I agree with fred!
1200 GS TE Exclusive suspension
- Thread starter Engineer
- Start date
Im just on road home from trip from NI to lands end. My 17 rallye, my old 14 te i sold to mate and other mate on 16 iconic gs's. All bikes were faultless and if anything the 17 bike has moved on improving on the other 2 suspension wise
I think Warlord is all over this.....
The OP question is about the 2017 GS TE suspension, this does not have 3 damping positions, just 2. The preload has min, auto and max.
Take one out on a demo and see what you think of it.
OLd Faithful
Registered user
Selff-levelling disaster
I agree with this. I have owned many GSs over the years, and all of them (particularly the water-cooled versions) have felt agreeably sporty either one or two up. The latest model (mine is a Rallye Sport) seems to pogo over bumps and is more upset over broken or rippled pavement than my previous 2015 model. Definitely a retrograde step.
I agree with this. I have owned many GSs over the years, and all of them (particularly the water-cooled versions) have felt agreeably sporty either one or two up. The latest model (mine is a Rallye Sport) seems to pogo over bumps and is more upset over broken or rippled pavement than my previous 2015 model. Definitely a retrograde step.
fred_jb
Registered user
Did you specify the Sports Suspension option with your Rallye Sport or is it the standard suspension as on the Exclusive and TE? Also, what preload option are you using?
yankeedoodledandy
Registered user
After reading this discussion, I guess I need to test ride one of the new ones with the plug in place and see what the fuss is about.
However, when I got my 2013, I was kind of expecting that at some point BMW (or an aftermarket solution) would enable customization of the damping settings for fine-grained changes to the rebound/compression/preload, but it never happened. The fact that they're now going backwards to simplify it even further (like the XR settings) seems like a real dick punch. Good news is it really lessens the temptation to upgrade.
However, when I got my 2013, I was kind of expecting that at some point BMW (or an aftermarket solution) would enable customization of the damping settings for fine-grained changes to the rebound/compression/preload, but it never happened. The fact that they're now going backwards to simplify it even further (like the XR settings) seems like a real dick punch. Good news is it really lessens the temptation to upgrade.
Demo
After reading all these post one thing is certain. Its all down to personal choice as to weather the new ESA / suspension works for them. The GS is the best selling endure bike out their and all other models and brands are pitched against it for a reason. BUT this is all down to the bike being the correct bike for them. Test ride a bike , ride it how you want it to ride , take where you know the road surface and see how it performs. Suspension is always a personal set up and never going to suit 100% all the time. We also don't have the road surface 100% of the time that we would all love.
After reading all these post one thing is certain. Its all down to personal choice as to weather the new ESA / suspension works for them. The GS is the best selling endure bike out their and all other models and brands are pitched against it for a reason. BUT this is all down to the bike being the correct bike for them. Test ride a bike , ride it how you want it to ride , take where you know the road surface and see how it performs. Suspension is always a personal set up and never going to suit 100% all the time. We also don't have the road surface 100% of the time that we would all love.
DC
Registered user
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2014
- Messages
- 4,156
- Reaction score
- 13
mine arrived early last week ,it has now been serviced at 600 miles its a rallye sport
for the first 600 i just left the suspension on factory settings..ie how it came out of the dealers...i noticed it was in Road mode and road suspension set at auto./ Road ...on Sunday just gone, i put the suspension is Dynamic and auto, and the bike running in road mode.
the difference is huge, no bouncing around .its not too soft ,perfect for the road i was riding. I'm 13 stone, If i had ben full on tosser size at 17 stone , it might have felt different
For me the new suspension from BMW on these bikes works well and is a move forward for them. Then again Im just an ordinary rider and not an Ohlins Guru like some on here ,that will probably post without riding the bike !
for the first 600 i just left the suspension on factory settings..ie how it came out of the dealers...i noticed it was in Road mode and road suspension set at auto./ Road ...on Sunday just gone, i put the suspension is Dynamic and auto, and the bike running in road mode.
the difference is huge, no bouncing around .its not too soft ,perfect for the road i was riding. I'm 13 stone, If i had ben full on tosser size at 17 stone , it might have felt different
For me the new suspension from BMW on these bikes works well and is a move forward for them. Then again Im just an ordinary rider and not an Ohlins Guru like some on here ,that will probably post without riding the bike !
fred_jb
Registered user
I can understand why BMW have applied more automation to the suspension settings and as a result have given less user options. For every person with sufficient expertise to manually tune their suspension without ending up with incompatible or even dangerous combinations of settings, there are probably 999 who would do just that. It is also not as simple as people make out.
The Dynamic ESA II system not only has the ability to adjust preload, but also has a clever system for adjusting spring rate, something which is needed to properly adjust for different loads, but which would not normally be possible without physically changing the spring. An interesting article here explains that: http://origin.bmw-motorrad.co.uk/uk..._detail/suspension/item_esa_II.html¬rack=1
It was previously only possible to crudely adjust for load using the three load presets, but it is now very finely adjustable to exactly suit the load on the bike, using the AUTO setting, which has got to be progress. However different spring rates and preload demand corresponding adjustments in damping to be properly effective, so I think it is too much to expect users to be given full access to fiddle with these settings, given that they need to properly match the automatically set preload and spring rate.
As well as the loading aspect, there is also the fact that the ESA suspension damping is now supposedly dynamically varied to suit road conditions and riding style, so that is another reason why you can't let users have total control over damping settings, except possibly by allowing the automatic adjustment to be completely turned off.
As a result of these factors I think BMW now just provide the means to biase the automatic settlings in one direction or the other using DYNA and ROAD modes, but cannot afford to let users have free rein to screw up the settings completely.
Personally, having fitted and played about with fully manually adjustable front and rear suspension on other bikes in the past, I think that unless you are on a racetrack, then that way lies madness. There are just too many adjustments and interdependencies, making it difficult to determine what needs changing to effect an improvement, and then there is the difficulty in actually detecting an improvement with seat of the pants methods.
Sure, fully manually adjustable suspension is capable of giving an improvement over basic non-adjustable suspension, but given the choice I would go for an automatic system every time, and given the additional complications introduced by auto load adjustment and dynamic damping adjustment I really would not want to have full manual control. In my experience the 2017 bike does an exceptional job of balancing all the requirements both solo and loaded with a pillion, so I am pretty happy with it.
I think the previous system needed more user input, but with improvements in automated settings the current system does not. However, if you want full manual control and enjoy spending hours fiddling with suspension settings, and then changing them every time you take a pillion, then why not go for the basic non-ESA bike, as it seems a bit perverse to buy the automatic suspension version and then want manual control over everything.
Fred
The Dynamic ESA II system not only has the ability to adjust preload, but also has a clever system for adjusting spring rate, something which is needed to properly adjust for different loads, but which would not normally be possible without physically changing the spring. An interesting article here explains that: http://origin.bmw-motorrad.co.uk/uk..._detail/suspension/item_esa_II.html¬rack=1
It was previously only possible to crudely adjust for load using the three load presets, but it is now very finely adjustable to exactly suit the load on the bike, using the AUTO setting, which has got to be progress. However different spring rates and preload demand corresponding adjustments in damping to be properly effective, so I think it is too much to expect users to be given full access to fiddle with these settings, given that they need to properly match the automatically set preload and spring rate.
As well as the loading aspect, there is also the fact that the ESA suspension damping is now supposedly dynamically varied to suit road conditions and riding style, so that is another reason why you can't let users have total control over damping settings, except possibly by allowing the automatic adjustment to be completely turned off.
As a result of these factors I think BMW now just provide the means to biase the automatic settlings in one direction or the other using DYNA and ROAD modes, but cannot afford to let users have free rein to screw up the settings completely.
Personally, having fitted and played about with fully manually adjustable front and rear suspension on other bikes in the past, I think that unless you are on a racetrack, then that way lies madness. There are just too many adjustments and interdependencies, making it difficult to determine what needs changing to effect an improvement, and then there is the difficulty in actually detecting an improvement with seat of the pants methods.
Sure, fully manually adjustable suspension is capable of giving an improvement over basic non-adjustable suspension, but given the choice I would go for an automatic system every time, and given the additional complications introduced by auto load adjustment and dynamic damping adjustment I really would not want to have full manual control. In my experience the 2017 bike does an exceptional job of balancing all the requirements both solo and loaded with a pillion, so I am pretty happy with it.
I think the previous system needed more user input, but with improvements in automated settings the current system does not. However, if you want full manual control and enjoy spending hours fiddling with suspension settings, and then changing them every time you take a pillion, then why not go for the basic non-ESA bike, as it seems a bit perverse to buy the automatic suspension version and then want manual control over everything.
Fred
how on earth do they adjust the spring rate electronically? wizardry !!
Or not 
The change in spring rate is facilitated by two springs switches in series. An elastomer element (Cellasto) in combination with a conventional helical spring below absorbs the forces during compression. The radial outward expansion of the Cellasto element is permanently limited by a steel sleeve. On the inside, an electrohydraulic mechanism is used to move an aluminium sleeve. The position of the inner sleeve influences the inward expansion of the Cellasto element and therefore its spring rate. This has the same effect as the use of two springs of different strength. If the inner sleeve sits on the steel spring, the Cellasto element will not function and only the steel spring will work. If the internal sleeve is then moved, it is also possible to vary the spring mount of the steel spring, in other words the "spring preload".
The change in spring rate is facilitated by two springs switches in series. An elastomer element (Cellasto) in combination with a conventional helical spring below absorbs the forces during compression. The radial outward expansion of the Cellasto element is permanently limited by a steel sleeve. On the inside, an electrohydraulic mechanism is used to move an aluminium sleeve. The position of the inner sleeve influences the inward expansion of the Cellasto element and therefore its spring rate. This has the same effect as the use of two springs of different strength. If the inner sleeve sits on the steel spring, the Cellasto element will not function and only the steel spring will work. If the internal sleeve is then moved, it is also possible to vary the spring mount of the steel spring, in other words the "spring preload".
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2017
- Messages
- 21,697
- Reaction score
- 582
I agree with me 
The only issue I can see with electronic suspension is when it fails.
A) will it still allow you to hobble home with everything else functioning? Or will it just shut down for full recovery?
B) how does it fail safe? what mode will it default into?
The only issue I can see with electronic suspension is when it fails.
A) will it still allow you to hobble home with everything else functioning? Or will it just shut down for full recovery?
B) how does it fail safe? what mode will it default into?
fred_jb
Registered user
I agree with me
The only issue I can see with electronic suspension is when it fails.
A) will it still allow you to hobble home with everything else functioning? Or will it just shut down for full recovery?
B) how does it fail safe? what mode will it default into?
Very good questions! I would like to know the answers to those too.
There is no failsafe setting, it stays where it fails, it could fail rock hard or (as mine did) lose the lower third of the preload/damping range so that in normal and road setting with solo rider, me 11.5 st, I was grinding the pegs. I was able to up the settings for me to ride but no good for two up.
fred_jb
Registered user
Or not
The change in spring rate is facilitated by two springs switches in series. An elastomer element (Cellasto) in combination with a conventional helical spring below absorbs the forces during compression. The radial outward expansion of the Cellasto element is permanently limited by a steel sleeve. On the inside, an electrohydraulic mechanism is used to move an aluminium sleeve. The position of the inner sleeve influences the inward expansion of the Cellasto element and therefore its spring rate. This has the same effect as the use of two springs of different strength. If the inner sleeve sits on the steel spring, the Cellasto element will not function and only the steel spring will work. If the internal sleeve is then moved, it is also possible to vary the spring mount of the steel spring, in other words the "spring preload".
The article that quote comes from states that this mechanism can provide a variation in spring rate of 110 N/nn (628 lb/in) to 160 N/mm (913 lb/in) which is an impressively wide range and to me this explains why the GS can be so good both for solo riding and when loaded up with pillion and luggage.
As a comparison I had a Versys 1000 Mk 2 a while ago, and although it was great solo, I had real difficulty when trying to set it up for a tour of Greece with pillion and luggage. Basically even with maximum preload adjustment there was still excessive rear sag which seemed to cause a light front end and unstable low speed handling. I took it to Nitron and as they didn't have a fitting for that model I agreed to leave it with them to use in developing one, in return for a substantial discount on a new rear shock optimised for my needs. They measured the stock shock as having a spring rate of 600 lb/in and built a replacement for me with their recommendation of a 700 lb/in spring, with the adjustable compression and rebound damping range optimised for the stiffer spring. While full preload on this did allow the excessive sag to be dialled out, it didn't fully cure the light front end when fully loaded. At the end of the day the softer stock spring was probably better for solo riding, so both the standard and Nitron shocks were still compromises, as they were limited to one spring rate. While the preload adjustment allowed the ride height to be set correctly, the fixed spring rate would not be optimum for both solo and two-up use.
I think this just goes to show what an advanced system the latest BMW ESA is, in being able to dynamically vary spring rate over such a wide range to suit the actual load on the machine.
Similar threads
