BMW K1200, K1300, and K1600 Forum banner
1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
No bogey's twist wrist
Joined
·
619 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Just reading posts on k1200r forum,

The guy from Motorad at the Long Beach show said they were done with new models and the LT would be going away but not the R!
Ray

Now that I would believe, leaves the big bagger types the Goldwing alone, and the GT as an LT lite.
 

·
Statmaster
Joined
·
2,313 Posts
I don't know where Ray gets this stuff. I wouldn't quote a BMW rep at a show, since they are rarely the guys in the "know" about stuff like this. The sources I have are the same ones that were right about the S and the delays (and reasons for it), the arrival of the R, and all the info that was right about the new GT.

Here was my reply:

http://www.k-bikes.com/forums/showpost.php?p=13033&postcount=4
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
910 Posts
The new GT is a K-S Supertourer!

Yeah, scratching my head over this as well. First, even it were considered an lighter version of the LT, what's wrong with that?

Second, just spent some time at the local dealer yesterday; quite festive with a nice Christmas tree, roaring fire in the fireplace and my poor salesmanager in an arm cast from tearing his bicep lifting a heavy rock on his farm. His take on this is that the R12RT is more LT like with the fairing integrated mirrors and the wide look of the fairing. He has been surprised that more than a few customers have considered both the LT and RT and gone with the more recently designed RT.

Third, the new GT is a whopping 200 lbs lighter than the current LT, but a mere 50 lbs heavier than the K-S. And look what both the new GT and LT share: that great roaring new inline four cylinder engine, the fantastic Hossack suspension, the whole rear drive assembly, the new trellis frame, the adjustable rear suspension, canbus, and the whole electronic guage config.; and the same lean-forward riding postion - if you want it and adjust the steering appropriately.

Fourth: the subject heading of this thread is, therefore, completely misleading: the new GT is a "K-S supertourer"

Fifth: Riding this new GT is going to knock the socks off the unsuspecting. In real world performance, it will match the agility, acceleration, and long ride comfort of the K-S! I'm betting. Can't wait for the first riding reviews.

Miles
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
398 Posts
First, I have to confess I am "engine smoothness" obssessed. I love the near nil vibration level of my K1200RS. I was surprized by the amount of vibration of the K1200S that I test rode. Unless they took care of that with the GT model, I would not consider the GT to be a LT subsitute. A comfortable tourer has gotta be smooth and near vibration free in my thinking.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
66 Posts
Yeah, the K1200RS is about as smooth as it can get- but it's the rubber mounts, not the engine. That engine is actually incredibly buzzy- you could try a k1100RS and see. The whole bloody bike buzzes everywhere. I remember the initial reviews of the K1200RS- one said that it was simply amazing- that BMW had gone from the most vibration in its class to the least in one step. My guess is that the GT will be solidly mounted but with an additional couple of years of development time, who knows on the LT? Certainly there would be enough room. . . .
 

·
We're zoned for what ? cool !
Joined
·
186 Posts
The buzz goes back further than that.

When I was shopping for my first K-bike in 1990, I rode both the K100RS and the K75S. That four cylinder had what I thought then were unacceptable levels of vibration, whereas the three cylinder was a lot smoother. So that's what I bought, and still have. So you're right, it's the rubber mounts in the K12RS that smooth it out, because the motor itself is a buzzsaw.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
395 Posts
Heck you want vibes, next time you ride your K12RS or GT drop your left foot back to the side stand knob and feel what the engine is really doing! amazing they could isolate it so well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
910 Posts
brentboshart said:
First, I have to confess I am "engine smoothness" obssessed. I love the near nil vibration level of my K1200RS. I was surprized by the amount of vibration of the K1200S that I test rode. Unless they took care of that with the GT model, I would not consider the GT to be a LT subsitute. A comfortable tourer has gotta be smooth and near vibration free in my thinking.
Brent,

It all depends on what you are looking for. Bob and Karl summed it pretty well. But, I have to tell you that as between the choice of a "special" rubberized sub-frame that weighs in at 56 lbs. to quell vibes and a very modern, high powered in-line four with twin counterbalancers, I'd take the one with the c.b.'s.

There's other considerations as well. When BMW went with the sub-frame on the K12RS, they had to raise the height of the engine more than an inch. This made the bike a bit top heavy. BMW was fortunate to be able to "lower" the new engine by tilting it forward to a near level 55 degrees making for an amazingly low c.o.g. It shows in the handling.

The new in-line engine is very narrow, more so than a typical 600 cc engine in a sportbike. This allowed for a very narrow sillouette in the new K bikes and the new GT. This means that the pegs are more inboard and consequently can be lower and give more leg-room w/o compromizing ground clearance.

I agree with you overall, though, the deamenor of the new engine is more raucous and bold, whereas the brick is the paragon of civility. Sure going to be interesting to see who has both the need for full saddlebags, more upright riding position, and a balsy performing engine at the same time!

Miles
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,624 Posts
Brent... I am also smoothness obsessed.. it's a curse.. and I also was VERY unimpressed when I first rode the new S.. and felt even worse after I bought one... I think I used the term .. "unforgivable" in my initial review..

However.. I have done a "John Kerry".. meaning flip-flopped 180 degrees on my opinion of the S. As the miles go on.. the engine starts to smooth out at ALL rpms.. Mine hasn't even got 600 miles on it and it's MUCH smoother than when I picked her up. I suspect that after 2000 miles or so both the engine and the clunky shifting will be just a bad memory like the Dukes of Hazzard..

Will the upcoming GT be as smooth as the RS or old GT?? I don't think so, but I do think it'll be smooth enough to make people happy.. I could be wrong..

brentboshart said:
First, I have to confess I am "engine smoothness" obssessed. I love the near nil vibration level of my K1200RS. I was surprized by the amount of vibration of the K1200S that I test rode. Unless they took care of that with the GT model, I would not consider the GT to be a LT subsitute. A comfortable tourer has gotta be smooth and near vibration free in my thinking.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
398 Posts
Well, I have learned that smoothness/vibration is a relative thing. When I bought a R1150RT (no test ride - big mistake) I was unhappy with the amount of vibration, more than my old R100cs. I fought with that bike trying to make it run smoother (and the surging issue!). Finally, I decided it just was not going to work and I should stop whining and enjoy motorcycling more than this. Sold it and bought an used K1200RS. I've been infatuated with it ever since (1.5 seasons and 30k miles). Love that gliding through the air feeling (and yeah, I know it really is not smooth but well isolated..). When I had the RT, I rode my friend's GSXR1000 once in a while and was amazed at how smooth it was. Now, that I have my K1200RS, it seems like his gixxer vibrates a lot. Its all relative, its what you are accustomed to. Minimal vibration is acceptable, and who knows, maybe even desired with a sport bike but I think less tolerable on a more upright, fully faired machine. I love the looks of the K1200S, the new GT is tempting but my K1200RS just makes me grin from ear to ear very time I ride, so I'll just have to wait for the honeymoon to be over...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
214 Posts
Pirate said:
I have done a "John Kerry".. meaning flip-flopped 180 degrees on my opinion of the S.
I hate to say "I told you so" but ... (atually I never did say that but I meant to :) )

Brent... I am also smoothness obsessed.. it's a curse.. and I also was VERY unimpressed when I first rode the new S.. and felt even worse after I bought one... I think I used the term .. "unforgivable" in my initial review..
Yeah, that's what you said. All I can say is: I finally picked up my K1200S today and I just cant seem to get the "crap eating grin" off my face. I love it.
As far as smoothness goes. Allot of you seem to compare the KS to the 1200RS and find it a little more buzzy. Well let me tell you, after riding my R12GS for so long, this KS is a smooth as butter :) Gearbox is as most say "a little clunky" but I don't care. Smooth enough for me and I suspect it will get even better with time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
910 Posts
mark5lam said:
Yeah, that's what you said. All I can say is: I finally picked up my K1200S today and I just cant seem to get the "crap eating grin" off my face. I love it.
As far as smoothness goes. Allot of you seem to compare the KS to the 1200RS and find it a little more buzzy. Well let me tell you, after riding my R12GS for so long, this KS is a smooth as butter :) Gearbox is as most say "a little clunky" but I don't care. Smooth enough for me and I suspect it will get even better with time.
Mark,

Well, I'll say congratulations here rather than over on the K-S fourm since I can't begin to answer any of the questions you asked. <g>

My K-S is approaching 5,000 miles right now and it doesn't seem to me that the vibes are much different than when it was new. What I experience is that if you pin the throttle at around 8,000 rpm, then you get the "tingle" thru the bars. But, in my own style of riding, seeing 8,000 rpm usually means zapping thru that range of rpm (usually first or second gear) right on up the band toward red-line; so the tingle stage is bypassed, generally speaking. Cruising the roads and byways, like a GT rider might do, the engine is dead smooth, but the power available for passing if you need it. And basically (when you whack open the throttle) this engine makes such a fuss and does that induction roar that you never notice any vibration. BMW seems to have gotten the counterbalancer thing right on this engine.

It does seem to me that, like with most new engines, it revs more easily now, and seems to be more flexible (less tight) with even a bit more power now than when new.

In sum I really like this engine; makes me feel young. <g> And, if you're riding two-up on the new GT, I'll bet the s.o won't even notice the fun your having with the new in-line four!

Miles
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
Can't see BMW getting rid of the K1200LT...ever. The LT is a touring rider's dream. It is a stone smooth, quiet, mile eating road warrior with decent power for an 850 lb. bike. A lighter LT would be nice, but slightly lower with more power would be very cool. Acceleration is the only thing I miss about my K1200RS.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
HaHaHaHaHa!!!!!

BMW dropping the LT is like Honda dropping cars so they can just make motorcycles...........Regards Pete
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
K-bike buzz ...

ROB said:
When I was shopping for my first K-bike in 1990, I rode both the K100RS and the K75S. That four cylinder had what I thought then were unacceptable levels of vibration, whereas the three cylinder was a lot smoother. So that's what I bought, and still have. So you're right, it's the rubber mounts in the K12RS that smooth it out, because the motor itself is a buzzsaw.
I'll throw in my $.02 worth since I've owned a K100RS, a K1100RS, a K1, and a K1200LT.

The 1996 K1100 is significantly less buzzy than the 1986 K100 ever was and both engines were solidly mounted. Reportedly the reduction in buzz was a factor of taking greater care to balance the various engine components.

The K1 was surprisingly smooth. Presumably they were already learning their lessons by 1990. Still, that's a tough bike to ride for a long distance for a variety of reasons.

The K75 wasn't as buzzy because there was a counter balancer in the engine. Reportedly that's one reason why they went out of production -- the three cylinder engine was as expensive to produce as a four cylinder.

The K1200LT is the smoothest of them all, but you can feel the engine buzzing ever so slightly inside all of that tupperware and rubber-isolated framework at certain speeds. I'd say that a K12 engine buzzes just as much as a K11 engine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,582 Posts
Miles_Miller said:
Yeah, scratching my head over this as well. First, even it were considered a lighter version of the LT, what's wrong with that? Editing added by jpalamaro

Agreed Miles. My guess is that marketing volumes/sales will most likely dictate the future of the LT, your arguments Miles, not withstanding. I don't have those numbers but presumably dealer feedback with respect to RT sales VS LT sales, and perhaps some of the questionnaires completed by dealers and customers, play some sort of role, but the one that matters most is sales volume and profitabiity. The only reason I would not question the demise ( I think it's going to happen) of the LT in its current configuration/engine is (excluding the F650 and 800, if ever) are the platforms, at least engine-wise, have been reduced to the R1200 Boxer and the new 4-cyl. in
K-S/R/GT. Let's face it, the GT shares a heck of a lot of its 12S/R heritage . . . the LT would have to be, and am not a motorcycle engineer, a total redesign, unless the K engine can just be dropped in??? Suspect not!

So now an ancillary question which was posted on the LT site some time ago. Will the current LT's used prices plummet, or perhaps rise if the LT bites the big one? But then again, that's why I don't 'gamble' in the stock market.

Personally, I eagerly await the KGT...and see it as a wonderful 'blend' of my LT and my K12S, neither of which are IMHO an ideal bike [for me], but very well-suited for their intended purpose(s).
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top