BMW in Cycle World...

["Tom Brown" <tbrown@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

>> Front cover is a backdrop of silver K1200S...

>I can't help but think BMW is trying to kill the boxer (again).

The choice of bikes for the cover was not BMWs.    It was cycle world's.

>That K1200S is one fine-looking motorcycle (and comes in my favorite shade
of
blue). That combined with what sounds like world-class performance stands to
seriously erode my long-time bias towards twins--of any make.

Well, John, the R1 has world class performance too, but I don't want to ride
to Denver on one.   Nor do I want to do much of anything else with it other
than park it in front of a biker bar or take it to a track.

By most accounts, the K12S is a nice handling motorcycle until you get on a
boxer, then it feels like you've been driving a cement mixer.    It's a great
road rocket if you want to lose your license, but isn't made for our speed
limits.   Handling on bad roads is better than all other bikes in this class,
but still not as good as a boxer by a long shot.

>Especially considering that the boxer remains down on power (BMW ought to
bring out a blown ~850), and in terms of styling, the twins these days range
from "What do you expect, it's a GS" (at best) to "What the hell were they
thinking?".

John, you read too much Cycle World and do too little actual riding!

You obviously have not ridden a new boxer.  BMW has invested a ton of time an
money into them and the results are stunning.  They may be down on peak HP
numbers compared to a hyper bike, but they are not down on real world power at
all.  80+ ft lbs of torque max and at least 60 ft. lbs for most of the rev
range.   The GS has 100HP at the crank.  The RT and ST have 110 at the crank
These are seriously fast bikes and handling is further improved.   The old GS
was an amazing handler in twisties, but the new one is in another dimension.
Just about everything that's good about boxers is better on the new boxers.

Old and new GSs are detuned precisely because top speed is not much of a
concern on a bike with a near vertical rider's positon and limited wind
protection.   It's forte is tight twisty asphalt and the occasional jeep
trail.  Sure, it can tour and run at highways speeds.  Sure you can find a big
windscreen and get almost the protection you need for the long haul, but it's
not the purpose of the bike.  The detuning gives it smoother low-end power and
the ability to travel at low speeds along bad terrain.   It's not a dirt bike,
but it can go places the other big bikes can't and handles amazingly well.

I have to agree that the new styling of the RT and ST are taking a little time
to sink in for me.   I bought a new RT anyway, but got dark graphite color so
it would not have so much of the multi-coloer "melted leggo" look.   I haven't
put a lot of miles on it yet, but I think it'll be a winner.

>At least I still love the looks of my R11RS!

Well, there's never been anything wrong with the looks of those bikes.

The new ST in silver is really growing on me however.   There's one at my
dealer's that I just have to look at everytime I'm there.   The RT is less
successful, to my eyes because of the obvious problems with the snout and
mirrors and fairing. The rear of the bike and the bags and the suspension bits
and nearly all the rest of the bike is better looking and working than the old
ones.  The dark color mitigates a lot of the styling stupidity for me.  The
features and performance more than make up for one or two styling
blunders...just bugs me that they could be so blind to it....probably the same
group of fools that designed the 7, 5 and 6 series cars was demoted to RTs.
So much is better on these bikes.  It's a shame they had to get arrogant with
the styling.

- -TB

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