Limited power BMW K1200S in France

[Java]

I bought year ago a Yamaha FZ6-N here in Dordogne. Great bike but since it is a naked bike, it is not much fun on long distance trips (>700 km/day). I am planning to buy a second bike, a long distance sports tourer and have narrowed the choice to BMW K1200S. The bike has 168 hp engine but limited to 106 hp in France.

I would like to know if anybody has experience about this 106 hp version. Is it worth the money anymore, how is the handling etc.? I really do not need all that power but since the bike is designed for that maybe cutting the power so much will make the performance worse.

I do not know how the power restriction is done in practise. Is it simply a different fuel injection mapping (which should be easy to re-map) or something else?

 

[Bob T]

Can't be too specific on this, but I have done loads of research on it. The bike has computers running the ignition and injection systems, Those computers are set for a particular market, the French one giving only 106 bhp. To upgrade to 168, a UK dealer told me that the bike has to be reprogrammed by a dealer and the new program is supplied by BMW.

I do know that there are Belgian dealers who will reprogram at a price, and there are options for 106, 154 162 and 168 bhp.

Jude wanted a K1200S, but after reading about the differences, we found that the 106 bhp version is not as smooth in the power delivery as the full power version. She eventually decided to keep her R1100S.

I was considering the K1200R Sport, but for the same reasons, decided to keep my R1100S.

A good long distance tourer alternative might be the K1200RS or GT made up to 2005. They were 130 bhp full power and the French version was as sweet as the full power version. I owned a 2004 GT(130bhp), with ABS, heated seat and heated grips, electric screen and BMW panniers, and I can say that it was a very fast motorway cruncher, that was comfortable enough for 550 miles in well under 7 hours.

[Chezstevens]

I might add that the R series tourers are the bees knees for touring.  I have owned the R1150RT and currently own the R1200RT.  I have 5 x 1000 mile days and 1 x 1400 miles in 30 hours (inc Hotel rest of 6 hrs and ferry crossing).  They are very comfie and I have got off the bikes at the end of the days and been able to walk!!  The R1200RT does not have much over 106 bhp but it surprises many with its turn of speed on A and B roads.  I remember my R1150RT kept up with a couple of spanish superbikes in northwest spain - they were amazed and invited me to their club bar for a nosh.  I have had scratchers - my Ducati comes to mind - but comfort counts when you are 48.

regards

Vern

 

[Bob T]

You are correct, Vern, but I found that the K with the bars further forward was miles more comfortable than my R1150RT, that was the main reason for changing. The RT was so upright that it gave me pain in the lower back. I was also 48 last Thursday, but on Friday I became 49.

[oakbri]

I bought my Ducati 998 new here in France in 2004. When I went to collect it, the dealer asked me if I wanted it upgraded to full power. Not sure what to say, he assured me the majority of new sports bikes were derestricted at their first service. He told me one of his customers was even a Gendarme who had his bike derestricted although I don't know if that's true.

I am not sure what has to be done on the BMW. On the Ducati there were bungs in the air inlet that restricted the air flowing into the cylinders and a small mechanical stop on the throttle. The parts are now in a bag in my garage and can easily be refitted before I sell the bike.

[Bob T]

There is a forum for K1200s Here

[Sunday Driver]

Note that on 5 March 2007, the law was revised to introduce more stringent penalities for unauthorised modifications (eg, derestriction) to motorcycles:

Code de la route Art L321-1

The importing, offering for sale, selling, proposing for hire, encouraging to buy, or using a cyclomoteur, motor cycle or quadricycle with engine, which has not been type approved or which is no longer in conformity with its original type approval is punishable by six months imprisonment and a 7,500 euro fine. When this infringement is carried out  by a professional, it is punishable by two years imprisonment and a 30,000 euro of fine. The vehicle can be seized.

The conditions under which any vehicle intended to take part in a race or sporting test can be derogated from the provisions of this article are determined by separate decree.

See also Art L321-3:

Any person found guilty of the infringements set out in Art L321-1 will also incur the following penalties:

1° suspension of driving licence for a period of between one and three years;

2° confiscation of the equipment used to commit the offence;

3° in accordance with Art R131-27 of the penal code, prohibition from exercising the profession practiced at the time of infringement, for a period of one to five years.

 

[oakbri]

Sunday driver

Many thanks for the info. I had no idea the penalties were so strict. I think the reason so many riders still derestrict their bikes is that the law would be very difficult to enforce, unless the police had a mobile dyno. If you were unlucky enogh to be in a crash that would change things I guess, as the police could take your bike to the pound and have it scrutineered there.

I will keep my bike full power as I like the security the extra horses gives me when I need to get out of trouble. When I learnt to drive I was always taught "mirror, signal, manoeuvre" whereas on the continent some countries seem to disregard the "mirror, signal" part. I have had many instances where I am in the fast lane and a car, or on a dual carriageway, a lorry just pulls out. Luckily I have always been able to accelerate my way out of trouble instead of becoming mincemeat on the central reservation. I would hate my wife to have to visit my grave knowing I may have been killed due to some brainless bureaucrat deciding from a desk how powerful my bike should be.

I know in the UK they are now thinking of ways to restrict the power of a bike and are even discussing a GPS linked system that restricts the bike to the local speed limit. However I think the lawsuits that would come about from people proving they had an accident BECAUSE of the equipment may make it unfeasible.

[Sunday Driver]

oakbri

Whilst many riders would have been happy to derestrict their bikes in the past, I suspect this new punitive legislation will have led many of them to change their views.  Furthermore, if we accept that riding a motorcycle gives us greater exposure to the risk of an accident (such as rider loss of control, SMIDSYs, etc) then the probability of being subject to post-accident police scrutiny must be equally high. 

Not sure about the 'extra horses' argument, though.  In road safety and motorcycle training circles (both basic and advanced) this is usually countered by the view that when approaching an overtake, it's safer to assess the situation of the vehicle about to be overtaken to see if it's likely to pull out in front of you and, if necessary, hold back until it's safe to pass.

 

Now that'll have opened a can of worms, I bet....[;-)]

 

[oakbri]

Hi Sunday Driver

I agree in light of the new legislation things will change, as I said I bought my bike back in 2004.

I know there are people who will disagree with the extra power argument, but the assessing the vehicle to be overtaken argument is also flawed when the lorry driver just pulls across into your lane without any warning whatsoever. I have been halfway along a 40 foot trailer, with another vehicle behind me when this has happened. I couldn't brake due the the car behind me, who was busy doing some emergency braking himself before he was mincmeat. However a quick squeeze of the throttle safely propelled me the last 20 feet or so past the lorry. I feel that having the power at my disposal saved me in that situation.

In light of my previous remarks I would like to say that on the whole bike riding in France is far better than the UK. Apart from the vastly superior roads the car drivers here show bikers far more courtesy than in the UK. As a result it is much safer to ride a bike here, which makes the governments draconian laws a bit irrelevant.

[bmt]

[quote user="oakbri"]... but the assessing the vehicle to be overtaken argument is also flawed when the lorry driver just pulls across into your lane without any warning whatsoever.[/quote]

I disagree.  Lorries should be *expected* to drift, either as the start of an overtaking move or just from driver inattention.  Not an uncommon occurance at all.  Other circumstances at the time will weigh one or the other more likely.

If you haven't got a 'quick squeeze of the throttle' left and there's traffic around, then you're too close to the limit, even by my standards. [;-)]  My bike is just under 100 bhp and I have no trouble accelerating smartly at autoroute speeds.

[BIG MAC]

Put simply a nanny state is a nanny state its not the power of the bike its the brain power of the pilot.

I am all for super-licences for those who wish a 100bhp + licence with a stringent accompanied test and also higher penalties for law infringement.

ie longer bans for unsafe riding and a de-motion to a lower class licence when getting a ban from  the higher class, the only way back by re-test.

Motorcycling is a joy, if someone want a zillion horsepower and is able to control it then let him IMHO of course.

[Sunday Driver]

[quote user="BIG MAC"]

I am all for super-licences for those who wish a 100bhp + licence with a stringent accompanied test and also higher penalties for law infringement.

[/quote]

No objection to that concept. 

However, I'm not sure if it'd be worth going through all the hoops to get a super licence if you can't then ride your zillion horsepower bike faster than 90kph on the 'interesting' roads without infringing the law that you mention. 

May as well just stick to 100bhp.....[;-)]

 

[oakbri]

I am all for training. The 100 bhp law simply doesn't work. If you have a crash at 160kph you will most probably die, doesn't matter if the bike has 100bhp or 180bhp.

At the end of the day France has a woeful death rate for bikers. Much worse that say the UK, which does not have the BHP limit. And yet strangely France has superior roads and as I have said before, in my opinion, car drivers which show you much more consideration.

According to the latest figures (for 2005, as it takes a while to process) France had 892 motorcycle deaths while the UK had 561. Check http://ec.europa.eu/transport/roadsafety_library/care/doc/annual_statistics/2005_transport_mode.pdf

It must be a real bummer for the bureaucrats who make these stupid laws when the statistics just won't comply!!!!!

[Bugsy]

[quote user="oakbri"]

Sunday driver

Many thanks for the info. I had no idea the penalties were so strict. I think the reason so many riders still derestrict their bikes is that the law would be very difficult to enforce, unless the police had a mobile dyno. If you were unlucky enogh to be in a crash that would change things I guess, as the police could take your bike to the pound and have it scrutineered there.

I will keep my bike full power as I like the security the extra horses gives me when I need to get out of trouble.

[/quote]

Hi oakbri,

The Police in Paris already have mobile dyno's and have already confiscated and crushed bikes found to be over the power limit.

106bhp is more than sufficient on todays motorcycles and provides adequate security should you find yourself in need of a quick burst of acceleration.

These restrictions on power will surely be brought into being in the UK due, in part, to the mindless few who insist on blasting through built-up areas. They will also be the ones who moan the loudest when it happens.

I enjoy a blast as much as the next guy but today, the track is the place to do it. Stick religiously to the posted limits in towns and villages and limit your bit of play to the quieter 'D' roads. Unless you're happy and able to keep shelling out 90 euro's for fines, that is.

Mobile speed units are now seen virtually every day in France and using stealth tactics worthy of the SAS.

If you exceed the limits here its no longer a case of 'if 'you get caught, but 'when'.

Enjoy..........................................

[Bob T]

Don't believe statistics! These ones are just very simple death numbers. What I would like to see is total number of bikes registered in each country and average milage per year for each country, it would mean more like that.

Our bikes are both 99bhp, but when I think back to the UK when Jude had 165 and I had 130, I realise that those bikes would be less use to us than the ones we have now.

[oakbri]

Bob T

I don't know how many bikers in France. In the UK there are 5 million bike licence holders with an estimated 1.1 to 1.3 million active. I would guess France is similar, but I really don't know, I am sure that information would be available on the web somewhere. However in the UK the bikers ride on much worse roads, and, as the weather is generally wetter and colder than France it figures they also ride is harsher conditions and on higher powered motorbikes. And yet Frances death rate is approaching twice the UK's. Something doesn't seem to add up ?????

Modern motorbikes are highly tuned and finely balanced machines. The power available at the back wheel is taken into account at every step of the design process, and has an effect on things such as the length of the swing arm, the stiffness of the frame, even the size of the tyres. The bike manufacturers spend millions on research and development to get this just right. Then some faceless French politician hacks off 40% of the power that was used in all those calculations. Could it be the reasons the French manage to kill so many of their bikers each year could be aggrivated by their meddling, not made better.

I read in another post where someone compared riding the full power machine to the restricted and said the restricted machine did not feel right.

I don't know what is involved in the French bike licence, is there a problem there maybe?. I did my licence in the UK. I hold a car licence, a bike licence, a power boat licence and a commercial pilot licence. I felt the bike licence was the hardest of all them to pass. That said, I have many years of riding without an accident. I NEVER speed through built up areas, but if I am on an empty road away from buildings, pedestrians and other traffic I can be a very naughty boy. When I need a real speed fix I visit one of the two tracks near my house.

[TreizeVents]

Just a little feedback for those of you who “cut loose” on D roads.  When I lived near Kirkby Lonsdale, and also

rode my bicycle often on a road that goes through the Quernmore Valley, on the

way up to the Lune Valley ( am sure all you Northern bikers know those roads),

it was the consensus that those roads were never safe (or pleasant) for cycling

on a Sunday.  Lots of deaths of course,

as the bikers wound it up on the “isolated” roads.  We never cycled on those roads on Sunday because the bikes come

up so fast, they scare the whatsit out of you, and often pass very close

indeed.  Just makes life

unpleasant.  Naturally all the bikers

who were speeding had “well-maintained bikes” and were “highly skilled riders”

who were riding “well within their limits”. 

However, you don’t know that when they come up behind you so fast.  But perhaps it does not trouble bikers that

they disturb other people, being “kings of the road”, and able to break laws

with impunity …. on the D roads.  There

were death notices in the paper nearly every week.  By the way this is just information (not an argument), as no

doubt I will find little sympathy or understanding in the “bikers’ club”.  I thought I might try again.

[Bugsy]

[quote user="TreizeVents"]................................................................But perhaps it does not trouble bikers that they disturb other people, being “kings of the road”, and able to break laws with impunity …. on the D roads.  There were death notices in the paper nearly every week.  By the way this is just information (not an argument), as no doubt I will find little sympathy or understanding in the “bikers’ club”.  I thought I might try again.

[/quote]

We are not all like that TV, just as all cyclists are not hell-bent on breaking every rule in the Highway code. We all live in the world of the 'richard head' unfortunately.

 

 

[oakbri]

TreizeVents

I don't think the majority of bikers believe they can break the laws with impunity. As I said, I don't speed through built up areas and only pick up speed when I am away from ALL other traffic and pedestrians. I consider cyclists other traffic with as much right to be on the road as me.

However as any biker will tell you there are few things to compare to seeing a dry, totally empty road open up in front of you and its those few moments of pleasure that are what biking is all about.

The death notices you talk about are what the government call " single bike accidents" And it is those jokers who do believe they are "kings of the road" and are causing the governmets to impose the ridiculous laws like the ones we see in France. Sadly these laws will do little to reduce the accidents but will slowly squeeze the enjoyment out of biking altogether.

[bmt]

[quote user="oakbri"]Modern motorbikes are highly tuned and finely balanced machines. The power available at the back wheel is taken into account at every step of the design process, and has an effect on things such as the length of the swing arm, the stiffness of the frame, even the size of the tyres. The bike manufacturers spend millions on research and development to get this just right. Then some faceless French politician hacks off 40% of the power that was used in all those calculations. Could it be the reasons the French manage to kill so many of their bikers each year could be aggrivated by their meddling, not made better.[/quote]

My emphasis.

No, it couldn't.  Are you suggesting that modern bikes can only be ridden with the throttle wide open and the engine at 90-odd % of it's rev range?  That's the only time it's developing anything near its rated horsepower.

I also put it to you that modern sports bikes owe more to fashion and the needs of the track, than to achieving perfection on the road.  The design process is geared to selling product only.

Road safety is a culture thing, not something that can be legislated.  I think the 100 bhp limit is misguided and misinformed, but not responsible for anything other than bad feeling.  Join the FFMC and have your say in the negotiations for lifting it, but you might find CT for bikes is the cost.

[TreizeVents]

I am sure you are both right, that not "all bikers" are like that.  I merely report something you might not know when you "open up" on the "little roads".  There is something about a motorcycle that makes the appear out of nowhere when you are cycling.  Cars are somehow different, maybe just slower to arrive.  Its worse on the roads that are not straight or level, that is those that provide a bit of challenge for a biker with a powerful machine.  I was prompted to write by ringing a friend in that area (a famous gathering point for bikers in the North,  in case some of you don't know it) who went for a bike ride on Sunday.  Knowing them and the area well, I asked where they went.  She and her husband had avoided all the main roads and pootled about on tiny roads (not possible to speed on them, not attractive to bikers) to avoid the Sunday bike traffic.  It really is something around there.   But as I say,  you bikers might not know how scary you are to cyclists when you open up on small roads.   I am sure you all think there is a small minority who ruin it for the rest.  And you are probably right.  But keep that in mind when you hear people going on about one particular example people use to com=ncem an entire movement of people, whether they be bikers or protesters. 

Is there a movement within the bike community to do something about these few renegades?  Certainly in the cycling world, there is much debate and discussion about the (usually) young lads on mountain bikes who tend to wind people up.  There ahs been no answer as to what to do about them.  Of course in urban areas, there is the problem of the young lads on little motor bikes, but those of you in rural areas won't have that problem.

[oakbri]

[quote user="TreizeVents"]
Is there a movement within the bike community to do something about these few renegades?  Certainly in the cycling world, there is much debate and discussion about the (usually) young lads on mountain bikes who tend to wind people up.  There ahs been no answer as to what to do about them.  Of course in urban areas, there is the problem of the young lads on little motor bikes, but those of you in rural areas won't have that problem.
[/quote]

Hi TriezeVents

There is certainly a lot of bad feeling between bikers regarding the fools who ruin it for the rest of us. There are different ideas, which have support from different people. You will have heard it already on this thread when people have mentioned more training and a licence that goes up in stages. These are just some of the ideas currently supported by the biking community. There is a difference however between a system that is supported by those it affects and a system that is forced upon us, which looking at the statistics, is totally ineffective and does nothing to solve the problem.

[oakbri]

Hi bmt

I don't suggest that bikes have to be ridden with their throttles wide open. But as I said the engine power is taken into account at every stage of the design process.

If you think that engine power is anything other that a fundamental part in the whole bike design process try riding say a GSXR 600 and then getting on a GSXR 750. If you think that riding the 750 with the throttle say only half open is the same as riding the 600 with the throttle full, l I can tell you, from experience, you will be very very surpprised.

The 100 bhp limit is not misguided or misinformed, it is an attempt at a quick fix to a problem which is now backfiring in the governments faces as the death tolls are not falling.

[bmt]

[quote user="oakbri"]If you think that riding the 750 with the throttle say only half open is the same as riding the 600 with the throttle ful,l I can tell you, from experience, you will be very very surpprised.[/quote]

Not at all.  But limiting the engine maximum rpm would have no effect at all on mid-range characteristics, but reduce the power available.  Reducing the power from, say, 150 to 100 bhp would reduce the top speed by about 10% (it's a cube law -- increase in speed requires increase cubed additional power).

Don't get me wrong, I understand what you mean; however, for the vast majority of day to day riding, there just isn't any difference.  For the weekend Power Rangers, I'm sure it would be the end of the world, but you just can't ride a bike at 10/10 all day, every day.  Well, not at my age.[;-)]  Even when I was young, immortal and someone else was always at fault, riding hard for extended periods was just plain knackering.

[quote user="oakbri"]The 100 bhp limit ... is an attempt at a quick fix to a problem which is now backfiring in the governments faces as the death tolls are not falling.[/quote]

Agreed, so it was midguided and misinformed ... along with day-time headlights ... but I digress.