Wish List

["Tom Brown" <tbrown@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Steve:

I just don't agree with you one bit!

Sure, you say you're not interested in a new S with a 19% gain in HP and 60
lbs. less weight, but when you're really ready to shop for a new bike, what
are you gonna buy?    It may not be good enough, but it's still the best out
there for riders who really ride their bikes.  There are more popular bikes,
but they're suburban toys and their price point is much lower too.   BMW
management has stated that they're not interested in the sport bike market
because it's just not profitable enough.   Why chase a narrow, overcrowded
market full of people with no money?

I read that you are enamored with Aprilias at the moment.   I have a 2000
Mille R.  It's a fine bike.  I have put 10,000 miles on it in the 4 years
I've owned it.  I have 8500 miles on my '04 RT that I've owned since August.
The Mille has higher peak HP, weighs less, handles "better".  Why do I ride
the RT so much more?  Why did I buy another RT after putting 62K on my old
one?   Heritage, right?

The Aprilia Falco is a pretty rideable bike.  It's got a reasonable riding
position, RS level weather protection and that really sweet engine, but my
sources tell me that the handling isn't there with this bike's non-Mille
frame.  I think a used Falco could be purchased for a pittance and fixed up
with a badly needed Ohlins or other rear shock and maybe some fork work,
higher bars and different windscreen, some practical bags...you might have
something there...a sport touring bike with a chain that was almost as fun
as your S.

The Aprilia Futura has everything I've wanted in a bike except good looks
and fun.   Also, weather protection is stingy for a sport tourer.  Handling
of this bike is a downright yawn.   You can actually lean it into a turn and
take your hands off the bars.   Comfy seat, though.  I nice tourer if you
don't mind wind and bugs blowing on your helmet and chain maintenance...and
the odd electrical gremlin...ask a mechanic.   The Capo Norde is just about
the ugliest bike I've ever seen.  My feet don't touch the ground either.
Finally, all Aprilias have chain drives, which makes them lighter and has a
lot of other advantages plus one big disadvantage...You have to lube it
every two gas stops and it's a messy job.   There's just no way around that.
I prefer shaft drive.   I'm spoiled.

The new Mille R, which is now the base racer-rep bike, at $14,000?   Chain
drive, really low bars, almost 996-like riding position.  Take a look out
the fancy new rear view mirrors.  All you'll see is a nice look at your arms
and shoulders.  I think they're actually worse than Ducati now and should be
illegal for street bikes.   My 2000 has a reasonable riding position and
mirrors that work if you scrunch around a bit.  Let me tell you about resale
on Aprilias.   I can buy a 2000 Mille R today with similar miles, 10,000 or
less, for around $6,000.   It makes me sick.  You're S is worth much more
with many more miles.

Your peak power wishes do not take the requirement of a broad band of torque
into consideration.   The guy who made the comment that 101 HP is plenty if
you have the widely spread meaty torque curve was right on.   It's far more
important than peak power.   Peak power and lying ass dry weight claims just
sell magazines.   My RT has plenty of power.  Would I like 20% more.  Well,
OK, if I don't have to sacrifice anything else to get it.

How can you say that twins are not popular?  Have you forgotten about the
most popular bike on the planet?  The 45 degree Harley V-Twin?   These bikes
are slow farm implements and I'd never pay the 20+ thousand they ask for a
decent one.  Add the fact that you see them everywhere.  They have 60 HP,
but lots of low end torque.  An unbelievable amount.  The most popular bikes
from Japan are 600cc sport bikes.  They have pretty huge peak power.  Almost
as much as the liter bikes.   They have a lot less weight too.   Why would
anyone pay for all those extra cubes?   Heritage?   Nope.  TORQUE.

I like boxers.  I like the way BMW builds things.  I like the way boxers
handle.  I like their torque.   I looked very seriously at a Yamaha FJ1300.
It probably would have been a swell bike, but looking at resale and the fun
of the overall ownership experience, I stuck with the RT.   I'm pretty happy
with my choice.   I could be riding a bit faster, but I doubt I'd be putting
as many miles on or having as much fun doing it.   I also work on my own
bike.  I like working on BMWs because I like the construction of them...this
is part of the reason they weigh a bit more than your standard rocket bike.
I'm hopeful BMW won't chase your buying dollar too hard and ruin their bikes
for the sake of a few meaningless pounds and HP.

I have a water cooled bike and an oil cooled bike.  My water cooled bike
builds up heat in summer that can be a little annoying in traffic.  The
"heritage" boxer design keeps a big part of the heat out on the ends of the
engine where it can dissipate.  Why do I need liquid cooling again?  I
forgot?  Why do I need another system to maintain on my bike?  Why do I need
more hoses and coolers?

Weight: Remember we expect a GS to have shaft drive, Telelever, hold a lot
of stuff and have a big alternator and we want to run our heated clothing
and extra lights too.  We want it to have big ground clearance and strong
wheels.  We want it to have a riding position that will allow us to put big
miles on it and then go out and jeep trail it all day at our destination.
These practical considerations are what really make a BMW a better choice
than most.

It's interesting that neither of your two choices for Japanese "keepers" are
known for having particularly low weight.  The TLs were great engines,
although a bit heavy, with chassis, also a bit heavy that were ultimately
not up to the high speed job.  The VFR is a bike I also admire.  It's not
state of the art light either.  That legacy V-4 engine design is probably
the problem.  Even with chain drive, these bikes are porkers compared to
their inline 4 sportbike counterparts...and more expensive.   Why on earth
would anyone buy one?   Heritage?   Character!

Speaking of reused tech, the V-Strom, which is another bike I sort of like,
uses the "heritage" TL engine, which has great character too.

I guess I just don't see what anyone else is doing that's any more
revolutionary than this new GS.   Yes, there are lighter more powerful bikes
out there, some of them cost less money, but they don't do what a GS does
and I don't want to own them as much as a BMW.

Your assertion that some Joe Biker non-BMW guy isn't gonna flip over this
new GS doesn't really matter to me or to BMW.  They sell plenty of bikes at
a good price point.   Their real market is in Europe, unlike the BMW cars.
We buy far more BMW cars than Europe, but these bikes are designed for
European roads...another reason I like them.  Over there, the GS is the most
popular bike BMW makes and you can be SURE that they'll sell all they can
make for a couple years.

I rode an 1150 GS in the Alps last year.   In spite of all that awful weight
and only 85 HP, I and two friends were able to pass most every Ducati and
Japanese sport bike on the steep paved passes of Tyrol on our rented GS's.
GS's rule up there.  The riding position, wide bars, long wheel travel, huge
torque band and perfect geometry combine to make these things catchable
rockets on unfamiliar roads, especially when direction of travel reverses
every 300 yards or so.

I LIKE the oilhead configuration.  I LIKE that the engine is a major
stressed member of the frame.  I LIKE that the engine, with 1140 c.c.s is
still smooth enough to bolt the subframes directly to it and still get a
reasonably vibe-free ride, especially at cruising speed.   Heritage, ha!

- -TB

------------------------------