and, although I'd never buy version 1.0 of anything, I'll bet that this one will be of high quality.

I'm not sure that this is the particular tool that I'd buy to solve any of my particular problems though. Especially if it comes in at much over 10K buckarettes. :lol:
arkline #27
not THE Ron Kline

"No matter where you go, there you are."
toecutter
Basic User
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 10:00 pm

Post by toecutter »

The thing is this isn't version !.0 of this engine.

Bombardier has been using the 800 twin on their Outlander ATV for some time now.
Save a horse, ride an R-bike!
Deans BMW
Honorary Lifer
Posts: 1933
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 5:48 pm
Donating Member #: 0
Location: Show Low,Az.

Post by Deans BMW »

Toecutter, the 800 twin on the Outlander ATV is a "V" twin not a parallel twin.
Dean-O
Member #33
arkline
Quadruple Lifer
Posts: 720
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 5:51 pm
Donating Member #: 0
Location: Seattle, WA
Contact:

Post by arkline »

I have a question that I can't quite figure out. Why doesn't BMW use the more "advanced" suspension systems on these units? I love the Telelever front end, although there are those who dispare of it's lack of "feel". So, why aren't they applying that technology to these new bombers?
arkline #27
not THE Ron Kline

"No matter where you go, there you are."
Deans BMW
Honorary Lifer
Posts: 1933
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 5:48 pm
Donating Member #: 0
Location: Show Low,Az.

Post by Deans BMW »

Don't know until they establish the price, that might give a hint to your question.
Dean-O
Member #33
User avatar
Optimus Prime
Basic User
Posts: 335
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 11:18 am
Donating Member #: 0
Location: Peoria, IL

Post by Optimus Prime »

arkline wrote:I have a question that I can't quite figure out. Why doesn't BMW use the more "advanced" suspension systems on these units? I love the Telelever front end, although there are those who dispare of it's lack of "feel". So, why aren't they applying that technology to these new bombers?
I can think of 2 reasons.

1. Price
2. Choice - Some people prefer the conventional forks to the duo and tele-lever front ends.
Leno

Post by Leno »

3 The technical problems of attaching the front suspention to that engine.

remember they are not going to put the duo front on the boxer because of exactly that issue.
Post Reply