What was wrong with the Criusers?

finally! words from a pro.

PGlaves said:

Most (not all) of the folks who concluded the cruiser had too little "power" reached that conclusion reading magazines and the internet while riding their armchair instead of by riding the bike. While I don't think BMW got it quite right, they did what Harley has done for years: designed and tuned an engine for lots of torque at the expense of peak horsepower. Since peak horsepower is relevant primarily at one high rpm point somewhere near redline, while torque is felt at every stop light, within a fairly broad range peak HP only gives ill informed moto journalists something to chirp about and one more little thing to put in their charts. For pure sport bikes it is relevant because they are operated often at high rpm - but for cruisers keying on the horsepower number instead of the torque number is simply misinformed balderdash.

Some of you will remember some of the experiments performed on his R1100RS by (the late and sorely missed) Rob Lentini. Alterations of the timing; using the GS air tubes; substituting cat code plugs, and other things too, for example. The timing changes and GS air tubes did not DETUNE the engine. They RETUNED the engine to provide more mid-range torque, at the expense of peak horsepower. And in an equally deliberate way BMW retuned the 1200 motor in the cruiser to provide gobs of torque - hp at redline be damned.

Since most of the press writers - sport bikers by nature - couldn't understand it very well, all they did was write about the peak HP number. And then lots of BMW riders parroted what they had read. Which is actually pretty funny, because if they really cared about peak horsepower they would be riding a CBRXX, Hyabusa, of some similar bike instead of a BMW boxer twin.

Click to expand...

I was wondering when someone with lots of experience and knowledge of torque vs. HP would clarify the point that I attempted to make earlier. Wish I could say it the way you do Paul. I've been touting the importance of torque almost since I first bought my cruiser but to few care about torque and are totally obessed with HP. I also like your point about judgements based on reading reviews vs actual experience. Even two-hour test rides don't give a person a real appreciation for the true capabilities of the R1200C. I currently have close to 120K miles on them and grow to appreciate the cruiser a little more every time I ride it.

beemerdon,

One point I picked up on after re-reading these replies is that there is a big difference between choosing to ride a certain way and having to ride that way. Like the difference between having to keep up with commuting traffic at 85mph and choosing to ride that way because it's what you want to do. Makes a lot of difference in the level of enjoyment for most folks.

I spent some time chasing Nye and Swider over what passes for twisty roads in the NE on a cruiser. I, to be blunt, hated it. It wasn't the first time I'd spent time on one.

Crappy compromised suspension

Anemic completely uninspiring power

Awkward and uncomfortable seating position

Too little ground clearance

And, sin of all sins, weird uncertain handling. There was no way to even guess what the front end was doing. It was all the complaints about the telelever front end amplified to an extreme and put into bike form. "Wooden and distant" doesn't come close to describing it. The awkward long bars don't help.

I rode it hard. I rode it gently. I wrestled with it through a few U-turns. I even ran one through a mocked up ERC while helping a friend become a better rider. It isn't a sports bike or even a sport tourer, but I did expect a new BMW to perform better than a neglected mid-70's japanese rat bike. IMHO, if it did it wasn't by much. It is exactly the wrong kind of bike for how I like to ride.

If you have one and love it, enjoy it. It's not for me, but thankfully we each can find a bike for our needs and desires.

R1200C owner honesty. Pros and cons~

Well I have had my R12C for 3 years and 50,000 miles. Love the bike! But you ask what is wrong with it and I can tell you the chrome was terrible! It was under powered yes but with minor add-ons you can give it more HP than a Harley. The seat that came stock on it would break your tailbone. A must to change! The spoke wheels are high tech(tubeless) but if you like to ride you'll get cerpeltunel cleanning them. On a scale of 1-10 on handling. I give it a 5 compared to other beemers and a 9 compared to other cruisers. Other than that I must say I have never had a bike I get so may compliments on PERIOD.... My RT is pretty trick,and I muct say my C is pretty maxed out,but I do not go for any ride and people roll down there windows to tell me that they neve seen such a beautiful bike! I do keep it very clean,and I ride my RT 3X as much,just because chrome always needs cleanning when you ride it. And evey time I ride my C it does make me smile,and I do not think I will ever sell the bike,where as I will some day upgrade my RT. My Thoughts!!

What was tight with the cruisers

This ill-titled thread begins with the question "How could they evolved to make them compete with the HDs & VTXs?" (sic). The answers I read here are "more power" and "more noise". Brother beemerphiliacs, noise is not power.

The RedHead and I were riding Annie, our new CL on the freeway through hilly West Virginia in company with friends on a Road King. We stayed in touch via CB. Time and again, the Road King rider gave me a shout to hold up, until I finally let him lead. He could not keep up with my lead hand. Yet now, with 50k on the clock and thoroughly broken in, Annie runs far stronger than she did back then.

That night, at dinner, we compared specifications. Turns out the Road King's twin cam 88 puts out a fifth less horsepower and a quarter less torque from a fifth more displacement.

Yet who complains that the Road King, or any other TC88 is under powered?

Noise is not power. If you want power, get a GoldWing. You never hear them coming; yet they can pull stumps.

As for noise, don't be rude.

cmpu

The Cruiser is a sweet ride.........

Hey, can't we all just get along?

The Cruiser is a great ride. It's not for everyone, but those of us who own them know we've got something very special. And the roundel is just as pretty as the ones on any other beemer.

tpr3cats3 said:

Hey, can't we all just get along?

The Cruiser is a great ride. It's not for everyone, but those of us who own them know we've got something very special. And the roundel is just as pretty as the ones on any other beemer.

Click to expand...

If we have to explain it to you, you won't understand.

Perhaps it is unfortunate BMW didn't further develop the C into even more than it was. As one who has ridden an older /7 with the dance of the driveshaft influencing the handling, its too bad BMW couldn't have developed a Paralever style rear end to go with the shorter drive of the cruiser. That alone would have improved the handling dramatically.

I learned to hustle on my 76 R100RS, to the point I had riders on much more modern bikes wondering how I did it. Riders of the old BMWs learned how to make them hustle. Perhaps it is similar with the R12C.

I do know that I can recommend the R12C to a rider preferring the ower seating of a cruiser and they'll get a great bike. Possibly at a great price.

Strong feelings

Looks like there are alot of strong feelings on this topic - those from the C community being by far the stronger.

Is it perfect? Of course not. On my last trip there were countless roads I wouldn't dream of taking it on because it rides too low and is just too damn pretty to get marred by rocks and vegetation. That's no reason to get rid of it though, it's just a very good excuse to add a GS to your stable! The C's stock seat is, to me, a modern torture device. I did two trips on it and suffered for weeks afterwards. Now I have an Airhawk for any ride over an hour and I can - and do - ride all day in comfort! The fuel mixture choices BMW had to make to get the bike legal made it almost unrideable around town - a malady that plagues other BMWs as well. I installed a Techlusion and now she runs smooth as silk. Still need to sort that out on my GS.

Problems other riders have mentioned such as the poor chrome quality haven't affected my '01, but I do have a break in the mount for one of my rear turn signals. In my opinion that wasn't made strong enough for the weight of the signal housing and the cruiser ride. It's epoxied for now but I'll be taking that apart for a permanant fix this winter. The side covers are quit heavy and can come loose, possibly flying away. Taking care to put them on tightly and installing a secondary restraint takes the worry out of this complaint.

I, too, passionately love my C. it does everything I expect it to do; handles well, takes me on fun trips, goes fast enough to kill me if I'm not carefull, and gets LOTS of attention. One thing it will not do is please everyone - but then, nothing does. I didn't buy my C to please anyone but me.

What's wrong with the Cruiser?

I'm not an owner so I'm somewhat unbiased on the question - my SO rides one and she loves it after a half dozen R- and K-bikes. She fell in love with the looks when she first saw it on the showroom floor. I've put about a thousand miles on her bike - my main ride is an '02 R1150RS.

So what's wrong with it? Five things in her (our) experience - the chrome spoke wheels flaked after about a year of ownership (from new). BMW warranteed replacements - we anted up a small differential charge and swapped them for the mag wheels from the Phoenix which have been fine and look better IMO. Second, the front turn signal lenses keep breaking. They are too fragile for the vibes. Third - if this were my bike I would want a better rear shock than the stocker - though my SO is happy with it and this is a relatively minor complaint. Fourth, the ABS has a habit of not cycling through the self-test properly at initial startup. My SO has spoken with a number of chromeheads who report the same problem. Finally, whatever its technology - it seems to seep oil past its rings more than regular oilheads, which results in smokey startups on occasion. She has also heard this from other chromeheads.

WRT the other comments - this has the most beautiful paint job I've ever seen on a stock BMW. It's the green paint which I believe has a gold metalflake base coat. When we pull into gas stations, non-bikers always go over to the cruiser and remark how beautful they think it is. Subjectively it feels like it has plenty of power and it handles just fine. It has a very comfortable seating position and seat (the leather stocker). Yes, I can be faster on my RS - but I've never been left behind on the cruiser.

Cheers,

The answers to these questions are always subjective. We can be objective, too. Biker techno-geeks know these are different machines and the differences are always accumulative when you consider the difference in riders' abilities. Apples Vs oranges discussions never go well.

If you don't like how a bike fits you, change the setup! This is a cardinal rule for any bike you ride. There are three BMW handlebars available for the C, plus aftermarket stuff.

The C and the CL and the Montauk are NOT the same bike; the frames and the front ends and the rake and trail are different. The C has HALF the trail of the CL and Montauk, making it nimbler. The CL tranny has 6-speeds, the others are 5.

The low-hp engines have high torque. I live in the mountains. I'll take the torque, thank you very much.

Okay, my turn for an apple Vs oranges: I rode a K75RT and couldn't get used to my feet flapping out behind me, pointed down to the ground. Like I was a grasshopper on the tank or something? No thanks.

Ha ha!

Probably all true

bikerfish1100 said:

I took a demo on one. I owned a K11RS at the time. I had previously owned a H-D FLH (fat loud heavy).
The R12C tried to straddle the fence between a BMW (a definitive sport-tourer) and a cruiser (long on looks and "feel", short on power and handling). It ended up being neither fish nor fowl- it did not have real BMW handling nor power, nor did it have the classic cruiser sound or look to it.
i seriously doubt that BMW could have made the break necessary from their own history to make that bike competitive in that particular arena.

Click to expand...

These comments and all the rest are probably why it didn't work in the marketplace. Too bad. It took me a couple 1,000 miles to get really happy with mine, but now you couldn't tear it away from me. It's solid, meticulously built, has all the bells and whistles for touring, lots of wind protection and great seats (heated, too). As far as the power is concerned, I never feel underpowered, and since I own both an R1100S and a K1200R, I think I have a fair point of reference. I think the R1200CLC is one of the finest motorcycles ever designed and built. Only niggle I have is the shocks. Stock ones suck.

I rode an R1100RT in 2006 and loved almost everything about it. I didn't like the fact that even at the lowest seat level, the seat height is 31.5 inches. That is why I dropped the dang thing 5 times in that year. Uneven ground and gravity beating me. I decided to trade the RT in for a 2003 CL almost entirely because its seat height is 2 inches lower. I dropped the CL once this past year (my own fault for coasting through a corner and then making a panic grab of the brake to avoid a collision). I love my CL even more than the RT for that reason. Don't get me wrong -- I had a goofy grin for 7 months in 2006 and 8 months in 2007. I love riding.

What did BMW do wrong with the cruisers -- crappy marketing in my opinion. Until I was 3 months into owning the RT (I bought it in January and picked it up in the first week of April of '06), I didn't even know BMW had made cruisers. I knew they made touring bikes, sport-touring and adventure style bikes. I had been away from riding for 20 years and knew about the other model lines. I had no idea the "C" line even existed.

A more comfortable seat on any of their bikes would be nice. I can ride for a couple of hours without any issues but to put in a 350-400 mile day is hard to do. This applies to both the RT and the CL.

Many of you have said you rode a C or CLC and didn't like them. I agree. I rode mine about 6 months before I bought it when the owner was trying to sell it to me and take my R80RT in trade. I didn't like it at all and preferred my old airhead. About Christmas of last year, he got in a financial bind and I made a very low offer that he accepted. When spring came, I decided to give the bike a try before I put it up for sale so I decided to ride it everywhere so I could get accustomed to the weight and odd low speed handling. It grew on me and I wouldn't consider selling it now. It is an acquired taste.

More to think about.

When I look for a used R12C, I look for the two that have mags; Phoenix/Montauk

I hate the spoked wheels, especially the rear one. The rear wheel area that needs a hub cap looks silly with or without a cap. It is a good excuse for luggage.

One thing that keeps other cruisers popular is the ability to refurbish them to the new owner's tastes, however bad it is. Does the R12C have enough after market accessories to make that possible?

RJM2096 said:

When I look for a used R12C, I look for the two that have mags; Phoenix/Montauk

I hate the spoked wheels, especially the rear one. The rear wheel area that needs a hub cap looks silly with or without a cap. It is a good excuse for luggage.

One thing that keeps other cruisers popular is the ability to refurbish them to the new owner's tastes, however bad it is. Does the R12C have enough after market accessories to make that possible?

Click to expand...

You are on target to be looking at Cs with the mag wheels. The spokes are pretty, but a pain to keep looking good. Also the chrome on most of the spoked wheels is of poor quality and has a tendancy to pit & rust very early on.

The accessories were pretty scarce the first couple of years, but more are available now. The factory leather-covered saddle bags are small and suitable for commuting and shorter trips of 3 to 4 days. The cool thing out now is a much larger saddle bag set (38 liters each I think) that fit the same railing and are just as easy to install with the flip of a couple of levers. There are also some after-market luggage racks avaialble if you want to carry more or add a top-case. Check over on chromeheads.org for more info about accessories and modifications. There are some really good prices out there on used cruisers right now so you should be able to pick one up fairly cheap. IBMWR is a good place to look too.

RJM2096 said:

When I look for a used R12C, I look for the two that have mags; Phoenix/Montauk

I hate the spoked wheels, especially the rear one. The rear wheel area that needs a hub cap looks silly with or without a cap. It is a good excuse for luggage.

Click to expand...

Hubcaps are available, I think there are four on the market, one of which is BMW's. You can change any C to the mag rims from the Phoenix; they're BBS, actually. That's what I did. You can put on K12RS rims, too, it just takes spacers. This lowers the C.

RJM2096 said:

One thing that keeps other cruisers popular is the ability to refurbish them to the new owner's tastes, however bad it is. Does the R12C have enough after market accessories to make that possible?

Click to expand...

Ha ha ha! Apparently not, never enough, otherwise why would chromehead owners keep custom-machining stuff?

Let's see, from BMW for the C alone: three handlebars, three rider's seats, backrest and passenger seating, three shocks, two types of rims, three engine guards, five windshield options, two mirror options, two accessory driving light options, two luggage options...

Aftermarket? Don't get me started. I put on Kuryakyn footpegs and Rizoma mirrors to get the setup that works for me. There are probably 6 other windshield providers, and that many custom seat and shock builders.

Have you seen the GG & Cruzo products? Set the gauges into the tank, relocate the turn signals to the side of the headlight, crop the rear fender and put on a hugger, straight bars, fatter rear tire... Biker bling!





Oh, those Europeans:


Or you can just chrome the rest of it, too:


Nitrous, anyone?


http://www.cruso.info

knary said:

I spent some time chasing Nye and Swider over what passes for twisty roads in the NE on a cruiser. I, to be blunt, hated it. It wasn't the first time I'd spent time on one.

Crappy compromised suspension

Anemic completely uninspiring power

Awkward and uncomfortable seating position

Too little ground clearance

And, sin of all sins, weird uncertain handling. There was no way to even guess what the front end was doing. It was all the complaints about the telelever front end amplified to an extreme and put into bike form. "Wooden and distant" doesn't come close to describing it. The awkward long bars don't help.

I rode it hard. I rode it gently. I wrestled with it through a few U-turns. I even ran one through a mocked up ERC while helping a friend become a better rider. It isn't a sports bike or even a sport tourer, but I did expect a new BMW to perform better than a neglected mid-70's japanese rat bike. IMHO, if it did it wasn't by much. It is exactly the wrong kind of bike for how I like to ride.

If you have one and love it, enjoy it. It's not for me, but thankfully we each can find a bike for our needs and desires.

Click to expand...

Fastest.

Cruiser.

Ever.

Apple VS oranges Oh so true!

Ok I have both, and every thing I read states one thing, Either you want to sport or cruise. The sport bike beemers riders don't like it because it is a cruiser and all the people that have both accept the bike for what it is, and usally custom fix all the problems they had. (there are plenty). Really is that not what every biker does to there bikes over time anyhow???

I am a member of the chromeheads.org websight and I must tell you it is a great place for everyone that has a chromehead cruiser. Being a member for over 3 years and owning a C. I have seen many R12's sold over there but everyone regreted selling and many repurchased later. I really only remember one guy that really hated his C,and went to a Jap bike.

I think the C needs to be compared to other cruisers. It really is no shock to me that many other beemer guys fing it hard to accept that bike because it is the only cruiser that BMW every made.

I really think that once you have one you will love it in the time it takes you to customize it the way you want it anyway.

Oh I also think the price will really go up on these bikes and become the classic's that they are. The after market acces are becoming more scarce and parts will start to dwindle. Only common sense. "supply and demand"

Last thought! The C is a high tech Harley of BMW's. Dependable Boxer highway cruiser. Yea! they could of made it better but they left that for you to do. I look at it like this I ride my RT every day. I ride my C on the weekends. I smile when I am riding either one. If I did not have my C, I would own some other cruiser. I love to look at Harleys but when I ride them I am reminded of the reason why I do not have one. Oh and by the way, every harley bar I stop at all the harley riders druel,and wish they had some of that technology.(it is well accepted ) That alone should be a reason to own one. Can't say that for my RT. They only say isn't that what the cops ride!

Over and out!!!

The accessories really sucked

I owned a cruiser as my first Beemer, a 1998 model. Beautiful bike, but the only saddlebags available were from BMW and were too small to be practical. The tankbag eventually offered looked more like my wife's purse than a motorcycling accessory. It did not have a tachometer, nor could one that looked right be added.

Years later, BMW finally came up with a touring cruiser -- a day late and a dollar short.

I traded mine in on a GS and never looked back.

All here are arguing with the Chrome Heads web group.
They are doing a kind of letter writing campaign to justify their love of mediocrity.
They will not accept the fact that BMW has turned its back and dumped the whole Cruiser line.
The whole group is still living in their dungeon and dragon world, unable to realize the world has passed them by.
Come on guys get out of your mothers basement there always have been and are better bikes.

The "Lepper C" was the worst bike I ever owned.

Small tank, pot metal brackets, old rubber formulas on assorted parts, crappy lights and Goofy Ape Hanger handle bars.
The go slow bike from 1998-2004.

Remember when you see a C and its rider point and laugh, because they are riding a joke.