Yes I can comment more on the weight issue.

The dry weight of the outgoing standard R1200GS is 203 kgs.

The dry weight of the F800 Adventure is the same. Its supposed to be a lighter bike - a middle weight bike. It isnt. If 200 kgs is a big adventure bike then middle weight bikes should be 165-180 kgs dry. I cant see how anyone can consider a 229 kg wet weight bike (without luggage) anything but a big / heavy bike.

The problem is when you look closely at an F800, you struggle to find any evidence on the bike have BMW designers been weight conscious. If BMW had put a little effort into weight reduction the bike could easily be 25 -30 kgs lighter

Your Tenere 660 is also about 185 kg dry weight. As far as I am aware, its the heaviest single cylinder bike in the world. Possibly the heaviest single cylinder bike ever built. Again, Yamaha has made zero effort to reduce weight. That bike could be 40 kgs lighter.

Manufacturers make a lot of effort to reduce weight on track replica bikes, on MX bikes and on proper enduro bikes. But they dont make any effort on adventure bikes. And if the adventure bike buying public dont demand lighter adventure bikes, the manufacturers never will bother making any effort to reduce the weight of them.

In response to your debating of F800 vs X-challenge (144 kgs dry), I recommend you read these thoughts from a man who not only owns both, but has done proper off road adventuring on both the F800GS and the XC (each bike for at least 3 months across Siberia and Latin America) - With that experience of both bikes I know of no-one more qualified to give a balanced, objective comparison on real world adventuring on those two bikes:

ADVrider - View Single Post - Sibirsky Extreme 2012

The same guy, in another post in an answer to a question about comparing the two as adventure bikes, wrote this:

Bear in mind he was referring to the F800GS ... the new F800Adventure is 15-20 kgs heavier again!

A further interesting observation related to weight from one of us HUBBers riding around the world on a KTM 690 (138 kgs dry) at the moment. He was last month in the stunning scenery of Tajikistan ...

ADVrider - View Single Post - RTW with Noah on a KTM 690

Why have a big bike if it will limit your trip?

To me this is one of the ultimate questions that I see people who are new to Adventure Motorcycling failing to ask themselves. Certainly there are some very skilled riders for whom a big bike will not limit their choice of routes. But they are a tiny minority in the world of adventure riders. For the rest (98%) of us mortals, we need to seriously consider weight.

You should not be limiting your adventure because of your choice of a heavy bike. If a person limits their adventure because of the weight of their bike, then the adventure itself was not their priority. Maybe image is? Maybe something else? (not that there is anything wrong with that)

My experience when it comes to bike selection, gear selection, tyre selection etc .... is you should plan for the toughest parts of your trip. If a guy is riding from London to Cameroon, across the Sahara, the experienced man will not select his bike, his tyres, his luggage as to what will work best on the motorways of Europe. If the hardest part of that planned trip is the dunes of the Sahara, then he needs his choices to first and foremost, be compatible with that. Any adventure bike for a given trip is a compromise. But the selection criteria you should compromise the least, are those required for the hardest parts of the trip. A wise choice is not an even compromise between all aspects of your trip, its a compromise heavily biased towards the hardest parts of your trip.

You should plan (and select gear) for the toughest parts of the adventure you want to have. Any bike, any luggage, any tyres can deal with the easy stuff ...

Here are more observations related to bike weight from another HUBB writer a few weeks ago in Mongolia:

Whats clear from those observations is that the amount of fun was totally connected to the weight of the bikes.

Here's another story from last year and Mongolia - written from the perspective of a different guy on a KTM 690 (138 kg dry):

ADVrider - View Single Post - Sibirsky Extreme 2012

[edit] A new comment just in from UB, from another adventurer, whose 1200 GSA was too heavy for the job and ultimately arrived into the Mongolian capital on the back of a truck.

http://www.horizonsunlimited.com/hub...mongolia-71550

The reality is, as soon as you get off the asphalt, weight is a very very important issue. Lose 40 kgs and its a totally different experience, as the guy comparing his experiences between the F800 and the XC pointed out. The difference between suffering / enduring somewhere like Mongolia and enjoying it, is 40-50 kgs in bike weight.

__________________

Thank you very much for your great reply and effort!

I just wrote an email to a Belgian motorbiker friend whom i met in West Afrika if his x-challenge was not for sale and if not, he new another one to buy for me an tune up with his help, experience and advice :-)
his bike > My RTW his bike > XChallenge - ADVrider

Most people probably agree that it's easier to use a light bike offroad then a heavy bike. I own a 400EXC and a 200 (210?) kg BMW and I can go places with the EXC which I find impossible with the BMW.

But on the other hand I would say that my heavy BMW has never limited my trips. What have limited my trips are lack of range. I need a bike which can carry fuel for 750 km and water for a few days and all my other luggage. Basically I would say that a heavy bike is more suited for heavy loads, in general it's better to add 100 kg to a 200 kg bike then adding the same weight to a 150 kg bike. (handling, frame, brakes etc).
I've met quite a few travelers in Africa who use light bikes but still stick to the main route because they simply don't have the range to get off the main routes. This have been more common the last years.

If you don't need the range and plan to do a lot of hard offroad a lighter bike might be a better choice.

I also think that pleasure is an issue. For me it's much more fun to ride a bigish powerful bike, 50.000 km on a single cylinder bike doesn't sound like my kind of fun - but people are different.

totally agree!
But lifting up our heavy Tenere bikes 10 times a day on sand roads in Senegal (see picture) ain't fun anymore :-)

So people and roads are diffirent! :-)

I also think that pleasure is an issue. For me it's much more fun to ride a bigish powerful bike, 50.000 km on a single cylinder bike doesn't sound like my kind of fun - but people are different.


[/QUOTE]

With much less experience than many of the contributors, I am trying a approach with this type of pleasure in mind.
I have a 2006 1200GSA that I took half way around Australia with 55kgs worth of gear including hard panniers. The few times I went off road were scary, based on the weight and my lack of experience.

Using the expertise of the Ultralight community (backpackers/cyclists/others on the Hubb), I have reduced my gear to under 20kgs. I have replaced the battery, replaced the rear rack and rear seat with a plate and gone for Giant Loop soft luggage, also replaced the stock muffler. This reduced my weight by 22kgs before gear! All up saving of 44kgs!

I have sufficient gear to do a RTW trip (minus food and water) and my bike is around the standard weight for a GSA of 260kgs fully packed. While that is still a heavy bike, I am trialling it with that setup around some harsh Australian off-road in The Kimberley (WA). I am not in an enduro race and I don't need to push myself to extremes, but I do enjoy some fun off road and so far I have traversed deep and sometimes wet red sand, knee deep creek crossings, corrugated and stoney roads and the bike has handled it all easily. I can happily skip across some gnarly roads at 100km/h with ease. Yes I've come off but a standard GSA is not that heavy to pick up for me, so no big deal so far.

I rode 9000kms on tarmac to get here and the same bike is handling this terrain, all with comfort, tons of power and ease.

I also have a Yamaha XT600 that I used to regain my riding skills on. Great bike, but would not have considered it for a minute to do what I have done on the GSA. It was hard work to ride over 100km/h on the highway and never felt as stable as the GSA in any conditions. That was without gear.

In summary, A large bike with very light gear is my choice. I'm sure the 800GS would be equally capable with light gear and significantly less total weight than the 1200.

Question to all: How many of you weigh all your gear and know exactly the weight you are carrying?

Well done !

As previously noted - the GS is no lightweight. It's academically close to the GS and actually weighs more than a KTM 950/990 with significantly less power and very marginal suspension off-road.

I use a very accurate fish scale - total weight now just under 20kgs of gear, parts, tools, etc.

My plan is to do far too many kms this summer. It's about the last way I like to travel but time demands cannot be changed and neither can Siberian nor high-mountain weather !

My KTM ADV is just about 200kgs with fuel and gear. Soft bags, no racks, elimination of OEM battery, 2-1 exhaust, etc - a lot of weight has come off.

It's STILL heavy and at the same time lighter and more composed (by leagues) than either a GS1200 or GS800 offroad on which I will be alot, alone.

But once I am hemmed in by roads again . . . a much lighter bike would be awful for the necessarily long distances.

I'm with Walter, philosophically - pick the bike for 90% of your riding. But on rides eclipsing 10,000kms, nevermind RTW, that's not much guidance. 90% of time ? 90% of distance ? 90% of difficulty ?

So . . . from the backpacking community - take the smallest pack you can live with because you'll ALWAYS fill it.

I think the 950 is about as small as could be done (!) for my current ridiculous goal(s) . . . but I still wish I could find another 30 kgs to remove. Especially in the middle of Siberia, solo.

__________________
Orange, it's the new black.

It's such a grey area isn't it...

So.. Pick a bike that you do 90% of your riding on !!! In the U.K. I do 99% tarmac.... So should I ride a fireblade to Siberia ??

I know that's not what you meant but here's my point.....

I love to travel with a lightweight bike which is more off-road capable. And 95% of my travelling is on paved roads....Sure, I'm stuck doing 70 mph on the highways but that's always a bonus in hindsight. Going slower, you really do smell the roses. But that's not my point either.

If you have a smaller, lightweight bike then you aren't restricted physically or mentally when you have an unforeseen opportunity.

Eg... When I was in Africa most of the best places to camp or stay were down on the beaches, on lake-sides or up on mountain tracks. On the map, all of these places are close to well paved roads.

I met so many riders on big, heavy bikes that couldn't/wouldn't make that short 5 mile detour of off-road and they ended up staying at the stinky hostel in the next village.

Their bikes were capable but it would of been a stressful challenge and not easy and after a long day on the road. The mental challenge of a daunting dirt track on a 260KG bike just didn't appeal. It wouldn't have to me either.

Blasting off down an unknown dirt path on a 650 Single ain't no bike deal is it !!!

It would be the theme............. All the big GS'S parked up outside hostels/hotels watching SKY News in a hotel bar and all the lightweight knobbley tyred bikes were sleeping on the lakeside, looking at the stars with the sound of hippos grunting in the distance.

THAT'S my point...

Even if you plan to do most of your trip on tarmac (and most of us do), having the bike that can EASILY do rough tracks and sand really opens up your possibilities to experience the things that you left home see.

__________________
Did some trips.
Rode some bikes.
Fix them for a living.
Can't say anymore.

Well, people have different opinions but I think most of the best places in Africa are far from paved roads. They might be days, and some times weeks from the paved roads. Personally I stay away from the paved roads as much as possible. That's when range is necessary. Chris Scott once mentioned that fuel is range and water is time, I like both.

BTW:
I'm leaving to the southern parts of Norway now and will be offline for a few days. My family is in a car and will be there in four hours, I will drive the backroads and gravel and will use 12 hours. Maybe a lot more if this night extreme weather (called Geir) have messed up my route.
It's far better with 12 hours of fun then four hours of boredom.

I don't need to carry water this time

No ... Pick a bike that is compatible with the hardest parts of your planned trip, even if that hard part is just 5% of your trip.

__________________

This reminds me of earlier discussion which questioned the positions of the centres of gravity of bikes: I would fully expect that the CG of the big bike is lower than that of the 800, but I don't recall any definitive answer to the query.

A low CG assists greatly for those who find it easy to pick up a dropped 1200GS, not even taking into account that the 1200 bike doesn't go over fully onto it's side (in a simple drop, discounting more major spills) but just lies there on one of the pots. With some of the massive crash bars/outriggers that can be fitted to these the bike may not be at much more than 45 degrees to the horiz.

__________________
Dave

Question to all: How many of you weigh all your gear and know exactly the weight you are carrying?[/QUOTE]

I use a 1975 R90/6, it weighs around 218 KG with around about 50% full tank.

Last year I weighed all my gear after coming back from a 6 week trip and was really shocked to see that I was carrying an extra 100 lbs weight! So I have switched from Krausers to Enduristan Monsoon panniers, with a single seat and have decided to be much more carefull about what stuff I take. I'm off again next week so may have time to do some weighing before I go, idea is to get luggage down to under 80ibs.

Changing from Ikon to Maxton shock absorbers saved 4ilbs alone!

Charles

For once I agree, there are a few plusses between the R12GS(A) and the F8GS(A); chain drive (can be fixed), fuel economy (still not in xC land, but close), and as I've had both the R12GS and GSA I still find that the F8GS is sooo much easier to drive. Some people might be unhappy with the std. wind protection, but for me it works, if I can't hang on, then I'm just driving to fast - and I can stil do +800km days.

But you're absolutely right, coming from the R12GSA (a year later) I still find the F8GS easier to driver, but looking at the xC standing next to an F8GS(A) one see the difference, and I understand your arguments. The xC is a pure 50/50 bike....

The problem is that BMW decided to stop making small interesting bikes like the xC, which makes the next option the F8... or a different brand.



Casper

__________________
www.exilepixel.com
www.c-note.dk

They're actually planning on making smaller capaity bikes

From: BMW Partners With India’s TVS to Build New Motorcycle Series - Bloomberg