G oog le BadWeB | Login/out | Topics | Search | Custodians | Register | Edit Profile Ads by Motorcycle.comMotorcycle InsuranceMotorcycle PartsMotorcycle Helmets Motorcycle Tires Buell Motorcycles

Author Message   Thesmaz Posted on Saturday, October 15, 2005 - 04:41 am:        I can't find a place here in Belgium that carries MCN and I'd really like to read the review/comparo. Would someone that has a copy be willing to scan and post or e-mail it to me? Please?   Cabexbx Posted on Saturday, October 15, 2005 - 07:56 am:        MCN the British Mag or Motorcycle Consumer News the US Mag?   Thesmaz Posted on Saturday, October 15, 2005 - 03:35 pm:        From what a couple of guys have mentioned on other posts, its the british one. They do a comparo with a GS and a Multistrada   Henrik Posted on Saturday, October 15, 2005 - 08:03 pm:        The US mag Motorcycle Consumer News, November issue also has a GS vs. Ulysses comparison. Henrik   Court Posted on Sunday, October 16, 2005 - 12:06 pm:        I read it yesterday. CONGRATULATIONS to the folks at Buell. You did it! . . . you out "Beemered" the BMW.   Jim_sb Posted on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 02:49 pm:        Anyone care to provide the highlights? Or bullet points? Jim in Santa Barbara   Budo Posted on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 04:49 pm:        They did a point by point comparison, styling, finish, handling, braking, power, etc. In the end the fact that the Uly cost $4,400 less than the BMW (their example) and the fact that the Buell 'put a grin on their face'. The Uly got the nod.   Chadhargis Posted on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 04:52 pm:        The biggest handicap the Uly had was its 5 speed tranny versus the GS 6 speed. The GS out gunned the Uly to 60mph and through the quarter mile because it has closer ratios over 6 gears. Even then, the Uly wasn't too far behind.   Thunderbox Posted on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 05:07 pm:        Yah the Beamer ate the Uly by a whole .1 seconds in the quarter. Maybe a half bike lead. I guess Buell is going out of business soon. Who would want a pig like that anyways.   Reepicheep Posted on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 05:15 pm:        *Shrug*. That's their opinion, and they are entitled to it, but seeing as how an Haya-GSXR-YZF-R1000 YamaSukiHonda will crush both bikes 0-60 anyway, and that a 5 speed on an engine with a really wide torque curve does the same thing with less disruption is better for a touring bike, I wonder if I would agree. I also wonder if the 6 speed on the GS is a workaround to get vibrations down at cruising speeds. I love the 5 speed on my 9sx (over the 6 speed that was on my old Yamaha 600cc naked standard). Anybody got relative dyno plots for the XB12X versus the GS? That does not tell the vibration story, but might show if the 6 speed is a feature or a bugfix.   Thunderbox Posted on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 05:19 pm:        I would bet that 9 times out of ten you can't match your own quarter time within .1 of a second anyway.   Spoof Posted on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 05:48 pm:        I'd guess the close ratio 6 speed on the GS is more about keeping useable low gearing for offroad work, though my understanding is that GS owners aren't satisfied with that in the 1200.   Thunderbox Posted on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 05:57 pm:        The very first time I rode my 02 M2 I thought why did they need 5 speeds let alone 6. If the Uly had 6 gears the only purpose would be to decrease engine speed for highway cruising. There is no need to space them any different than they already are.   Lowflyer Posted on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 07:59 pm:        Spend $500 in mods on the Uly and $500 on the GS, and then race them. I would bet on the Uly.   Cabexbx Posted on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 09:29 pm:        Here's a nice summary ripped from Sport-Touring.Net on the GS and Uly comparo... By category Engine- Unclear which they preferred. Inferred a tossup Transmission- BMW Quote: ... there is no question which is the slickest shifting tranny, the BMW's easily. Suspension- Ulysses Quote: ... there was no difference of opinion among our testers: The Buell has the better suspension; more compliant with better road feel. Brakes- Ulysses Quote: In the end, the sense of rider control was the deciding factor. The Buell had it in spades, while BMW has perhaps tried too hard to fool-proof the act of braking, ... Handling- Tie Quote: Both bikes have their advantages, the BMW on the dirt, the Buell on anything else, but you'll have to make the call which is best for your kind of riding. Styling- BMW Quote: ... we have to give this one to BMW. Riding Impression- Ulysses Quote: Ridden back to back, or playing follow the leader with the GS, the Buell is the more involving ride. It has the best suspension, handles with more finesse, brakes with more control, and puts the bigger grin on your face at the end of the road. Instruments/Controls - BMW Quote: Functionally, the GS is the better design... Attention to Detail - Tie Quote: .. we'll call it another tie. Value - Ulysses Quote: But in such a close race, that's a big price difference, so score another one for the Ulysses Overall- BMW (dirt) Ulysses (street) Quote: The BMW GS is a remarkably versatile machine on- and off-road, but on the street, even on the worst pavement, the Buell is simply more fun to ride, in our opinion.   Natexlh1000 Posted on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 10:14 pm:        Dynos! Let me just put the magazine down on my flatbed scanner.... and my flatbed scanner:   Jim_sb Posted on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 11:33 pm:        Very interesting. Their fill-in the dots rankings on the engine appear to favor the BMW, but that is not evident per se in the graphs. Still, yet another favorable review for the Uly. Thanks for the info. Jim in Santa Barbara   Blake Posted on Tuesday, October 18, 2005 - 01:15 am:        Once again I am disappointed in the reporting of what is supposed to be an objective and accurate magazine, both for very simple errors and for allowing a BMW R-GS owner/rider to author the comparison article. Examples of poor objectivity and plain old errors that I see in the article. Style: "It's a good thing (the GS) stays so clean, even when ridden off-road, because there's a lot of surface area to clean." Apparently dust don't stick to a GS? Engines: 1. "...the BMW is a more modern short-stroke powerplant..." No mention in the article (only burried in the "miscellaneous comments section of the "Specifications and Performance Data" listings) that mentioned that this supposedly more-modern powerplant requires valve lash maintenance every 6,000 miles. They do mention the lack of a catalytic converter and pay lip service in their test notes (picks and pans) to the Uly's "exceptional fuel efficiency." It seems like the article was written by two different people and not checked for consistency. For example, Searle says the fuel mileage is "nearly identical." His comment being based only upon the contrived averages they calculate. Obviously the other contributor, in penning the test notes (Picks and Pans) took note of the 61.4 mpg that the Uly achieved. Searle for some reason avoids commenting on the Buell's amazing 61.4 mpg high fuel efficiency mark. To merely average the high and low values achieved in fuel efficiency is a horribly error prone approach. It allows a single anomalous (goofy strange out of whack) data point to overly influence the average result. The only true accurate method to determine an average fuel consumption rate is to divide the total miles traveled by the total amount of fuel consumed. And both bikes had better be driven identically and over the same course at the same time. Otherwise the data is simply not responsibly comparable. 2. Searle wonderously reports that despite being heavier and comparably powered, the GS outperforms the Uly in 1/4 mile and 0-60 mph tests. There is no mention of the significant effect of wheelbase in such standing start performance measures. Is he unaware of the effect of that very significant factor on such results? There is no roll-on type testing. And here we have some blatant errors. In the article Searle reports the GS having 1/4 mile and 0-60 mph times of 12.06 and 3.86 seconds, respectively. But on the "Specifications and Performance Data" page those times are reported as 11.61 and 3.62 seconds. Like I said, looks like two different authors and poor checking/editing. We are left wondering which numbers are correct. More confusion abounds. The article reports three different rev limits for the Uly. The initial 6,800 RPM peak rev limit we all know, the 6,400 engine protection mode rev limit that kicks in after 4-5 seconds at higher revs. Then the "Specifications..." page reports the rev limit as being 6,600 rpm, which is confirmed by the dyno plot. I guess they averaged the two prior numbers and decided to cut off the dynomometer results at 6,600? Seems to me that other than when trying to reach peak speed in 5th gear why/how would you ever be running the engine at more than 6,400 rpm for more than 4 seconds? Non-issue. Teh 6,400 rev limit should be mentioned aside and explained. Accelerating in lower gears, it is a complete non-issue. As mentioned already, their dynomometer run for the Uly shuts down at 6,600 rpm, thus knocking of approximately 4 HP from the Uly's peak RWHP performance. I doubt that little discrepancy was an accident; they surely had to decide to cut the data off at that point for the Uly. Either that or their dyno operator is incompetent. I will happily conclude however that the big GS as evidenced by the above dyno plots (thanks Nate ) flat out spanks the Buell in engine performance almost everywhere. The few spots that the Buell outpulls the GS are at down very low around 2,500-3,000 rpm, immediately around 5,000 rpm where the GS torque takes a sharp momentary dip, and then at the very top above 6,500 rpm where the GS begins to strangely drop off. What is really surprising is that the GS flat-out out-torques what should be a torqier engine. The torque curve for the big GS is darn impressive. This for me is evidence that there is still a lot more performance to be squeazed from the big Buell engine, especially since in RS trim the big BMW oil-head makes another 15 RWHP, SERIOUSLY putting the spank on the current Buell powerplant. 4. They rate the engine for "Low end", "Mid-range", and "Top end". While the GS will rev to 7,500 rpm, it's power drops off significantly after 6,800 rpm, so starting at 2,500 rpm and going to 6,800 rpm both bikes can be said to offer the same start and finish to their operational power bands. If we define low, mid, high as the 1st, 2nd, and last third of that powerband, we can make a meaningful comparison. Here is the way I see it... Engine Performance Comparison: HP Shown for Start - End and (AVG) Rev Range: RPM (Start - End) Uly RWHP GS RwHP Advantage MCN Score Uly/GS Low: 2500 - 4000 29 - 46 (37.5) 22 - 50 (36.0) TCTC 4.0/4.5 Mid: 4000 - 5500 46 - 68 (57.0) 50 - 72 (61.0) GS 3.5/5.0 Top: 5500 - 6800 68 - 86 (77.0) 72 - 80 (76.0) TCTC 3.0/3.5 Overall - - GS 3.5/4.5 TCTC = "Too Close To Call" Transmission: Searle reports that the Beemer wins "easily". But the score MCN gives the two bikes on their "Specifications..." pages are 4.5 for the Uly and a lesser 4.0 for the GS. Again, two different authors/numbers. Which is it? Same deal on the styling ratings. Searle awards that to the GS in the text of the article, but the scoring data shows the Uly beating the GS (5.0 versus 4.5). Styling score, who cares anyway, right? That's a very personal/subjective consideration. In the text Searle give the nod to the Uly over the GS in the riding impression category. The scoring doesn't reflect that. Here's the way the MCN scoring compares between the two... MCN Uly VS. GS Comparo Scoring Tally Category Uly GS Advantage Engine 4.0 4.0 Tie Transmission 4.5 4.0 Uly Suspension 5.0 4.0 Uly Brakes 4.5 4.0 Uly Handling 4.5 4.5 Tie Styling 5.0 4.5 Uly Riding Impression 4.5 4.5 Tie Instruments/Controls 4.5 4.5 Tie Attention to Detail 4.5 4.5 Tie Value 4.0 3.5 Uly Overall 4.5 4.0 Uly The article on hemorrhoids was interesting. Last month's issue had the dyno charts all goofed up for the Ducati and the ZX-6R and reported the wrong OEM engine HP. Really poor fact-checking proof reading at MCN. I just noticed something else, the "Specifications..." page for the GS is labeled as being for a "2004 BMW R1200GS." No such bike exists as far as I know. The 2004 GS was an R1150 model. How much do proof-readers earn? (Message edited by blake on October 18, 2005)   Blake Posted on Tuesday, October 18, 2005 - 01:33 am:        One more thing... apparently the GVWR of the Beemer is only 496 LBs. The bike apparently weighs more than it is allowed to weigh fully loaded. Ruh-roh.   Thesmaz Posted on Tuesday, October 18, 2005 - 03:09 am:        Blake Thanks for the overview!   M2nc Posted on Tuesday, October 18, 2005 - 05:50 am:        If they were shifting the Buell at 6600rpm instead of 6800rpm they were leaving that .1 second there. Also as you said, how timid were they due to the launch characteristics of the XB. I only tried the Uly once at my favorite back road drag strip and I could not keep the front tire down at full throttle in first gear. Even so the speed at the end of the stretch almost bested the M2 and I was short shifting Uly. The BMW is a great machine with loyal riders. The Buell just gives people in that market a choice, and riding styles and expectations will dictate what they buy. So far I'm happy with my choice. The bike is not what I expected. It is more comfortable than any other Buell I've been on and I tend to do more touring than road thrashing. Like the article states, it just puts a grin on your face. The neat thing is that it feels very different from the M2, so I'm keeping both and will ride them for different reasons.   Court Posted on Tuesday, October 18, 2005 - 05:53 am:        I thought the fact that two consecutive GS's exhibited the same power delivery problem was in interest. The Uly has taken on the GS at it's own game and actually, given the significant price different, created a new niche.   Cataract2 Posted on Tuesday, October 18, 2005 - 09:26 am:        Now I REALLY want a Uly...   Buellgrrrl Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 12:24 am:        Sorry to rain on the parade, and on both the BMW and Buell floats- But the R1200GS and the Uly are first year designs. The GS in the last year has shown an ability to trash is transmission amongst other problems, and who know's what weaknesses a year's riding experience will reveal in the Uly. So what happens when these bikes break? Well today I rode down to Judson Motor Sales to get 8 parts for my 1983 and 1984 BMWs, and they had 7 of them in stock. Meanwhile my 2001 Buell waits for weeks for common parts that any Buell dealer should stock. So unless Buell manages to make major improvements in dealer service over the winter the Uly is doomed- as soon as word gets around the BMW boards and rallies that the early adopter's Uly's are sitting waiting for parts the potential BMW to Buell converts won't even give the Uly the time of day. Given that little improvement is likey in Buell dealers service departments over the winter, or even the next decade, I predict BMW will have no problem selling out of GSs next year while new Uly's will be down to $8k by this time next year.   Blake Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 02:17 am:        Buelgrrrl, Interesting twist of the thread. "So what happens when these bikes break?" May I answer? You fix 'em. Were you looking for a place to air your frustrations and this thread about the Uly vs. GS article in MCN was the best place? LOL! Fine with me. Let's investigate your situation shall we? My own experience is opposite yours. While others have, I've never had to wait beyond reason for parts for my '97 Buell (stator, clutch cable, throttle cables, race exhaust, race can, cam position sensor, turn signals, wheel bearings, primary tensioner shoe assy, speedometer cable, spark plugs, oil, filters, drive sprockets, shock upgrade, bike covers, seat hold-down screw, '98 version oil pump, coil, spark plug wires,...). For years now and almost without fail, Buell parts have been delivered inside of one week from the date of order to the respective dealerships. Unfortunately, for far too many cases where a dealership was telling customers that their parts weren't in yet, the dealership had simply failed to submit the parts order in a timely fashion. Sad but true. Thought we had put that unfortunate era behind us though. If the above is what is happening to your parts order, there is a way to expose the situation. Ask your dealership for the order number, if they cannot provide one, they haven't ordered your parts yet. If they do provide one, then call Buell Customer Service and have them check it's status for you. If there is "no such order number", then you've found them out, they didn't order the parts yet. If it is a valid order number, BCS can tell you when it was placed/entered and the reason for any delay. If it turns out that the dealer is being disingenuous, then that is NOT Buell's fault and certainly not the case at all Buell dealerships. And bad dealerships are certainly not the sole curse of Buell motorcycles. You can bet that not all BMW shops provide perfect service either. Such generalizations are simply not valid in my experience. Certainly not based upon one singular situation. "Doomed"? I doubt that very much. You have email.   Jammer Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 02:22 am:        Here is one mans perspective. To Forgive is DivineIt's not about the Uly however but about how our passion for motorcycles allow us to forgive their shortcomings. Jeff   Jlnance Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 06:46 am:        My own experience is opposite yours. While others have, I've never had to wait beyond reason for parts ... For years now and almost without fail, Buell parts have been delivered inside of one week What we have here is a failure to communicate. (did you see the movie?) Buelgrrrl said the BMW dealer had the parts in stock, which is considerably different than having to wait a week for them. Even getting DaveS to fedex me parts overnight isn't like being able drive over the the dealer and just pick them up. To be fair Buelgrrrl said BMW only had 7/8ths of the parts are in stock, so depending on what was missing, she may be no better off.   Timblanch Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 09:25 am:        I'm new here and have gotten a lot of great information from this site. I'm in the market for a new bike, and I test rode a 12GS and Uly in September for about 45-50 minutes each. Iv'e never owned a BMW or Buell. I love the ADV-type of bike and both of these have the wonderful characteristics of an ADV: 'in command' seating with great handlebar leverage, sit upright comfort, lots of leg room, high view point, long travel suspension, go-anywhere attitude, torquey engines, minimal bodywork, etc. With the Uly, it's great to have another choice! What I found different between the bikes was that the GS seemed more confidence-inspiring and developed, as it should have since BMW has been building ADV's for 25 years. However, the Buell is wonderful in many ways, some better than the GS to me (engine feel, suspension quality and ride, less driveline snatch, great mpg, passenger backrest) but is definitely a 'bird of a different feather' in the typical Buell sense. Some good (low muffler, torquey v-twin), some bad, (perceived 'ancient' engine, super short wheelbase combined with super tall saddle create an oddly proportioned bike, limited steering, obnoxiously loud fan, engine heat, cable blocks odometer, front end dive, cheasy-looking switchgear, heavy peg vibes, sqirrelly or 'hunting' highway behavior). The BMW is not without issues either. I didn't care for the vibes on the highway, the snatchy driveline and the buffeting windshield. Overall I enjoyed both bikes but for me the GS was more fun to ride and easier to put faith into (telelever with abs is amazing!). The Buell is trying to capture new riders and having some success, but it is a very different type of ADV bike. This buyer is hesitant to get Buell's first year model of a new category of bike. While Erik's design concepts work pretty good on his naked street bikes (isn't it interesting to see Yamaha copying his under engine muffler for 2006?), to me I'm not convinced that all of these design concepts transfer to the ADV category. I would like to see them stand the test of time. Some concepts such as the low muffler don't concern me too much but the tall proportion combined with front end dive does concern me. I'm not sure what I'm going to end up buying. Thankfully, I have all winter to think about it. Tim   Dmcutter Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 01:05 pm:        I have not noticed the excessive fork dive. I find that I actually do use the rear brake fairly aggressively because I know it won't lock up, so I guess that helps reduce the dive. I also have not found peg vibration to be noticeable, although the bars get buzzy at 2000 rpm, but I think the timing is off-I know it should not be that rough low down. Switch gear is no cheesier than any Japanese bike I've owned. Just my 2 cents...on another note, the dyno numbers are substantially lower than Cycleworld,s, and they said their preproduction model was lower than stock should be because of some mangled gaskets. What's the deal with that?   Whodom Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 01:14 pm:        Tim, note that all XB platform bikes are very sensitive to suspension set-up. I'd try to arrange another test ride through a dealer that'll agree to go to the trouble to adjust the suspension for your weight. Based on what others have written, that can make a huge difference. David, in my experience with my tuber (a 2000 S3) the thing that affects vibration the most is the adjustment of the primary chain. If it gets too loose, the bars will get buzzy. Good question about the MCN low dyno numbers. They must have a REALLY conservative dyno. (Message edited by whodom on October 19, 2005)