Moshe Levy's Facebook Posting - New R1250 GS & RT

I like what drneo66 wrote. For those of us who buy used bikes...the future looks great. There'll be some great deals out there.

With a previous bike, there was a common question asked. How fast will it go? Someone came up with this answer and I've always liked it since. "It'll get up to killing speed just fine. What you do with it then, is up to you."

I've got a bike that'll get to 140 mph, supposedly. I'm sure I need more horsepower.

More HP is never a bad thing. I don't have to ride balls out to appreciate acceleration and the abilty to pass others more quickly. Others may not want it, or feel they need the extra HP, but this is the natural progression of the internal combustion engine. I'm a safe and sane rider, but will take the extra HP every time. Whether that may be worth it to others to trade up, and pay extra for that luxury is always a function of the size of your wallet or your degree of common sense.

Anyone who moved from a oilhead or hexhead to the water boxer surely appreciated the significant difference in usable power. I suspect those who move to the VVT will feel no different. Sign me up, right after I convince my wife!

utahskies said:

More HP is never a bad thing...Anyone who moved from a oilhead or hexhead to the water boxer surely appreciated the significant difference in usable power. I suspect those who move to the VVT will feel no different. Sign me up, right after I convince my wife!

Click to expand...

utahskies said:

Whether that may be worth it to others to trade up, and pay extra for that luxury is always a function of the size of your wallet or your degree of common sense.

Click to expand...

If I'm not mistaken, luxury auto maker Rolls-Royce used to advertise the horsepower of their engines simply as "adequate" back when lesser car brands were actively engaged in horsepower competition. Safe to say most R-R purchasers were probably not counting pennies at the time.

A prospective buyer also has good reason to hope the new 1250's VVT will be a bit more trouble-free than the car VANOS system that precedes it. Mechanical complication always involves a certain degree of reliability and maintenance risk. I agree it is up to the buyer to decide if it is worth it.

Simple, reliable, comfortable and high-quality workmanship motorcycles are still good. It's just getting harder to find a new one.

daboo said:

I like what drneo66 wrote. For those of us who buy used bikes...the future looks great.

I've got a bike that'll get to 140 mph, supposedly. I'm sure I need more horsepower.

Click to expand...

People buy HP/performance for acceleration, suspension, etc, not so top speed which might be done once or twice just to see, if ever.

Given: HP = Torque x RPM ÷ 5252

Solving for Torque:

HP*5252/RPM = Torque

If HP goes up, for a given RPM, then Torque goes up too.

I like torque, more than top end speed.

Lots of horsepower can be fun, but beyond a certain point might be somewhat impractical.
Kawasaki's 1000cc HR2 makes about 300HP, but just imagine the thrill of whacking the throttle open on a Boss Hoss BHC-3 ... 455HP and 455ft/lbs torque!

Merely "adequate" power can be good too, especially for a bike positioned for long haul touring where reliability and ease of maintenance are important considerations. I hope BMW is not over stressing other drive line components just to claim the next generation of boxers is somehow "better".

43912 said:

If I'm not mistaken, luxury auto maker Rolls-Royce used to advertise the horsepower of their engines simply as "adequate" back when lesser car brands were actively engaged in horsepower competition. Safe to say most R-R purchasers were probably not counting pennies at the time.

A prospective buyer also has good reason to hope the new 1250's VVT will be a bit more trouble-free than the car VANOS system that precedes it. Mechanical complication always involves a certain degree of reliability and maintenance risk. I agree it is up to the buyer to decide if it is worth it...

Click to expand...

I think we need to recognize that the BMW single-VANOS is 26 year old technology it is no coincidence that this was done at the same time stricter emission control regulations were introduced. Single-VANOS systems (intake cam only) decrease nitric oxide (NOx) emissions by 24%, the double-VANOS (both intake and exhaust cams) is 22 years old and had a smaller but appreciable improvement on emissions. A lot has changed sine then.

One major problem with the original VANOS units was the material used for their O-rings. They used Buna which didn't do a great job of sealing and let oil past, etc. For well over a decade now companies like DrVanos (they used to be one of my sponsors for an M3 that I raced) have been replacing the Buna O-rings with Viton O-rings. Similar to the improvements from using Viton valve-quide seals, this is a major improvement.

43912 said:

... Simple, reliable, comfortable and high-quality workmanship motorcycles are still good. It's just getting harder to find a new one.

Click to expand...

Emission regulations is the entire reason for that. This has been the driving force behind poor idling of the original Oilheads, and tons of other driveability and reliability issues for cars and bikes since the 1970's. That why Airheads up until the late 70's are so much simplier than those of the 90's. Most of the added complexity was/is driven by a need for stricter emissions control or better fuel economy while meeting those stricter emission standards. We also don't put up with many of the reliability issues that plagued earlier, simplier bikes.

It is very easy to forget that motorcycles are actually far more reliable today than ever before. That doesn't mean there aren't still reliability issues, just that they are not nearly as prevelant at previously. What has changed the most is our tolerance for dealing with reliability issues. I've got a 2006 Ducati ST3s that is nowhere near as trouble-free as my 2014 R1200RT. My 1975 R90S runs great but has nowhere near the build quality, material, or reliability of my 2014 RT. It is far simplier and like my Nortons, far easier to work on but definitely not as reliable.

There has been a ton of work done on VVT since BMW started using VVT and for motorcycles, certainly Suzuki has shown how a simple, uncomplicated system can produce good results. All we can do is hope that whatever path BMW takes will be simple, reliable, and effective. A big ask, but we can hope. ;-)

43912 said:

... I hope BMW is not over stressing other drive line components just to claim the next generation of boxers is somehow "better".

Click to expand...

Me too. They likely aren't, but only time will tell, unless the systems are being used in something generating similar power levels, but until we know what any of the actual package will be, all we can do is hope.

GotFog said:

Given: HP = Torque x RPM ÷ 5252

Solving for Torque:

HP*5252/RPM = Torque

If HP goes up, for a given RPM, then Torque goes up too.

I like torque, more than top end speed.

Click to expand...

I'm with you, torque is what I enjoy most often. For public road riding you will reap the benefits more frequently and regularily from TQ than from HP.

Just a note, while TQ and HP always cross at 5,252 rpm, the actual TQ and HP curves can be manipulated significantly and that is what VVT is used for. It recaptures TQ and HP that would otherwise be lost at any given level of emissions. The variability of it based on ECU and sensor data allows it to give us the best of both worlds, based on today's level of technology.

I just don't see a 25 hp increase. BMW would be better served with a more modest increase in hp that would be in keeping with increases we've seen in pervious years. Like many of you, I've spent a lot of time reading and talking BMW, and I've never heard anyone say they would love to buy an RT, if it only had 150 horsepower. But I have heard several people say they would be pleased to see a little more torque.

I suspect a probable modest increase in horsepower along with an increase in torque. It's interesting that the Motorcycle.com article said nothing about a 25 horsepower increase.

I just got a 2018 RT in January, and I have to say I absolutely love the engine. Every time I think about it I feel like its time for a ride. That said, I don't think anyone will be upset with a 135 hp engine, and a noticeable increase in torque as long as there is no additional weight. I only mention weight because the black covers make the engine look massive.

Like an earlier post, I like the smaller size of the top box, but I suspect it is being used to house the motorcycle equivalent of a black box like the ones I've seen on numerous police bikes to house the radio, etc.

Either way, I can't wait for the debut of the 2019 BMW R1200RT at the Intermot Show in Cologne this fall.

E.

I believe every one knows that horse power sells bikes The RT and GS principle leading competitors is KTM Ducati, both of which claim around 150hp. That is the reason for more HP. Sales!

After riding RT for many years I concluded they had become to big. bulbous for me, I have a RS now. Love it. Use if for touring and brisk local rides.


What I would like to see in BMW use the VVT and all other new technologies in 1000cc, RS package and size, sport tourer. I'd like to see 450 lbs, 110 hp and premium suspension (Tractive, Wilbers, Ohlins) fitted with ESA which is useful when adding a rider or the weight of touring luggage.

Just dreaming. Small market will never happen!

ExGMan said:

View attachment 66844

Click to expand...

I love THAT!

It certainly seems as though BMW is on track to be part of the "more power is better". I agree that my 2016 RT does not need any more power than it already has. That being said I also agree that those needed the latest and greatest will provide a lot of nice used bargains for us.

Also, it seems that soon the F800GT will be where the R1200RT was a few years back. It is already close to 100 HP. When I was replacing my 2002 R1150GS and was looking at a 2012 Triumph Tiger 800 and mentioned I was not sure 800cc was enough my BMW/Triumph dealer noted "that 800cc has more HP than your 1150gs". So by the time I am ready to replace my RT the F???GT may be just what I need.

LFarling said:

I am not sure how I could use 150 HP when 125 HP sometimes scares me to death when I underestimate it.

Click to expand...

If I may?

My 1300GT has 160hp & I find it quite helpful when loaded down & I need to pass on an uphill. The biggest reason I'm holding off on a RT is because *I* want more than 120-125hp. The new motor with 144hp excites me.

My .o2

lkraus said:

Another "spy report": http://www.motorcycle.com/features/2019-bmw-r1200rt-spy-photos-new-boxer-engine.html

Maybe the headlight change means we finally get LEDs?

And what's that under the nose?
Collision detection? Laser Cannon?
View attachment 66802

Click to expand...

oh please let it be laser cannon. those hardey riders with daymaker aux lights they never turn off need some filaments burned out. cars that tailgate need taught a lesson, maybe a tiny hole in the radiator, not enough to make a slick, just enough to disable.

maybe a deer mode

rod

Rod:

Please tell us where you ride so we can avoid that area.

E.

LFarling said:

I don't know why we need 150 HP? My personal best is 128 MPH on a closed course

I will say on the KTM I have a friend who had a Super Duke for like 2 months and it cooked him to death so he got rid of it.

I like the VVT and if the HP increase does not create a bunch more heat life will be great.

As I age the weight becomes more of a issue then anything else about the bike. It is why I went to a GS. I can not see these 1250's getting lighter.

It is great as technology marches on but you have to give some things up to get others. I am just wanting to see what one has to give up to get this new tech.

It is going to make a bunch of bikes obsolete and worth way less on trade ins and public sales. I will have to watch this as I can not afford to be a player just getting on a 17.5. I can tell you the 17.5 GS is all that and a bag of chips too. I absolutely love the bike to death and I do not lust after this new one as I did this GS. My 15 RT was nice but the 17.5 GS is very nice.

Click to expand...

That is why we bought two new G310GS bikes!!!

This is fascinating to me as the 3asy ride on my S1000R is up summer 2019 and I have been heavily debating if I want to get an XR or 1200GS at that time. I was split 50/50 but a closer in power engine on a more robust platform would clearly put the GS in the lead for what I want out of my next daily commuter.

Well, truth be told Pat I think we tend to ride in the fashion to which our bikes are designed. I'm old and injured and sold the sport bikes for the GS to ride differently and it worked. To be clear, I was way too old to be stupid on the sport bikes, but I sure tended to go faster.