• Welcome, Guest! We hope you enjoy the excellent technical knowledge, event information and discussions that the BMW MOA forum provides. Some forum content will be hidden from you if you remain logged out. If you want to view all content, please click the 'Log in' button above and enter your BMW MOA username and password.

    If you are not an MOA member, why not take the time to join the club, so you can enjoy posting on the forum, the BMW Owners News magazine, and all of the discounts and benefits the BMW MOA offers?

Does BMW need a water cooled boxer?

Sadly, all this a moot point unless BMW perfects a bullet-proof Final Drive. :violin

And sadly you and others will continue to grouse about the poor quality of a new final drive unit that has not even hit the market yet.

Here is an article from Motorcycle.com.

"Liquid-cooling allows a quicker warm-up time, reducing critical post-start-up emissions, while also lowering operating temps. This will help achieve stricter Euro 5 standards slated to begin in 2015. Liquid-cooling also enables increases in power, so along with a bump in displacement to around 1250cc, we expect a bump in power to compete against the latest batch of challengers to the adventure-touring throne."

http://www.motorcycle.com/manufacturer/bmw/2013-bmw-r1250gs-preview-91202.html

In practical terms, watercooling will yield the power needed to haul more stuff faster. :ha

So yes, it's needed.

Ian

.
 
My quick thoughts...

BMW needs a water cooled boxer for emissions and an HP crazed marketplace.

Most riders, for how most ride, do not need a water cooled boxer.

Riders don't need a water cooled boxer unless they want a new boxer. Government regulations determine what we can buy.
 
my 1200gsa is too big & my 1150gsa is way too big.

I never do two up or haul a lot of stuff.

I hate the 800 GS, so it looks like I will get a Turnip 800 XC some day.

I wish they would focus all their technology in another direction...bigger bigger bigger.....come on.

How about a 1000cc Adventure with the same torque & HP as what we have now? How about it losing 50 lbs?

I'm fine with peak 100 HP. How flat of a torque curve can you give it? How small of a package can you put it in?

They have seemed to go the way of twin turbos for lots of low down grunt in their cars. What would happen if they concentrated their efforts on a small turbo for the 800?
 
just part of the evolution in engine designs...

still don't know why they needed an oil cooler and gasp...4 valves per cylinder and FI in the 90's:whistle

:laugh:laugh
 
my 1200gsa is too big & my 1150gsa is way too big.


I wish they would focus all their technology in another direction...bigger bigger bigger.....come on.

How about a 1000cc Adventure with the same torque & HP as what we have now? How about it losing 50 lbs?

I'm fine with peak 100 HP. How flat of a torque curve can you give it? How small of a package can you put it in?

I would have preferred they go this direction as well.
 
Ah.... Of course.... I forgot about emissions. Because as we all know, it's about mpg and reducing fossil fuel use until it's about emissions, then it's about emissions, mpg be damned. This rant of course belongs more on the Diesel Truck Registry website than here but the concept is the same.

Emissions and power are better able to be managed with the engine control systems we have now. The first step in having lower emissions is using less fuel in the first place. Less fuel = better mpg.

At the same time, engine control systems can provide terrific mpg. Back 15 years ago, who would have predicted a 300HP Mustang that gets 31mpg on the highway?
 
We don'nt need no stinkin watercooled engines. Just design a damn useful seat that we do not have to spend another $500 dollars to replace!

I have more power than I need now. Design some comfort and a lower frame for a change. And while your at it how about those six fuel strips I have replaced. Couldn't you have done a better job on that. Thier engineers are all Dutch-tall and long legs yea?

there I said it and I feel better!

Jack
 
We don'nt need no stinkin watercooled engines. Just design a damn useful seat that we do not have to spend another $500 dollars to replace! Jack

We get to have the watercooled engines because of government regulations and testing. They can't test our *** the comfort so they cana't regulate the seat.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by wecm31 View Post
They did....the monoshock Airheads!!!!!


It's stone simple to handle 50 horsepower, indeed.

Paul,
how much trouble did you ever have with your K's final drives, out of curiosity? and what HP do they deliver?

(not to hijack the thread at all)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by wecm31 View Post
They did....the monoshock Airheads!!!!!




Paul,
how much trouble did you ever have with your K's final drives, out of curiosity? and what HP do they deliver?

(not to hijack the thread at all)

None - and K bikes range from 75 to 90 to 100 hp/

And the same bearing is used in the monolever Airheads, classic K bikes, and Oilheads. Horsepower, weight, and bumps matter.
 
Just wondering does anyone know what affect, if any, the mandatory lube change has had on the final drive failure rate?

Bill
 
Just wondering… does anyone know what affect, if any, the mandatory lube change has had on the final drive failure rate?

Bill

Since nobody but BMW knows the real failure rate overall, I sincerely doubt anybody knows how many failures were prevented by getting debris out of the final drives with the first oil change.
 
Last edited:
Since nobody but BMW knows the real failure rate overall, I sincerely doubt anybody knows how many failures were prevented by getting debris out of the final drives with the first oil change.

with modern lubricants lasting longer, it still does seem to make sense to do the first change far ahead of recommended mileages, in order to clear debris. too bad there's no available data for the consumer on this one, from BMW. i wonder if anyone has any sense of whether or not other brands of motorcycle have had problems with their own shaft/final drives?
 
None - and K bikes range from 75 to 90 to 100 hp/

And the same bearing is used in the monolever Airheads, classic K bikes, and Oilheads. Horsepower, weight, and bumps matter.

hmmm. well that seems to lead us back to the discussion about HP *needs*- tho HP seems also (in this instance) to be a by-product of the new motor, with the intended end result being reduced emissions... i guess the bikes have gotten generally a bit heavier, too as of late. will overall bike weight increase with the advent of the new liquid cooled motor?

also:
think folks nowadays are riding farther & faster than ever before?
was the final drive on the Oilheads as bullet proof as on the Airheads & Ks?
 
Back
Top