BMW F 800 R and Suzuki GSR 750 – Nakes Bikes in the test

Posted on by admin

Menus

BMW F 800 R and Suzuki GSR 750 - Nakes Bikes in the test
Bilski

Comparison test: mid-range Nakeds

BMW F 800 R and Suzuki GSR 750 in the test

With around three-quarters of a liter displacement, the BMW and Suzuki are not in the top league of naked bikes, but they are already on the wallet. Power or poser bike? The two youngsters in comparison.

The self-confident appearance is important, the first impression is usually decisive. Already here the two young street fighters, the descendants of the two full-grown big bikes BMW K 1300 R and Suzuki B-King, are almost worlds apart. The BMW F 800 R is striking and unmistakable: the bright yellow cap hangs crookedly over the left, slightly pinched eye, a slim, powerful, sinewy figure – more the type of well-trained karate fighter in a hip-hop outfit. The Suzuki is different: with broad, protruding shoulders and piercing, steel-blue parking light eyes and a distinctive headlight chin, the GSR tries to make an impression, the type of bodybuilder with a bald head and flat forehead.

Those who are not guided by the outside world will look with interest at the inner values, the completely different sources of power. The 800 cm³ heart of a boxer is embedded in the aluminum bridge frame as a supporting element. Boxer? No, of course it’s the parallel twin known from the F 800 S, ST and GS (here with 87 instead of 86 hp due to the different exhaust system), which only sounds like a boxer due to its 360-degree ignition offset. Which can definitely be understood as praise, because the snotty, pithy sound of the two-cylinder engine suits the self-confident demeanor and the sporty demands.

The F. 800 R spits big tones, but also lets them be followed by action. The twin pushes respectably from 2500 tours. The BMW with its long and wide-spread lower gears does not win the sprint ranking, but when it comes to racing out of medium speeds, for example when measuring the torque in the last gear, the F 800 R is in its element. It seems logical that the two-cylinder cannot shine with the smooth running of the Suzuki four-cylinder. But the vibrations that the BMW engine develops at medium speeds (between about 5000 and 6500 rpm) and close to the lock-off speed at almost 9000 revs can be annoying for the faint of heart. The transmission has also been seen to be smoother, quieter and more precise. For example with the GSR 750. This in turn demands more of the driver when it comes to seating comfort. Sure, an aggressive naked bike like the GSR does not have to be a comfort litter suitable for touring, but the rather narrow, straight handlebars and the wide tank, which spreads the rider’s knees wide, force the Suzuki rider into a suitable, but always aggressive, seating position.

Buy complete article

BMW F 800 R and Suzuki GSR 750 - Nakes Bikes in the test

Comparison test: mid-range Nakeds
BMW F 800 R and Suzuki GSR 750 in the test


Manufacturer

Suzuki GSR 750.

On the other hand, the BMW leaves the load with passengers and / or luggage cold. Thanks to the steering damper, which incidentally showed no tough response or other disturbance behavior at an outside temperature of over 20 degrees, the BMW neither muckles when accelerating hard on an undulating road, nor does it allow itself to be carried away with nervous twitching of the handlebars when fully loaded. Speaking of payload: Bavaria has developed a practical solution for adjusting the spring strut preload. A handle stored under the seat is simply attached to the easily accessible setting wheel, so the strut can be easily and conveniently adjusted to the respective load.

The overall more tightly tuned, equipped with less sensitive responsive suspension elements reacts here much more sensitive and wedges the front. However, the Suzuki has a little better control of the brakes, albeit far from perfect. Your stoppers, which were previously criticized as not particularly biting, now come with ABS support on request. Incidentally, at a pleasantly low surcharge of only 300 euros, which means that the anti-lock device is only half as expensive as its BMW counterpart. Half as expensive, half as good? It can’t be proven so blatantly, but both the BMW brakes and their supporting ABS do a clearly noticeable and measurable better job than the package from the Japanese.

A source of joy is and remains the extremely short-stroke four-cylinder, the 106 hp offshoot of the GSX-R 750 engine from 2005. It goes without saying that it runs smoothly and is never disturbed by vibrations. It can’t offer the thump of the BMW from the very bottom, but the picture changes already from 3500 rpm: The Suzuki four-wheeler accelerates significantly, develops powerful power over a wide speed range and hits the limiter with momentum, which only starts at over 11,000 rpm forcing to switch. Even in terms of consumption, it does not have to be clearly distanced from the well-known economical Bayern twin. Just under or just over four liters per 100 kilometers – one of them should imitate that first. Which would refute the stereotype of the tough, hard-drinking street fighter once again. Under the rough shell of the two evil-looking types there is a core that is suitable for everyday use. And the striking outfit of the F 800 R and GSR 750 prove that cheap bikes don’t have to look cheap.

MOTORCYCLE scoring / test result


Bilski

BMW F 800 R..

engine
The magnificent four-cylinder Suzuki combines proper pressure in the middle and great revving, smoothness and economy in a grandiose manner. The even more economical BMW twin, which pushes powerfully from the very bottom, unfortunately has to be criticized for a somewhat rustic gearbox, rough load change shocks and, in the long run, disturbing vibrations at high speeds. Both completely different engine concepts are nevertheless extremely fun in their own way.
Winner engine: Suzuki

landing gear
The foolproof driving behavior of the BMW makes the Bavarian into a stress-free fun-bringer on country roads of all quality. It falls lightly in an inclined position, always remains neutral and shows practically no tendency to erect. The Suzuki is hardly less manageable, but needs to be driven a little more energetically and with more concentration and, due to its tighter set-up, it rumbles a little rough over bumps. One would like more setting options for both.
Chassis winner: BMW

everyday life
Both the BMW and the Suzuki offer decent everyday comfort. The BMW offers the slightly more comfortable driver’s seat and also pampers the front passenger. On the GSR, some people might be bothered by the wide tank that spreads its knees wide. On the other hand, the 17.5-liter barrel helps the economical Suzuki achieve a greater range. Overall, the smallest differences emerge in this chapter; both are good for a problem-free fun bike for all days.
Winner everyday life: BMW

security
The hour of the BMW strikes not only, but also clearly with the chapter braking and driving safety. The stoppers deliver a real bite, the ABS controls quickly and sensitively, the steering damper prevents the handlebar from slapping. The Suzuki just can’t keep up with that. 
Safety winner: BMW

costs
Long service intervals (every 10,000 kilometers) keep the costs for the BMW within limits. Suzuki (every 6000 km) should follow suit here.
Winner costs: BMW

Price-performance
A higher score at a slightly higher price allows the BMW to achieve the same value as the cheaper Suzuki: hence a tie
Price-performance winners: BMW and Suzuki

Max points BMW F 800 R. Suzuki GSR 750 Overall rating 1000 669 652
placement 1. 2.
Price-performance note 1.0 1.2 1.2

MOTORCYCLE test result

1.BMW F 800 R
The handy, very neutral driving behavior and the great brakes secure the victory for the BMW with its powerful, but somewhat rough twin.

2. Suzuki GSR 750     
The Japanese bull with the powerful, smooth-running four-cylinder wants to be grabbed more by the horns, brakes and ABS are not at BMW level. The GSR just got the short straw.

Technical specifications


Bilski

BMW F 800 R and Suzuki GSR 750.

BMW F 800 R. engine
engine Two-cylinder four-stroke in-line engine
injection Ø 46 mm
coupling Multi-disc oil bath clutch
Bore x stroke 82.0 x 75.6 mm
Displacement 798 cm3
compression 12.0: 1
power 64.0 kW (87 hp) at 8000 rpm
Torque 86 Nm at 6000 rpm
landing gear
frame Bridge frame made of aluminum
fork Telescopic fork, Ø 43 mm
Steering damper hydraulically
Brakes front / rear Ø 320 mm / 265 mm
Assistance systems SECTION
bikes 3.50 x 17; 5.50 x 17
tires 120/70 ZR 17; 180/55 ZR 17
Tires Bridgestone BT 014 front “F”, rear “E”
mass and weight
wheelbase 1520 mm 
Steering head angle 65.0 degrees
trailing 91 mm
Suspension travel v / h 125/125 mm
Seat height 1 825 mm
Weight with full tank 1 205 kg
Payload 1 200 kg
Tank capacity 16.0 liters
Service intervals 10,000 km
price 8300 euros
Price test motorcycle 9,685 euros 2
Additional costs around 264 euros
 MOTORCYCLE readings
Top speed * 210 km / h
Acceleration 0-100 km / h 3.7 sec
0-140 km / h 6.4 sec
0-200 km / h 15.8 sec
Pulling speed 60–100 km / h 4.0 sec
100-140 km / h 4.6 sec
140-180 km / h 5.1 sec
consumption
Country road 4.0 liters
Reach country road 400 km

Suzuki GSR 750 engine
engine Four-cylinder, four-stroke in-line engine
injection Ø 32 mm
coupling Multi-disc oil bath clutch
Bore x stroke 72.0 x 46.0 mm
Displacement 749 cm3
compression 12.3: 1
power 78.0 kW (106 hp) at 10,000 rpm
Torque 80 Nm at 9000 rpm
landing gear
frame Bridge frame made of steel
fork Upside-down fork, Ø 41 mm
Steering damper –
Brakes front / rear Ø 310 mm / 240 mm
Assistance systems SECTION
bikes 3.50 x 17; 5.50 x 17
tires 120/70 ZR 17; 180/55 ZR 17
Tires Bridgestone BT 016 “EE”
mass and weight
wheelbase 1450 mm 
Steering head angle 64.8 degrees
trailing 102 mm
Suspension travel v / h 120/135 mm
Seat height 1 820 mm
Weight with full tank 1 215 kg
Payload 1 185 kg
Tank capacity 17.5 liters
Service intervals 6000 km
price 8290 euros
Price test motorcycle 8,590 euros 3
Additional costs around 190 euros
 MOTORCYCLE readings
Top speed * 225 km / h
Acceleration 0-100 km / h 3.3 sec
0-140 km / h 5.7 sec
0-200 km / h 12.5 sec
Pulling speed 60–100 km / h 4.3 sec
100-140 km / h 4.2 sec
140-180 km / h 5.2 sec
consumption
Country road 4.1 liters
Reach country road 427 km

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *