Yamaha YZF-R1 and BMW S 1000 RR comparison test

The new Yamaha YZF-R1 has not only been long awaited by Yamaha fans, but also by BMW. Since the last redesign of the Kawasaki ZX-10R in 2011, the R1 is the first supersports bike from a major Japanese manufacturer, and one that has been redeveloped from the ground up at that. That ensured a high level of excitement at BMW and provided cause to thoroughly redesign the BMW S 1000 RR, to send it strengthened into the fray with its new rival.
Although the re-engineering doesn’t just affect the engine, it does enjoy particular attention among motorcycling fans, holding the more potential prestige. Especially seeing as Yamaha states the power of the Yamaha YZF-R1 as 197 HP, whereas the BMW specification for the BMW S 1000 RR remains below this at 196 HP. Is this a sign of understatement and diplomacy, or does the small difference symbolise a major event, a change in power relations? In order to clarify this, the competitors were required to reveal their power before the test drives, on the MOTORRAD test stand in the comparison test, according to proven comparability-generating procedures.

These motorbikes are the crown of creation

The Yamaha YZF-R1 was the first to go, at 200 HP exceeding the factory specification by two, and with 115 Nm even surpassing the reported maximum torque by three. On top of that, at 2,700 rpm, the power was available and at its disposal earlier than stated. The reason for this deviation lies in the wide torque plateau that the R1 four-cylinder forms between 8,500 and 12,200 rpm; here the torque is continually more than 110 Nm, and regardless of small engine and measurement tolerances, the maximum sometimes occurs at this rev speed, and at other times at that rev speed. The testers were impressed. Then the BMW S 1000 R had the opportunity to up the ante. That it does. And how. Not only in terms of peak power, which soars to an exorbitant 205 HP. And not only at the peak torque, which reached 119 Nm, but also within the lower rev range between 4,500 and 8,000 rpm. Here the BMW put up to p HP and 20 Nm between itself and the Yamaha.

 

Then on it went on the road. Because the winter in Germany doggedly defended its reign, MOTORRAD conducted the tests in Spain, in the Costa Dorada back country, where the hilly topography, along with EU subsidies, has resulted in the creation of beautiful roads. Always curvy, occasionally narrow with narrow radii, occasionally wide with sweeping corners, generally flawlessly asphalted. Where this is not the case, they are peppered with selective bumps. A paradise, even for supersports riders. On public roads you are not permitted to open up their full power, however, their confidence and precision, and the high quality of the suspension elements and other components provide fresh inspiration all over again. For the author the Yamaha YZF-R1 and the BMW S 1000 RR are still the pride of creation. Even high-quality crossover models such as the Ducati Multistrada benefit from the technology that is first tried and tested by sports bikes, subject to extreme requirements, speeds and loads.

Both motorcycles allow for lazy gear changing

The Yamaha YZF-R1 is completely and utterly immersed in its striving for drive dynamics. More so than the BMW S 1000 RR, which now and then treats its driver to a touch more everyday suitability. After just a short distance and the first bike swap, the ergonomics of both bikes made this evident. On the BMW the driver sits lower, with a comparatively narrow knee angle but high-mounted handlebars. On the Yamaha – which is pleasant for long-legged drivers – the knees don’t have to be bent to such a degree on account of the high seat and the foot rests being mounted slightly lower. In return the handlebars are positioned low down, just 2.5 centimetres higher than the seat – the specification in the top test (8/2015 edition) accidentally placed it one centimetre higher. Either way, this layout requires a bent over posture, and acts as a continual invitation to active (fast) driving. You’ll come back to it whenever possible – the day is young and you’re not old yet . But when impeded by slow traffic, or with exhaustion setting in after a long day’s driving, you’ll be more drawn to the BMW.
Other findings regarding the character of the two motorcycles: both allow for lazy gear changing, the BMW S 1000 RR, however, does so two gears higher. On the Yamaha YZF-R1, due to the low torque in the mid-range and the relatively long overall ratio, the driver gets the impression that it is better to remain in the lower three gears. A feeling that is confirmed by the torque values. They are indeed calculated at full throttle in the highest gear and are indicative of the demand for a strong performance in the lower rev range being taken to the extreme. However, although in practice drivers stubbornly only rarely accelerate in the top gear, meaning that the differences aren’t quite so evident, they do accurately reflect the situation. The subtly pulsing V4 sound of the Crossplane also entices you to drive it with higher revs than a normal inline engine.

The BMW developers have intentionally done without a balance shaft

The difference in acceleration is less significant than the torque values. At around 200 HP a slight increase in peak power doesn’t provide much additional thrust: when accelerating to 200 km/h the BMW S 1000 RR gains a full three tenths of a second, and in spite of the race start assistant and wheelie control a well-versed driver must first perform all of the usual clutch and throttle wizardry. The response of the engine is much more important for everyday driving and on the race track than sheer acceleration. The comparison of the two machines in the various drive modes shows that in the case of the BMW the direct or, if so inclined, the firmer of the two variants still responds more softly than the softest of the three Yamaha YZF-R1 variants, which also comes hand in hand with a torque reduction.

Those who want to make use of the full tractive force of the Yamaha YZF-R1 must pluck on the throttle with a great deal of sensitivity, if they want to avoid provoking a harsh load change in spite of the flawless mechanics of the drive train. This is particularly annoying on unknown roads, on which you often have to play on the throttle. In return the new R1 engine spoils you with almost perfect running characteristics. The four-cylinder with its Crossplane crankshaft does fire at uneven intervals, but vibrates less and more softly than the BMW four-cylinder with its conventional ignition sequence. The balance shaft that the Yamaha engineers consider essential on account of the special engine configuration performs its duties very well. The BMW developers have intentionally done without a balance shaft in order to minimise power losses. On account of this, the smooth running of the BMW S 1000 RR again remarkable.

With regard to the noise, the Yamaha YZF-R1 holds back too much. Thanks to the unusual ignition sequence, it sounds somehow lower than the BMW S 1000 RR, and it would be good if we could hear its rhythm more clearly. However, the Yamaha exhaust dampens more strongly than the new BMW system, which doesn’t feature a pre-silencer. This system has a more hoarse timbre and emits an evocative roar in the high rev range. When the throttle grip is closed, the petrol feed isn’t immediately interrupted either, and a tiny, inadvertently injected drop of fuel ensures a deep rumble from the exhaust, which brings a touch of Formula 1 to the braking zone. But it never gets annoyingly loud. However, the BMW sounds as though it were an aggressive beast, while the Yamaha on the other hands feigns the satisfied, deep growler.
What may sound like a waste of fuel, is practically unnoticeable with regard to consumption. Driven on the same road, at the same, continually alternating speed, and by the same testers, the BMW S 1000 RR required 0.4 litres less fuel over 100 kilometres than the Yamaha YZF-R1. Because it also has slightly greater fuel capacity, it also manages 30 kilometres more than its competitor with one fill of the tank. These results show how mature the S 1000 RR now is, for only through diligent detailed work can an engine simultaneously be given a higher peak power and a plumper torque curve, and with all this it even tends to have a lower fuel consumption. The high degree of maturity in the BMW technology is also evident in the details, such as the switching assistant, which has for some time been more than just a race track gimmick. The Pro switching assistant delights with soft gear changes in both the lower and the upper rev range. But if you have ever felt like you are forcing the transmission when shifting down, it means the throttle valves were still slightly open. If you consistently lay off the throttle and don’t use the clutch, all you need to do is step up through the gears, and the electronics take care of the rest. Right down to accurately dosed bursts of acceleration when switching down into first gear, in order to moderate the drag torque of the engine.

In the Yamaha YZF-R1 the switching assistant only works when gearing up. Its function can be adjusted in two steps, but even in the step with the longer switching times smooth gear changing is not always successful in everyday traffic. During full acceleration on the motorway or race track, however, the system works perfectly.

The relationship is comparable with that between Honda and Yamaha in the MotoGP World Championship

With regard to the engine and drive system, the relationship between the BMW S 1000 RR and the Yamaha YZF-R1 is comparable to that between the Honda and Yamaha in the MotoGP World Championship. The YZR-M1s have a slightly lower HP but are seldom prevented from winning races. Even in the duels against the seemingly all-powerful duo, Marc Márquez and the Honda RC 213 V, the excess speed that the Yamahas make possible in the first phase of a cornering manoeuvre was often plain to see. And the R1, many of the systems in which can be traced back to the M1, feels as though it too could also produce a scarcely believable speed through the bends. The reason for this lies in its sensationally sage front wheel drive, it steering precision and feedback.

The BMW S 1000 RR has more comfortable suspension and damping, which benefits its driver on country roads. A few test laps on the Alcarràs race track showed that the more comfortable tuning of its suspension elements takes a little getting used to there. The spring movements at the front initially gave the testers the feeling that they were not hitting the line accurately, and the back end resorts to pumping during hard acceleration. Over time concerns regarding the steering precision proved to be unjustified, and the rear wheel suspension with reduced compression damping even behaved better than when set to a firmer setting, yet on the race track, the Yamaha YZF-R1 with its tauter tuning made things easier for the driver. To let it run over a succession of bumps in a quick corner, to notice how the front wheels became one with the asphalt, how the suspension worked, how precisely you hit the lines, is an exquisite experience. You are happy to put in the physical effort required to make this happen.

BMW S 1000 RR with four modes pre-configured in the plant

The BMW test machine was equipped with semi-active damping, the individual functions of which can each be adjusted in 15 steps, which differs from the factory configuration. In the case of some functions, the adjustment range could be tighter, at least in the traction phase at the back. However, this should only be considered a provisional test statement, as the race track for the comparison test between the BMW S 1000 RR and the Yamaha YZF-R1 was not the main point of focus. A more in-depth race track comparison of all current supersports bikes in mid May will provide more detailed information.
At Yamaha the semi-active damping is reserved for the YZF-R1 M, however, this sophisticated R1 is already sold out in Germany anyway. Away from the race track and the BMW S 1000 RR revealed no need for individual chassis adjustments – incidentally, on the race track none of the testers felt the need either. The tuning that is performed in the factory in conjunction with the four pre-configured drive modes, Rain, Sport, Race and Slick was ideally suited for drivers of varying stature. For country roads the majority were highly satisfied with the Sport mode. Those who like things spectacular can also activate Race mode.

The ABS and combination braking system in the Yamaha YZF-R1 are continually activated

During the test drives on the Yamaha YZF-R1 a clear tendency towards softer compression damping emerged. At the fork it was 23 of 29 clicks open, to the rear the high speed setting was adjusted to 5.75 of a total of six turns. The pre-tensioning of the fork and suspension strut was also slightly reduced compared to the default setting. The YRC modules (Yamaha Ride Control) for the engine control (PWR) were generally set to two, while the nine-step adjustable traction control (TCS) was set to two for the race track and three for country roads. The fourth step wasn’t bad here either. With regard to the remaining modules, the factory settings do just fine. Or to put it briefly: the B-mode with the RTCS set to level three is sufficient for a wide range of contexts, from sporty country roads to serious race track driving. As for the ABS, both manufacturers draw on different systems and philosophies. As such, the ABS and the combi braking system on the Yamaha YZF-R1 are continually activated. Whether the rear brakes with you with varying strength in the various modes is down to the system. The driver doesn’t know anything about it.
In the BMW S 1000 RR the rear braking function and the ABS control are deployed less and less the more they are tuned for race track use. The ABS can even be switched off altogether. With the same average deceleration, the S 1000 could be more easily dosed; and its brakes also changed less than the R1 system under high load. Aside from the differing characters of the two motorcycles, it is these and other subtleties that confirm the level of maturity of the BMW. You notice that updates have been made, even in the third generation of models. If you project its progress onto the Yamaha YZF-R1, which is at the beginning of its development, then we should be looking forward to an exciting future. And may the continual optimisation of all supersports bikes long continue.

Comparison test results

1st BMW S 1000 RR
Its engine and its suitability for everyday driving at the main strengths of the BMW. This doesn’t mean it has nothing to offer on the race track when pitted against the Yamaha. However the transition to radical fast driving cannot be made quite so easily as on the Yamaha YZF-R1.

2nd Yamaha YZF-R1
Torque weakening and rough response see the Yamaha YZF-R1 fall behind. Its bold disregard for everyday concerns such as comfort or cost also plays its part in placing the R1 in second place. In spite of this, or perhaps directly because of it: a fascinating motorbike.