Another consideration to think about is that the more rugged you make the bags and the more bulletproof you make the attachments to the bike, the more stress you put on the rear subframe when you do crash. And someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the S10 has a steel main frame and an alum subframe. My bet is that the alum subframe is probably the weak link on the S10. On the GS, there appears to me (and I have no hard data - just my anecdotal observation) to be a correlation between rear subframe failures and mounting bigger/heavier/more-rugged rear bags. Some of this is simple overloading, but I bet bigger aftermarket bags transfer more crash stress to the subframe.
I crashed semi-hard on my BMW R1100S on a gravel road one time and the factory (mostly plastic) hard bag ripped off, breaking the plastic latch that holds the bag to the mount. But I could still hang it on the bike, Rok-Strap it down to stay in place and ride the rest of a 1500-mile tour. Once home, I replaced the plastic latch and was back in business. But more importantly, I had no damage to my subframe mounts and this is a weak point on this bike - had I broken these mounts, the bike would have gone from having $1500 of damage to being totalled.
It just depends on what you want to do with the bike. There is a tendency in discussions like this to simply conclude that the more rugged something is, the better it it is, but ruggedness always has drawbacks and anytime you protect something on the bike, you transfer stresses to something else. Even things like frame sliders on sportbikes can have the effect of changing a low-side crash to a tumble crash and/or breaking the frame or engine mounts rather than just rashing the plastic. Everything is a tradeoff.
As another example, I have a V-Strom and it has the SW-Motech setup for the skid plate and lower engine guards. I'll be the first to admit that it's NOT the most rugged setup - the skid plate is fairly thin aluminum and even has a cutout where the exhaust header protrudes so the plate can be mounted higher (Strom's are notorious for poor ground clearance). And there is minimal protection for the plastic side panels. Now with 17k miles of use (including six or eight tours on some pretty gnarly and rocky forest service roads - e.g., Colockum Pass between Ellensberg and Wenatchee WA), the skid plate is somewhat scratched up and has a few hard rock hits, but nothing major. It's done its job just fine. And the more rugged skid plates mount lower to protect the header and in doing so, dramatically reducing ground clearance, and tending to cause more of what they're trying to prevent. I have dropped the bike once or twice at low speed and haven't done anything more than a few minor scratches. Now, I haven't asked my Strom to go over logs or climb through boulder fields, but then that's not my plan with a 475-lb 650cc bike with 6.5" of suspension travel at both ends. And it will be even less of a plan when I own a 575-lb 1200cc adventure bike.
As a final example, I remember reading a blog by a KLR expert who does a lot of work on these bikes and sees a lot of bikes. His opinion is that most of the adventurized KLR's he sees are so heavy and armored-up, that the bike crashes a lot more and is so badly overloaded that it breaks more.
Again, I'm not trying to discourage anyone from getting aftermarket bags or bigger crash guards - I may too and I like the SW-Motech stuff. But do make an evaluation of your planned use of the bike when making decisions and realize that there are always tradeoffs.
- Mark
