1299 Base vs. 1299S

It all comes down the the deal that's available to me...whichever model the dealer is more apt to discount will be coming home with me.

Good luck, most dealers I've talked to are discounting very little and the bikes are selling anyway. Next year the deals will be there

Macattack said:

I originally typed revalved then I typed reworked then I replaced it with upgraded. But I get what you're saying. I agree with what you're saying I just believe it's really what a person wants more than how capable the base vs s is. Not sure the el suspension would be useful on a track without modification or maybe even just running it fixed.

Click to expand...

I agree completely, 100% (bold part). We are discussing 2 of the fastest, lightest, most technologically advanced motorcycles ever produced (base vs S). There isn't a single person on this board, myself included, who can say they are such a good rider and they need a bike that is more capable. A more capable bike simply doesn't exist.

From the reports I have read (especially from racers who have tested it) EC suspension has come a long way and now with the S model, it actually offers benefits on the track vs conventional suspension.

Suspension setup is ALWAYS a balance of trying to get the bike to work as good as possible, for as many corners/sections as possible. There are always places you are making sacrifices...you just have to give up those places to make the bike work better for the majority.

With the EC on the S, you get a bike that could theoretically be good everywhere. In earlier editions on other bikes, before the current IMU, the EC suspension was more of a gimmick. Now, it is a useful tool. You can get the spring rate how you need it, then you have a bike that will adjust rebound and compression for every corner.

fzr100098 said:

Not as much torque though, esp low and midrange (where you use it on the street)

Click to expand...

We are really splitting hairs. The R1 (unrestricted and with an exhaust) makes something like 87lb/ft of torque. That is only about 10lb/ft or so less than the 1299. Very few riders will be able to notice that. And 87lb/ft is WAY more than anybody needs on the street. My Sprint only has about 60lb/ft and it pulls very hard, harder than anybody really needs on the street.

Not to mention the R1 is $8k cheaper. You can find ways to get/manipulate torque for a lot less than $8k.

The R1 is just as good (and in some eyes, better) than the 1299...and costs $8k less.

I understand this is a brand based forum and people will obviously be biased. But I look at bikes objectively, for what they are and what they can do. The name is irrelevant. And the R1 is the better value, without question.

Like I said, I only went with the 1299S because it is legal in more race classes since it is a Twin.

The R1 is a better value, but it's also just another Japanese bike. It's not really a fair comparison to compare modded to unmodded. The low and midrange torque of the 1299 is always going to tower over the R1, its torque peak is way up there - fine for the track, not so great for twisty mountain roads. Depending on how much you shop around, the cost difference between the Base 1299 and the R1 is about 4-5k, and I believe the 1299 is a higher quality machine (and it looks better)

Chaotic said:

I agree completely, 100% (bold part). We are discussing 2 of the fastest, lightest, most technologically advanced motorcycles ever produced (base vs S). There isn't a single person on this board, myself included, who can say they are such a good rider and they need a bike that is more capable. A more capable bike simply doesn't exist.

From the reports I have read (especially from racers who have tested it) EC suspension has come a long way and now with the S model, it actually offers benefits on the track vs conventional suspension.

Suspension setup is ALWAYS a balance of trying to get the bike to work as good as possible, for as many corners/sections as possible. There are always places you are making sacrifices...you just have to give up those places to make the bike work better for the majority.

With the EC on the S, you get a bike that could theoretically be good everywhere. In earlier editions on other bikes, before the current IMU, the EC suspension was more of a gimmick. Now, it is a useful tool. You can get the spring rate how you need it, then you have a bike that will adjust rebound and compression for every corner.

Click to expand...

If your a fast racer you will swap out the electronic suspension for intermediate and novice it will be fine with tuning .

When I jumped on a 2015 S1000RR right after I test rode the 1299, I couldn't believe the difference below 6k, it was literally like there was nothing there - again, that doesn't matter on the track, but it was night and day

fzr100098 said:

The R1 is a better value, but it's also just another Japanese bike. It's not really a fair comparison to compare modded to unmodded. The low and midrange torque of the 1299 is always going to tower over the R1, its torque peak is way up there - fine for the track, not so great for twisty mountain roads. Depending on how much you shop around, the cost difference between the Base 1299 and the R1 is about 4-5k, and I believe the 1299 is a higher quality machine (and it looks better)

Click to expand...

As far as being "just another Japanese bike", that is bringing other elements to the discussion like "soul" and "character", and how important those types of things are is up to the individual. They aren't a factor when looking at the bikes objectively.

Of course the 1299 has more low/mid-range. But again, the R1 makes over 80ft/lbs of torque...that is A LOT. Yes, the 1299 has more, but how much does one really need on the street. I have ridden Liter bikes that "only" make 60ft/lbs of torque and that was way more than enough.

We are splitting hairs when it comes to debating the torque of these two bikes. That is like saying having $96million in the bank is much better than only $87million in the bank. Well of course it is, but $87million is way more than anybody needs to be happy.

Looks is another thing that is up to the individual (however I do agree with you, the 1299 looks better IMO). But as far as build quality, having owned 5 Yamaha's in the past (3 R6's and 2 R1's), I will put their build quality and attention to detail up there with any others.

Many of the things you are discussing are subjective. I was simply discussing the better "bang for the buck" bike...and the R1 wins that competition. It is just as fast (some say faster on the track), just as light, just as powerful (for all intents and purposes), has arguably better electronics, will likely be more reliable and aftermarket parts/information will be much easier to obtain (and cheaper). When you combine those things with the R1 costing $5k-$8k less...there is no question which is the better value.

But at the end of the day, it is up to the individual to determine how important things like character and exclusivity are and how much weight they hold in the value discussion.

fzr100098 said:

When I jumped on a 2015 S1000RR right after I test rode the 1299, I couldn't believe the difference below 6k, it was literally like there was nothing there - again, that doesn't matter on the track, but it was night and day

Click to expand...

Yes. But the BMW has more of a "screamer" motor, similar to the ZX10. The crossplane motor of the R1 has different characteristics.

wilkson said:

If your a fast racer you will swap out the electronic suspension for intermediate and novice it will be fine with tuning .

Click to expand...

I know that has always been the general thinking (especially with the older versions), but the American editor that tested the 1299S it at Portimao is a long time and current Professional Racer with many podiums to his credit...and he had very good things to say about it.

He said under hard braking the suspension would stiffen to give the support and stability that was needed, then as brake pressure was released and lean angle was added, the dampening would soften allowing him to make apex. He was truly amazed by how well it worked, even at race pace.

I thought this thread was about 1299 vs 1299S, not 1299(&S) vs R1(&M). Having done this dance at the original introduction of the 1199 and gone the base route, this time I'd go S for street-oriented duty due to the active nature of the better-to-begin-with suspension, the better LED lights and the more common size of the forks which greatly increases the choices in alternate clipons for ergonomic adjustment. For a track bike you could easily go base and flip wheels and suspension with enough left over to cover a good chunk of exhaust/tune cost.

As for the R1 comparisons, according to Chris Ulrich at RRW both the 1299S and the R1M have C3/R3 front and C5/R5 rear damping stacks in the Ohlins fitted to them, so effectively the same suspension on both bikes save for the two companies' active adjustment programming. Same spring rates up front with a bit stiffer in the rear on the R1, but likely a somewhat different motion ratio due to the linkage. The R1 does make great power now and peak torque is good, but it is going to be well shy of the 1299 down in the low and midrange. Motorcyclist has a dyno overlay of the 2015 and 2014 R1's, and the new bike is actually a bit weaker than the old one below the mid-7K range; it just revs higher and keeps building on top where the old bike tapered off. Expect the new RSV4 to be similar; more power and revs, and the cost of some grunt down low. The new R1 is a great bike and looks very user-friendly, but Ducati will definitely win the torque battle in the 2015 liter bike war.

Get the S and be done.

I did, and I can tell the difference between stock suspension and the Ohlins.


I have never second guessed my decision to get the S, I love the bike.


The nice thing about better suspension on the street is the pavement is crap, and that is where the good stuff works the best.

Steve B said:

The R1 does make great power now and peak torque is good, but it is going to be well shy of the 1299 down in the low and midrange. Motorcyclist has a dyno overlay of the 2015 and 2014 R1's, and the new bike is actually a bit weaker than the old one below the mid-7K range; it just revs higher and keeps building on top where the old bike tapered off.

Click to expand...

This was bone stock correct? The stock bike is restricted

Expect the new RSV4 to be similar; more power and revs, and the cost of some grunt down low. The new R1 is a great bike and looks very user-friendly, but Ducati will definitely win the torque battle in the 2015 liter bike war.

Click to expand...

RSV4 doesn't do it for me in the aesthetics dept but I know it's a great bike. R1 looks good in raven black but I'm still getting use to the iron man face front end

fzr100098 said:

This was bone stock correct? The stock bike is restricted

Click to expand...

Yup, stock v stock:

VIDEO: 2015 Yamaha YZF-R1 Dyno Run and Power Comparison | Sportbikes Motorcycles | Dyno Tests

Not surprising really, and yes it does look a lot like most unrestricted Japanese liter bike power curves. They'd all kept a lid on the top end until BMW broke the code and released an unrestricted I-4, so now they're pulling back the curtain and showing numbers that you'd have needed some light mods and a tune to get before. Much more tenable proposition now with the current state of electronics

The thread was/is about the base vs S. Then somebody asked about the R1 and which one i would get for a street bike, and where we are.

Stock vs stock isn't a fair comparison because of the restrictions built into the Yamaha ECU to pass US noise/emissions testing. A $275 ECU reflash gives it a big jump in power.

And a 1300cc V-Twin is always going to win the torque battle against a 1000cc I-4. Always. But again, we are splitting hairs when comparing 80+ft/lbs to 90+ft/lbs...and even more so if we are talking about street riding. I can remember when people were PUMPED to have 70ft/lbs of torque, now we are talking about a bike being "inferior" because it "only" has 85ft/lbs.

1299 is actually 100+ ft-lbs in most dyno tests I've seen, a significant jump

Ok.

But I would love to be able to do a "double blind" test to see how many riders can TRULY notice a difference between 87 and 97 ft/lbs of torque while doing down the street.

In other words, for all intents and purposes we are arguing semantics.

Let us know when you get your bike Chris, I think you will notice

Will do

basically, i agree with Chris, though, the sensation of torque difference is a very "seat of the pants" type ...

for example when i put the Akrapovic map in with my modded exhaust, i was blown away.

In all fairness, the first few hundred yards on the new mapping were right on the drag strip, so i had that thing jumping in my face way more than i expected.

but also on the streets, not only at WFO, the torque difference at 1/2 open throttle is quite a sensation.

i think that's what most people are talking about, the sensation, not the number based performance.