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

[Bob Hancock]

If I had a GPS and a long enough road without an LEO around I'd love to do a run. I did one just to see and ran out of road pretty dang quick at around 150 indicated and it was still pullin' real nice. But that's go directly to jail territory, so how to actually do it? I looked into the East Coast Timing Association thing that Jim talks about but it costs real money to do it, so it's not like I can show up with a set of leathers and pay twenty bucks and make a run....much more involved than that. So we end up with a pic of Parriot on the front straight at Daytona at 160 on a pretty much stock bike, but not as stock as mine. Of course he didn't have miles and miles to build up steam either. Can anyone out west do this....maybe somewhere that has long straights and no LEO's and a GPS? Some of those pics I've seen from ck show me a great place to air it out. It really shouldn't be that hard. I just don't want to go to jail in Georgia to find out.

[EZ-RIDER]

Hello;

Check this product out cheapest one is around $30.00 and is as good as a GPS. top speed on mine is around 185 mph

http://www.sigmasport.com/en/produkte/bikecomputer/?flash=1

[NoCalRider]

Perhaps San Jose BMW will take an R1200S to Bonneville this year along with the salty dog. We're hoping for a solid 170 mph from the old 2 valve, pushrod R100, by the way. I'm amazed at what Chris and Willie have done with that old machine

[ckcarr]

Originally posted by EZ-RIDER
Hello;

Check this product out cheapest one is around $30.00 and is as good as a GPS. top speed on mine is around 185 mph

http://www.sigmasport.com/en/produkte/bikecomputer/?flash=1

Not good enough! I hold the R1200S record...

[Bob Hancock]

Originally posted by NoCalRider
Perhaps San Jose BMW will take an R1200S to Bonneville this year along with the salty dog.

Problem with that is Chris can't take a stock bike anywhere. It would be breathed on for sure. Thing is....I'll bet he already knows what a stock one will do.

[markjenn]

If you're talking about a dead stock bike, the folks at the magazines already did the work many moons ago in their original road tests of the R1200S and they all were in the range of 148-150. Do we think they didn't know how to top end a bike? Or do all of us have the faster color?

- Mark

[Bob Hancock]

Question in my mind is did they have the straight to see it through. Sometimes they do, sometimes not. Can you verify the accuracy and extent of what the mags report? I read most of that stuff with a bit of cynicism. I don't know what the stock bike will do, and actually don't much care. I do know it's pretty fast....about as fast I suspect as the 2001 996 I had.

[NoCalRider]

While we're at it... are we speaking about a strictly showroom stock bike, or would you accept the results of an R1200S with totally stock engine but taller gearing?

[markjenn]

Obviously, I can't verify the accuracy of the mags, but they have no reason to undestate the number (in fact, they like to overstate since it makes the bikes look better to their advertisers) and they all say they have secret stretches of deserted roads they go to where the bike can easily reach it's terminal speed. They're good at things like this - they do it all the time.

Once a bike gets near its terminal speed, acceleration tapers very radically to nothing as power and drag come into balance, so you don't need ten mile stretches to get the terminal speed of a bike. Even Bonneville has something like a 2-mile acceleration zone where bikes reach terminal speed and this is for much faster bikes than 150 mph. I lot of folks like to talk that their bike is "pulling like a freight train" at the top speed they got and assume there is a lot left, but there seldom is.

- Mark

[Bob Hancock]

prolly right mark.

[markjenn]

Originally posted by NoCalRider
While we're at it... are we speaking about a strictly showroom stock bike, or would you accept the results of an R1200S with totally stock engine but taller gearing?

My opinion is that a stock R1200S is at or very near its power peak at 150-mph with stock gearing, so that changes in gearing would gain nothing. But I don't have any data. As per the beginning of this thread, a stock R1200S is a 110-hp bike with worse than average aero. You can't go 160-mph on a 110-hp bike unless you're doing something major to reduce aero drag. True 160+ mph production bikes have 120+hp. That's the physics.

- Mark

[Bob Hancock]

Originally posted by NoCalRider
While we're at it... are we speaking about a strictly showroom stock bike, or would you accept the results of an R1200S with totally stock engine but taller gearing?

Actually if we're talkin' stock....then I would say it's how it came out of the crate. Give it a good break-in....see how fast it'll go. Once you start fiddling, then who knows. My bike has the remus headers and the foam air filter and I think that helps but I don't really know. I like the way it sounds though and it's pretty dang fast. Faster than I am.

[markjenn]

Originally posted by Bob Hancock
prolly right mark.

There is one wild card - I think the S. Cal mags (like CW) tend to head out and test top speed at deserted stretches of roads on the high desert. So the bikes are running at elevation - not a lot, but perhaps 2-3K feet. This reduces engine power by a few percent.

But there are some mitigating factors: 1) The desert air is thinner so aero drag is also reduced - not as much as power, but the air is thinner; 2) some of the magazines "correct" their data to sea-level conditions; 3) many will do the run in the direction they have a tailwind to get the highest possible number; and 4) the bikes are generally "ringers" - carefully selected by the mfgs to be the best runners of their test fleet, carefully broken in, and carefully tuned.

So, all-in-all, I'd call it a wash.

- Mark

[Tacodog]

Originally posted by NoCalRider
While we're at it... are we speaking about a strictly showroom stock bike, or would you accept the results of an R1200S with totally stock engine but taller gearing?

My stock bike with 3500 miles on the odo indicated 144 on my GPS at about 8200 rpm (maybe 8300, I only quickly glanced at the tach). This was with an almost worn out ContiSportAttack 190/50-17.

Theoretically, with a new tire measuring ~78 inches circumference, and "if" the bike can pull redline (8500 rpm), the max speed computes to 154-155 mph.

What is the optional rear ratio that some bikes have?

[Steve Carlton]

Turns out there never was a standard 2.62 (taller) ratio. BMW finally cleared up the issue. The "alternative" ratio was 2.75, and that's what they all came with.

You related to Rapid Dog?

[Tacodog]

Originally posted by Steve Carlton
Turns out there never was a standard 2.62 (taller) ratio. BMW finally cleared up the issue. The "alternative" ratio was 2.75, and that's what they all came with.

You related to Rapid Dog?

That narrows it down a bit.

No, can't say I'm related to Rapid Dog. Is there any advantage to claiming that?

[Steve Carlton]

Probably some disadvantages. Hey- black R1200S. Maybe we're related.

[Tacodog]

Originally posted by Steve Carlton
Probably some disadvantages. Hey- black R1200S. Maybe we're related.

Or just have excellent taste.

[signit98]

Originally posted by Steve Carlton


You related to Rapid Dog?

Carlton, you are killing me!

[zx9rmal]

Originally posted by Mr. Deltoid
Get a 1098 and be done with it

OR........ get a stock '07 GSX-R1000, top it out at 13,300 rpm, with speedo (limited to reading 186 mph) indicating 15 mph/1,000 rpm in 6th gear. Then apply about a 7% correction factor and be done with the 1098.