BMW R 1250 GS vs Triumph Bonneville Bobber 2021

Compare Specifications of BMW R 1250 GS and Bonneville Bobber 2021

Selected Bikes

BMW R 1250 GS
BMW R 1250 GS

Brand:

Model:

Triumph Bonneville Bobber 2021
Triumph Bonneville Bobber 2021

Brand:

Model:

Brand:

Model:

Brand:

Model:

Technical Specifications
Fuel Petrol Petrol
Engine Displacement 1254.00 cc 1200.00 cc
Engine Air/liquid-cooled four stroke flat twin engine, double overhead camshaft, one balance shaft and variable engine timing system BMW ShiftCam. Liquid cooled, 8 valve, SOHC, 270° crank angle parallel twin
Engine Starting -- Electric
Clutch Oil lubricated clutch, hydraulically operated Wet, multi-plate torque assist clutch
Fuel System Electronic intake pipe injection Multipoint sequential electronic fuel injection
Cooling System Air/liquid-cooled --
Maximum Power 136 PS @ 7750 rpm 78 PS / 76.9 bhp (57.5 kW) @ 6100 RPM
Maximum Torque 143 Nm at 6250 rpm 106 Nm @ 4000 RPM
Load Carrying Capacity 216 kg --
Transmission Constant mesh 6-speed gearbox with helical gear teeth 6-speed
Gear Shift Pattern -- 1-N-2-3-4-5-6
Drivetrain Shaft drive Final Drive: Chain
Top Speed 200 kmph 185 kmph
Riding Modes 2 riding modes (Rain, Road) --
Battery 12 V / 11.8 Ah, maintenance-free
Alternator : Three-phase alternator 510 W (nominal power)
--
Display -- Analogue speedometer with LCD multi-functional display
Frame Two-section frame, front- and bolted on rear frame, load-bearing engine Tubular steel, twin cradle frame
Headlamp LED --
Mileage
Overall Mileage 21 kmpl 21 kmpl
Tyres
Front 120/70 R 19 MT 90 B16
Rear 170/60 R 17 150/80 R16
Wheel / RIM Cast aluminium wheels
Rim, front : 3.00 x 19"
Rim, rear : 4.50 x 17"
Front Wheel: Wire 32-spoke, 16 x 2.5 inches
Rear Wheel: Wire 32-spoke, 16 x 3.5 inches
Brakes
Front 305 mm Dual disc brake, floating brake discs, 4-piston radial calipers Twin Ø310mm disc, Brembo 2-piston sliding axial calipers, ABS
Rear 276 mm Single disc brake, double-piston floating caliper Single Ø255mm disc, Nissin single piston sliding axial caliper, ABS
ABS BMW Motorrad Integral ABS (part-integral), disengageable --
Suspension
Front BMW Motorrad Telelever; stanchion diameter 37 mm, central spring strut 47 mm Showa cartridge forks
Rear Cast aluminium single-sided swing arm with BMW Motorrad Paralever; WAD strut (travel-related damping), spring pre-load hydraulically adjustable (continuously variable) at handwheel, rebound damping adjustable at handwheel Mono-shock RSU with linkage
Colors Available
Colors -- MATT STORM GREY MATT IRONSTONE
CORDOVAN RED
JET BLACK


Physical Specs
Length 2207 mm --
Width 952.5 mm --
Height 1430 mm --
Weight 249 kg 251 kg
Handlebar Width -- 800
Seat Height 850 700
Wheelbase 1514 mm 1500 mm
Fuel Tank Capacity 20 litres 12 litres
Overview
About -- The price for Cordovan Red is ₹ 12,18,000.00 and the price for Matt Storm Grey Matt Ironstone Read More
Features - TFT rider information display with connectivity
- ASC (Automatic Stability Control)
- HSC (Hill Start Control)
- UPDATED HIGH TORQUE ENGINE
- DISTINCTIVE SOUNDTRACK
- DISTINCTIVE FLOATING SEAT
- NEW BLACKED OUT STYLE
- HIGHER SPEC BRAKES
Additional Details Emission control : Closed-loop 3-way catalytic converter, emission standard EU-4
Fuel consumption per 100 km based on WMTC : 4.75 l
CO2 emission based on WMTC : 110 g/km
Fuel type : Unleaded super, octane number 95 (RON), adapive fuel quality regulation (91 to 98 RON)
Castor : 100.6 mm
Steering head angle : 64.3°
Seat height : 850 / 870 mm (lowered suspension* 800 / 820 mm) *OE
Inner leg curve : 1870 / 1910 mm (lower seat height* 1750 / 1790 mm) *OE
Permitted total weight : 465 kg
Exhaust : Brushed stainless steel 2 into 2 twin-skin exhaust system with brushed stainless silencers
Swingarm: Twin sided fabrication
Height Without Mirror: 1024 - 1055 mm
Rake: 25.4 º
Trail : 92.0 mm
Fuel Consumption : 60.9 mpg (4.6 l/100km)
CO2 Figures: 105 g/km EURO 5 CO2 emissions and fuel consumption data are measured according to regulation 168/2013/EC. Figures for fuel consumption are derived from specific test conditions and are for comparative purposes only. They may not reflect real driving results.

Which one do you think is better? And why?
Name :

Comment :

2120