Two adventure bikes get put to the test
Triumph Tiger 1200 XCa copes with loads easily, while BMW R1200GS carries its weight well
BORMIO, Italy — David Booth and Neil Vorano and two big adventure bikes go head to head on the tight hairpins of the Stelvio Pass in Italy.
David Booth: Adventure touring motorcycles are the SUVs of the motorcading set. Like their four-wheeled brethren, their visage is all butch off-roading. They do offer a (variable) ability to “tour” where lesser motorcycles dare not go and, most importantly — and just like SUVs — they are trendy.
Some — like a Jeep Wrangler — can climb up a sheer rock face. Others — emulating, say, a Honda CR-V — might be challenged to go deeper off-road than a clapped-out minivan.
In between lie the two bikes we tested in Italy in early June. Both BMW’s R1200GS and the XCa version of Triumph’s recently revised top-of-the-line Tiger 1200 are, despite their pseudo dirt bike styling, really touring motorcycles in disguise. They’ll manage a dirt trail better than a Honda Gold Wing, but their raison d’être is still eating up miles of motorway and back roads, albeit without the weight of full-boat touring bikes.
Neil Vorano: Yes, for real overland adventure, I’d rather have a lighter bike (the idea of picking up more than 300 kilograms fully laden after a slow-speed drop in the bush just doesn’t appeal). But there’s no question these two bikes are ideal for longer highway trips and pavement twisties, the likes of which we enjoyed on these mountain passes of the Alps. Indeed, it was telling that, by my estimation at least, one of every three bikes seemed to be a BMW GS, of some year or other. These bikers may not be traversing the Saharan dunes, but they’re putting on plenty of pavement mileage.
And they are heavy for a reason; laden with technological options, these are the luxury steeds equivalent to a Land Rover. They are extremely capable, but also saddled with gizmos to make the trip easier and more comfortable. Stuff like the automatic suspension adjusters, cruise control, keyless ignition, hill-start assist and multi-ride modes. Some I can’t do without (thank you, hand warmers, in the midst of a torrential downpour), but some seem a little superfluous (how often do you need to electronically adjust the rear suspension for preload?). Regardless, while there seems to be plenty of fat to cut, these are part of a popular segment.
DB: I do agree with you that some of the electronic bits are superfluous. Certainly, once I set up the suspension damping, I never change it regardless of my riding. One thing I did really like, however, is the Triumph’s automatically adjusting rear spring preload. It’s really quite magical: No matter how you load up the big Tiger — just yourself, maybe with a passenger or, in my case, a passenger and a whole duffel bag worth of high heels — the XCa adjusts the rear preload so the ride height, and therefore the handling, remain constant. The BMW’s ESA system can do the same thing but requires some futzing with a complicated infotainment system (basically you search for the suspension settings, go the rear preload submenu and then choose between one helmet, two helmets, and two helmets and full luggage). With the Triumph, you just climb aboard and go. For once, electronic trickery that works.
NV: I’ll give the Triumph that, it’s a pretty handy system. I’ll also say I like its aluminum panniers with tiedown points over the plastic boxes on the GS, even though those are ingeniously expandable. I’ll even go so far as to say the Tiger has a better gearbox; its shifts neatly snicking into gear where the BMW’s gearbox feels a little vague. But that is where my affinity for the Triumph over this GS ends. In our sorties over the mountain passes, through hairpin switchbacks, I’ll take the big BMW’s handling and its boxer twin engine any day.
I can go on about that airand-oil-cooled engine, with its vastly smoother operation and lower vibrations over the Triumph’s three-cylinder mill. But what I really appreciated on the BMW was its suspension. It was not only able to soak up low- and high-speed bumps, more important was that there was little to no dive in the front forks, even coming down the mountains and braking heavily for a curve. You can thank its single-spring Telelever setup for that. After spending so much time on the BMW, a jaunt on the Tiger felt unsettling, the bike pitching forward with every grab of the brake.
DB: So let’s get the Tiger’s one deficit to the Beemer out of the way right now. Though it has lost some weight in this latest rendition — how much depends on the model — the Triumph can be a heavy beast. And though that big 1,215-cc triple has many attributes, it’s a tall thing, which means the Tiger 1200’s centre of gravity is higher — significantly higher — than the BMW’s. The result is that the XCa can be a little reluctant to turn. It handles very well, ultimately perhaps better than the BMW, but you have to force it into corners sport bike-like, knees-out and hanging off. That works when you’re solo; not so much when you’re two-up.
That said, the Trumpet triple is a gem. Super smooth, it’s torque is so linear you’ll swear it’s electric. Unlike some Triumphs past, the EFI system’s fuelling is excellent and it has great service intervals — 24,000 kilometres between valve services — so you can do big miles without visiting the shop.
NV: Considering your
sparse diet is a form of self-flagellation, I’m not surprised you don’t mind the high-strung vibration of the three-cylinder engine. While both engines are just powerful enough without being too high strung (141 hp for the Triumph, 125 hp for the BMW), you can’t argue the low-frequency throbs of the boxer twin aren’t more comfortable
than the constant high oscillations of the triple, can you?
Regardless, neither bike is a lightweight, by any means: 242 kg dry weight for the Triumph, 244 kg for the BMW. But with the GS, I felt like I was sitting in it, as opposed to the Triumph, where I felt perched on it. The BMW gave much more confidence in
turns, whereas the Triumph felt relatively unstable. Not that the Triumph is a bad bike, just that the GS is that much better for such a big motorcycle.
DB: Vibration? We didn’t feel no stinkin’ vibration. Like I said, I’ll grant you the BMW felt lighter and that the lighter feeling is a worthwhile trait. But the Triumph engine felt smoother, more responsive and more powerful to me. Its brakes were better, the ABS didn’t actuate too soon (as the BMW’s rear brake did) and the Tiger has the simplest digital infotainment system menu I’ve used to date. It’s also the first adventure bike I’ve tested that I would not immediately replace the standard windshield.
So yes, the BMW feels like you sit in the bike but, as far as I can see, that’s it’s only advantage. That said, there’s a new R1200GS due very soon so we may have to do this whole comparison again next year.
The BMW R1200GS starts at $20,300; the Triumph Tiger 1200 XCa starts at $23,750.