R1200ST to get facelift

[roadscholar]

I don't know if this has been covered yet since I haven't researched all the threads on ST's, but it appears those of you that have one will possess a unique model. I was informed by a reliable source (is there any other kind?) that BMW was redoing the front end styling on the ST due to underwhelming sales. This could explain why they won't be producing more until Aug. '06. Originally I considered it ugly, but the more I see it the less I dislike it. Its just different than anything that has come before. You have to give BMW credit for trying to open new doors, and maybe even more for correcting something that didn't work.

[hophead]

I really am becoming more perplexed with all the news about how unattractive the ST is and how it may be redone by BMW. Those lights are phenomenal, they illuminate the road at dark like nothing I have experienced in any vehicle. The windscreen could not, for me, function any better. And the look from the pilot's view? Superb! Why worry?

[sardineone]

Haven't had a chance to checkout my headlights in the dark yet, but I like the look. I find the bike has elegant style the more I look at it IN PERSON! This bike's style shouldn't be judged from photos.

[roadscholar]

Its definitely growing on me, and I keep going back to the showroom to look at it as a prospective owner. Riding it is incredible, its significantly faster than my Boxer prep. Seat of the pants says its in the ballpark with an ST4. There are many things to like about it. I just think BMW observed what happened with the Aprilia Futura and Ducati 999 (at the time radical designs) and decided not to continue that path.

[BMWSTeve]

I doubt there would be a face lift. New tooling for new plastic parts would be tough to get into production in that time frame. There isn't profit potential in a motorcycle to warrant the investment for new skins and H/L. Maybe the delay is to put the new S next to the ST. When people find how uncompromising the ergos of the new S will be, the ST will feel like a better decision regardless of looks.

 

 

The one R1100S owners will never admit that they really all want RT's. Go to your dealer or a rally and a majority of them have some combination of higher windshields, higher bars, touring saddles, and lower pegs. The first improvement they want is a bigger gas tank. Shovelstroked on this list is a rare bird on an R1100S.

[ShovelStrokeEd]

No rare bird, I. I want a bigger gas tank as well. I just happen to like the ergos of the standard configuration boxer cup prep. I've really been riding the same bike for the last 40 or so years. A couple of choppers notwithstanding.

 

My first low bar bike was a Triton with, of all things, a dustbin fairing. All my other bikes had flat and narrow bars if not clip-on's. Of the current crop, the old Harley has beach bars on it but all the rest have basically the same seating position. The '94 RS being the most luxurious of those. It works for me and I can do long days on any of them.

 

The ST sits so much like my S as to be near perfect. I really hope they don't change anything, I like that bike. If I could afford it, I'd be piling up the miles on one right now.

[tom collins]

I think the whole problem with the ST and the RS before it was that the RT is just too competent and therefore, too close in performance for the price. Compare the VFR to the ST1300 or Goldwing. The VFR is significantly lighter and faster and much more adept in the turns than those other two, although the 1300 is pretty good but heavy. The VFR is also a decent amount less money. So, there are significant performance and price differences, so Honda can sell profitable quantities of both style of machines. I think the difference is not clear enough in the RT/RS comparison.

If BMW would give ST buyers something unique to that bike (aside from the looks), preferably performance enhancing or hard cases and ask the same money, they could probably move more of them. Historically, the used market really says it all.

A used RS is generally several thousand dollars less than a used RT. In 2001, I was able to buy a pristine 97 RS with 25,000 miles, hard cases, barbacks and parabellum screen, but no std. heated grips on 97s for $8,000. I was the only person to look at it and he had been trying to sell it for a year at higher prices. Comparable RTs were then going quickly for $10,000 to $11,000 at that time. With that equipment, the RS when new had cost the same as an RT did.

Unfortunately, the market will probably treat the ST the same way. It is really a question of value and the ultimate arbiter is always the consumer.

Don't shoot me, I am just the messenger. I think the ST is a very cool bike, just like I thought the RS was. I personally can not longer ride at a lean now, but if I could only choose new bike (like most folks), as things stand, it would have to be the RT because I just could not rationalize the ST at their asking price (even excluding physical inability to ride a leaned forward bike). Now, you put an ABS, hard bagged, heated gripped ST at $15,000, you are talking serious interest.

 

Tom Collins

[BitScribbler]

Unfortunately, the market will probably treat the ST the same way. It is really a question of value and the ultimate arbiter is always the consumer.

 

I have always thought motorcycling is about matters of the heart, not the head. I agree that some people can only buy a bike if the market tells them it's a great bike, or if it's a great deal and they won't lose as much money. I feel sorry for them, they're buying a bike for the wrong reasons.

 

Personally, although I'm normally very careful with my money, as far as bikes are concerned I buy what floats my boat, because it's about enjoyment, not watching the pennies. In other words, for me, it really is definitely *not* about the (market) value, it's about the value *to me*.

 

I still continue to seriously enjoy my ST. True, it's probably depreciated more than an RT. So what? I'm happy, if poorer in cash terms. Does that make me "poorer" in life?

[wilsons]

I wouldnt care if it lost 10 grand in value, I'm keeping it til I ride the wheels off of it.

[roadscholar]

Fact is, if they do change the front end, that one may become sought after for its scarcity and not depreciate much, if at all. And I agree, that's not the right reason to buy one. Not trying to knock this bike, I think its the best sport touring bike available.

[wilsons]

Agree'd. Its one of a kind, and there IS NO OTHER bike like it. period IMHO. There are a few that are kinda 'close', and this bike I believe IS what an ST should be.

[Deans BMW]

My ST now has well over 16,000 miles and has been a fantastic trouble free, extremely competent, excellent sport touring motorcycle.

[Corkus]

The one R1100S owners will never admit that they really all want RT's. Go to your dealer or a rally and a majority of them have some combination of higher windshields, higher bars, touring saddles, and lower pegs. The first improvement they want is a bigger gas tank.

 

Steve, I think you're wrong in your characterization of S owners. Their interest is so low in RT's that they do not frequent this discussion board very much. They are not closet RT fans, they are fans of the S.

 

When people find how uncompromising the ergos of the new S will be, the ST will feel like a better decision regardless of looks.

 

I predict this will turn out to be wrong also, in that I don't see BMW releasing an S, or any bike that has uncompromising ergos.

 

The new S will have the same basic riding poistion as the old S, it will have bags, and it will only have 5 or 10 more hp than a 12RT, not the rumored 130 hp. It will be an incrimentally better bike but it won't be very different from the previous model. The K12RS/K12S notwithstnding, this is the way it goes with all BMW model upgrades. (I think the K12RS was discontinued, not upgraded.)

 

EDIT: I do think you are right Steve, about the ST not getting a facelift. Sales of the ST are not low because of the front of the bike, which I don't like either. People who like BMW's have no trouble seeing past the styling of the front of the ST. In this respect the ST is like the RT. The styling of the RT is not all the rage. People buy an RT because it is a great bike and it works well, even if they don't like the styling all that much. A restyled ST nose would not change much for BMW, they won't do it.

[Isettanut]

My first impression of the 1200RT was not positive. Having owened a 2002&2004RT I was not prepared to new styling. Neither did I and still do not like the looks of the BMW cars. I prefer 89-98 series 5 and 3 series. After buying ,riding,washing,and geting used to the seperate panels of the fairing it all makes sense. Each panel has a purpose. Lower panels direct lots of cooling air to the engine and away from the rider/passenger. The top panels channel water and air away from the rider/passenger. The panels are much easer to r/r than previous RTs. The bike is easier to clean and throws less crap on the exh. headers and front engine cover. Having said all of this I now like the looks of the 1200RT much better than the previous series going back to 1996 and beyond. I am hooked on the look. I also like the ST. And how can anyone compare the 1100S to any RT. Thake goodness BMW gives us a choice. I had a 1999 red (the sexey one). I liked it a lot but wanted more protection than performance. Being 66 years old had something to do with my choice of ride. Guess I had better get back to the Home. Leon

[jaySTrider]

Well I had a chat with the guys on the BMW stand at the International Motorcycle Show over here in the UK today and they were puzzled by the comments re either the restyling of the ST or the freezing of production until next August. As far as they are concerned ,the factory is still producing them for delivery this year and into next year, although they did say that it has proved more popular on this side of the pond.

[R4ND0M_AX3]

But...but... You heard it on the internet. It must be true....right?

 

Like some others have said. I don't think BMW is in the business of releasing new bikes then changing them or even stopping production after one year. They know people are slow to change.

 

Now BMWNA may choose to import less from BMWAG on the next go around. Even that might be a stretch. I think it will be here to stay for a while longer just like it is.

[MoDog]

Steve, I think you're wrong in your characterization of S owners. Their interest is so low in RT's that they do not frequent this discussion board very much. They are not closet RT fans, they are fans of the S.

 

I agree with Corkus. After I lost my '02 S to a deerstrike, I bought an '04 RT and put 12K miles on it before selling it and returning to the S. I found that I missed the windblast, riding position, and lighter weight of the S. For me, the RT fairing was just too good and the seating position too upright...go figure...like someone already said, I'm glad there's a full range of bikes out there so we can all be happy.

[roadscholar]

I guess time will tell. I'm still sticking by my source. He's not prone to misstatement or even exageration. He's not an insider, which means he doesn't have to follow the corporate line, but he's not an outsider either, which means he has information we don't. Give it a few months.

 

I like where this thread is going. Thanks for the response.

 

Bill

[BMWSTeve]

I guess I forgot to insert the right smilies. People will buy what their heart desires of what they feel their image is. Sorry. I look at peoples bikes, examine their tire tread pattern, listen to their story, and draw my own conclusions.

[Corkus]

I look at peoples bikes, examine their tire tread pattern, listen to their story, and draw my own conclusions.

 

All of us do likewise.

 

Sunday I was having fun looking at a rider and his bike, I had no idea what to make of it. The kid was 25 or so, hip haircut, earring, his bike was an old Japanese sportbike with a dark red windscreen, no emblems and it needed a bath. What I really couldn't figure out was this kid's preload settings, they were full soft. That had to be completely wrong for his weight, he was a big kid. His tires had big chicken strips which might have been because the suspension was set so far off, heck, I don't know.

 

I would have enjoyed talking to him, but I didn't get the chance. He had a very interesting bike.

 

I like the perspective you bring to this thread Steve, lots to talk about.

[BMWSTeve]

Thanks, Crokus!

 

That is what these forums about, in my opinion. We input with our experiences, which are similar but real and hopefully somebody learns something from other experience. I modded my R1100RS so well

that when the S came out, I didn't notice a big difference between the 2 except cosmetics. Now a "stock" RS vs. a "stock" yes there is a tremendous diffence in handleing and performance. I may never do anything with the ST motor, I am pleased, for now. The handling, well better shocks would be always nice to do before the OEM's wear out. A longer paralever I think may be neat raise the rear, may be I will fab one up this winter! The steering is sharp enough for me, but I am sure some

hotdog could use the ground clearance.

[hophead]

"All of us do likewise.

 

Sunday I was having fun looking at a rider and his bike, I had no idea what to make of it. The kid was 25 or so, hip haircut, earring, his bike was an old Japanese sportbike with a dark red windscreen, no emblems and it needed a bath. What I really couldn't figure out was this kid's preload settings, they were full soft. That had to be completely wrong for his weight, he was a big kid. His tires had big chicken strips which might have been because the suspension was set so far off, heck, I don't know.

 

I would have enjoyed talking to him, but I didn't get the chance. He had a very interesting bike.

 

I like the perspective you bring to this thread Steve, lots to talk about.

 

Corey, preload settings are to me an integral tool for the rider to set himself up with proper rider sag, not static sag. If he was a big kid it would stand to reason that the preload settings had to be backed off [softened] from stock settings if the spring rate was not stiff enough. To get proper sag that is, the kid was likely too heavy for the bikes stock setup.

What bike was it? Japanese perhaps? Springs too inadequate for the rider's weight? Not uncommon. The unfortunate thing when this happens is one adjusts the preload properly for rider sag and all the while overwhelms or renders the compression and rebound circuit's dampening abilities useless.

The chhicken strips can often be indicative of the roads one rides or the commute one does, not necessarily the rider and bikes ability to lean.