The one thing that stands out between the 1150 and the 1200 is the 1200 looks more plastic. The 1150 has a metal petrol tank and looks built to last, the 1200 has so much plastic protruding that it looks like a sneeze in the wrong direction will break it.
The basic design of the engine and drive has been around for decades, why they are still having so many failures will remain a mystery.
I dont think they are any more unreliable than any of the jap bikes - if you look at the average mileage of a gs1150/1200 compared to most other bikes its much higher. pete does higher mileage than Alot of the XRVers, also its a bigger, more complex bike than the XRV/XLV. (although there is no excuse for 4 shaft drive failures. but it's not the norm) As Chad says the finish is also down to how you look after the bike and some of the reliability issues I think are just pot luck. I had quite a few issues with my tiger - 70,000 miles in just 2 years,I would expect some problems due to the fact it was used all year round and it was used quite hard. many other tiger owners have had no problems. I thought the quality of finish was suberb (as did Chad) yet others complained. I had problems with my XLV650 (sidestand snapped, corrosion, buckled wheels from new, paint flaking, electrical problems, clutch going with less than 10,000 miles) next year I will buy either another tiger or a GSA1200.
Caffrey - The greatest dog in the world.
I've had the GS for about 4 years now and it still has to see its first washing. Runs fine, too. Sure the rims look a bit nasty and the engine's a bit stained, but that's just looks. If the 4valves can't handle not being cleaned then I've got another reason to steer clear...![]()
Michel
--
'89 NX650 -- R.I.P. -- Gone
'92 R100GS PD -- Now with PD tank
Our Lady of Blessed Acceleration, don't fail me now! -- Elwood
Bookmarks