Considering Trading my 1150RT for a 1200RT: Any Thoughts?

[Claudio]

Greetings,

 

I've had my 2003 1150RT for 2 years now and I do love it. I am considering moving to a 1200RT for some of the mechanical, weight, and performance improvements I've read about in all the literature.

 

The only ergonomic tweaks I had added to my 1150RT was (a) taller windshield and (b) Corbin seat.

 

I was wanting to hear from previous 1150RT riders who moved to the 1200RT on any of the following:

 

- Is the 1200RT as comfortable as the 1150RT for long days? How about your passenger? (if not, were the ergo tweaks straght forward)

 

- Was there truly noticeable performance/agility gains for you?

 

- Would you have rather kept your 1150 or was the 1200 the right move?

 

Thanks in advance.

[Lawman]

I too had an 03 RT..I enjoy the R1200RT much much more for all the reasons you've listed but in addition I will never own another bike without cruise..My 03 may have been a little more comfortable when at straight highway cruising in heavy winds but that was probably just due to the additional weight...I can even find the battery on the new one...If you can stand the financial bite of trading you should do it...

[Amac]

mechanical, weight, and performance improvements I've read about in all the literature.

 

There are very slight weight and performance improvements. Mechanically, I think the 1200 is an inferior motorcycle.

[Francois_Dumas]

Wondering just how much more 'performance' you want/NEED from a touring motor?

 

I have ridden the 1200 a few times now and like the slightly 'easier going' throttle, and of course the cruise control (although I have a simple but effective one on my 1150 too). The weight is a non-issue for me.. they're both heavy and I don't mind.

 

I have had some great offers (price wise) on my 1150 if trading to a 1200, but the 1200 STILL is WAY more expensive.

 

So to me it comes down to having 'surplus money' (which I haven't) and 'looks' (and I prefer the 'whale').

 

So there

[marcopolo]

mechanical, weight, and performance improvements I've read about in all the literature.

 

There are very slight weight and performance improvements. Mechanically, I think the 1200 is an inferior motorcycle.

 

[Francois_Dumas]

mechanical, weight, and performance improvements I've read about in all the literature.

 

There are very slight weight and performance improvements. Mechanically, I think the 1200 is an inferior motorcycle.

 

 

 

I like my 1150 but I wouldn't go THAT far

[Mike O]

mechanical, weight, and performance improvements I've read about in all the literature.

 

There are very slight weight and performance improvements. Mechanically, I think the 1200 is an inferior motorcycle.

 

Yes, I think most folks are confused about the weight differences (it's been discussed here many times before). Most of the difference is in the literature conveniently supplied by BMW. If you inspect closely (as Motorcycle Consumer News does) you'll learn that there is less than 35lbs (IIRC) difference. BMW conveniently started measuring weight on the 1200RT without fluids, sidebags, etc. MCN measured the 1200RT and was surprised there was a discrepancy from the specs as well. Chalk this one up to the marketing department.

 

Those having ridden both say it 'feels' lighter. 'Feels' is subjective and you should see for yourself if the 1200RT really 'feels' lighter to you. I've ridden both and I can't honestly feel any difference. They are touring bikes and they're both heavy.

 

Mike O

[tom collins]

the largest difference i noticed when riding a 1200 as against the 1150 was when it was time to do a medium tight u-turn. on the 1150, i have to fan the clutch and play with the steering a bit, on the 1200, just let the clutch out and made the turn, did not get that scary about to fall over feeling. real cruise control would be very nice too, but the $, if you've got it, spend it i say. in these economic times, if you've got to borrow it, i say keep what you have.

 

tom collins

04rt

[tallman]

mechanical, weight, and performance improvements I've read about in all the literature.

 

There are very slight weight and performance improvements. Mechanically, I think the 1200 is an inferior motorcycle.

 

Slight?

 

HP 110 vs 95

Torque 85 vs 72

Curb weight 571 vs 614

Better fuel economy, larger tank (w/less weight)

That's more than slight, IMO.

[Smoky]

I find the 1200 to be a large inprovement over my 1100RT. More nimble handling, much better sound, and I think 2-up performance is equal or better than solo performance on the 1100.

 

But I will wait until the Canadian prices are brought in line with our stronger dollar before I'll step up to buying.

[roadrider3]

I now ride a 1200 from a 99 1100. The 1200 IMO is superior in every way. Not only more power and better fuel economy but in a crosswind it is far more stable. The crosswind is very important to me living in Texas the 2nd windiest state in the country after North Dakota and the fact there isn't a wrap around fairing on the 1299 I think helps this situation tremendously. Cruise control is a good addition for a few minutes at a time, but more power better fuel economy, greater cruising range and better handling make this a better ride. You will also find that the On board computer and info it displays a great improvement.

If you are seriously thinking about moving up consider a good used one, I bought an 06 with 8000 miles on it and loaded for $13,800.

Good Luck

[EffBee]

There are very slight weight and performance improvements. Mechanically, I think the 1200 is an inferior motorcycle.

 

Let's see. The 1200 is more than 10% lighter. That's 70 lbs. You call that "slight."

 

The 1200 has 15 more horsepower. That's a a 16% increase. You call that "slight."

 

The 1200's gear ratios are more suitably spaced to its powerband, something that 1150 riders complained about. The new transmission shifts much more smoothly. The engine management system is far more sophisticated, with nary a complaint of surging. Yet reports of gas mileage in the 50's (vs. the low-mid 40's on the 1150) are the norm. The 1200 has a balance shaft, which not only smooths out typical twin-cylinder vibration, but allow smoother revving up to the new 500rpm-higher redline. The brakes are more powerful, only partially linked, have no more need of servos, and are easier to service. Yet you think the 1200 is "inferior mechanically."

 

Separate from mechanically, by all accounts the 1200 handles substantially better. Its saddlebags are more robust and each can carry a full-face helmet. It can support a trunk of up to 49 liters capacity. It has superior lighting. Service costs are down.

 

Can you be more specific about these "slight" improvements and this mechanical inferiority to which you refer?

 

I realize you ride a Buell. I met you at UnV in Gunnison and listened patiently as you told me about all ofyour modifications, and described it as a $10,000 RT. I congratulated you on your choice and said nothing negative.

 

All brands are welcome here. And you're entitled to your opinions. However, can you point me to any recent post in which you had positive or constructive things to say about BMW's. I don't mind if you haven't had many. Just so long as we're clear where you're coming from.

[russell_bynum]

mechanical, weight, and performance improvements I've read about in all the literature.

 

There are very slight weight and performance improvements. Mechanically, I think the 1200 is an inferior motorcycle.

 

I think the difference is fairly substantial. From a rider's perspective, the 1200's are lighter, more powerful, and handle better.

 

Comparing Lisa's R1100RS to the R1200ST (The ST replaced the RS), the ST is a fairly substantial step up.

 

Likewise with the R1200RT vs. the R11XXRT, the GS, the S, the R, etc.

 

I'd really like to know how you consider the 1200 a mechanically inferior bike.

[Mike O]

For the record, I went back and checked Motorcycle Consumer News - June 2005. From their technical review:

Handling/Riding Impression

The new chassis is the same tubular steel arrangement used on the GS. The overall weight is less, but hardly by the amazing 70 lbs. that BMW claims. Our scales say only 15 lbs. less , and judging by the larger bodywork and larger gas tank we aren’t surprised, so we’d have to imagine an honest error rather than deliberate deception.

But to be clear, it's what you 'feel' when riding the bike as weight distribution may be a contributing factor in it 'feeling lighter' (but as the MCN scales confirm... it's not 70lbs lighter).

 

I certainly believe its a 'better' bike than the 1150RT mechanically. Whether it's worth the trade is entirely up to you. Take one for a ride. Don't base your decision on 'specs' (which are inaccurate in this case).

 

Mike O

[HexHead]

I've said this before and at the risk of ruffling some feathers will say it again. Those that own an 11xx and state it's better than a 1200, if they are brutally honest with themselves will find they are just too cheap to step up, and are simply justifying that position.

 

Yeah, looks may be subjective but the rest of it ain't.

[jakfrost]

Again, drove the 11xxRT for 65,000 miles, thought it was the greatest thing since sliced bread...then, oh,oh, drove a friends 1200RT. There was no going back. Ever. I borrowed the money for the difference. I didn't care. For me motorcycling is my passion, hobby, stress therapy, and general 'come back with a smile' tool. I don't put specific finacial limits but try to get good value for my money.

 

All things considered, this bike is it. And since I can only afford to licence and insure 1 bike at a time, its a pretty hard mission to accomplish.

 

I have driven 36,000km in 2 summers and the more I ride it the more I like it. This is a really good thing .

 

Jim W.

[jbim]

I say...do it. We only live once. If you can afford it, stop considering and get what you want.

[smiller]

I've said this before and at the risk of ruffling some feathers will say it again. Those that own an 11xx and state it's better than a 1200, if they are brutally honest with themselves will find they are just too cheap to step up, and are simply justifying that position.

 

Yeah, looks may be subjective but the rest of it ain't.

I don't mean to ruffle any feathers, but that has got to be one of the most clueless comments I've ever read on this subject. And when it comes to motorcycles, everything is subjective.

[Amac]

Having owned an 1150RT (two, actually), and test ridden a 1200RT, it's my impression that the RT is a "cheaper" bike. It just doesn't feel as robust as the 1150RT, and seemed inferior in almost every respect. Now perhaps the unit I rode was a lemon. Perhaps it wasn't set up correctly.

 

As noted earlier, much of the weight difference is a shell game. A 15 HP difference on a touring bike doesn't concern me much.

 

Canbus and ESA are, in my opinion, negatives...as a result, I'd prefer an 1150RT over a 1200RT. I'm sure others would make a different decision, but if I had to write a check today for a brand new off the showroom floor RT, it would be for an 1150.

 

As for the BMW line in general, I think that at this point in time it's safe to say that one manufacturer or another offers a better version of every bike in the BMW lineup for less money than BMW asks with the possible exception of the RT which seems to straddle the gap between sport touring bikes like the Triumph Sprint etc and the Gold Wing rather nicely.

 

As for the marque, I do have concerns about reliability, expense, the questionable warranty service, and the shrinking dealer network.

 

...and yes, I do love my Buell, though I do realize it's not the perfect ride for everyone.

[LDHack]

I have more confidence in the reliability of my '04 R1150RT vs a current model R1200. It's too early in the new model run for me. The final drive of a significant number of 1200's failed during Iron Butt '07. This is a very significant issue to me, since long mile reliability is critical to my riding.

[tallman]

Since you don't ride a BMW, love your BUell, why in the world are you concerned about such things?

Questionable warranty service?

This board is full of examples of service provided beyond warranty period.

Shrinking network?

Contraction did happen, but, that seems to be reversing.

A Better version of every bike for less money?

Exactly.

And that is precisely what we want you to think.

As I've said to you before.

Enjoy the Buell. Many people do, even with all of its quirks, or because of them. Just the way many enjoy BMW's.

You are dismisssive of HP+ improvement, "doesn't concern" you, although every manufacturer and consumer strive to accomplish that.

You are entitled to your opinion, and that is what it is, opinion.

You couch your comments with words like "impression", "feel", "shell game", "seemed", none of which are based on data.

Your profile says you are a medical student. I wish you great success in your chosen field, we certainly need all of the caring medical practitioners we can get.

I do hope, however, that your bedside manner is better than the impression you create by your constant attack on the BMW marque on this board.

You frequently offer only unsupported opinion, and then dismiss any data that weakens your bias with a dismissive remark.

You seem much too intelligent to continue to resort to this approach.

Again, enjoy the Buell. It's obvious you do.

Best wishes.

[wrestleantares]

As for the BMW line in general, I think that at this point in time it's safe to say that one manufacturer or another offers a better version of every bike in the BMW lineup for less money than BMW asks with the possible exception of the RT which seems to straddle the gap between sport touring bikes like the Triumph Sprint etc and the Gold Wing rather nicely.

 

Well, to get a comparable bike to the LT you have to get the $23,000 Goldwing from Honda (USA)- about $2K More than the Beemer.

 

I have opinions on other particular models, but they get more and more subjective.

 

BTW: I think the Honda ST straddles the same line that the RT does. Other offerings I would agree (FJR, Concours, etc.) Go more sport. But the ST and RT are somewhere between that and the luxobarges.

[beemerfan]

I was wanting to hear from previous 1150RT riders who moved to the 1200RT on any of the following:

 

- Is the 1200RT as comfortable as the 1150RT for long days? How about your passenger? (if not, were the ergo tweaks straght forward)

I'm responding relative to the R11RT, which had basically the same ergos as the R1150. I find the R12 much more comfortable than the R11. I can turn out consecutive 600-700 mile days and wake up ready for more. 350 mile days used to really whip me on the R11, especially if there was much of a cross-wind. Both bikes were straight stock.

- Was there truly noticeable performance/agility gains for you?

The performance gains relative to the R11 were awesome. My R12 handles the tight stuff much better. It also isn't nearly as sensitive to mid-corner dips and bumps. There's no comparison on the acceleration side. The neatest part of the whole thing is this all comes on a bike that gets 10mpg better than the R11 for my type of riding (R12 - low 50's, R11 - low 40's) and greater than 300 miles riding range under most conditions.

- Would you have rather kept your 1150 or was the 1200 the right move?

There's no way I'd ever go back to the R11. I also wouldn't trade for an R1150. The R1150's I've tested felt too much like the R11 and that's would be a step back for my riding style.

 

The R12RT is a great bike if you do the right type of riding. If you're looking for "just a touring bike," then you may never notice the changes. If you're looking for a sport touring bike, you'll probably find the R12 is a change for the better.

 

Good, low-mileage used ones are widely available. Yes, it will cost more - newer bikes generally do. Is it worth it? Only you can decide that one.

[Claudio]

Thank you all for the great opinions and thoughts. There were some positive and negative aspects that I was not considering.

 

I am waiting for 2008 pricing here in Canada but I think I will go for it. For the types of trips we have been doing on the 1150 (long days in all kinds of weather, aggressive twisty roads) , I think the improvements will be well worth it.

 

I am less of a fan of the new lines on the 1200, however, I think I'll learn to like them.

[Switz]

The big change for the 2008 models..........Drum roll............

 

Price increase around 8%

 

Yup, that's it.

[ully211]

Claudio,

 

Do you have a "cruise" on your 1150 or a throttle lock? If a cruise, what is the model/make? I've looked in to the MCCRUISE model in Austrailia, but until they have support here in US I'm not taking that dive...

[ully211]

"Cheap" is a pretty strong word. Not all of us make decisions the same ... how 'bout being a little more positive on your posts ... just a thought.

[BamaRider]

Back to the original question on trading up to the 1200-my answer is YES.

[MikeEdgar]

I made the switch from a 2003 1150RT to a 2007 1200RT. Differences:

 

1) No surging. My 1150RT had notable surging for the first 6000 miles, though it gradually became smoother after that.

 

2) Cruise control. I've spent long days on the superslab and would stop just to give the wrist a rest.

 

3) 1200RT seems lighter. Perhaps it is a lower center of gravity.

 

4) 1150RT seemed to track better on the freeway. The 1200RT seems to need more correction. Maybe it is the tires.

 

5) Better gas mileage (50 vs 45), but that's not enough to justify the price.

 

6) I think the 1200RT feels a bit more sporty. Both are heavy, but the 1200RT just feels better in the corners.

 

It cost me about $9K to upgrade to the 1200RT. Worth it? Well, I like the fresh warranty and I know that I won't be riding motorcycles forever. So, while I still can, I might as well enjoy the experience of having a new motorcycle. Once every 4 years seems perfectly reasonable to me.

 

If you can afford it, go for it.

[SK_in_AB]

Looked and debated moving up. Just closed on a used '06 to replace my '02 1150.

 

For me the advantages (only from specs and a 1 hour test drive):

Feels much lighter even if its <30#

better lights, instruments, cruise

better luggage hardware and bigger cases

Better mileage and tank range

Heated seats (this is Canada after all )

smoother engine and shifting

 

 

The disadvantages:

High cost - thats why I bought used

Looks are more edgy and agressive and less appealing to me

No tool kit

Canbus could be a mtce hassle

 

Good luck with your decsion - I hope to ride mine before the weekend!

[Francois_Dumas]

I've said this before and at the risk of ruffling some feathers will say it again. Those that own an 11xx and state it's better than a 1200, if they are brutally honest with themselves will find they are just too cheap to step up, and are simply justifying that position.

 

Yeah, looks may be subjective but the rest of it ain't.

 

I feel spoken to...

 

Dunno what I said exactly, but I am happy with my 1150.... sure, the 1200 is better in many ways, technically, but the 'up' price is just too high to justify the improvements.

 

And some of us just don't have a 'extra money' to burn.

 

And lets face it: in the end it is ALL a matter of dough and looks and perceiving, 'coz none of us really ride because we HAVE to (except maybe our resident LEO's) !

[bvaughan]

Dunno what I said exactly, but I am happy with my 1150.... sure, the 1200 is better in many ways, technically, but the 'up' price is just too high to justify the improvements.

 

And some of us just don't have a 'extra money' to burn.

 

And lets face it: in the end it is ALL a matter of dough and looks and perceiving, 'coz none of us really ride because we HAVE to (except maybe our resident LEO's) !

i like very much this modest comment from someone who has been smart enough with money to be able to stop working and make time to goof off with beemer buddies in god's waiting room when not shuttling to and from his second home in the south of france.

 

a santa ana pd motor here in orange county on a relatively new 1200rt said he much preferred the ride and wind protection of the 1150 and that this would be his first choice for long distance touring but that the speed and agility of the 1200 made it the work bike of choice, except that he (along with others) hates the new double-grooved dunlop runflat front tire and was planning on going back to (as i have) the old single groove that was standard issue on the 1150 rtps.

[HexHead]

I've said this before and at the risk of ruffling some feathers will say it again. Those that own an 11xx and state it's better than a 1200, if they are brutally honest with themselves will find they are just too cheap to step up, and are simply justifying that position.

 

Yeah, looks may be subjective but the rest of it ain't.

 

I feel spoken to...

 

Dunno what I said exactly, but I am happy with my 1150.... sure, the 1200 is better in many ways, technically, but the 'up' price is just too high to justify the improvements.

 

And some of us just don't have a 'extra money' to burn.

 

And lets face it: in the end it is ALL a matter of dough and looks and perceiving, 'coz none of us really ride because we HAVE to (except maybe our resident LEO's) !

 

And you obviously were not someone I was referring to. It's one thing to say the 1200 has lots of improvements but the price is too high.

 

I was referring to those that say "I wouldn't have a 1200 because my 11xx is a better bike."

 

And again, looks aren't in play here, because you know the old saying "one man's art is another man's pornography." To say "I wouldn't have a 1200 because I think an 11xx is a better looking bike" is a fair statement.

[beemerman2k]

To be honest, I like the R1100RT over the R1150RT for many reasons: no linked brakes on my 1100, the 5 gears work better for me than the 6, but I like the lighting on the 1150 better.

 

But the R1200RT blows both of them away without even trying. I've ridden one on a few occassions and everytime I do I'm just flattened by the experience. Much like when I first rode an R1100RT and how superior it felt to me over what other manufacturers were offering with respect to my priorities as a motorcyclist. No bike is objectively better than another; they must all be measured by an individual with respect to their own personal set of priorities.

 

If I had the chance to get an R1200RT, I'd do it in a hot second without hesitation.

[smiller]

But the R1200RT blows both of them away without even trying. I've ridden one on a few occassions and everytime I do I'm just flattened by the experience.

Man... after reading all these comments all I can say is that the nitrous bottle must have been turned off on the ones I drove.

[Mike O]

But the R1200RT blows both of them away without even trying. I've ridden one on a few occassions and everytime I do I'm just flattened by the experience.

Man... after reading all these comments all I can say is that the nitrous bottle must have been turned off on the ones I drove.

Ditto. The one I rode was loaned to me by the dealer while I was having new shoes put on my 1150RT. He said take your time getting back. So I put the 1200 through its paces. I thought the tranny was better (less clunky). I liked the instrumentation better and cruise control. But to say it had superior performance (ala your nitrous), not the one I road. Neither the 11xxRT nor the 1200RT have sport bike power if that's what folks are expecting the difference to feel like. It's not THAT different. FWIW, I've ridden my buddy's 1200GS. Now THERE I could tell a substantive "seat-of-pants' power difference. But I attribute that to a). less weight, and b). the same sensation I get when I ride any 'naked' bike over my RT.

 

As many have said, toss the mechanicals into an 11xxRT chassis, with a nominal (<20%) price difference and I'd be all over that like lane-splitting at <70 MPH.

 

Mike O

[tallman]

Isn't "feel" an interesting concept.

MCN http://www.motorcyclenews.com/MCN/bikere...?&R=EPI-149

has 12.4 sec 1/4 mile time for the R 1200 GS and 12.2 sec for the R 1200 RT.

I've seen even lower numbers.

I ride a GT.

The new one is "better" when you look at the numbers.

More; HP, torque, mpg, fuel capacity, lighter weight, for starters.

But, I like mine better. One day perhaps...

Same with the RT. The 1200 is a better (by the numbers) motorcycle.

For many, that is enough, for others it's not.

Best wishes.

[beemerman2k]

But the R1200RT blows both of them away without even trying. I've ridden one on a few occassions and everytime I do I'm just flattened by the experience.

Man... after reading all these comments all I can say is that the nitrous bottle must have been turned off on the ones I drove.

 

When I wrote the "blow away without even trying", I wasn't referring to engine performance, although I do believe the R1200RT will easily beat the Oilheads in virtually any race you care to name, I was referring to the overall package. I don't care about drag racing an RT, I only care about how well the bike delivers mile after mile of excellent enjoyment.

 

The hexhead motor is ultra-smooth when compared with the oilhead, revs much faster, and is just flat better. I have put some great miles on my RT (about 97K), and I love my bike. But an R1200RT it ain't.

 

As EffBee himself once said, "The R1200RT is just better in every way". I couldn't agree more.

 

Oh, but let me add my last 2 cents: the best hex head in my opinion? -- the R1200ST. That bike flat out rocks! It was for me, the best motorcycling experience I ever enjoyed. The K1200S is better if you're riding over about 100mph, but in the "real world", the R1200ST is bitchin'!

[smiller]

As EffBee himself once said, "The R1200RT is just better in every way".

Well then, it's settled.

[beemerfan]

But the R1200RT blows both of them away without even trying. I've ridden one on a few occassions and everytime I do I'm just flattened by the experience.

Man... after reading all these comments all I can say is that the nitrous bottle must have been turned off on the ones I drove.

...or running on lower octane fuel.

 

MO dyno'd an '04 R1150RT - 84hp & 68ft/lbs at the rear wheel. The next year they dyno'd an '05 R1200RT - 103hp & 81ft/lbs. (round numbers on both) To me, that seems like a noticeable difference - I could sure feel it. I've seen other dyno figures that put the R12 at more like 98hp & 79ft/lbs - that's still a pretty stout increase.

 

Regarding handling, which is more subjective - tester's have called the R12RT more "flickable." I agree. In addition, I find the bike much less prone to wallowing in a bumpy turn than the R11XXRT version.

 

I'd agree those who say the R11XX is more "planted" on the highway. However, I only use the highway to get to the next backroad. If I wanted to drone on the highway I'd get a K12LT or a GL1800.

[boatzo]

Are there any difference between the 05, 06, & 07 12RT?

 

I just had an opportunity to test ride a 07 - R12RT and while it was smoother than my 1100RT (and very nice), I wasn't really grabbed by it enough to actually buy one. I want to move to something with lower miles (I am @ 92k). The debate here is to go with a 04 - 1150RT or wait till I find a good deal on a used 1200RT. There just aren't that many on the market yet.

[Silver Surfer/AKAButters]

If it were an option for me, i would not hesitate for a second. I know it's ugly , but I'm all about newer technology and higher performance. Lighter, more power, cruise control, Yes!

[Francois_Dumas]

i like very much this modest comment from someone who has been smart enough with money to be able to stop working and make time to goof off with beemer buddies in god's waiting room when not shuttling to and from his second home in the south of france.

 

 

I agree, 'cept for one thing. I lost my job but did not stop working. In fact I work some 14 hours a day, 7 days a week.... ask Nina !

I WAS smart enough to change it to work I love doing and comes dangerously close to *gasp!* 'hobby'

[Yukonlarry]

I have a '02 1150RT and it is "my bike". the only changes I made to it are a taller windshield and a Techlusion performance module to remove that "pesky surging". The performance is outstanding, the surge is gone, top end acceleration is effortless. Anyway, if you like the 1200 and it feels right that is probably the bike for you whatever anyone else thinks.

[wrestleantares]

Isn't "feel" an interesting concept.

MCN http://www.motorcyclenews.com/MCN/bikere...?&R=EPI-149

has 12.4 sec 1/4 mile time for the R 1200 GS and 12.2 sec for the R 1200 RT.

I've seen even lower numbers.

 

 

The GS does however have lower numbers for 40-80 roll on, that would certainly to a feel that the bike is quicker, as that is more real world feel than a quarter mile time.

[tallman]

Isn't "feel" an interesting concept.

MCN http://www.motorcyclenews.com/MCN/bikere...?&R=EPI-149

has 12.4 sec 1/4 mile time for the R 1200 GS and 12.2 sec for the R 1200 RT.

I've seen even lower numbers.

 

 

The GS does however have lower numbers for 40-80 roll on, that would certainly to a feel that the bike is quicker, as that is more real world feel than a quarter mile time.

 

Perhaps, but I'd be willing to suggest that the difference in airflow on the GS vs the fairing protection of the RT goes a long way towards creating a very different "feel".

When I removed my Aeroflow windshield this spring, and put on the short ZTech shield, the first time I rode and rolled from 30-80 in 2nd , a very diffferent feel due to the windflow.

The Boxer family has some interesting models and the 1200 version brings out the best in most of them. My one quibble woould be the R 1200 S. A faster (by a little bit on the road) bike compared to the predecessor, but lacking in comfort and carrying capacity, IMO.

[beemerfan]

Are there any difference between the 05, 06, & 07 12RT?

As far as I know, only the brakes. In '07 BMW went away from the servos.

 

I've seen used ones in various shops, but they don't seem to stay around long. Someone also recently posted in one of these forums that they were selling one.

 

Whatever you decide - good luck!