GAS usage?

Has any info been heard about this new 1600 mpg's???If BMW has intro'd another gas pig, I'll be way disappointed. My KLT1200 got 45-50mpg's almost always, which was very good for such a monster 800lbs scooter. I hope the new 6 cylinder beast gets 50+, or I have no interest in it. For crying out loud, many cars today are getting over 40, so I expect my beloved beemers to do better too. My current GSA1200 is the pig of pigs(love the bike otherwise), regarding gas so I'm looking to do better. Randy

I can't locate the reference at the moment but they are supposed to be comparable to the K1200/1300's.

Found it -

Low engine speed level, high gas velocities, efficient combustion and minimised
frictional loss in the engine of the BMW K 1600 GT and BMW K 1600 GTL result in a
high degree of efficiency and therefore a low level of fuel consumption. In view of its
power potential, the engine achieves top figures in this area, equivalent to the level of a
comparable 4-cylinder motorcycle when a touring-oriented riding style is maintained.
For example at a constant speed of 56 mph, a fuel consumption level is achieved of
over 52mpg (K 1600 GT). This is largely due to the high geometrical compactness and
the specific orientation of the in-line 6-cylinder engine towards maximum efficiency.

Fuel consumption

GT GTL
56mph 52 51
75mph 41 40

Thx

Thanks for the article on this. I am confused to WHY BMW has got to go 6 holes, when the trends in the field are going the other way and 4 holes make the same power? I like the engine however, even not seen it in person and the bike sure looks sweet in pictures. Triumph makes the 2300cc three hole'r and the Wings are the only other 6 piston bikes out there I know? Its a tiny piece of the market, having a 6 piston bike, imo and we'll see how long it lives. Gas mpg's would be a HUGE selling point IF it did well in that department, not the HP thing! BMW may have that decades old(Japanese race), bigger is better thing, more HP is even moreso and it could be fatal, or certainly growing way old, imo. ITS probably just me getting older, Yep. Randy

More from the same media info may help to explain-

For decades, 6-cylinder in-line engines have exercised a special fascination. In addition
to their perfect running smoothness they also offer supreme output and torque, giving
the rider powerful emotional impressions.

ÔÇó Supreme in-line 6-cylinder engine with a high level of pulling power, especially in the lower and medium engine speed range.
ÔÇó Engine output 118 kW (160 bhp) at 7,750rpm and maximum torque 175 Nm (129Lb. ft.) at 5,250 rpm.
ÔÇó Over 70 per cent of the maximum torque is already available from 1,500 rpm.

The last point may be the biggest benefit of going with a 6 plus there's the emotional factor.

It's smoother than any motorcycle motor I've ever ridden. It's eerie how smooth it is.

kbasa said:

It's smoother than any motorcycle motor I've ever ridden. It's eerie how smooth it is.

Click to expand...

+1 It's physics -- you just can't ever get an in-line 4 to run as smooth as an in-line 6 (at least not without *several* counter-balancers).

There's a reason the BMW and Mercedes in-line 6's are famous as wonderful motors.

K1600gtl mpg

Randy-

Cycle World has a glowing feature article in the June issue. The new scoot was highly impressive.

Their test mpg numbers were 38/35/37 (hi/lo/avg).

Like you, I get consistent 45-50 on my K1200LT.

Steve

I've gotten consistently 45 - 50 mpg on my K12GT. Talked to the owner of Ride West today after riding the K16 back from Denver. 50mpg + at very peppy speeds. I have also heard that the mileage would match the K12's and K13's. And my goodness, the smoothness of a BMW 6 can't be beat.

smooth

the bike is hockey rink ice smooth, all thru the rpm range. not as cushy comfy as the lt, but moreso smoooooothhh comfy. I found it far more comfortable to ride then the lt. not top heavy, not wide legged, more agile, and SMOOTH. did i say smooth? and corners, omg, corners, corners, corners.... I thought the lt was the best bike i had ever ridden till now.... NOTHING COMPARES

i believe I could put a rubber bottomed coffee mug on the gas tank and it wouldnt vibrate off all day, of course id throw it off in the turns Cuz footpegs are lean detectors

I just don't know?

I always thought my new BMW twin was smooth enough and is clearly not a good compare to the "new" 6 smooth! Now, what is better? A nice feeling, very livable bike/engine under you, or a no buzz at all engine with great handling, as most beemers of recent and horrible gas mileage? My current GSA1200 gas mpg thing has been my biggest gripe of recent and the bike can simply "never be beat" in handling, imo.. The magazine reports above at high 37-38mpg's for the new 6 hole beemer is a joke, if true...I simply don't care how cool it may be in looks and smooth and I LIKE all that, but the engineers have fallen OFF their rock if they don't get the mpg factor figured out soon!!! Define smooth? My bikes should always have some feel under me, in the "engine" dept., or it gets away from the bike phenom all together...I hope the twin always lives and my eyes too, watch the new beemer roll out with gusto. Randy

Polarbear said:

.... The magazine reports above at high 37-38mpg's for the new 6 hole beemer is a joke, if true...I simply don't care how cool it may be in looks and smooth and I LIKE all that, but the engineers have fallen OFF their rock if they don't get the mpg factor figured out soon!!!

Click to expand...

If a cross section of average, real world riders end up getting 36-38 mpg I won't consider one either. Keep in mind though that magazine testers are notorious for wringing out motorcycles.

Not to hijack the topic, because I to am interested in the 1600 for something ride around the country with my wife. But I really do like the boxer motor in my GSA. Since it , at least I believe, is remotely based originally upon the radial design of an airplane engine, (just had a few opposing cylinders lobbed off), it seems to remind me of an airplane engine when running along about 4,000 rpm. It is actually quite soothing to me.

Can anyone tell me if they have experienced the same thing?

Now back to the thread all ready in progress.

Polarbear said:

I simply don't care how cool it may be in looks and smooth and I LIKE all that, but the engineers have fallen OFF their rock if they don't get the mpg factor figured out soon!!!

Click to expand...

This is where you and lots of other people will disagree. The K1600 is set out to be BMWs superlative bike. In order to be best in class for a number of features, which seem to be tech, ride comfort, power, and touring capability, they are going be less than the best at some things... one of which is fuel efficiency.

I for one don't care at all about the the fuel efficiency of a high performance luxury motorcycle. The numbers given are only about a 10% reduction from what I get on my RT, and about 15% reduction from what I got on a much, smaller, lighter, underpowered 3 cylinder K75. To me, it is just stunning what they did with a 6 cylinder engine.

I love my 2 cylinder R just like you do, but to be honest the feel of the boxer engine creates an emotional response because of its visceral nature, but is not necessarily the most efficient ride. The K bikes are so smooth it feels creepy those who have never ridden one... after some long rides on the R, I yearn for another K bike.

If the price of gas or the efficiency of the engine is your priority, I think the new BMW scooter will be out soon, and I am sure it will get 80 MPG+

The gas mileage numbers shouldn't surprise anyone. My old goldwings always got worse mileage than the Civic!

I can't believe the amount of hand-wringing and kevetching going on in this thread over fuel mileage -- over a bike that no one has any real-world daily US riding experience with! *Especially* a bike for which BMW has been chest-thumping about how surprisingly *good* the mpg is for a 1649cc motor!

Come on, guys/gals -- let's give this one a rest until there's a *real* reason to b*tch & moan. The last few posts seem to be taking it as a given that the mileage *is* lousy, despite BMW's PR and in the absence of any contrary evidence! (the magazine test mileage is *not* a datapoint -- those guys apply two throttle positions: WOT and OFF; nothing real-world there).

RODE IT yesterday

K1600GTL and a BIG Thumbs UP to Fresno BMW Dealer in their handing me the keys, "GO HAVE FUN" attitude, solo. Nope, no salesman leader, just me and the 1600, for 20 miles or so...My original question and topic, MPG's is answered a tad bit, but only 400 miles on this bike is no broke in motor either, I understand! The computer reads 40+ mpg's after my ride and many before me to the 400+ miles on this bike so far. I am sure ALL have been "ringing out" this new phenom, playing a lot with throttle and all, including me. SO, the 40mpg is a likely increase to middle 40s to perhaps even higher with normal use.? REPORT in 20 miles is a hard sell and I'll keep it kind a short. "Throttle by wire" is a very first impression and abnormal for all us cable folk to throttle! Very short transition to this however and all is well in a few miles. Not so much unlike my KLT1200(seating) in feel and clearly 100+lbs lighter, slightly more nimble at slow. I rode only freeway and city streets so twisty roads is another day. Shifting is noisy and a clear, click into every gear is obviously loud. Maybe my throttle by wire(very touchy feel),hand thing contributed to noisy gear box shifting? Fast, an understatement, with smooth 6 unlimited power band from 2000rpm up to launch speeds! Smooth, equal to the KLT1200LT(my 97000m KLT1200 ownership), I could not tell much difference, if any. Gadgets! A TON of learning them ALL, as the bike has been overdone in this department, my opinion. Clearly will take weeks to learn all this bike can do electronically speaking, with all its features. Summary; Very much so a road warrior with unlimited comfort, eating miles as you play with all the onboard toys this thing has. My only worry would be getting LOST in the dashboard as I ride, trying all the gadgets! I loved my long miles on the KLT1200 and this would be an extension of that, with much more pump in HP and perhaps much improved handling too. A wonderful experience in my short test ride of 20 miles and I still love my GSA1200 to much to move on as yet and not sure this day if I could ever go to the bigger bikes again...Happy Trails, Randy

Another K1600GTL MPG Data Point

Earlier I noted that Cycle World reported mileage of 38/35/37 (hi/lo/avg) in their test.

Today I read that Rider tested the K at 42.7/37.8/40.2 (hi/lo/avg).

Maybe we could agree that the average average is about 38.5???

Incidentally, I test rode this scoot and my normal concerns about mpg evaporated...nothing so practical mattered as I experienced bimmer/beemer "joy".

There is no comparison (performance or efficiency) to the K1200LT. So enjoy a sedate KLT 50 mpg or an exuberant KGTL of 38.5 mpg.

mileage

I will take 38 mpg all day to have this wonderfull bike beneath me. Come one..... if your paying nearly 30k for a bike, are you really in need of fuel economy? sounds like yet another reason for someone who really doesnt want it to justify not getting it.

The majority of people who bash this bike were really never going to buy it anyway.

If you dont want it, dont buy it. If you buy it and complain about gas mileage....... youshouldnt of bought it.

Get real people. If you get better mileage on your lt, keep it. I had 2, the 2nd happiest day of my motorcyling life was watching frank ride my 02 k1200ltc down the road with the 14,700 dollars in my pocket. 3rd happiest day was when I traded the 96 R1100RT and 99 K1200ltc in on my 02 K1200LTC, and the happiest day of my motorcycling life will be when Royal Blue gets delivered in July.

If I want mileage, I will buy a vw golf diesel, or the new BMW scooter at 80mpg.

Breaking in my GT, I got a little less than 35 mpg. But that was racing through the canyons and over the passes. Even on the straight-aways, I'd accelerate and decelerate hard. If I can get 35 mpg treating it like that, 40 mpg should be no problem in normal use.

My RT ranged from 38 to 54 mpg. (Crossing Texas in April, I got 56, but I had a considerable tail wind.) I probably averaged 45 on the RT. The GT is like the RT only faster, more stable, easier to flick through the corners, more tractable, and easier to ride - fast or slow. 40 mpg for a bike like this is worth it to me.

- Kate

I think many of us have been spoiled by the fuel mileage many of our BMWs get. A lot of the big cruisers and tourers from other brands get in the high 20s and low 30s with far less performance.

If we measured performance per gallon rather than miles per gallon, the K1600 may be the most efficient bike we can buy.