Actual Top Speed For A Dead Stock R1200S? 160+ At Least!!!

[RoLoo]

...160+ ?
...155 ?

...who cares...

...board member Rob Wijhenke once wrote this : ...oh, before I forgot. If the speedo would go to 270 (168,8 mph) km/h I did 270 km/h on the speedo today. 253 (158 mph) on the GPS. Actually I hit the rev limiter...

...IMO not 'bad-at-all' for stock Beemer...

[JimMoore]

Naysayers, put downers, and people in a bad mood. So much for brotherhood gathered around and single marque............ [/B]

How do you pronounce that word, "mar-KEE", or "mark?"

Thanks in advance,

[bikpaintr]

Originally posted by JimMoore
How do you pronounce that word, "mar-KEE", or "mark?"

Thanks in advance,

According to the Websters Dictionary "marque"(product model) is pronounced mark & marquee(theater sign) is mar-Kee.

[bikpaintr]

Originally posted by Dr. Curve
Your law of physics does seem askew however. My Mille would surely do above 160 and it did not have 125 rear HP. [/B]

I'd have to agree as my Futura certainly doesn't have 125 rwhp but owners have clocked speeds of 158mph on gps. The aerodymamics of the particular bike are going to play a part in top speed & make up for some of the missing rwhp.

Here in New England roads long & flat enough for accurate top speed runs are scarce and well patrolled. I know my bike is still accellerating fairly hard at an indicated 135mph but haven't had the opportunity to push it any further.

Dr. C - Why not take the 12S out with a GPS & settle the question? By the way Lance in Maine says to say hello.

[pdonnell]

No boasting here. Just surprised and happy that BMW has given us such a strong bike
.
When have you ever been unhappy about a BMW Jim? There are many people who have been around here for years who have seen your one-sided enamored view of anything BMW. You didn't start this thread to make everybody feel good. Just to be boastful.
.
As for "brotherhood gatherd around and single marque", I'll pass on that cup of kool aid.

[roger albert]

Yes, skipping the single-marque knee-jerk praise-punch doesn't mean you don't like beemers. It just means you put physics and reality ahead of hyperbole. The thread name pretty much captures it

"160 + At Least!!!"

I'd have been impressed with either the "+" or "At least" alone.
Both together have me on the verge of renouncing science for brotherhood. I'm all aquiver.

Of course, it's possible the beast will do it, and if so, cool.
Get some data, and then boast. The speculation is just goofy, and a bit embarassing.

[Deans BMW]

My R1200ST at the Bonneville Salt flats hit the revlimiter in 6th before the first mile marker, 144.4 with a worn rear tire and just over 147 with a new rear tire and again at the revlimiter. My ST will easily hit the revlimiter in 6th at 8,000 ft elevation. We figure that it will hit 150-151 with the right gearing or a taller tire. My ST shows 151-152 at the revlimiter in 6th. It is no streach to see the R1200S exceed 160 with the right gearing. The San Jose BMW R1200S on the hi bank at Daytona would hit the revlimiter in 6th, totally stock engine, stock A/F, snorkle etc with the exception of a full Titanium Remus exhaust running the final drive unit from a R1200RT, the highest available.

[pdonnell]

Yunno, I know my ZX-14 will do a tad better than 160mph. But I don't give a rip because I'm too old now to disregard my spincter alarm that goes off north of 140mph. So its just a zone in the netherworld now.
.
When someone can GPS out a 160+ on this new twin then I'll be pretty darn impressed BMW made it.

[roger albert]

Good Data Dean,

Thanks for sharing it. Which rear drive ratio was that then?

Thanks again
Roger

[zx9rmal]

Ahhhh, I love the testosterone. But........

1. We don't know what measured distance Cycle World uses to measure top speed.

2. If you look at Cycle World's stats page, you can compute, based on rpm @ 60 mph, that the 12S does 17.74 mph/1,000 rpm. If the bike will the rev limiter (8,800 rpm?), that equates to 156 mph. About right.

And.......<>

Count me in boys.......190mph on the GPS on my previous 'Busa and geared ZX-10. Wanna be able to tell my grandchildren (soon?) that grandpa did that.

Just like the dude in "Dirty Harry"said......."C'mon man, I gots to know!".

[Dr. Curve]

Roger, the new R1200RT comes standard with a 2.62 to 1 rear. Thoughts?

[roger albert]

Thoughts?

Sounds darn tall, and I'm suprised it pulls redline in top gear on an S.
But it's nice to hear that it apparently can. I'd just like to see some hard data, that's all. If 160mph is true, then it would be all the more impressive, given the very limited gearing options (and the poor aeros of the half fairing and opposed cylinders) Very cool.

I wonder how accurate the Tach is on these too. Though generally more accurate than speeds (a lot more) theyr'e not necessarily spot on either. Probably a minor quibble, but one that makes circumference calculations (always a bit inaccurate and different at speed/loaded than static) multipled by rpms a bit more inaccurate still.

Still cool though. If the next year of racing is a bit kinder to the wallet than the last, then I may yet have to pick one up.

[Dr. Curve]

Well Roger, if you do get one you will be able to do something you have obviously never done before............and that is to run 160 plus on a stock BMW twin. Hard to face the truth, and given your history I can understand your grabbing at inaccurate tachs, problems with circumference calculations, loaded with static, and other bookawitz oriented data comments. Please get a R1200S as soon as you can so that you can enjoy the top speed rush of this new twin that many of us are coming to grips with now-a-days. Why resist the truth, 160 plus, when it has been confirmed by numerous sources here in the states and abroad?

[Phil Buttolph]

Hearsay only but in the dozen of so reviews I read about the 2007 R1200S it was stated that BMW did a lot of wind tunnel/aero/design work to lessen the 'flying brick' drag..

Question never answered: are new R12Ss imported with 2:75 as stock final ratios and can you currently order a 2:62? Most articles refer to the stock 2:75...and I assume that the Daytona bikes ran 2:62s...

Folks with recent delivers, what are you final drive ratios?

[Dr. Curve]

Phil, as has been mentioned multiple times, the bike can be ordered with a 2.62............and that is what I have. They are coming thru now with a 2.75 in most cases. The 2.62 will cost you a little more from what I understand. It will not get up to speed as fast.............but will be going faster once it does get there.........if you decide on the 2.62.

In either event Phil...........get ready to have a very good time on a exciting new twin.

[EZ-RIDER]

Hey;

On the way down to southern California last year on 395 going south on my bike with saddle bags I did a 155 on the speedo and 147 mph on the
Sigma bike computer

[Steve Carlton]

The 2.62 is standard, and you can't order the "alternative rear axle," which is the 2.75.

[ckcarr]

Mine has a 2.75, is that not normal?

[Steve Carlton]

Your MSRP should say it's the alternative. My preference would be to have the 2.75 and have 1st gear be as short as possible. It's about a 4 mph difference at 80 mph and 8 mph at redline in 6th gear.

[RoLoo]

...2.62...
...2.75...
...155...
...160+...?

...it is just fast...