Paul, you don't just don't understand new math. Just kidden, I'm like you I think it's stupid.
-
Welcome, Guest! We hope you enjoy the excellent technical knowledge, event information and discussions that the BMW MOA forum provides. Some forum content will be hidden from you if you remain logged out. If you want to view all content, please click the 'Log in' button above and enter your BMW MOA username and password. If you are not an MOA member, why not take the time to join the club, so you can enjoy posting on the forum, the BMW Owners News magazine, and all of the discounts and benefits the BMW MOA offers?
-
Beginning April 1st, and running through April 30th, there is a new 2024 BMW MOA Election discussion area within The Club section of the forum. Within this forum area is also a sticky post that provides the ground rules for participating in the Election forum area. Also, the candidates statements are provided. Please read before joining the conversation, because the rules are very specific to maintain civility.
The Election forum is here: Election Forum
The new BMW F 700 GS and BMW F 800 GS.
- Thread starter mika
- Start date
Paul, you don't just don't understand new math. Just kidden, I'm like you I think it's stupid.
It seems unfortunate to me that BMW increased the horsepower on the 650/700 from 71 to 75, only to now require premium fuel. IMO, one of the biggest advantages of the 650 over the 800 was the ability to run regular fuel.
Also, I'm not sure that the double disc on the front was necessary, or an improvement, given the limited (but acceptably competent) capabilities of the 650 forks.
JP
Also, I'm not sure that the double disc on the front was necessary, or an improvement, given the limited (but acceptably competent) capabilities of the 650 forks.
JP
mika
Still Wondering
The increase in fuel requirement is unfortunate for the F700 buyer. If you are new to the bike it is something of a non issue if it is the bike for you. You can't miss what you didn't have.
The lack of an increase in fuel carrying capacity does not surprise me. More of a redesign, instead of 'revision', would have been required to pull that off. The changes may be driven by other factors.
We have been looking at the change to a dual disc from an end user - rider - stand point to try and understand why and the value of the change. I have begun to do some digging to see if there is a manufacturing reason, as I suspect.
The change brings the F series BMW and the Husqvarna Nuda line together with dual disc abs systems. I do not know how many parts, if any, the two may actually share but the approach would seem to allow that along with shared design costs/savings from a manufacturing perspective. IIRC the single disc systems were sourced from Bosch and the dual disc systems were an in-house item.
The lack of an increase in fuel carrying capacity does not surprise me. More of a redesign, instead of 'revision', would have been required to pull that off. The changes may be driven by other factors.
We have been looking at the change to a dual disc from an end user - rider - stand point to try and understand why and the value of the change. I have begun to do some digging to see if there is a manufacturing reason, as I suspect.
The change brings the F series BMW and the Husqvarna Nuda line together with dual disc abs systems. I do not know how many parts, if any, the two may actually share but the approach would seem to allow that along with shared design costs/savings from a manufacturing perspective. IIRC the single disc systems were sourced from Bosch and the dual disc systems were an in-house item.
pglaves
#13338
That peak horsepower number is essentially meaningless on this bike. I'd have to see the HP and torque curves to know exactly but will bet that peak horsepower is reached just short of engine redline where we seldom ride for longer than brief seconds.
The curve shape and amount of mid-range torque is what matters to most of us most of the time. 4 peak horsepower is a very poor tradeoff to need gas that is 20 to 70 cents more per gallon than regular.
JIMSHAW
Ambassador at Large
Yep, it's a couple of hundred RPMs higher than the F650 (twin - gotta say 'twin' or BMW wins the confusion contest). What makes the F650 Twin a good compromise is that the torque is similar to the F800. I don't use a lot of horsepower; I really like torque. Really.
I agree, the F700 looked good until I read the fuel spec. I equates to US 89 or above octane. I've been dealing with this issue for eleven years with my 1150GS. Paying $.40 less per gallon is like getting an 11% mileage increase.
I'm still in the market for an F650 Twin GS. As I ungracefully age, the old 1150GS just keeps gaining weight and getting more top heavy. <sigh>
mika
Still Wondering
Pump Math-
What your experience in the mileage trade off? IF the pump difference is < or = does it make a difference?
My daily riding with my Roadster the math seems to dictate using the cheap stuff but the math makes the actual savings marginal. On trips is where I will pop for the expensive brew and realize a gain.
I have eyed F bikes and wondered what the pump math is for them.
What your experience in the mileage trade off? IF the pump difference is < or = does it make a difference?
My daily riding with my Roadster the math seems to dictate using the cheap stuff but the math makes the actual savings marginal. On trips is where I will pop for the expensive brew and realize a gain.
I have eyed F bikes and wondered what the pump math is for them.
pglaves
#13338
Yes - because the torque curves are similar and you ride using the torque, not the peak horsepower. Dynos to measure peak HP are for race tracks, very difficult tuning issues, testing aftermarket exhausts, and motorsports writers who don't know much about what they are talking about when it comes to things mechanical.
mika
Still Wondering
Paul, as I understand it torque and hp are mathematically related. You can't have one without the other. Peak horsepower happens later (higher rpm) as a function of the way the formula works. The engines ability to produce torque is limited by how much air you can pass through the system. Stop making torque and once the formula plays out you stop making peak horsepower.
Once the basic engine design is set how much and when the two are delivered is largely a matter of how you handle the movement of air and the air-fuel mixture through the system. To increase either you need to increase the volume put through the system. Changing intake, valve timing issues, and exhaust are the three main areas to play with to do this and determine when you get the profile and duration of either curve.
In the case of the F650/800 isn't the major difference between the engines in the electronics and how they manage things?
Once the basic engine design is set how much and when the two are delivered is largely a matter of how you handle the movement of air and the air-fuel mixture through the system. To increase either you need to increase the volume put through the system. Changing intake, valve timing issues, and exhaust are the three main areas to play with to do this and determine when you get the profile and duration of either curve.
In the case of the F650/800 isn't the major difference between the engines in the electronics and how they manage things?
JIMSHAW
Ambassador at Large
Amen
And... trying to explain torque and horsepower to the average rider is a fool's errand. It's why horsepower numbers are vague and confusing. The torque curve is a good measure of how much enjoyment you will get from your bike.
And... trying to explain torque and horsepower to the average rider is a fool's errand. It's why horsepower numbers are vague and confusing. The torque curve is a good measure of how much enjoyment you will get from your bike.
Fuel Mapping etc.
Motorcyclw USA
"At the heart of the 700 and 800 motorcycles is the liquid-cooled, four-valve Twin. The 700ÔÇÖs engine is detuned slightly, putting out a claimed 75 horsepower at 7300 rpm compared to the 800ÔÇÖs 85 HP at 7500 rpm. BMW says this is a slight increase (4 HP) compared to the older F650 with a tad more torque as well. The final gear ratios are slightly lower also (17/42 sprockets vs. 17/41 on the 650). EFI handles the fueling and the mapping can be changed to run on regular gas instead of premium, and it can also be detuned to 48 HP for very inexperienced riders ÔÇô ah, the beauty of modern electronics. A six-speed transmission gives the bikes a low first gear for easy launches and technical off-road use while having the legs to easily run high-speed roads in comfort"
Motorcyclw USA
"At the heart of the 700 and 800 motorcycles is the liquid-cooled, four-valve Twin. The 700ÔÇÖs engine is detuned slightly, putting out a claimed 75 horsepower at 7300 rpm compared to the 800ÔÇÖs 85 HP at 7500 rpm. BMW says this is a slight increase (4 HP) compared to the older F650 with a tad more torque as well. The final gear ratios are slightly lower also (17/42 sprockets vs. 17/41 on the 650). EFI handles the fueling and the mapping can be changed to run on regular gas instead of premium, and it can also be detuned to 48 HP for very inexperienced riders ÔÇô ah, the beauty of modern electronics. A six-speed transmission gives the bikes a low first gear for easy launches and technical off-road use while having the legs to easily run high-speed roads in comfort"
F800r
My first chance to check out the 800 engine. The dealer loaned me a 2012 F800R while my bike was being worked on. Very impressive ,solid ,plenty of power and handled the curves . I've never been on this style bike but if I was commuting or in the city lots it would be on my short list for sure
My first chance to check out the 800 engine. The dealer loaned me a 2012 F800R while my bike was being worked on. Very impressive ,solid ,plenty of power and handled the curves . I've never been on this style bike but if I was commuting or in the city lots it would be on my short list for sure
samuelh
New member
Just got this from BMW SF:
"Thanks for your inquiry about the new 2103 F 700 GS. The good news is that ASC (Automatic Stability Control) can be equipped on a bike with a low suspension. The part of the Safety Package that is incompatible with the low suspension setup is the ESA (Electronic Suspension Adjustment) component but the TPM (Tire Pressure Monitor) and ASC can be equipped on a low suspension bike. "
"Thanks for your inquiry about the new 2103 F 700 GS. The good news is that ASC (Automatic Stability Control) can be equipped on a bike with a low suspension. The part of the Safety Package that is incompatible with the low suspension setup is the ESA (Electronic Suspension Adjustment) component but the TPM (Tire Pressure Monitor) and ASC can be equipped on a low suspension bike. "
The benefits of ESA go mostly to those who go from light and solo to heavy with pillion and back a bunch. Otherwise, the performance of the ESA shock is well below good aftermarket stuff on many models. So for most, excpt maybe for dealers who like the profit margin, loss of ESA is no big deal...
I don't know what the preferred trick setup is for the F bikes at present but I'd be more lieky to spring for aftermarket than ESA especially on this type of bike which in my view is ill suited to regular two up riding...
But I sure want a centerstand on a chain drive bike - these bikes are still too big and too heavy to be real dirt bikes so loosing a little ground clearance is no big deal. Looks like an owner might have to fabricate one for a lowered 800 unless the aftermarket makes it first...
Agree with all the comments on torque vs hp. The latter means a bunch on my track stuff but is pretty meaningless for street compared to the fatnss of the torque curve.
But one of my favorite ways of increasing both is mssing from modern factory bikes - boost is great thing. Got 3 boosted cages though - a 500 hp rotary motor, a 400 hp boosted Toyota inline 6 and my VW turbodiesel whose fuel economy is a match for my RT...
I don't know what the preferred trick setup is for the F bikes at present but I'd be more lieky to spring for aftermarket than ESA especially on this type of bike which in my view is ill suited to regular two up riding...
But I sure want a centerstand on a chain drive bike - these bikes are still too big and too heavy to be real dirt bikes so loosing a little ground clearance is no big deal. Looks like an owner might have to fabricate one for a lowered 800 unless the aftermarket makes it first...
Agree with all the comments on torque vs hp. The latter means a bunch on my track stuff but is pretty meaningless for street compared to the fatnss of the torque curve.
But one of my favorite ways of increasing both is mssing from modern factory bikes - boost is great thing. Got 3 boosted cages though - a 500 hp rotary motor, a 400 hp boosted Toyota inline 6 and my VW turbodiesel whose fuel economy is a match for my RT...
Last edited:
jamesdavidhoward
New member
Regular gas can be important for F650/F700
The capability of using regular gasoline can often be an important detail if you're really using the "slightly de-tuned" F650GS and F700GS for out-of-the-way travel. Many interesting or majestic spots in E. Oregon and Nevada (for example) will not have - or often run out of - 92 octane premium.
I've got 26,000mi on my 2009 F650GS twin, it has been wonderful (er, with a custom seat, that is). The 32" seat height is important for me; the F800's 34" height would mean having to look for a rock every time I try to put my foot down. The features of the F700 that are particularly appealing are the extra front brake disk, traction control, retaining the tubeless tires and (supposedly) a bit of a suspension upgrade. Otherwise, retaining much of the frame and running gear means the extensive availability of after-market "farkles" will still be usable. (No waiting a year for new stuff to come out from suppliers.)
I'm horrified they've converted to the ( left-right combined toggle, push-to-cancel ) Japanese-bike-style turn signal mechanism. Sigh.
The capability of using regular gasoline can often be an important detail if you're really using the "slightly de-tuned" F650GS and F700GS for out-of-the-way travel. Many interesting or majestic spots in E. Oregon and Nevada (for example) will not have - or often run out of - 92 octane premium.
I've got 26,000mi on my 2009 F650GS twin, it has been wonderful (er, with a custom seat, that is). The 32" seat height is important for me; the F800's 34" height would mean having to look for a rock every time I try to put my foot down. The features of the F700 that are particularly appealing are the extra front brake disk, traction control, retaining the tubeless tires and (supposedly) a bit of a suspension upgrade. Otherwise, retaining much of the frame and running gear means the extensive availability of after-market "farkles" will still be usable. (No waiting a year for new stuff to come out from suppliers.)
I'm horrified they've converted to the ( left-right combined toggle, push-to-cancel ) Japanese-bike-style turn signal mechanism. Sigh.
