Any Alternatives to the weight of the RT ?

jforgo said:

Looking at these responses confirms to me that modern bikes have largely become too porky! (Following population physical trends perhaps?) Easy to see why people hang on to their Airheads, with the very heaviest one being the R100RT 1981-84 at a mere 525# soaking wet! A bike is supposed to be fun, not work. The work factor seems to increase with the weight, especially in urban or very tight twisty environments.
On top of that, if you ride alone, can you pick your bke up by yourself if you dump it? This may seem "old school" to some, but I just don't consider it prudent to be riding something you cannot pick up and push by yourself. Unless, of course, you are strictly a "pack rider".

Click to expand...

A couple of years ago, when I was about 70, I dropped my R1100RT. Using the method demonstrated by "Skert" as many of the rallies, I was able to pick the bike up with little trouble.

But, I wouldn't mind having a roadster for the less weight but would miss the weather protection of the RT

jforgo said:

Looking at these responses confirms to me that modern bikes have largely become too porky! (Following population physical trends perhaps?) Easy to see why people hang on to their Airheads, with the very heaviest one being the R100RT 1981-84 at a mere 525# soaking wet! A bike is supposed to be fun, not work.....
.

Click to expand...

Hense the new F800GT. It weighs under 500 pounds soaking wet, has comfortable ergos, and 50% more power than an airhead.

People want everything. they want peformance, they want comfort, they want handling and they want all the gadgets they are used to in their daily life plus luggage capacity.
As a result, you have heavy bikes.
If you design a bike with a 180 rear tire, it is going to be heavy.
If I take one of my late 70s/early 80 bikes and add all the practical stuff that comes on a modern tourer like the K1600GT, the bike will end up weighing 800 pounds.

Just on looks alone the new? 800 GT, & other models are eye catching,..for sure. Given the specs , HP seat height, fuel cap, etc It is {IMO} a serious contender for stepping down?. I'd rather it be shaft drive. But the chain / belt is less complex? and saves weight. The Rotax engine has proven itself . And @ 85-90 HP it is more than enough ....

milo said:

Hense the new F800GT. It weighs under 500 pounds soaking wet, has comfortable ergos, and 50% more power than an airhead.

Click to expand...

Yes, if I was looking for something new, that does seem like an attractive ride. Haven't tried one yet...

jforgo said:

... that does seem like an attractive ride. Haven't tried one yet...

Click to expand...

LOL, I really need to NOT test ride one!

And I thought the RT was a light bike...

i know the little F650GS twin isn't in the same class as the mighty RT but i have mine set up for long distance touring and consider it to be a "mini RT" A MadStad windshield w/winglets, Aeroflow handguards, leg guards and duct deflectors do a good job of protecting you from the elements. Jesse boxes, Givi topbox and a RKA tank bag give me plenty of storage.




i also just picked up a 2007 R1200R and have also set that up for long distance touring. in addition to the BMW side cases i added a Givi 46 liter top box that i swap between the F and R bikes, a CalSci windshield, BMW hand guards, and a RKA tank bag.





i am very interested in seeing and test riding a F800GT. to me the belt drive is a big improvement over the chain on my F650

Glad somebody said it.

I, too am a fan of the older airheads. The only thing lacking is real power, but they do go & go. Lighter, lower seating position, all the luggage is available, and they are prettier too. You can ride an R80 or R100 as many miles in a day as you can any other bike.
PLUS if you are so inclined, you can do ALL the work on them yourself- something noone can claim for the newer BMWs.

Yes I too

would like a lighter bike, a lower seat, Heated grips, cruise control (which I love), adjustable windscreen good ergonomics, linked ABS brakes, Heated seat, six speed and 90 hp or more, And some good protection from the rain and the wind.

Every time I think about looking at an alternative bike to my RT and then take my RT out for a ride, I have a hard time imagining riding anything else.

Another choice is Honda's new CTX700.

http://powersports.honda.com/2014/ctx700.aspx

jforgo said:

Looking at these responses confirms to me that modern bikes have largely become too porky! (Following population physical trends perhaps?) Easy to see why people hang on to their Airheads, with the very heaviest one being the R100RT 1981-84 at a mere 525# soaking wet! A bike is supposed to be fun, not work. The work factor seems to increase with the weight, especially in urban or very tight twisty environments.
On top of that, if you ride alone, can you pick your bke up by yourself if you dump it? This may seem "old school" to some, but I just don't consider it prudent to be riding something you cannot pick up and push by yourself. Unless, of course, you are strictly a "pack rider".

Click to expand...

You might take this as just me being defensive about my bike - whatever. Take a look at this graph and compare the area under the curve for the K1600. I don't know, but that looks like it ought to be a lot of fun - and it is. I've been known to spank the kneepuck draggin' sport bike guys in the hillbilly twisties and with a torque curve that starts at a value that all others top out and, well, that just makes it too easy to have that kind of fun. If you don't believe me go ride one. It rides like a bike that is a couple a hundred lbs lighter than it is, it has all the state of the art touring goodies, looks great, and yes, no one yet has figured out how to do all that cheaply.

I'm 66. Bought my RT a year ago and I was largely influenced by the light weight when compared to other sport/luxury tourers.

But when I can't be trusted to hold my RT up any longer, I'll look at one of these:

jforgo said:

Looking at these responses confirms to me that modern bikes have largely become too porky! (Following population physical trends perhaps?) Easy to see why people hang on to their Airheads, with the very heaviest one being the R100RT 1981-84 at a mere 525# soaking wet! A bike is supposed to be fun, not work. The work factor seems to increase with the weight, especially in urban or very tight twisty environments.
On top of that, if you ride alone, can you pick your bke up by yourself if you dump it? This may seem "old school" to some, but I just don't consider it prudent to be riding something you cannot pick up and push by yourself. Unless, of course, you are strictly a "pack rider".

Click to expand...

Admittedly a lot of bikes are heavy, but when riding and when on the balance point stopped you will not feel that weight. When riding large bikes in twisties, there is some mass physics at work, and the bikes may not roll around their CG point as quickly as a lighter bike. Rake angle of the forks, the resulting trail, and width of the handlebars has a huge impact on maneuverability irrespective of bike weight. Choppers suck at maneuverability for a reason!

If you drop one, it could be an issue, but if you know the trick to picking up a bike that is not an issue either. I have 95 pound petite women in my classes who can pick up a loaded Harley Ultra, or LT if you prefer, after they know the technique.

A lot of the complaints with heavy bikes and slow maneuvering speed is, again, lack of training or skill in this area. People complain that the RT is hard to maneuver at low speed because it is "top heavy". If you know the technique it is very, very easy to ride at amazingly slow speed. Ditto for any other large bike up to and including the big Harley Ultras. A lot of the HD crowd cannot make the 20' wide "box" in the limited space maneuver. It is very easy to do with proper training. (Hint: You need to be in the friction zone and slightly above walking speed to let the bike hold itself up when leaned over for the turn).

Please consider taking some refresher training courses. They are a lot of fun, and you probably will learn stuff you never knew.

BTW: My 2011 RT is 571 pounds soaking wet, with 110 HP, and is, shall we say, "peppy" .

I also agree with Pittsdriver and the K1600 data. That bike can do stuff in 6th gear without downshifting that is amazing. The inline-6 is an amazing powerplant, as are all BMW 6's.

Norms 427 said:

I'm 66.

....But when I can't be trusted to hold my RT up any longer, I'll look at one of these:

Click to expand...

I dunno, Norms. Have you "ridden" one of those? They're not like a motorcycle at all because you don't lean into turns and centrifugal force flings you out. It's basically just a three wheel convertible only less comfortable w/o AC, heat, or the benefit of the top when it rains. Having three wheels with three different tracks it's hard to avoid a pothole. Also they tend to "wander" on roads with a raised crown in the center. May as well just get a Elio. http://www.eliomotors.com/

ka5ysy said:

A lot of the complaints with heavy bikes and slow maneuvering speed is, again, lack of training or skill in this area. People complain that the RT is hard to maneuver at low speed because it is "top heavy". If you know the technique it is very, very easy to ride at amazingly slow speed. Ditto for any other large bike up to and including the big Harley Ultras. A lot of the HD crowd cannot make the 20' wide "box" in the limited space maneuver. It is very easy to do with proper training. (Hint: You need to be in the friction zone and slightly above walking speed to let the bike hold itself up when leaned over for the turn).

Please consider taking some refresher training courses. They are a lot of fun, and you probably will learn stuff you never knew.

Click to expand...

You could be right here in some cases. But, if you are short and old and an urban rider, the height and weight issues with the RT are real and you often run into situations where that is the case. We are not talking about being able to pick the bike up, or do a slow-speed u-turn in a parking lot. You can't just brush it off as lack of skill or training.

themayer said:

You could be right here in some cases. But, if you are short and old and an urban rider, the height and weight issues with the RT are real and you often run into situations where that is the case. We are not talking about being able to pick the bike up, or do a slow-speed u-turn in a parking lot. You can't just brush it off as lack of skill or training.

Click to expand...

Again, this is a rider issue. Why would you run into any situation where that would become an issue? One of the skills of riding a motorcycle is to quickly analyze the roadway surface you are getting into. Short folks do have issues with relatively tall bikes, but I have seen a lot of old, short riders dump low-suspension bikes because they do not know how to ride slowly and stay off the front brake when maneuvering in a parking lot.

I know a BMW R1200 GS Adventure rider who is in his 70's and is vertically challenged at around 5'6" and has absolutely no difficulty handling the beast. I can barely get the balls of my feet down on that bike, but he simply slides off one side and puts a foot down. It is all technique and training, nothing magic at all.

Norms 427 said:

I'm 66. Bought my RT a year ago and I was largely influenced by the light weight when compared to other sport/luxury tourers.

But when I can't be trusted to hold my RT up any longer, I'll look at one of these:

Click to expand...

I considered a Spyder before I got a Maxi-Scooter. I talked to the dealer, owners and went on forums dedicated to them. I decided that they were not my cup of tea. The dealer representative admitted that the switch for a long time rider is difficult because they don't lean in curves and it is easier for a newbie to adjust. He also admitted that the biggest complaint is fuel mileage as many owners are getting from the mid 20s to around 30 MPG. Also, the one I liked had a MSRP of over $26,000.

osbornk said:

I considered a Spyder before I got a Maxi-Scooter. I talked to the dealer, owners and went on forums dedicated to them. I decided that they were not my cup of tea. The dealer representative admitted that the switch for a long time rider is difficult because they don't lean in curves and it is easier for a newbie to adjust. He also admitted that the biggest complaint is fuel mileage as many owners are getting from the mid 20s to around 30 MPG. Also, the one I liked had a MSRP of over $26,000.

Click to expand...

i'll second that. my g/f has one which she purchased after taking the MSF BRC course, but not quite taking to the leaning thing. she had plenty experience with quads, and fins the Spydie to be perfect. for me, it's fun and different, but the differences are extreme! all my sensory input (eyes, hands, butt, EVERYthing) says "bike", until its time to steer the thing (or to use the non-existent front brake lever!).
bottom line- if you have lots quad experience, teh learning curve won't be so bad. if you have only lots of m/c experience, you might find that learning curve pretty disconcerting.
but a Spidey is still more fun and motorcyclish than a convertible!

milo said:

I dunno, Norms. Have you "ridden" one of those? They're not like a motorcycle at all because you don't lean into turns and centrifugal force flings you out. It's basically just a three wheel convertible only less comfortable w/o AC, heat, or the benefit of the top when it rains. Having three wheels with three different tracks it's hard to avoid a pothole. Also they tend to "wander" on roads with a raised crown in the center. May as well just get a Elio. http://www.eliomotors.com/

Click to expand...

No, I haven't ridden a CanAm but I've owned a Ural for 2 years and 18,000 km. I agree that 3 wheels is nothing like 2 wheels ... but they're still fun in their own, VERY unique way.

You know, on second thought, I think I'll just keep riding my Ural when the day comes to give up 2 wheels ...