• 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?

Who makes the most reliable motorcycle?

I didn't even have to search for this on another BMW forum...

I left the name off, but the quote is legit.

XXXX said:
After having owned a 1200GS for 8 years, I will never own a BMW shaft-system bike again. This "low maintanence" feature ended up costing me $1500+ and I traded it in last year after yet more problems were discovered.

Oops...this is from a thread started today.
...Many threads on FD failures. Have the wonderous Bavarian engineers got this sorted out yet? If I was to buy a '15, '16, '17 R1200, would I still be worrying about what seems to be an inordinate amount of driveshaft / FD issues? I realize they may be over-represented here and that many members ride hundreds of K's miles with no problems. Just wondering if y'all think this problem has gone away...


Chris
 
Last edited:
And given BMW's ad pieces: UNSTOPPABLE, Legendary, Ultimate....I believe there's naturally a higher expectation of these machines when it comes to reliability/durability. And not just by ad propaganda alone, but also based on premium dollar spent to obtain that "Ultimate", "Legendary" two-wheeler. Perhaps these items tend to render displeasure more quickly when surveys come about.

Excellent points, sir.

I've noticed in life that those who insist on telling you how good/great they or their product are/is, are quite often to be found lacking. Those who are actually good/great have 1. humility, and 2. a reputation which precedes them (or their product) and need no self-confirmation/promotion.
 
Last edited:
Is there a reliability survey where BMW motorcycles come in among top three or five? As skewed as some think any such survey might be, doesn't it seem slightly dismal for BMW, that they represent less than 2% of a market (certainly fewer customers to complain), but next to highest rank in those filing complaints? Just another aspect of all these ramblings.

I've not seen one Dan.

As for the proportion that BMW represents on sales I think 2% is the World market and the US is 4% (where this survey was done). However, I don't think that has any bearing on the survey.

People are misreading some of this.

What the survey is saying is that of the 12,000~ motorcycles surveyed (11,000~ owners). Forty-percent (40%) of the BMW owners in the sample reported at least one fault with something (from a Bluetooth issue to engine failure no one knows) by the fourth (4th) year. However, the study does not identify those breakdowns so it theoretically could be 1 BMW but is more likely closer to the BMW US market share. So lets take that 4% figure as representative of the sample group as well so that would mean 480 BMWs.

Sorry. I don't believe that for a second. To me, it is just rationalisation. Like saying 10,000 respondents to a survey are not a proper sample size...

Chris
Chris, it wasn't that 10,000 is "not a proper smaple size". It is that 480 BMWs (possibly less) from a specific group (CR subscribers) as opposed to a random group definitely is too small a sample size to have any credibility.

We have no data showing what the actual sample size was for each make which automatically means you cannot accept or dismiss the findings, but you therefore absolutely can not rely on it either. Again, it comes back to a meaningless study designed to fill pages and sell subscriptions.

If one were to take the stupidest case possible within the parameters shared, then when you extrapolate that best (within the stated parameters) their might have been 480 BMWs and 40% possibly had their GPS not show their music playlist properly that would be 192 BMWs with faults vs 11% of Yamahas (13% of the US market = 62,920) which would be 1,560 Yamahas in the sample, had complete engine failure.

So that is perhaps 192 BMWs in the group had an issue and perhaps 1,560 Yamahas had an issue. Which ones had tiny issues and which had major issues, nothing is said on that. But we do know that
Among those bikes needing repair, 45 percent incurred no expense
and by far the top two issues were electrical components and accessories.
 
An interesting discussion. I'm surprised it has come back up since that Consumer Reports article is at least a year old. It was a hot topic then also. I think it was an accurate survey. New BMWs are not Airheads. More complexity= more places for them to fail. No way around it. I would probably switch to a Japanese bike myself but for a few things I can't get past. I really like the removable bags, electric windscreen, heated grips and reasonably simple engine on my (now antique) R1100.

One issue I don't think I saw mentioned is also critical to me: resale. In the past (pre-BMW) I found that it was nearly impossible to sell a Japanese bike. I had to just about give them away. I swore I wouldn't be in that predicament again. Of course 1100s are going for next to nothing at this point, but I believe they will recover. I see a lot of old Gold Wings that people are trying to unload. It just looks hopeless. They are so dated looking. BMWs don't seem to age as badly.

But as someone alluded to, they are German machines. Better expect to work on them from time to time. If you don't, you will probably be disappointed.
 
...One issue I don't think I saw mentioned is also critical to me: resale. In the past (pre-BMW) I found that it was nearly impossible to sell a Japanese bike. I had to just about give them away. I swore I wouldn't be in that predicament again...
I had a similar problem when I went to sell my Honda...but I think it is a problem for all used motorcycle sales.

When a motorcycle costs as much as some cars to buy new, most of those who buy them are well off old men. We are buying our dream bike, and so we're willing to pay whatever it takes to get it. For the most part, we want it new. Pristine. Unridden by anyone else. We have the ability to pay cash with no problems. But we are dieing off. Those coming after us, don't have the money. Even if they get a loan, the cost is prohibitive for a toy. (And yes, IMHO, a motorcycle of any brand is a toy unless you use it as your only transportation.) And so there aren't many to buy our toys when we're done without us taking a bath in the process by selling it at a huge loss.

The only way you can minimize the loss you'll take in depreciation, is to look for a bike that is used. Let the first owner pay the depreciation loss and put on the farkles...and then buy it from them when they've only put a few thousand miles on it.

Chris
 
Comparative reliability aside, BMW's are certainly “good enough” motorcycles when you consider other criteria such as riding comfort, handling, and braking. That and many models have the electronic doo-dads that many modern riders consider essential for their riding enjoyment.

Certainly the technology exists to make them more reliable, however, so the question might be “why doesn't BMW fix some of these issues?”. Well, who would really benefit from that investment?
A replacement ESA front shock for an R1200GS is $2300, an ABS unit goes for about $2500, and rear drives are certainly expensive. Other brands don't seem to have issues with these costly components, but when one considers the profitable revenue stream BMW must enjoy from these and similar replacement items well beyond the new bike sale, it begins to make sense.
The dealerships benefit too, as the necessary goal for many car and bike dealerships today is to structure the parts and service department to cover fixed expenses for the ENTIRE dealership (see “dealer service absorption ratio”).

As I see it, the rider has a couple of choices; ride the BMW(s) you like and take the occasional (and perhaps very expensive) repair bill hit, or keep 2 bikes, a BMW for club participation and “biker cred”, and a Japanese bike (Goldwing perhaps?) for longer trips where long term reliability might be a more important factor.
 
Comparative reliability aside, BMW's are certainly “good enough” motorcycles when you consider other criteria such as riding comfort, handling, and braking. That and many models have the electronic doo-dads that many modern riders consider essential for their riding enjoyment.

Certainly the technology exists to make them more reliable, however, so the question might be “why doesn't BMW fix some of these issues?”. Well, who would really benefit from that investment?
A replacement ESA front shock for an R1200GS is $2300, an ABS unit goes for about $2500, and rear drives are certainly expensive. Other brands don't seem to have issues with these costly components, but when one considers the profitable revenue stream BMW must enjoy from these and similar replacement items well beyond the new bike sale, it begins to make sense.
The dealerships benefit too, as the necessary goal for many car and bike dealerships today is to structure the parts and service department to cover fixed expenses for the ENTIRE dealership (see “dealer service absorption ratio”).

As I see it, the rider has a couple of choices; ride the BMW(s) you like and take the occasional (and perhaps very expensive) repair bill hit, or keep 2 bikes, a BMW for club participation and “biker cred”, and a Japanese bike (Goldwing perhaps?) for longer trips where long term reliability might be a more important factor.

And that was the exact attitude the Detroit guys had in the 60s and 70s. Look what happened to them. I love my '15 RT, but I am not happy that a "premium" bike has so many warranty issues. This is my 2nd BMW bike, and both have had warranty work. My Toyota and Honda cars did not have that problem. Now that the Japanese manufactures see the money that BMW made in the sport touring class, they are building some competitive bikes. As the money gets tighter, you will lose the new buyers to the other brands. They (the competing brands) just need to copy BMW, but build it better, faster, and cheaper. They will, and BMW will see sales drop. I love my RT, but I haven't had enough of the Kool-Aid to not see the engineering failures of BMW bikes. I just choose to live with them. Expecting that attitude from the customer base in the future is shortsighted.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
The only way you can minimize the loss you'll take in depreciation, is to look for a bike that is used. Let the first owner pay the depreciation loss and put on the farkles...and then buy it from them when they've only put a few thousand miles on it.

Chris

I'm old enough. Have the money and can pay cash... but my dream bike is always lightly used.

I'm currently riding a 2016 S1000XR fully equipped with all options that someone paid $23325 for with Givi Trekker Outbacks less than one year and 2880 miles ago. I bought it in February, from a dealer with all the farkles in place for under $15k, tax, tags, on the street. The dealer still made a profit so... what do you suppose they gave that poor schlep for his new bike? I did the same kind of thing with my R1200GS Adventure in 2014.

BMWs don't really hold their value any better than anything else... they just cost so damn much to start with that losing 25-40% riding it off the floor still leaves a bloody expensive used bike.

Still, there must be something about them. I keep buying the damn things after riding the competition.
 
...BMWs don't really hold their value any better than anything else... they just cost so damn much to start with that losing 25-40% riding it off the floor still leaves a bloody expensive used bike.

Still, there must be something about them. I keep buying the damn things after riding the competition.
I did much the same as you. I picked up my bike from a retired cardiologist. Nice guy. He wanted to go touring with the bike, so he did the research and fixed it up with every conceivable mod you could do to make it more suitable for touring and comfort. Then he found he wanted a side car and bought a larger BMW. He sold the F800GT to me with about 2000 miles for about $3-4000 less than a new one would cost, and included about $3000 of accessories...and priced it below the current Kelley Blue Book.

When I went looking for the bike though, I did not go looking for a BMW. I was looking for something in the sub-1000cc engine size, with a fairing and without a chain. There aren't many choices.

Chris
 
Now this is just my impression but it seems we are perhaps a very forgiving owners group. That's OK. If that's part of the characterization of a BMW owner so be it.

But I wonder why the MOA does not advocate on behalf of owners for better reliability or parts, service and warranties. When surveys like the Consumer Report comes out, it's understandable to that many will want to defend the brand, but shouldn't we also be asking what's up? I happen to believe BMW builds great bikes but I also believe they could build better bikes. Part of the issue may be a tracking problem. For example late last summer I purchased a 2016 R1200RS. I had to exchange three Nav 5 Units before I got one that worked. My dealers response to the issue was to just give me a diffenrent one to try each time I went in until it was sorted. I suspect that BMW NA never heard a word about GPS failures from my dealer and if you don't know there's a problem its going to be real hard to solve it.
 
Now this is just my impression but it seems we are perhaps a very forgiving owners group. That's OK. If that's part of the characterization of a BMW owner so be it.

But I wonder why the MOA does not advocate on behalf of owners for better reliability or parts, service and warranties. When surveys like the Consumer Report comes out, it's understandable to that many will want to defend the brand, but shouldn't we also be asking what's up? I happen to believe BMW builds great bikes but I also believe they could build better bikes. Part of the issue may be a tracking problem. For example late last summer I purchased a 2016 R1200RS. I had to exchange three Nav 5 Units before I got one that worked. My dealers response to the issue was to just give me a diffenrent one to try each time I went in until it was sorted. I suspect that BMW NA never heard a word about GPS failures from my dealer and if you don't know there's a problem its going to be real hard to solve it.

Oh, if only it were that simple, Grasshopper.

When my two final drives were gutted from my R1200RT, I asked the BMW Master Mechanic at my dealership if he tore them down to actually identify the problem. He stated "No. They get shipped back intact to Germany." I asked if they definitively tore them down there - he smiled, shook his head and said they simply "disappear into a black hole. We never hear anything about them again."

Some mistakes are corrected - some are just buried, in the name of corporate greed.

I agree BMW makes great bikes. I agree BMW could make them better.

I would disagree with anyone who tells me they are trying. The emphasis has for many years now, to make their bikes as light (delicate?) as possible, and as electronically complicated (reliability?) as possible. Not exactly what every motorcyclist is hoping for?! :dunno
 
...I would disagree with anyone who tells me they are trying. The emphasis has for many years now, to make their bikes as light (delicate?) as possible, and as electronically complicated (reliability?) as possible. Not exactly what every motorcyclist is hoping for?! :dunno

You really captured a thought I've had, but couldn't put into words as well as you just did. A light bike will perform better in testing than a heavier more durable bike. And motorcycle reviewers don't keep a bike long enough to see how the bike lasts over time. Also, the more gadgets on the bike, the more it appeals to guys. We like gadgets. It's something we get to fiddle with and point out to our buddies in the parking lot. Never mind that we need a manual to figure out how to operate them. :D

Your description of what happens with those final drives is interesting. The cost of the bike is high enough to cover BMW's potential costs for warranty work. As long as someone will pay the price for the bike, they will continue to sell it just like it is. There's no incentive to lose profits to fix the problem. The dealership gets paid for the work they do on broke motorcycles. There's no incentive there either. In fact, a BMW franchise looks like a better franchise to have than one from the Japanese manufacturers. The Japanese bikes don't break that often, so there's not as much work for the staff.

When I mentioned on a non-BMW forum that I was buying my BMW, I was surprised by the negative comments there from former BMW owners. They had been stung badly by costly repairs.

Chris
 
Silly question, all told.

Do guys/gals that own Ferraris care much about reliability? Porsche GT3s? MV Agustas? Ducatis? Do they punish themselves with Camrys if they have a problem?

Good to define reliability, too ... I wouldn't define it as never having to have scheduled dealer service and never having a problem with that. Or that dealer service is cheap. Being able to fix things with baling wire or fasteners from Home Depot isn't a definition of reliability, either.

And the psychology ... motorcycles are essentially toys--like the Ferrari and Porsche--and the expectation that this adventure can be cheap and trouble-free may be unrealistic.

IMHO there's a lot of guilt and buyer remorse involved here ... and the antidote is an attempt to define motorcycling as economical and trouble free rather than the ego-driven adventure in toyland it more realistically is. There's really nothing wrong with conspicuous consumption. What are problems are guilt and jealousy. Yeah, the government shouldn't buy $600 screwdrivers, but no problem if you do.

The BMW RT seems to remain the world's Police bike, which should suggest some quantity of reliability ... something more expected with industrial equipment. The recent change to wet clutches a reaction to customer feedback.
 
[QUOTE
I agree BMW makes great bikes. I agree BMW could make them better.

I would disagree with anyone who tells me they are trying. The emphasis has for many years now, to make their bikes as light (delicate?) as possible, and as electronically complicated (reliability?) as possible. Not exactly what every motorcyclist is hoping for?! [/QUOTE]

I would also agree with that. I find it interesting that the vast majority of American's don't buy Porches, Audi, or BMW cars. They buy Japanese vehicles. Why? Superb reliability shown over many years, and a much better financial deal. They want something that lasts and requires a minimum of repairs. But motorcycles seem to have such a strong emotional pull that people readily overlook their faults. I guess I include myself in that category, although I have never carried it to the extreme of buying a new Harley.

Motorcycles certainly are toys, but if they are constantly needing repairs, that takes a lot of the fun out of it. There comes a point when pizzazz takes a back seat to just having something that works flawlessly all the time. I believe that may be the corporate philosophy over at Honda, Yamaha, etc.

BMW charges a lot for their bikes, and a lot to repair them when they break, which seems to be too frequent for the quality they always profess to be proud of. They have always been a niche company compared to other manufactures. If they can't get their reputation for quality back up, they likely will stay there.
 
[QUOTE
I agree BMW makes great bikes. I agree BMW could make them better.

I would disagree with anyone who tells me they are trying. The emphasis has for many years now, to make their bikes as light (delicate?) as possible, and as electronically complicated (reliability?) as possible. Not exactly what every motorcyclist is hoping for?!


I would also agree with that. I find it interesting that the vast majority of American's don't buy Porches, Audi, or BMW cars. They buy Japanese vehicles. Why? Superb reliability shown over many years, and a much better financial deal. They want something that lasts and requires a minimum of repairs. But motorcycles seem to have such a strong emotional pull that people readily overlook their faults. I guess I include myself in that category, although I have never carried it to the extreme of buying a new Harley.

Motorcycles certainly are toys, but if they are constantly needing repairs, that takes a lot of the fun out of it. There comes a point when pizzazz takes a back seat to just having something that works flawlessly all the time. I believe that may be the corporate philosophy over at Honda, Yamaha, etc.

BMW charges a lot for their bikes, and a lot to repair them when they break, which seems to be too frequent for the quality they always profess to be proud of. They have always been a niche company compared to other manufactures. If they can't get their reputation for quality back up, they likely will stay there.
(jconway607)

Well said. :thumb
 
Saw this on BR&TMR today. A Consumer Reports study from 2015 data ranked BMW 9 out of 10.

Sounds correct to me. I never considered riding a BMW to be a well thought out decision and I totally believe Japanese quality is at the top of the list and certainly ahead of BMW. However, there is no accounting for what we fall in love with. So please excuse me while I go for a ride on my RTW! I sure hope I don't break down. Buy just in case I did purchase a Good Sam's tow package which seems to have rather remarkable coverage.
 
Everyone here is making points about which level of interest BMW should have in it's known failures, but we are looking in the wrong spot. BMW is a company that makes profit for a living, and they are going to choose the path of least resistance towards making profits. Don't blame them, they are not alone. ALL companies basically perform this same way.

The bottom line here is that we should be looking at ourselves here! BMW isn't going to change their ways unless pressured to do so.....and we don't do that. The quote from earlier in the this thread said, "Eventually our customers will forget about it (failures).....well, that should be a slap in the face of us owners. This thinking goes in direct opposition to all that I've based my own morels on. I've had to learn from early on that when you ignore known issues in your life, that it always ends poorly. Why do we give a pass to this issue?

BMW has created a problem and I don't think they understand the depth of the issues they are facing moving forward. Someone earlier said something about the "age" of BMW owners. I was at a rally recently and there was about 40 riders. 3 of which were under the age 50.....and 2 of those 3 were 49....so basically 50 already. Can't argue with all the grey hair in the room. And it's all of these "older" owners are the only cross section of BMW owners that can turn this tide....the question is, will they? They are mostly long term riders who have liked BMW's for an extended period of time, and the other major factor here is that they have the money to absorb additional costs that come their way. But, if they continue to ignore all these issues and do not hold BMW to a higher standard, then the future of BMW motorcycles will be taking a big hit.

Unless the veteran owners that are leading the way for the rest of us, hold BMW to higher standards, then they are going to find less and less people with a sufficient financial base that can afford to own one....we've hit the tipping point here folks.
 
BMW has created a problem and I don't think they understand the depth of the issues they are facing moving forward. Someone earlier said something about the "age" of BMW owners. I was at a rally recently and there was about 40 riders. 3 of which were under the age 50.....and 2 of those 3 were 49....so basically 50 already. Can't argue with all the grey hair in the room. And it's all of these "older" owners are the only cross section of BMW owners that can turn this tide....the question is, will they?

Au contraire! You have described BMW MOA members that go to traditional local rallies - not the demographic of BMW buyers. They are most likely not the same at all. GS Giant events don't look like that. Track days with S1000 bikes don't look like that.

It is my carefully considered opinion that it is us (BMW MOA) that is not keeping up - not BMW.
 
Back
Top