|
R80GS Vs R100GS
Just doing the sums and there's about a AUD $5000 (US $2500) difference between the R80GS and R100GS, so if I was to purchase the R80GS and put the spare cash (who's got spare cash these days?) into 'jazzing' up the bike mechanically (Munich Motorcycles - and this is not intended to be a commercial plug) am I on the right tangent, or go for the R100GS.
The bike is for two-up travel, and I note that Grant does recommend either the 80 or 100 for two-up (I actually prefer the Tiger but that's another storey). Also guys & gals what would be the preferred options to the 'winner'? ------------------ Macca & Lynda Without adventure life is in full decay. |
I think that the R100GS would be better.
A little more horsepower and torque. With the paraleaver. The driveshaft will have to be replaced every 40,000 miles but it gives you a longer wheel base and you can use the tubeless trie wire wheels. There are some fixes that should be done to the transmission and electrics but over all they are good bikes that can be overloaded and abused. Grant has put 1000cc jugs on his GS and is thinking of adding a paraleaver. I am not sure which is easer (cheaper?) converting a R80GS to a R100GS or buying a R100GS and fixing its problems. Good luck, John. |
Here's the differences that matter between and R80G/S and R100GS
(please note carefully the G/S as opposed to GS. The R80G/S is a monolever produced from 1981 to 1987, the GS is a paralever produced in various forms including specific country models, in both R80GS - 800cc and R100GS - 1000cc versions, after the end of the G/S run, to about 1997) G/S has wimpy forks, GS forks much better. G/S is tube type tires, GS is tubeless. G/S has durable monolever, extremely reliable oil bath driveshaft, GS has paralever, technically better system, eliminates "jacking" but is limited in life - 40-50,000 miles, is much heavier, but is longer by 1 1/2 inches approximately, (better for two-up) has 4 bolt pattern wheel and stronger hub, and allows tubeless wheels / tires to be used. R80G/S has small battery, GS has much larger battery on same electrical system. G/S has reliable Bosch starter motor, but it doesn't spin the engine over as well as the less-reliable GS Valeo. G/S is lighter because of: small spindly fork legs and small disk brake, smaller gas tank, shorter subframe and seat, monolever swingarm is much lighter than paralever, minimal headlight assembly as opposed to massive headlight shrouding etc on GS and even worse the bars around the headlight on the Dakar models. Even things like the sidecovers are smaller on the G/S, the centerstand is smaller etc all add up to a significant weight difference. The G/S is over 40 pounds lighter, but some of that disappears in prep for overlanding. Also things like the GS battery, while double the weight, are a no-brainer. If you have the choice, always go for a bigger battery on an electric start bike, especially one that is notorious to kick, or may not even have a kickstarter. Engines and transmissions and electrics are effectively the same, so all the problems and their cures - and there IS a cure for ALL ills on both - is esseentially the same. For the nitpicker who says there isn't a cure for the driveshaft - there is - replace it regularly like any maintenance item, e.g. the timing chain. Both rear subframes, while different in dimensions and layout, are weak and need major bracing. As for Johns comments about which is easier/ cheaper to prep for overlanding - If I were starting fresh I'd go for the GS (not the Dakar) and do what is needed - much easier than adding a paralever to a G/S, trust me, it's not simple, the frame needs mods. For me, the tubeless wheels are a big plus, also the bigger battery and much stronger and better damped forks make the GS the winner. Feel free to disagree, but that's my choice. Remember I have a G/S because that's all there was in 1986. By time I'm done it WILL BE a GS. All that's left to do is the swingarm, and I have that, just need the time. Hope that clarifies the options a little, in the end it's your choice, and your pocketbook, and your own mechanical skills that determine which is best for you. There are of course new bikes to look at, the Suzuki V-Strom being worth a look - the reports are good, people like the bike, but it's no off-roader, somewhat similar to the Tiger from what I can gather. And the R11xxGs is still a major contender if you're mostly into good roads. ------------------ Grant Johnson Seek, and ye shall find. ------------------------ One world, Two wheels. www.HorizonsUnlimited.com |
Grant covered the bases, and again: are we talking 80GS or 80G/S? The 80GS being a smaller engined R100GS as Grant pointed out. I have had both the R100GS (past) and the R80G/S (present). The better susupension on the later, Paralever models, is worth the weight for two up. You will spend a lot of money getting a G/S to handle as well as the later bikes. I do find the G/S better off road, on my own. Mainly because of the reduced weight, and the bike just feels smaller. Keep in mind also that tire choices are getting limited for the 18 inch, narrow rear wheel of the G/S. As manufacturers change their lineup of tires, the older, less popular sizes tend to get dropped.
On thing that is worth mentioning is the smoothness of the engine. the 800cc engine has always been renowned as one of the best 'airheads'as vibration is minimal. I found my R100 shook quite a bit more at speed then my R80G/S does. Also, the 800cc engine in the G/S runs at lower compression, and is better on low octane fuel. Again, my R100 wasn't happy on anything less then 91 octane til I dual plugged it. The brakes on both bikes are marginal, but more so on the older G/S. Definitely inadiquate two up loaded - the origional 'ABS' |
Hey Macca
Munich M/cycles has a R100GS P/D in there for sale, well it was a couple of weeks back when I was there. I have a '91 model that I brought back from Germany and it has done 47,000 km and is a real workhorse! I have also a R1150 Adventure still in Perth (ridden from Cairns) and it is also a great bike. Grant's wrong as it is a better bike on the dirt as I rode over there through the centre all dirt! It is better than my R100GS! But I have short legs too so have to stand on the pegs and actually ride the bike.....haha. Ok mate, I will be back over there soon so give us a call and I will help if I can. Ph:0417 580 272. Cheers mate Ivan |
Actually I agree that the R11xxGs is "better" on the dirt - BUT - and it's a big BUT - two-up with luggage, it's just overall too heavy - ANY mistake and you're in unrecoverable territory, whereas the lighter R100GS / G/S - while also too heavy - is enough lighter that there is more hope of recovery. But let's face it - they are ALL too heavy to do anything serious off-road.
Of course it depends a lot on your skills - a better rider will find the R11 fine off-road, and do some amazing things with it, BUT MOST PEOPLE will find it to be just too heavy in rough going. The high weight is intimidating to most riders, and means that the less skilled can't make ANY mistakes or they are going to fall. But of course they WILL make mistakes, and picking it up is no picnic. The feedback I have had is generally that people find that the airheads are "better" OVERALL, all things considered, in the rough stuff. For ME, I think the oilhead is MARGINALLY better handling in the rough stuff, UNTIL I make a mistake - then I want the airhead. And although I haven't personally dropped an oilhead, I have helped pick one up a number of times... I don't think that either is enough better off-road to make it a deciding factor either way. The real decider - for most, the carnet is the single biggest expense in a major tour - and the airhead GS wins hands-down, as it has a MUCH lower "book" value, thereby lowering the cost of the carnet by a huge amount. YMMV... everyones skills and experience is different. ------------------ Grant Johnson Seek, and ye shall find. ------------------------ One world, Two wheels. www.HorizonsUnlimited.com |
Well guys I've gotten some excellent feedback, and at the end of the day, as I'm searching for the 'right' bike, I know I'll be in for some (serious?) modifications regardless.
Ivan, Lynda tells me you contacted me but I was still overseas, I trust you got intouch with Jeff (R80 Uk-Africa). Yep I will ring you as I want to see your set-up as I have checked out Jeff's. I've got Paul of Munich M/mycles on the lookout for a Rxx(xx)GS for me. To finish off with I trust no one has copyrght rules on their various 'projects' as I'm busily compiling (read plagerising (sp)) what changes (if any) I will (or Munich M/cycles) be doing. Happy trails. ------------------ Macca & Lynda Without adventure life is in full decay. |
I have one comment to add.
It is possible to push-start a 800cc. It is not possible to push-start 1000cc... I have tested... When I lost an exhaust valve on my 800cc I had to choose with my wallet, not a smart choice but about 200EU difference between 800cc and 1000cc was enough to push me over better judgement. Today I would stick with 800cc displacement, and improve that by 9.2:1 pistons, dual-plugging and lowering of the barrels instead of the heads. 44/38 valve conversion. => About 10.5:1, and about 60hp and about 6kg torque - push start possible any season -:) Or if you are to ride in areas with poor petrol, Egyptian Police conversion is an option (still 800cc). Question to all of you who ride and advocate 1000cc - have you ever needed the extra power over 800cc ? What is your explicit reason to choose 1000cc over 800cc (I do not refer to GS vs G/S - the cc displacement can be interchanged) ? The only reason for 1000cc that I can apprechiate is highway fast touring (>80mph / >140km/h)... and off-road is not freeway, autobahn, motorway, highway, high speed cruising... |
Quote:
Quote:
For me the extra power (and torque) is nice, my first thought after the conversion was “why didn’t I do this earlier?”. I like to drive a powerful bike, if that’s not important then there is no need to change anything. Personally I like to have 75-80 Nm at 3500 RPM. Quote:
Quote:
I find the R80 better on very technical sections because it runs smoother then the R100 on low revs but if you use lighter pistons on the R100 you have the best of both worlds. The R80 is geared a tad lower, which is nice. For me the negative aspect with a R100 is the need of an oil-cooler. I don’t need it on a R80 but for the R100 I had to install it. I have driven 200kkm with a R80 engine and 45kkm with a modified R100 engine and maybe a few thousand kms with a standard R100. Personally I think that the modified R100 is the best, followed by the R80. In the end it doesn’t matter much unless you are an engine-geek like me. |
I have an r80gs - without going into all the mods I have done over a period of time I would say go for the R80gs and fit seibenrock 1000cc upgrade kit, you gain better torque and power delivery than a standard 1000, smoother, smaller carbs give better low down control and a spare set of barrels and pistons in the garage if something goes wrong and by the sound of it still a much cheaper option in oz.
|
Quote:
What you did reply is: - never needed it - have none :yinyang: What you did reply is that you enjoy and apprechiate the extra power, and that is undisputable, but not an answer to the questions; it is avoiding the questions. What you did add as very important feed-back is: - 1000cc need an oil-cooler - 800cc runs smoother If I am correct the 800cc is easier to kick-start than the 1000cc? That would be an important sideeffect to consider as well if so. The weight differences, 1kg lighter for the 1000cc is as far as I see it hardly of any importance. My experience is that too much power and torque complicates driving when it is not needed. When I had 800cc I really wanted 1000cc - especially for the winter season. Now, with Siebenrocks 1000cc kit, I regrett my choice just about everytime I drive - too much power; loose tracktion too easilly on the rearwheel, spinning all the time and causing skidding sideways when I do not what it. Stated reasons 1000 over 800; the revs, luggage, pillion, overtaking - sure; I do agree that 800cc did lack that power, especially from around 90km/h (55-60mph) and up. In mudd/sleat/inches of snow - ok, then the extra power does make driving more fun and "inspired", but I do not -need- that extra power, it only makes it possible to go faster and that's all. Another thing I do notice is that is does require the battery to be in better shape to start a 1000 vs an 800... and that -is- a down-side. So all in all - I am not for 1000 if to drive in desolete areas. I would go for 800cc, 44/38(37) valves, perhaps only 9.2:1 and single plugged, but I would probably raise the compression ratio to 10-10.5:1 to get the best mileage, dual-plugged with the simplicity and safety of Daniel Dicke ; perhaps retro fit the canister with the braker-point (tip of memeber of this group in another string); since this solution gives just about the hp-power of the 8.2:1 1000 version of 60hp, just a bit less torque, freeway power just enough to carry a heavy load and pillion and still keeping the smoothness of the 800. 800 with raised compression needs an oilcooler though! Friend of mine advocates 900; it presents the best of the two worlds 800 and 1000 he says. So I can not say that I ever -need- the extra power of 1000. I love the power at summer on the freeways though! My explicit reason to choose 800cc are as listed; less demand on the battery at start, easier to kickstart (if I am correct), smoother running and easier to control power, cooler running engine. Can not see any practical reason for more power - only fun-factor and ego reasons -;) -:D |
Hey Albert - If an upgrade 1000cc from 800cc is for ego reasons then someone has a very strange ego. I have got to say as I travel two up quite a lot then the 800 was underpowered for such a large bike even at 1000cc its not a powerful machine by any standard and there are any amount of 600 cc bikes putting out this kind of power without the weight if you dont need the room for a pillion. I really cant imagine the bm being the bike of choice for ego. its a great choice for comfort - 2 up this is where it outshines the 600s available,simplicity and enduring build quality along with being very ridable in such a variety of conditions.
I have to say I feel there is little difference in kickstarting the bike now (as a 1000cc to when it was a 800cc) and I use the kickstart 80% of the time especially if the bike has been laid up a while. But its whatever floats your boat - so to speak. |
Quote:
As I wrote earlier I think both the R80 and R100 are great bikes, but my favorite is a R100 (or bigger) with light pistons. For me the only downside is that I need the oil-cooler, but I can live with that. Most bikes have radiators anyway. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
-:D
Just laughing heartilly - I did get some emotional responses out of you guys -;) Very good pointers Alibaba! Most apprechiated. Point of this whole discussion is to present to the original thread composer that there are diffenrences and similarities; pros and cons; and that we all do have different preferations based both on solid facts and on personal subjective preferences. To get a 1000cc smoother than an 800cc - that is a dream! Hope that we have been able to present the views on 800cc vs 1000cc well to Macca. Probably he should go for the 1000cc, especially if he is doing some longdistance drives across the out-backs - flat surface does trigger some high-speed travelling. The speeds we were doing across the mountains between Sweden and Norway back in 1994-1997, at winter with fully studded tires and skiis, was something like 80-90mph... and that was really heavy for my 800cc (9.2:1 with 44/40 and dual plugging, back then). As for ego: "plenty want's more!" -:D |
GS or G/S
When you say 80GS do you mean the paralever or the earlier G/S with the monolever? The latter has a shorter subframe, seat, not so good two up, and swinging arm with the driveshaft lasts a lot longer. If you use a paralever 80 or 100 GS try fitting the shorter rear shockabsorber from the R100R, it reduces the travel and improves shaft life quite considerably, mine has just developed a bit of play after 103,000 miles.
When travelling in developing countries with bad roads you rarely go very fast anyway so I would say the difference does not really matter so decide on the condition of the individual bike on offer, not engine size. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:14. |