When I sawthe talk about BMW’s new GS and its reported 1300 engine, I was intrigued. That larger powerplant certainly would be in line with the history of the GS lineage which started with the humble airhead R80GS back in 1980 and has grown steadily ever since through the oilhead and waterhead series of 1100s, 1150s, 1200s and 1250s. In the process, they’ve gained horsepower, speed, weight and complexity. One has to wonder, though: when is enough, enough?

我唯一曾经骑宝马GS是旧airhead version owned by my friend Dave, who thinks nothing of riding it hundreds of miles a day, despite it having only 50 horsepower and well over a hundred thousand miles on the clock. The newer generations of bikes – and this isn’t just limited to BMW – seem to be in an arms race. More displacement, more power, ABS, ride-by-wire, self-adjusting suspension, connectivity, adaptive cruise control, traction control, multiple riding modes, the list seems endless and is increasing every year as manufacturers vie for your motorcycle currency. Do we need this stuff and the extra weight it brings? This modern complexity comes at a price. I shudder to think of being chained to a dealer for even the most basic servicing, and of the horrendous costs involved in the event that something does go wrong. Dave’s old airhead may not have the 130 mph top speed of the R1250GS, or the 134 hp, and would struggle to top the ton on its analog speedometer, but it can still cruise all day with highway traffic, and when it comes time to haul it out of a mud hole, is at least 150 lb lighter than its modern counterpart.

All manufacturers seem to be on this “add weight and complexity” kick. The 2022 Triumph Bonneville T120 puts out about 79 hp from its 1200 cc water-cooled engine, weighs about 520 lb (236 kg) and tops out at about 110 mph. According to contemporary tests, the air-cooled 1966 Triumph T120 managed roughly the same top speed from 650 cc, 52 hp and a slimline 392 lb (178 kg). So much for progress.

Admittedly, I’m a dinosaur. My own ride of choice, my 1972 Moto Guzzi Eldorado, has carbs, points, drum brakes, springs-in-tubes suspension, and zero electronics. I can (and have) fixed it at the side of the road. It probably last saw a dealer in 1972, is infinitely rebuildable, and when one of those solar flares zaps the world’s electronics, it will still be chugging along.

Still, sometimes, when I’m on the highway, plodding along with the transports and RV’s and I see modern bikes slide effortlessly by, I suffer a moment of envy for all that power and technology. Abundant performance is handy and cruise control is certainly useful on long, boring highway rides, but infotainment systems? Blind spot monitoring? Roll-back protection? Heated seats? On a motorcycle? Really?

I understand that some of these “improvements” – the endless sensors, computer controlled fueling and ignition, catalytic converters etc. – are required to limit tailpipe emissions, but so much of the electronic equipment on the latest generation of bikes seems excessive to me. After all, how many riding modes and settings can you actually use in the real world? My guess is that, after playing around with them for a while, most people will use one or two settings then forget about the rest.

Does this mean that manufacturers should be encouraged to do a U-turn on this endless drive towards technological sophistication? Not at all. There will always be those who wish to be riding the most high-tech, cutting edge machinery and have the financial wherewithal to absorb the inevitable wallet and weight penalties that come with it, but I hope there will always be a place for less sophisticated, but still capable machines, that more closely mirror the simplicity, ease of maintenance, and robust engineering of bikes from an earlier age.

I doubt whether I’ll ever purchase a new bike, but if I did, given the kind of riding I enjoy, I’d probably be looking for the following characteristics. It would need to be able to maintain highway speed all day without beating me up too badly. Since I don’t care much about top speed and super fast acceleration, as long as it can keep up with traffic and get out of its own way, that’s good enough. I would want long travel suspension, ABS for safety, and a large front wheel for those long, gravel roads and tracks I enjoy riding. So as not to pollute the planet any more than necessary, it would have to have simple electronic ignition and fuel injection. Valve adjustments would need to be easy to do at home and only necessary at rare intervals. A bit of body work, an adjustable windscreen, a comfortable seat and a rack or two would be handy. Lastly, it should have a decent-sized fuel tank, sip fuel, and be light enough to pick up if I’ve dropped it.

Did I just describe the current-generation Kawasaki KLR650? Oh, I know many people will say it’s too slow, too basic, too heavy for serious off-road work, but it’s cheap, robust and has been proven reliable through countless adventures. And if I dropped it and broke the ABS sensor, I wouldn’t need a satellite phone to call the dealer in a panic because the bike has disabled itself.

On the other hand, that new Ducati Multistrada looks mighty appealing. 170 horsepower, wheelie control and front and rear radar…

Ah, technology. There are upsides and downsides to every choice we make. Perhaps I’d best just stick with my old Guzzi.