• 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?

  • Beginning April 1st, and running through April 30th, there is a new 2024 BMW MOA Election discussion area within The Club section of the forum. Within this forum area is also a sticky post that provides the ground rules for participating in the Election forum area. Also, the candidates statements are provided. Please read before joining the conversation, because the rules are very specific to maintain civility.

    The Election forum is here: Election Forum

Really wanting an in-line 4 tourer again

Wow thanks for all of the replies. I did not want to mention it, but the K1300GT that I had owned had a serious lagging issue when going 55 mph or faster. Say you are following someone and fall a little behind. You crank on the throttle to catch up and there is that second or two lag before the engine kicked in. I took it to the dealer and even they admitted to it being an issue but they could not fix it. I was pretty much told to ride it as is. I did buy the bike used from the dealer and who knows what the first owner did to it. You could certainly tell it had been dropped on both sides since both the fairing and the bags had some scratches on them The RT lured me with its speakers, bluetooth and ability to mount extra foot pegs on the engine guards to stretch out my legs. The dealer did give me a fantastic trade in on the K1300GT at the time. I just got back today from a fricken hot 150 mile ride in the Texas hill country. It is a very comfortable bike. My very first bike was a CBR600 F4i and i have just always loved the power of the inline 4. The K1300GT was pretty much like a super sport. No need to downshift with power in every gear. I am only into my second year with this bike and hope to have it paid off next year. I read what the one person said about the K1600GT, but the fact is that sucker is still 100 lbs heavier than the RT and the old K1300GT. I often end up parking on gravel here in south Texas and not being completely flat footed or strong enough to muscle that bike around would just stress me out. I am 5'7" with a 32 in inseam and my heals are just touching the ground on the RT now, plus I will play the chick card and say I just don't have all the upper body strength of some of you guys. It is still a beast to maneuver on gravel once parked. I do know that I am in the minority when it comes to female riders wanting a powerful bike built for touring but with a seat height and weight that makes it manageable to handle in parking situations. Most of the people who want sport tourers are male and can usually handle the weight. The max wet weight I would like is the 600-610 lbs that the RT currently has and a nice 31 in seat height would be awesome!

BTW - When I said the FJR made me feel like I was doing the splits, I should have mentioned it was making me spread my legs wider forcing me to support the bike fully on my toes only on both sides. Not a good thing. The specs of the FJR read awesome 635 lbs and a 31.7 seat height, but when I went to lift that thing of the side stand I was amazed how heavy that sucker felt. It definitely felt heavier than the RT by way more than 25 lbs and I know it did not have a full tank of gas in it. I believe the FJR is a bit more top heavy than the RT is.
 
BC1100S said:
One of those vows was to maintain a sense of humour. :D
Click to expand...

I'd love to see BMW scrap their F800GT and come up with a true luxury middle weight ST sacrificing nothing in performance, tech, & comfort--all at a curb weight of >=520lbs. It might look like this:

  • 115hp inline triple or quad, 950-1000cc
  • Dynamic ESA, Ride Modes, Shift Assist, ABS Pro, CC, heated seats/grips, built in navigation, TPM
  • Adjustable seat height, ergos like RTW, electric screen, trimmed fairing and side cases versus OEM RT/GT models***
  • Final Drive: belt w/ 50K change interval***
  • Audio system, central locking, keyless ignition all could be scraped to reduce cost and a little weight.***

    ***Done in part to help meet weight requirements
I don't think you can beat belt drive when its implemented properly: ultra quiet, lightweight, zero maintenance, efficient, totally clean, and arguably safer in a failure than chain or shaft. Plus, you can examine for signs of impending failure if it was implemented like the one on the F800GT. The power:weight of the above model is almost identical to FJR's but could be pared back to 108hp which would match R1200RTLC's P:W. If you're not hauling another person in 2-up riding there is no need to amp up curb weight to 604lbs on up to get fabulous sport touring performance and comfort, period, end of story. No brand makes this model and I believe it would have substantial appeal in particular to aging boomers who ride one-up most of the time. There are plenty of compromises, but none that can boast full on comfort and performance in this form factor. Deviate away from R1200RT's dull paint schemes and add some raciness to styling and paint and I think it could be a real winner--in fact BMW would be the only brand to fill this niche. Bigger, fatter, heavier is OTW out IMO. The Sport Touring sector is difficult to do really well, but for me as the bike goes up in weight the Sport side starts to degrade. If BWM can put out a GS 1200cc w/ its heavy shaft drive design at 525lbs I see no reason they can't do an ST model w/ the full set of real comfort and performance attributes at 520lbs or so using a smaller smooth inline 3 or 4, belt drive, etc.
 
satxbiker said:
BTW - When I said the FJR made me feel like I was doing the splits, I should have mentioned it was making me spread my legs wider forcing me to support the bike fully on my toes only on both sides. Not a good thing. The specs of the FJR read awesome 635 lbs and a 31.7 seat height, but when I went to lift that thing of the side stand I was amazed how heavy that sucker felt. It definitely felt heavier than the RT by way more than 25 lbs and I know it did not have a full tank of gas in it. I believe the FJR is a bit more top heavy than the RT is.
Click to expand...

In prep for a x-country trip of 10K miles in June '16 I test road FJR-ES and RTLC 3 times each and in the end settled on a new '16 RTLC. I found the FJR to feel like a locomotive or a drag bike! I believe the '15 FJR-ES I test road was 640lbs. I'm 6'4" tall and I found the same thing w/ regard to splayed hips and didn't like it at all. It's just unnecessary weight and heft for one-up riding IMO. Sadly, this is what it takes, or at least RTLC's 604lbs, to get great performance AND comfort. I strongly value and electric windscreen so for me this is an absolute necessity for a sport tourer sacrificing nothing on comfort.
 
GTRider said:
Your friendly local dealer likely has an S1000XR that would scratch your itch. Or look for a good low-mileage K13GT in the used market; they are out there. ... Personally, I plan to ride my K13GT until there is absolutely not enough of it left to repair or carry on... IMHO, of course.
Click to expand...

'Ya know, the S1000XR is a great bike - lighter than the K13GT, wicked fast, throttle-by-wire cruise control - but it just has not got the K-bike's solid, "planted" feeling, kabod in transliterated Hebrew. I like that a lot, whether rolling on instant warp speed on a frwy ramp or carving canyons in the desert. :)
 
ncpbmw1953 said:
I'd love to see BMW scrap their F800GT and come up with a true luxury middle weight ST sacrificing nothing in performance, tech, & comfort--all at a curb weight of >=520lbs. It might look like this:

  • 115hp inline triple or quad, 950-1000cc
  • Dynamic ESA, Ride Modes, Shift Assist, ABS Pro, CC, heated seats/grips, built in navigation, TPM
  • Adjustable seat height, ergos like RTW, electric screen, trimmed fairing and side cases versus OEM RT/GT models***
  • Final Drive: belt w/ 50K change interval***
  • Audio system, central locking, keyless ignition all could be scraped to reduce cost and a little weight.***

    These specs you have listed pretty much match the current R1200RS or R. They are 520lbs or less, have 125 hp and all the current BMW features if you opt for full options.


    It seems you like a 3 or 4 over the over the twin! Note the opposed twin has a lower Cof G. ( why porsche continues to use boxers ). There are rumors of BMW giving the boxer variable valve timing. rumor are of 140-150hp which seems easy if you look at BMW VVT engines in cars.
Click to expand...
 
I think my 2017, R1200GSA is every bit a good sport tourer as my FJR. It does not have the traditional Sport Tourer look, but it handles well, has plenty of power, carries all that you could need and offers good protection from the elements. In my opinion it is much more comfortable and there many add ons and modifications on the market. I had a 2012, R1200R and it was a great long distance tourer with a Parabellum Scout fairing and Hepco Bekker top loading cases. The new R12R looks like it can be outfitted to become a great Sport Tourer. Reasonable weight, good power and a low version should accommodate even the most vertically challenged of us.
 
bobzeliff said:
ncpbmw1953 said:
These specs you have listed pretty much match the current R1200RS or R. They are 520lbs or less, have 125 hp and all the current BMW features if you opt for full options.
Click to expand...

You're right, they're in the ballpark, but for me an electric screen and relaxed ergos are mandatory for the luxury ST compromising nothing in comfort & performance domains so as with every other model those two are compromised solutions. RS ergos are not good for me. Plus, I'd way rather have a well engineered belt drive for all of the reasons mentioned having lived w/ one on the F800GT. For me a good part of 'comfort' is indeed ergonomics but also to have the control of on-the-fly tuning of windscreen height is very desirable when you ride in variable temperatures and weather. I change my RT's windscreen position quite frequently according to conditions. It's very handy even in wet weather to blast your visor to clear it by lowering the screen to get the direct hit on the visor. To get an electric screen you start at 604lbs and it goes up from there. As for 3 or 4 cylinders that's optional, but I'm intrigued by smooth power and lower vibration levels as with FJR's very smooth inline 4.
Click to expand...
 
ncpbmw1953 said:
beemerphile said:
OK fine, BMW T1000GT :) The weight for the mechanism for an electric screen is pretty minor compared to that HEAVY shaft drive.
Click to expand...

Just take a minute and look at the shaft drive on any of the current R bikes. It is you rear swing arm and suspension all integrated into one assembly. Adding a chain or belt would have too the suspension might be less but not by much. FWIW don't ever get a rock caught in the belt drive!..instant locked wheel/broken belt.
Click to expand...
 
When I bought the 2012 GS, the dealer wanted in the worst way to get me to trade the 07K1200GT toward it. I wouldn't ever consider it, the KGT sits and awaits the twist of the throttle. I call it my rocket ship. And it performs like one. I've ridden it at 90 on cruise for 5-6 hours from Ca. to Az. twice [ out and back ] for an leo bike training course.

I've had a 1600GT try to stay with me on the twisties, to no avail due to it's added bulk and weight [ and the guy can ride a bike ]. The difference was not in the riders, it was in the bikes. When we swapped bikes, I couldn't do with it what I can do with my 1200GT either and lagged a little behind as he did initially.

Not sure why everyone is down on the 07KGT, mines been a great bike, though service is more expensive than the GS due to all the plastic that needs to be removed. It's not holding it's value as I'd like, but then, owning a rocket ship like the 1200KGT I have is worth the price of admission.

I'm keeping mine and have no desire to buy the bigger later K's. If I get to thinking of selling or trading it, I only need take it for a ride and that notion dissipates before I've gone a couple miles. The power it possesses to move out with no effort twisting the throttle and how it manages the twisties keeps those thoughts of dumping it at bay.
 
bobzeliff said:
ncpbmw1953 said:
Just take a minute and look at the shaft drive on any of the current R bikes. It is you rear swing arm and suspension all integrated into one assembly. Adding a chain or belt would have too the suspension might be less but not by much.
Click to expand...

If you call roughly 35 pounds of unsprung weight "not much". The chain and swingarm on my chain-driven bike weighs about 20 lbs so the shaft driven bike has a 15 pound weight disadvantage - not something to sneeze at and immediately noticeable if you travel roads with choppy bumps. :)

I'd also like to see some stats on belt-driven bikes (Harley, BMW, Kawasaki) which have destroyed their belts due to rocks getting in between the belt and sprocket. I had a Ducati which once injested a small rock in its cam timing belt drive system. It just put a hole in the belt. Lucky day for me? :dunno
Click to expand...
 
BC1100S said:
bobzeliff said:
If you call roughly 35 pounds of unsprung weight "not much". The chain and swingarm on my chain-driven bike weighs about 20 lbs so the shaft driven bike has a 15 pound weight disadvantage - not something to sneeze at and immediately noticeable if you travel roads with choppy bumps. :)

I'd also like to see some stats on belt-driven bikes (Harley, BMW, Kawasaki) which have destroyed their belts due to rocks getting in between the belt and sprocket. I had a Ducati which once injested a small rock in its cam timing belt drive system. It just put a hole in the belt. Lucky day for me? :dunno
Click to expand...

I'm saying the weight difference pays for the electric windscreen was all. Of course the other reality is that while the shaft drive is a logistical choice for longitudinal crank shaft engines they still demand changing directions with bevel gears and u-joint sets. This it would seem to me reduces efficiency considerably over the simple belt or chain drive where everything is turning in the same direction through the final drive. Rocks can cause belt damage so would not be a good idea on adventure bikes who do go off road much. I ran my F800GT thru gravel many times and never had a problem. With that bike you can even do a road-side replacement in about 10 minutes if you had to. I'm sure there are design elements to employ that minimize this possibility of rock chip damage and I think overall it's rare anyway. From what I read when belts fail often they simply shear teeth off and you lose power, whereas there is greater risk for wheel lock with catastrophic consequences when parts fail in a shaft or a chain final drive. My main points is adding a belt to free up weight to meet the additional weight of electrically adjustable wind management is a huge plus for me and it saddens me it doesn't start until 604 lbs. I know not everyone values this but for me it's a huge plus I hope to never have to part with.
Click to expand...
 
BC1100S said:
bobzeliff said:
If you call roughly 35 pounds of unsprung weight "not much". The chain and swingarm on my chain-driven bike weighs about 20 lbs so the shaft driven bike has a 15 pound weight disadvantage - not something to sneeze at and immediately noticeable if you travel roads with choppy bumps. :)

I'd also like to see some stats on belt-driven bikes (Harley, BMW, Kawasaki) which have destroyed their belts due to rocks getting in between the belt and sprocket. I had a Ducati which once injested a small rock in its cam timing belt drive system. It just put a hole in the belt. Lucky day for me? :dunno
Click to expand...

Could you share where you got that weigh data? Interesting numbers
Click to expand...
 
ncpbmw1953 said:
BC1100S said:
My main points is adding a belt to free up weight to meet the additional weight of electrically adjustable wind management is a huge plus for me and it saddens me it doesn't start until 604 lbs. I know not everyone values this but for me it's a huge plus I hope to never have to part with.
Click to expand...

I pretty much agree with you as my ideal sport touring bike would weigh about 450lbs. 110 hp is more than enough for me. It would have the physical envelop of the current R1200RS (ie NOT have a huge RT fairing). I admit I love the sound and torque characters of the boxer twin over 4's but that is just me. The mechanical 2 position windscreen is fine with me. I've set it up for clean air most of the time and the up position is the rain deflection position. Yes I've raised the bars and lower the pegs for a bit less crouched position . While I like the very low maintenance and longevity of the shaft drive, I have no objection to a belt drive if it does significantly reduce weight and does not require major bike disassembly to replace and has similar longevity.

I do wish BMW would offer true premium suspension,( including high speed dampening) Wilber, Tractive with their very good ESA package.
Click to expand...
 
bobzeliff said:
Could you share where you got that weigh data? Interesting numbers
Click to expand...

The BMW parts fiche has weights of each part listed. I added the swingarm, final drive, and driveshaft weights together to come up with 35 pounds. The swingarms on my Ducatis weigh about 10 pounds and I added another 10 for the weight of the chain. I did not include parts that would be common between them like the brake caliper or hanger, etc.

There are arguments pro and con all three modes of final drive. Personally, I lean towards shaft drive on the touring bike and chain on the sport bike. With belt drive, one needs a huge rear sprocket to provide enough engagement points so one doesn't buzz all the "teeth" off the belt under heavy acceleration. This reduces one's options if/when you want to change gearing. Other than that, I don't see a downside to belt drive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F
Considering buying a 2006 K1200R, What do I need to know / watch out for?
Replies
1
Views
275
lee
lee
rwadamsidaho
Edelweiss bike tours - New Zealand - Nov 2023 (21 Days)
Replies
1
Views
904
skibum69
skibum69
M
Heated gear rant..
2 3
Replies
59
Views
3K
crna59
crna59
S
New(ish) member in Kansas City, MO
Replies
7
Views
1K
Voni
Voni
Pasta_Mouse
New guy from the PNW, San Juan County.
Replies
5
Views
655
langoptc
langoptc
Back
Top