Честный обзор BMW S1000XR
I travel a lot in different adventure motorcycles and this is a review of the BMW S1000XR. The traditional greeting sounds silly because if the XR is not a sportstourer, then I don't understand anything about motorcycles. Moreover, many describe the XR as a "upright sport bike", which I agree with. I think many have already made a thermos of tea and laid themselves with sandwiches, anticipating how I will now talk nasty things about XR. I don’t hate BMW at all, they know how to make motorcycles, they just usually do skimp and instead of improving, they choose to maximize profits. Still, there are BMW models that I love, and the S 1000 lineup - dare I say it, awesome bikes - both the RR and XR. More to say, the 1000 XR is my favorite
1000cc crossover. But for all my sympathy, I never considered it for myself. The XR is a bike with a narrow segment that doesn't suit almost anyone - you need to approach it with the rhythm and style of life, and score on the cons. The purpose of the video is to try to convey to people who do not even consider XR, trying on something more traditional that this motorcycle is for them. Or at least make you want to take it
for a test ride. Foreword. Although the video will feature the roads of as many as four countries today, the most beautiful things were filmed in the Netherlands. There are many people in the subscribers who have never been in Europe in their life. Many people choose to start with some warm country in order to fly to one of the islands of Spain in winter and send their friends screenshots with the weather forecast, that we have +20, when it is -20 in Chelyabinsk, it happens. Instead, I recommend everyone to go to Holland in the summer, rent a bicycle and just ride - I guarantee a brain explosion, how fundamentally different is the approach to the formation of the concept of moving around the country. But for riding a motorcycle, the
Netherlands is so-so suitable. Firstly, the widespread priority of pedestrians and cyclists, all better roads are given to cyclists. And for motorcycles it is impossible to go there, the level of theft of motorcycles is huge for Europe, all roads are narrow, slow and even Dutch highways are limited from morning to evening at a speed of 100 km/h. Moreover, you pass the border with neighboring Germany - the road is exactly the same, but you can already ride at least 300. But there is one unique type of roads in Holland, as if created for motorcycles. Dikes.
Initially, dikes along large rivers appeared as protection from floods, which is a problem in Holland, even the word Dam itself is Dutch. Most dikes with smooth, fully visible turns, which are pleasant to chase on sportstourers, if not afraid of speed limits, although it is pleasant to ride at the legal 60 km/h. What is unique about it - usually it never occurs to anyone to make winding roads on flat ground - either you ride through mountains or in forest - this is insufficient visibility and increased risks. On dikes you can see a kilometer ahead without the risk that a deer will run out onto the road or that tractors will overtake each other around the bend - you can relax the butt. So what is it about XR that I love it for? The main thing is a great engine around which the whole motorcycle is assembled. If I prefer medium-sized cubicles with two or three
cylinders, then on motorcycles from a 1000cc you could not help but notice my sympathy for four cylinders. In the video about the Tiger 1200 I described in detail why this is so. In short - with four cylinders, the speed of revving is much higher than that of twin, and when you turn the throttle, the feeling of engine's response to actions is more pronounced. Keep in mind that the traditional torque graph with XR and Multistrada does not work because they have the motors' ability to go further beyond the graph and after 10,000 engine is not going to blow out. Due to the fact that you have a huge working range in your hands and the revs increase instantly, on four cylinders you kind of play with the handle as you want. To put it in an analogy, it's like
using a touchscreen with an instant clear response and some kind of slow touchscreen on ancient navigators or cars. Or as between a laser mouse and a ballpoint mouse - both mice will reach the corner of the screen in the same time, but it's all about instant response and clarity. This is very provocative, you want to turn the engine again and again, because you are delighted with the acceleration itself. Usually, due to the high revs orientation,
these models are empty at the low, but with such powerful bikes this is not a significant problem. It is quite convenient to ride the XR in the city, there is no need to re-throttle at the start, pushing the motorcycle - the engine has enough torque, it still does not stay long below. Understand correctly, low-revs engines for traffic jams are better anyway, but you won't have to suffer with XR either. Keeping only the high-powered four-cylinder crossovers, only the Multistrada V4 and S1000XR remain. Before the advent of the Multistrada, there was only one
crossover with truly sporty high-revving dynamics, where the power was too much, enough for anyone. Yes, sportbikes have even higher power, but with an increase in power, we run into the limitations of suspensions, brakes and ergonomics, which are not optimal for lying down - there is little point in crossovers to increase power above 170 HP. When the XR appeared in 2014, I was glad that BMW fans would see a little and understand that not all needs are covered by their boxer with Telelever. The catch is that BMW has a big RS sportstourer with boxer engine - by the way, they have also left Telever since 2014. BMW actually has 2 competing big sports tourers in its lineup. How they divide them in marketing - I can't imagine.
On the one hand, it is obvious to everyone that the XR engine is almost like the legendary RR sportbike. On the other hand, the XR has 1cm more suspension, which means it's kind of like a adventure bike. On website, the RS still hangs in the Sport section, and the XR in the Adventure section. The dynamics of the XR are simply frantic. Much, much more cheerful than the Tracer 9 and Versys 1000 - to be honest, I can't imagine a person who would not have enough XR power for real life. And I understand people who want this
bike even though there are more comfortable motorcycles - few can give such dynamics, in adventure class in general only Multistrada and KTM 1290, all the rest are much calmer. Moreover, when I talk about dynamics, it’s not about speed, as many people think. If we exclude tests, in real life I never ride faster than 130 km/h, and then on the highway, and in the city in shorts and flip flops my legal 40-50 km/h I feel sick, and I do not feel any pleasure at speeds under 200. And in my favorite mountains, the speed rarely reaches 100, but the feeling of bottomless acceleration when overtaking or after turning - you quickly get used to it and then return to a slow motorcycle is not so easy.
Even at speeds below 100, although keeping the XR from constantly overspeeding is unlikely to be something anyone can do - this is a very provocative bike, like a sportbike. A huge minus of the XR engine of the first version is always itching, it is especially unpleasant already from 5000 rpm, and 5000 is the very minimum, 110 km/h in sixth gear. You always want to scratch your hands, but if there are short gaps or in the city, it's still tolerable. In a serious long-distance tour with monotonous hauls along the highways, I would not go on XR. 130 km/h is 6000 rpm in 6th gear, there is complete hell. Moreover, itching is everywhere - the handlebar, footpegs, saddle. If the pilot always rides all the money and
often sees the number 200, there is not much difference, at such speeds even on a good highway there is a lot of side discomfort and the problem of vibrations does not stand out from the general flow, and other competitors at such speeds are not much better, perhaps that ubiquitous Multistrada V4. Sometimes on my travels I meet a polish man in the North Cape on a sportbike without numberplate, or in the Himalayas an Indian on a naked - for such people XR is ideal for around the world. Than even the first generation XR made me happy in an amicable way - a good quickshifter. As you know, BMW on motorcycles, at least not the most recent, has a disgusting hard quickshifter that works fine only in a narrow rev range. Good quickshifters differ from bad ones in only two ways - how wide the range of the soft switch is and how fast the switch is. In the case of the XR, if a typical BMW "product" was put on it, the argument would sound something like: "You just need to switch to 10,000 rpm and everything is fine", illustrating with an example on an empty road. In dense city traffic, there is simply no
way to always spin up the revs to the limit and control the acceleration - you either ride loud all the way, or switch at medium revs, there are still no other options. Fortunately, the XR is the best quickshifter of any BMW adventurers, and far better than the Tracer 9 or Versys 1000, but the Multistrada V4 and KTM 1290 are far from both soft and fast when shifted at mid-range. At high revs, everything is fine and there is no difference with the leaders. It also pisses me off a little that when cruise control is on, you can't click up gears to save fuel.
This is possible on modern cruise controls. The box itself is clear without any complaints, but you need to click the gear more often. For example, the Versys 1000 is more elastic, in 3rd gear you can comfortably ride at 50 km/h in the city, the XR starts to twitch and you need to turn on the second.
In an urban setting, you click back and forth. And the grip is also harsh. In general, the whole motorcycle is tough, harsh, the gears need to be pushed with force, the engine twitches, do not get fooled by the slicked plastic - XR is not for gentle ones. The suspension with the right tuning is very stiff even in the Road - it doesn't swallow anything, but it steers superbly - better than any crossover, and keeps the corner perfectly. Not suitable for bad roads at all. Any two-centimeter
drop on the asphalt near the hatch is already a serious test and it's scary to fly at speed. The only bike I've reviewed with equally stiff suspension is the Tracer 9, which is also a very rough sports machine. As I already said, only 7 years ago, a class of 170 mm tire for heavy adventure motorcycles appeared en masse, before that they rolled on the controversial 150 mm tires, as can be seen from the table. All 1200s with 150 mm 17" tires are old bikes from the early 2010s. The 250-kilogram Africa Twin Adventure Sports still rolls on 150 mm tires in the rear and 90 mm in front, because there are no options for the selected wheel diameter, which is why it objectively fails on asphalt. Adventure tires in the 1200 class are always a big compromise.
Considering that the overwhelming majority of owners of such equipment ride on ordinary road tires and do not fully ride on dirt roads, one way or another they deprive themselves of the charm of controllability in corners of powerful road bikes. On 190 mm tires, XR deliberately refuses any off-road capacity, but achieves uncompromising handling of sportbikes. And one more unobvious important factor - from 190 mm tires, you can choose tire for your riding style much deeper than on typical crossovers. Actually, Multistrada 1200-1260 - and there are no more crossovers with such tires in stock.
Interestingly, the base Multistrada V4 began to flirt with off-road and abandoned sports tires due to the transition to a 19 "wheel. While the V4 has a stiffer suspension than its predecessors, but 1260 in corners due to the sporty geometry of the wheels and tire holds better - it really feels. The sportier version of Pikes Peak will have a 17" wheel back next year, and wider tires - there will be awesome, even a test ride is not needed.
Now, one of the unpleasant things that makes the XR outright lose to any Multistrada in terms of tourism - the ergonomics of the motorcycle are not so good. The saddle on the XR is already like a parable, for most people it will be the most uncomfortable saddle on which they sat, so for sure on crossovers. Moreover, this was done not because of savings or in order to sell an additional comfortable, but a conceptual BMW decision to use a sports scoop. Only they forget that no one turns handlebar on sportbikes for 12 hours a day. The saddle here is literally like a scoop - a recessed soft part inside, and the edge is hard and above the center part. Accordingly, when traveling, no matter how you sit, no matter how wide your body is, one place will become numb to the point of pain.
You can hang one buttock, then another, but still it cannot be called comfort. Fortunately, this is easily solved by replacing the saddle and you can simply change the saddle before traveling if you want to leave a more sporty one for every day. Seating position is the most uncomfortable among any adventurers from a 1000 cc. Not the level of normal tourers, but if you ride with frequent stops or use a motorcycle in the city, you don't want more. I rode from morning to evening for 4 days and usually stopped once an hour to take pictures - in this style it was quite bearable, I did not have time to get numb.
When I rode from gas station to gas station without stopping, to put it mildly, I didn’t like it. It is necessary to pull at the handlebar and down harder than that of the same Versys or Multistradas. Not because everybody is stupid in BMW, this is a sensible compromise between an urban relaxed position and to steer in an incline and lying down to be more or less comfortable, but not like with clippers, of course. The legs, of course, are raised so that you can lay the motorcycle more, but the angle at the knees is comfortable enough, although not straight. There would be some kind of such review if I
only rode the first generation XR. Now let's add the second generation XR. I decided to split the review this way, because the XR is the rarest example of a motorcycle having a dramatic change in character as the generations changed. To put it simply, XR has become more friendly and more touristy. I have an ambivalent attitude to this.
On the one hand, I love the old XR because it is the only one so unique - the meanest straight-up sportstourer. On the other hand, the new XR is really better suited for touring and as the only all-rounder for anything more appropriate. Firstly, anyone will immediately notice that since 2017, XRs have become less vibrating. Vibrations are still there, but on the handlebars they are not particularly annoying and more stressful on the footpegs and saddle. In sports crossovers, mid-range vibrations are good for travel.
The dynamics in terms of numbers is somewhere at the old level, within the margin of error, but it has noticeably changed in details - it has become softer - closer to the dynamics of Versys in character, in some conditions the feeling of the beast has disappeared. Yes, and I only compare both bikes in Dynamic mode, of course. The main reason, it seems to me, is a significant change in gear ratios in the last three gears, and it is precisely there that the more tourist character is most noticeable. In a city or in the mountains, three gears are more than enough for racing, and then the touring calm mode is activated.
Taking sixth gear as an example, the first-generation XR at 110 km/h rode at 5000 rpm, the new XR at 4650 rpm, 130 km/h in the first XR at 6000 rpm, on the new one at 5500 rpm. 200 km/h on the old one - 9100 rpm, on the new one - 8400 rpm. The faster, the greater the difference. A concomitant moment - now you need to click less gearbox. By the way, the quickshifter has become even better - it's absolutely ideal on highways, in the conditions of a city - OK, but it can be even better. The gearbox itself is now softer and the grip seems to be softer.
The neutral gear, unlike the old rough version, needs to be stuck very gently and you can catch a false neutral. Want to hear the sound? The new version had an Akrapovič silencer, the old Arrow. In general, most in-line four-cylinder engines sound pretty similar, with a sporty charm - you like them all or hate them, with rare exceptions. Arrow is sonant and louder, but if we talk about Akrapovič - it is good for travel and tires, for example, less than Versys. The fuel consumption of the engine is huge. And keep in mind that the XR's recommended gasoline is 98. In general, the declared consumption of the first generation was
half a liter more, but I got one-to-one on the old one, on the new one - 6.5 liters per 100 km in average calm mode and 10-12 liters per hundred on the Autobahn when I was riding how it can. I can't say that all the time I was riding only 240 km/h - such empty places on German autobahns are not so common, the average speed is somewhere around 170-180, no more. And yes, the load was the same without topbox, but on the old windscreen a little higher, Wunderlich Sport.
By the way, I liked the original Sporty windscreen more in any modes than Wunderlich Sport. Firstly, over 230 km/h with Wunderlich, even in the lower position, this incredible stability of the motorcycle disappears, the wind begins to influence. And with BMW Sport windscreen on the new version, even at 240 km/h, it rides very stably, does not budge. Usually, crossovers even fidget by 180 and ride is not very pleasant, on XR the aerodynamics are such that 240 km/h you can really go as long as you like, if you want, it is like an iron on the highway and there is no feeling of extreme riding mode. The noise load on the ears is enormous, of course, and you have to lie on the tank.
Again, except for XR and Multistrada, no one in the class can ride even close so steadily. For normal speeds, Wunderlich is less efficient than standard Versys windscreen. I cannot say that it is tourist. It blows everywhere - in the stomach, chest, legs, groin, knuckles, etc. Moreover, you can't even lie down at speed, so as not to blow. In the upper position, there is merciless buffetting,
but in general, a stream blows into the helmet, either in the lower or in the upper position, already literally at 40 km/h. If you think that I put the windscreen in the lower position so that the video is not blocked for using the Malevich painting - no, in all modes the lower position is better. But in a narrow range from 200 to 230 km/h, Wunderlich is better than BMW Sport for comfort - I agree.
If you ride up to 200 - in all cases, the BMW Sport windscreen in the upper position is better - it just blows and does not hit the chest with a stream. In the lower position, BMW Sport looks like there is no windscreen at all and a dense air flow goes on, like on naked bikes. Whatever one may say, and the feeling of touring windscreen for long-range trips on XR cannot be achieved in any way.
A significant change in the new version is the suspension. The moves are about the same, only the shock absorber has increased by 1 cm, although it's stupid to talk about it, here the supplier has changed. The new suspension is much softer, or simply provides a smaller range of adjustments, the feeling of a hardcore sportbike is gone, but for a crossover, it still has great handling.
It is neither better nor worse, just before the emphasis was on sports, now on tourism. From a touring point of view, the new suspension is better, but still insufficient for bad roads. Suspension semi-active front and rear with two modes - Road and Dynamic. I usually ride motorcycles in the hardest mode, here I often rode in road mode, because there is almost never a noticeable difference, there is still no crystal clarity of the first version, and in the Road small irregularities are worked out a little softer. The brakes differ from version to version. Both are not bad, but not the ultimate dream. In the first version, there were not the most top-end Brembo,
but tuned, so to speak, in a sporty way, in the second version they also tweaked and switched to a cheaper supplier - Hayes, which were leaking. Brakes are like brakes, most buyers in Europe who use the XR sparingly will enjoy it. In Russia, I suppose, XR is bought only by adrenaline addicts and exploited as the last time - I can understand that everyone wants to change the brakes. I want super-sharp brakes here, not so much out of necessity as for the sake of rhythm, so that with insane acceleration, insane braking rhymes, otherwise there is dissonance. I have no idea how much effort went into surpassing myself - making the most uncomfortable saddle in a touring bike even more uncomfortable - a tough task, but they did it. In the new version, you roll into one position and the side edges of the scoop dig into the buttocks or thighs.
I stopped regularly to warm up, endured the rest of the time. And instead of enjoying the maneuverability and the engine, I constantly waited until I would finally have a rest. Even some enduro bikes are more comfortable to sit on the rail. It seems that they have already decided to make the motorcycle more touristy - why not change the sports saddle to a normal one? Otherwise, in terms of ergonomics, everything is like other BMWs.
A frustrating control wheel, which makes it inconvenient to use a turn signal with a clamped clutch, whatever you say. There is an auto shut-off of turn signals, but it does not always work appropriately. Everything else is convenient. If we talk about the second generation, here is the classic TFT-display, which has been talked about five hundred times. The screen itself is excellent - it does not glare, it has a matte finish, it is stylish, but you still cannot watch the fuel consumption and fuel level on display at the same time, or something else - only 1 parameter, and you also have to scroll through a bunch of unnecessary ones, such as two trip timers and two lunch timers. Do you know anyone who knows someone who has ever used this timer? The only difference from the classic BMW adventurers in the 900 XR and 1000 XR is that there is an additional daring sports screen mode with display of tilt angles. A funny thing, but, for example, Versys also has it , and I would say that it is more convenient there. Results.
In general, I cannot fully assess such motorcycles - their owners have a different temperament. I can ride for 200, but I don't think it's normal anywhere, even on the notorious Autobahn, or empty Spanish highways, which are engineered at just 200 km/h by standards. I don't feel any emotions from this - it's boring, noisy, not a single earplug can fully save you at such speeds, and there is an understanding that no one sees you.
Well, you need to understand that for such speeds in most countries, either they are deprived of their rights, or they are imprisoned. And purely for the track, it is wiser to have a separate sportsbike on purely sports tires without everything superfluous, XR still will not replace sports. All people are adults, I am without preachings - just not my technique, and I do reviews only from the point of view of travel. And traveling at high speeds is boring. It seemed like was traveling, overtook everyone, but what did see, except for the highways, which are the same in Asia and in Europe? A motorcycle, rather, not for travel, but a universal city bike with outskirts of the city, sometimes you can take it to St. Petersburg along the highway or to the Crimea. For some, this is a journey, however.
If you are struggling to buy a sportbike or a crossover, the XR is the perfect choice, because it most closely conveys the emotions of a 1000 cc sportbike of all the equipment that I have reviewed. Let's move on to the comparison heading, it is appropriate here to capture an understanding of how XR differs from everyone else. Let me remind you that the sequence is built according to the popularity of YouTube statistics requests, I did take it from a thumb. They also compare it with the Super Duke, but I have not ridden it, and with pure sports, but these are, apparently, schoolchildren who do not understand the difference in classes at all, but want 1000 cc sportbike right away. Can I not explain on serious face how RR differs from XR? BMW S1000XR vs Ducati Multistrada V4.
This is really the most popular comparison query, not a big GS for once. The main problem with XR is the existence of Multistrada V4. There are a lot of powerful competitors with upright fit - for example, the KTM 1290 Super Duke and Super Adventure, but Adventure is completely different in character, closer to motards, and I have not tried Super Duke, so I will not say anything. Even the Multistrads 1200/1260 with two-cylinder engines were still different, some people like twins, some people like fours - this is taste.
And the Multistrada V4 with four cylinders in the same direction of 1000 cc sportbikes and closer to the rest is similar to the dynamics of XR, so it makes sense to compare these two motorcycles. You can stick to the fact that XR is better on corners, which is true, but for the overwhelming majority it is not so important, because there is non enought places to apply this difference, and with the arrival of Pikes Peak, there will be no arguments at all. The Multistrada simply absorbs all the XR's capabilities while remaining one of the most comfortable bikes ever.
Plus, with Ducati, you immediately get excellent brakes, windscreen, saddle, etc. in stock, but the XR also has something in the basic version that is not put in a basic Multistrada - by default, I'm talking about a richer package, on both bikes. In terms of travel, Multistrada is incomparably better, in terms of riding on bad roads, it is incomparably better, etc., and it also rides funny. In terms of dynamics, they are plus or minus the same, only the Ducati has smoother acceleration.
We run into a price argument. Money aside, Multistrada is clearly better. If we compare the basic versions, XR starts from 18,000 euros, Multistrada from 19,500 euros, or in rubles 1,600,000 against 1,830,000 in Russia.
In euros - this is the arithmetic average of dealers in Spain, France and Germany. If we consider commensurate configurations, XR in a configuration like the V4 S will cost 21,000 euros against 22,800 euros for Ducati, or 1,835,000 against 2,180,000 rubles. in Russia. In fact, the difference between Europe and Russia is 10-15%, while Ducati has better stuffing right away - the brakes are much better, full-fledged navigation with a map, a comfortable saddle, intelligible mirrors and so on. BMW has a 5-year warranty, Ducati has a 4-year warranty, the
common argument against the Japanese doesn't work. It is clear that the ratio can change from market to market, especially where Ducati sells few motorcycles, but on average, something like that. The price for Pikes Peak is now 28,500 euros, but with a high probability it will gradually fall. In any case, this is already a different package,
if the XR is brought to the same level of equipment, about the same will be cost. If you consider a used motorcycle, the XR is a good buy. Firstly, if you are considering a motorcycle purely for the city and small trips, you can safely take the more brutal first generation with sporty handling - at least, this is an unforgettable experience. In Europe, for 10,000 euros, you can easily buy 2016 with low mileage. For 12 000 you can already buy the 2018 under warranty with an updated engine. Multistrada V4 is very fresh,
so there are no special offers yet. The Multistrada 1200 from the 16th year is 12,000 euros, the Multistrada 1260 from 2018 - 15 000. The difference is already 20-30%, while the old Ducati are more expensive to maintain and with a high probability you will immediately spend money at the desmo-service. In Russia it is more difficult because of the very small number of Multistradas on the market. Again, XR is produced for a long time and in large quantities, so there are no problems with the availability of spare parts and services. Yamaha Tracer 9. I'm surprised this is such a popular request.
According to reviews, including mine, it is not clear how these motorcycles differ. Obviously the S1000XR is more powerful and whether the Tracer is powerful enough is a subjective question. Someone will not be enough, depending on what experience was. It so happened that I took the brand new Tracer 9 GT
for a test the next morning after returning two XRs and I was not bored with the fact that the Tracer was weaker. The key difference between the models - the Tracer feels like a toy - an agile fellow, nimble, light, groovy, it is pleasant to twist it under you, push from row to row in a traffic jam, ride on serpentines, etc. The difference between them is only 13 kg, depending on the version, but if the Tracer 9 seems much lighter than its weight, then the XR, on the contrary, feels like a heavier, longer and larger motorcycle. He is more comfortable at very high speeds around
200, where the Tracer is already starting to wobble - this is clearly not his comfortable speed. The difference between them is about the same as between a 1000 cc sportbike and a 600 cc sportbike- not everyone prefers 1000 cc. Plus, the Tracer is smaller in size and squeezes through traffic more fun than its 1000 cc competitors, including the XR. The second important difference. Believe it or not, the Tracer, with all its skinny dimensions, is the most comfortable sportstourer in terms of a combination of factors. Firstly, it has the softest vibration-free engine of all similar bikes - Versys, Multistrada 950, 900XR and others can't provide such softness.
Secondly, the Tracer has a windscreen right in stock, which is suitable for tourism with good windscreen aerodynamics, and the optional touring screen is generally chic, while the motorcycle does not become scary. For some reason, many people scold Tracer 9 for ergonomics, with my 188 cm it is convenient for me even for long-distance trips, Tracer has a very straight seating position, comfortable fit, but the angle at the knees is slightly sharper than that of any 1000 cc. The only very important nuance is that the Tracer is not at all suitable for traveling together, it is a compact motorcycle for one. And until you rush to buy a Tracer, let me remind you that it has a super stiff suspension for good asphalt even in the semi-active version and the ground clearance will not allow you to move off the asphalt. BMW R 1250 GS, and sometimes 1200 GS is also requested. The GS is a low-revving tractor and don't give you dynamic feel such XR.
This is relative, of course. If you look under some of the reviews of mid-sized bikes, you can often find comments on how some 600 cc is actually fast. Usually with this argument - "faster than 99% of cars from traffic lights." 400 cc bikes also start faster than most cars. In addition to the engine, the geometry itself, suspension, wheels, etc. - everything in the complex cannot provide the sportiness that the XR does. The GS is, of course, more comfortable, better wind protection,
better suited for bad roads and more suitable for travel. The same can be said for any 1200 adventure motorcycle. BMW F 900 XR. On the one hand, the 900 XR is uncomfortable exactly as much as a 1000 cc, only the engine vibrations are less.
On the other hand, it has ordinary dynamics and the suspension is neither fish nor meat - for some reason the suspension moves have been made more, but the suspension itself is cheap and neither sportiness nor omnivorous roads are for you. And not suitable for travel, as well as a 1000 cc. A strange motorcycle. Probably, for undecided newcomers, it is suitable, but I still did not understand it. It's a little expensive for beginners, there is a cheap 750 GS, which is even less dynamic, but at least more versatile and will be enough for a couple of years to decide which class is more interesting.
I am aware that a 900 XR costs almost 2 times cheaper than a 1000 XR and you should not expect the same characteristics from it. But not to say that it is very cheap - for exactly the same money there is a Tracer 9, and a little more expensive than the Tiger 900 - these are more solid motorcycles that you won't want to sell in a year. Kawasaki Versys 1000. By and large, in the 1000 cc class, the Versys is the only competitor to the XR. It is also more with a bias towards sports, 4 cylinders, etc. Versys is less powerful. It is fast and sufficient for the majority, and the same sportiness is expressed, but if you compare them with each other, first on one passing, then on the other - the difference in dynamics is obvious. If BMW decides to move further towards
tourism with XR - in the next generation they will get something like Versys. Versys is more focused on comfort, even the engine is more elastic and does not require constant work with gearbox, and less vibrations. He has some kind of huge saddle for both rider and passenger, a relaxed fit and good stock windscreen, with which you can travel comfortably and does not interfere too much at speed.
The Versys is also obscenely heavy for a 1000 cc bike, so on the highway it has a slight tourer feel, which is only a plus for travel, but less playfulness on set of corners. Another important feature - Versys is better than other similar bikes for traveling together - it has an outrageous amount of space for two relative to competitors. And I also like the suspension, not even the semi-active, but the usual - I didn't see much point in paying for the semi-active, to be honest. It works as it should here,
although the moves are the same as those of XR. On the one hand, it is quite elastic and allows you to handle turns beautifully, I do not see any global differences with the second generation XR suspension. On the other hand, it swallows small irregularities quite well. On the bumpy road, the Versys rides better than any XRs and Tracers, which came as a surprise to me. And another important nuance - Versys is much cheaper. In the base of 12,000 euros with a small, it is more reasonable to take the S version for 15,000 euros and it will have an excellent rich equipment, which, of course, XR does not have in stock.
The difference between commensurate configurations is somewhere around 5-6,000 euros. Moreover, the model has been produced for a very long time and the first generations are also excellent. You can buy a 2014th with a children's mileage for 5000 euros in Europe. 2018 - somewhere around 10,000 euros. You can also find it in Russia. In terms of price-quality ratio, a very good, problem-free motorcycle - I don't understand why so few people buy them. More precisely, it is clear that, on the one hand,
it is unsuccessfully called Versys, and on the other hand, in Russia you cannot explain to anyone that a crossover on 17" wheels with short suspensions is good. Everyone needs a ground clearance of 270 mm, like the Africa Twin. KTM 1290 Super Adventure. On the one hand, the KTM has a frantic dynamic, albeit slightly different in character than the XR - more jerky. On the other hand, the KTM is equally suitable for
pulling 240 km/h, laying on serpentines, kneading dirt, and ride between the rows in the city. The most versatile motorcycle from a 1000 cc and above, which can do everything at once. There is no other bike that competes on equal terms with the XR, Africa Twin, GS, and midsize adventure motorcycles. And, compared to XR, it is much more comfortable, even suitable for travel. But it still lacks that specific character of four-cylinder sportbikes with 17" wheels. If a person cannot decide between a sportbike and a crossover, the KTM is bad idea.
It costs exactly like the XR, although it feels more premium on expensive components. If you take a second-hand - KTM 1190 in 2016, you can find for 9 000 euros, or for 12,000 in 2018. The only problem with KTM is that, unlike other brands, they are often bought not only for asphalt, it could just as well hard used on off-road, so in Russia I would choose such equipment with great care. And in Russia there are some inadequately high prices for the old 1190 and 1290.
Then there will be other 1000 cc crossovers. Subscribe not to miss, and don't switch.