GTR ignorance

[howard]

It looks like the eco mode on the newer bike helps the fuel consumption. I think if any bike is doing 50 plus that is really good as the GTR is a heavey bike and lets not forgett it makes 150 bhp and goes like the wind......a RT BMW might be lighter and better on fuel but i can not see my self riding one after owning the big K.
H

[nightrider]

i usally get about 45mpg    can show more on the computer  if you use 3rd and 4th gear for some serious go , like i did riding  with some other bikes i could visibly see the bars disappering . £20 gets me about 150m.  to get 55-60mpg  i would problably fall asleep  i would have to go that slow .   

[Lonewolf]

There are some strange and concerning stats being reported on here from 2010 model owners.

[mecki]

to get 55-60mpg  i would probably fall asleep  i would have to go that slow .   

Speed has nothing to do with it.
Smooth is the word. 

[100milesaway]

It seems like the difference in what people achieve regarding MPG is the way you ride. I NEVER rev  my bike hard through the gears, it's got a 1400cc engine so why would you want to do that?. My style is to ride in a very smooth fashion, change gears quickly, use as little braking as possible, read the road and flooooooooooooooooow. I only ever use ECO mode, and my 55 MPG has been achieved whilst still having lots of fun, and enjoying the bike and the roads I use. Nightrider you should come and have a ride out with us some time, I will guarantee you will not fall asleep. 

[Winston Smith]

OC - one of the reasons the GTR won't have been used will be the availability from Kawasaki UK and the amount of staff riders available on the mag.

The K1600GT is one of the staffers long term bikes hence it was available for the feature.

There is a lot of affection at RiDE for the bike, but bear in mind the staffers ride all sorts of bikes every day they have no affiliation to any brand.  Triumph actually let the same mag down for the Super Tourer test that should have been in Sept/Oct, but they still rated the big T for the short period they had it even though they were let down.

As for the MPG issues, when I had mine it usually 42-44mpg on mine, but a) I used the gearbox ( ) and b) I don't ride bikes for economy or the environment 

[nightrider]

It seems like the difference in what people achieve regarding MPG is the way you ride. I NEVER rev  my bike hard through the gears, it's got a 1400cc engine so why would you want to do that?. My style is to ride in a very smooth fashion, change gears quickly, use as little braking as possible, read the road and flooooooooooooooooow. I only ever use ECO mode, and my 55 MPG has been achieved whilst still having lots of fun, and enjoying the bike and the roads I use. Nightrider you should come and have a ride out with us some time, I will guarantee you will not fall asleep. 
[/the reason i had to rev the bike hard was the fact that the other bikes was useing the performance avaible from a low speed if not you get left behind .  i will come for a ride out next spring as you are not far from me

[tommytool]

I agree with 100miles... I ride sensibly, don't rev the of my bike and genuinely get 50 plus mpg regularly over the same journey week in week out. I looked at GTR's in 2008 but guess what - I was put off by the poor reviews and MPG figures. I now know the MPG figures quoted then to be complete 

Now don't all get swell heads on me but it was the real world opinion which changed my perception and part of that was the info I found here.

I'm no fan of BMW either having had multiple attempts to like both the RT and GS marques. Reviews had me doubting my ability to distinguish pros and cons for myself. BMW have two big advantages over the competition - the relative affluence of the demographic they sell to and the blinkered perception that if its German its reliable. How many safety recalls has the GS1200 had, or corrosion issues across most of the model range plus switchgear problems that's continues to surface?
Still hasn't stopped them selling about 20K bikes a year - the RS1200 model alone!

I'm sure there are BMW fans on here, but let's keep defending the bike the sites all about.
To all the partisan hacks and magazine editors out there - It ain't us whose ignorant of its virtues now is it ?

I'm now 5 weeks off the fags - can anyone tell!

[O.C.]

OC - one of the reasons the GTR won't have been used will be the availability from Kawasaki UK and the amount of staff riders available on the mag.

The K1600GT is one of the staffers long term bikes hence it was available for the feature.

There is a lot of affection at RiDE for the bike, but bear in mind the staffers ride all sorts of bikes every day they have no affiliation to any brand.  Triumph actually let the same mag down for the Super Tourer test that should have been in Sept/Oct, but they still rated the big T for the short period they had it even though they were let down.

As for the MPG issues, when I had mine it usually 42-44mpg on mine, but a) I used the gearbox ( ) and b) I don't ride bikes for economy or the environment 

Understood Chris, and thanks for clarifying.

But, is it a requirement of any publication to have a particular model as part of the Staff Fleet before its even considered as available competition ?

[Boomer]

Speed has nothing to do with it.
Smooth is the word. 

Oh yes it does.
If you sit at a constant 55Mph you will get nearly 65Mpg from the early GTR and nearly 70 from the 2010 and later.
If you sit at a constant 120Mph you will be lucky to crack 40Mpg.
However, if you pootle around at 20Mph then you will probably only get 40Mpg.
Constant speed is as smooth as it gets but speed IS a factor

In "normal" riding the best way to save fuel is to avoid braking which wastes energy as heat.
I think this is the "smooth" you were referring to. 

That said, if i gave a  about economy I'd be riding a Dullville or one of the new electric bikes. 

[Winston Smith]

Oh yes it does.
If you sit at a constant 55Mph you will get nearly 65Mpg from the early GTR and nearly 70 from the 2010 and later.
If you sit at a constant 120Mph you will be lucky to crack 40Mpg.
However, if you pootle around at 20Mph then you will probably only get 40Mpg.
Constant speed is as smooth as it gets but speed IS a factor

In "normal" riding the best way to save fuel is to avoid braking which wastes energy as heat.
I think this is the "smooth" you were referring to. 

That said, if i gave a  about economy I'd be riding a Dullville or one of the new electric bikes.