Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 19

Thread: 2010 RT vs 2016 RT

  1. #1

    2010 RT vs 2016 RT

    Ok, a few years ago I asked what were the differences between the 2005 and 2010 RT's. I got some great feed back and eventually sold my 05 RT and bought a great used 2010 RT which I really love. Thinking ahead a little, maybe next year I might sell my 2010 and try to find a nice 2015 or 16 RT. What would be the advantages of moving up to a Wet Head etc.
    ________________________________________
    The early bird might get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.

  2. #2
    Registered User lvermiere's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Grand Forks B.C.
    Posts
    72
    Quote Originally Posted by patiodadio View Post
    Ok, a few years ago I asked what were the differences between the 2005 and 2010 RT's. I got some great feed back and eventually sold my 05 RT and bought a great used 2010 RT which I really love. Thinking ahead a little, maybe next year I might sell my 2010 and try to find a nice 2015 or 16 RT. What would be the advantages of moving up to a Wet Head etc.
    Some more HP but also 60lbs+ added weight.

    For me the Hexhead HP is adequate and I don't need any extra weight on a bike.

  3. #3
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Virginia Beach
    Posts
    822
    I had a '10 and an '11. Bought a 14-light years diff! A completely different machine-all changes for the better. Go for it...
    Virginia Beach
    current:14 R1200RT 75 R60/6
    past: 11 R1200RT 10 R1200RT 03 R1200CLC

  4. #4
    Registered User lkchris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM
    Posts
    5,814
    With the 2010 you don't have to have water cooling and you don't have to have a wet clutch. No hot radiator air blowing on you, no water leaks.

    With the 2010 you can use the best tank bag in the history of tank bags ... not on the wethead.

    With the 2010 you don't have to have keyless locking nor power shift.

    The 2017 is going to have ABS-while-leaning, which will be a good thing. This not on 2014-16.
    Kent Christensen
    21482
    '12 R1200RT, '02 R1100S, '84 R80G/S

  5. #5
    Chuck Berry cberry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Indian Harbour Beach, FL
    Posts
    111
    I had about 130K on my 2005 RT and I loved it's quiet nature. Traded it for a 2015 GSA to up the off road/adventure game. It did that just fine, and the engine is superb.

    But, I just didn't like the top-heavy weight and the barn door effect at high speeds. So, I sold the GSA and decided that going back to the RT was the way for me. If I could have re-bought my old RT I would have! Instead, I decided that the end of the line, or Last Mohican, the 2013 90th anniversary edition would be a good choice. That's what I looked for and got...with only 7K miles on it.

    The extra weight of the wethead is a big negative for me, and its performance with the new engine is phenomenal, but not enough to win me over. Sometimes less is more, especially when it comes to systems or components which are subject to failure.
    Chuck Berry
    2013 R1200RT Anniversary Edition, 2015 R1200GSA (retired), 2009 G650GS,
    MOA #94523, IBA #27506 National Parks GOLD (still OLDEST at 69 in 2007) and again in 2016 at 78, SS1K at 76 & 77, Lighthouse GOLD Extreme at 77

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by cberry View Post
    Sometimes less is more, especially when it comes to systems or components which are subject to failure.
    Truer words have never been spoken.......

  7. #7
    Thanks for all the great input. I really love my 2010 and often think while riding it that its the perfect bike for me. Lots of people have told me how much better the wet heads are. I haven't ridden one yet. The guy I got my 2010 from had got a new 2016 RT.
    I really like the changes from the 05 to 2010 and I am super happy with my bike. Guess I will hang on to it for a few more years
    ________________________________________
    The early bird might get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.

  8. #8
    Kein Nasebohrer RBEmerson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    SE PA
    Posts
    352
    For what little it's worth, I'm currently on a '09 loaner, and spent a week in the Alps (Edelweiss) with a '15.

    At the end of the trip, I was quite happy to give the bike back, but not for the reason most people expect. And I like the '09 very much, but won't try to buy it or a close cousin.

    The biggest warning about any RT is "ooooohh, much too hard to steer in the mountains. The weight will wear you out!" Um... bat puckey. What took the least effort was steering and overall ride/road handling. What got me was the need to stay above 3K. Below that, the motor's just phoning it in. At 3K+, wind it up, drop the clutch, and watch the front tire lift. Really. That is, tons of torque in the power band. I never got much above about 85-90 MPH on the roads (autobahn speed limit in Austria is 130 km/hr or 80+ - 100 km/hr or 60 on open roads - 50 km/hr or 30+ in town). NTL the bike was quite stable and a pleasure to ride. But... if the tach gets below 3K, the squirrels in the treadmill take a break. In the tight twisties and hairpins, where speeds can drop to 10-20 mph, that means a lot of gear jamming to keep the needle above 3K. And often trying to get down from 6K+ would mean shifting in mid-turn - Not Wise. As a result, in the mountains I was working hard to keep the motor up to speed. And the motor was just flat plain buzzy. There was about 18K on the odo. In this setting I'd say the bike was ridden hard and not given the degree of care a person might give their only bike. I found a couple of "needs attention" points including an unidentified "burning oil" smell that might have been nothing or an incipient failure. Hard to say... Bottom line: nice riding bike, demanding buzzy motor.

    The '09 isn't water cooled and lacks a fly-by-wire throttle. It has the same 3K rev "floor" the '15 has. The suspension is clearly not in the same generation as the '15. It has a relatively high seat and, I assume, a high CG. The PO put on a Cee Baily windscreen that, IMHO, is a fail for keeping wind out of my face. There's a ZTechnik fart can muffler without the baffle. And the, I assume, valve cover guard is more useful as the highway peg mounts it provides. Seems like the PO had a thing about riding and sounding like an H-D. For all of that, I like the bike a lot.

    Back to back, I'm sure I can find the handling differences between the two bikes. But taken on its own, the '09 acquits itself quite nicely in anything from cruising sweepers to near hairpins on either side of the Blue Ridge in central PA. Coming off of my K1200RS, the height still takes some getting used to, but I'm pleased with how far over I can get the bike to go and still not feel worried.

    The gear box is as clunky as I remember the '15's being (no clutchless shifting package). It'd be nice to change the suspension mode on the fly. But then my RS doesn't have EAS at all. But it does have Íhlin shocks (woohoo!). The motor is not turbine smooth but it's not buzzy, even when I'm working hard on the really tight turns and let the motor wind up instead of shifting up. And churning along at speeds that would get me nailed in Austria (had my picture taken once, thank you, but bikes don't have license plates in the front - fine avoided), I could have just as easily continued west into the setting sun.

    The RS has water cooling. Sit in a parking lot on Interstate-105, where the temperature matches the route number, and water cooling looks mighty good. Complication? Weight? Well, of course. Think of any major bike built in this century that can be bump started with a dead battery. The list is a short one. So we're already plagued with complication. The question is "at what point do all of the toys' benefits outweigh the cost of having them?" There is, IMHO, no one answer. I believe in "ride your own ride". Your ride, with lots of technology, isn't someone else's simple, minimalist ride. Ride your own ride. :)
    Some people are wise. Some people are otherwise.

  9. #9
    Dress for fall & avoid it AlanColes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Bedford, Nova Scotia
    Posts
    369
    I think there is too much being made of the weight differences between the 2010 and the 2015. Yes, they're 33 lbs different, but that weight is located differently, so it is not what it appears. The center of gravity on the RTW is lower and the seat is also a bit lower, so in virtually every situation other than pushing dead weight, the RTW is going to be a little better and in dead weight maneuvers a little bit worse. I'll take the RTW in that regard.

    Others who like one versus the other have given their reason and many are valid points, but it really boils down to if you're okay with more complexity than there are gains to be had.

    Don't let the luddites scare you off either. I've got a 1975 R90S and a couple of old Nortons so I really like and appreciate simplicity but I also believe in modern medicine and fuel-injection, etc. You really need to do a test ride to see what you think.

    The maintenance on the RTW is easier and less than on the 2010. Yes there are more gizmos and electronics available but most, not all, are far more reliable than they used to be. We don't see people up in arms over the water-cooling, ABS, etc., etc., in cars or trucks, do we? Why? Because most, not all, but most, of these "modern" changes actually make the vehicle more reliable not less so.

    I went from my 2004 R1150RT to a 2014 RTW and am very pleased. I would not have gone to a 2010, but the introduction of the RTW changed things for me and all it took was one ride. I'd ridden Hex and Cam heads enough times that, for me, while they were great bikes and offered many improvements over my 1150, there wasn't enough to push me into spending the money. The RTW changed that for me and with 10,000+ kms on it this year through numerous mountains, back roads, etc., I'm still very happy. Take one out and decide for yourself.
    Regards, Alan
    President BMWONS - MOA Charter Club #097, BMW MOA #190956, BMWONS #327, Airheads #14457
    Current: '14 R1200RT / '06 Ducati ST3s / '86 R80RT / '75 R90S / '73 850 & '70 750 Commando Prev: '04 R1150RT / '81 Honda GL1100 / '77 Suzuki GS750 / '73 Norton 850 Commando

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by RBEmerson View Post
    Coming off of my K1200RS, the height still takes some getting used to, but I'm pleased with how far over I can get the bike to go and still not feel worried.

    The RS has water cooling. Sit in a parking lot on Interstate-105, where the temperature matches the route number, and water cooling looks mighty good. Complication? Weight? Well, of course. Think of any major bike built in this century that can be bump started with a dead battery. The list is a short one. So we're already plagued with complication. The question is "at what point do all of the toys' benefits outweigh the cost of having them?" There is, IMHO, no one answer. I believe in "ride your own ride". Your ride, with lots of technology, isn't someone else's simple, minimalist ride. Ride your own ride.
    If you're coming off an RS then good luck with an RT. I rode a K12RS for years and that brick was one of the best engines ever made. Power was absolutely linear, smooth as silk, and a joy to ride. I always said, that if BMW would put that engine in a touring bike (and not the watered down version in the pig LT), I'd be lining up to buy one. The riding position on the RS, and my wife's GT was abysmal for long distances but they rode like they were on rails in the curves. I can ride all day and night on my '08 R12RT, but you are absolutely correct that when that boxer engine drops below 3K, she let's you know in no uncertain terms.

    Still miss those K bikes.

  11. #11
    Kein Nasebohrer RBEmerson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    SE PA
    Posts
    352
    Quote Originally Posted by texasmule View Post
    If you're coming off an RS then good luck with an RT. I rode a K12RS for years and that brick was one of the best engines ever made. Power was absolutely linear, smooth as silk, and a joy to ride. I always said, that if BMW would put that engine in a touring bike (and not the watered down version in the pig LT), I'd be lining up to buy one.
    K1600GT. End of story. :) If I could sell SWMBO on the idea, I'd be on one in a New York minute.

    The riding position on the RS, and my wife's GT was abysmal for long distances but they rode like they were on rails in the curves.
    Every body's different - I don't have a problem with the RS riding position. 300+ mile days don't hurt. It does help to have (real, not a suicide lock) cruise control to let me relax my right as well as left arm and hand. The big gripe with the RS (and I assume GT) is the amount effort twisting the throttle requires. After being off the bike for a while, it takes a bit before the muscles come back (no joke there). Even so, it's not a deal breaker, just annoying.

    I haven't tried the GT version. I suppose the more upright position is an uncomfortable compromise between a full-on GT (later K-GT's, for example) and the RS. They are, after all, almost identical bikes with mostly different ergos.

    I can ride all day and night on my '08 R12RT, but you are absolutely correct that when that boxer engine drops below 3K, she let's you know in no uncertain terms.

    Still miss those K bikes.
    Indeed, subtle is not a word to describe knowing the squirrels are taking time off when the tach needle drops below 3.
    Some people are wise. Some people are otherwise.

  12. #12
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Wilmington, NC
    Posts
    2,254
    Got a hexhead RT, a K1200RS with RhineWest chip and Ohlins, and a wedge K1200GT. For sure I'd have a 1200 brick RT if one had been made- the motor is superb in all respects.
    Riding the RT is NC mts is an exercise in shifting to find the power and the need to move weight around a lot and/or trail brake all the time adds to the effort needed- though I suppose I could learn to love Harley speed. At least BMWs don' drag footboards and try to throw you into the trees. Tried an F800GT which is actually much better for mountains though not for getting there but its poor heat management makes it summer unusable here.

  13. #13
    Kein Nasebohrer RBEmerson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    SE PA
    Posts
    352
    The shifting is what drove me nuts in the Alps. Body shifting, or at least the amount needed, is probably driven by seat height. The RT is pretty willing about getting into a turn, and a little body shift inside brings the bike back up some. OTOH, the RS, with its low CG, is more demanding on that score. The RS obviously does better with the motor wound up a bit, but the power band's wide enough to make fewer demands for shifting.

    There were two H-D's with floor boards on the tour. I kidded the guy who liked dragging them that he should include magnesium strips on the bottoms to make a really bright show...
    Some people are wise. Some people are otherwise.

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by RBEmerson View Post
    K1600GT. End of story. If I could sell SWMBO on the idea, I'd be on one in a New York minute.

    Every body's different - I don't have a problem with the RS riding position. 300+ mile days don't hurt. It does help to have (real, not a suicide lock) cruise control to let me relax my right as well as left arm and hand. The big gripe with the RS (and I assume GT) is the amount effort twisting the throttle requires. After being off the bike for a while, it takes a bit before the muscles come back (no joke there). Even so, it's not a deal breaker, just annoying.

    I haven't tried the GT version. I suppose the more upright position is an uncomfortable compromise between a full-on GT (later K-GT's, for example) and the RS. They are, after all, almost identical bikes with mostly different ergos.

    Indeed, subtle is not a word to describe knowing the squirrels are taking time off when the tach needle drops below 3.
    Wife didn't have a problem with her GT, but then she's quite a bit shorter than me...

    Still some of the most beautiful bikes made by BMW.

    Mine -

    K1200RS-1.jpg

    Hers -

    K1200GT.jpg

    I still would like to find a nicely used K12RS/GT, they're just an outstanding motorcycle.

  15. #15
    Kein Nasebohrer RBEmerson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    SE PA
    Posts
    352
    Too right!
    Some people are wise. Some people are otherwise.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •