K or R

[luvabluzer]

I'm a recent new owner of a 99 R1100RT. I'd like to hear the forum members opinions on the differences/advantages of the R vs K models. For example, how does the K compare to the R engine performance wise. I know it's a opposed twin vs a flat four but I'm more interested in the riding impressions. Also ease of maintenance etc. Is one easier to live with than the other. Thanks in advance for your comments.

[cali_beemer]

What years of each are you looking at? In the R's theres a big difference between 1150's and the 1200. In the K bike they made a huge change in 2005. Right now this is pretty vague. Are you just looking for questions about working on them? handling?....

[Paul Mihalka]

K is higher performance, R is more relaxed. K is better on high speed sweepers, R is better on tight twisties. K maintenance is more involved but longer intervals, R is easy but more frequent.

In the end, get the bike you like to ride best.

[Endobob]

K is higher performance, R is more relaxed. K is better on high speed sweepers, R is better on tight twisties. K maintenance is more involved but longer intervals, R is easy but more frequent.

In the end, get the bike you like to ride best.

+1

 

I might add "In the end get the bike you like to ride and like the look and feel of best."

[plext]

The question really needs specifics, what type/year of R compared to what what type/year of K?

 

They have both changed quite radically over the years, not to mention the variation in specific models over the same ranges. A KS and KGT are surprisingly different, same with R variations.

[boatzo]

What the "OLD FART" says. Paul hit right on the head.

 

I loved my RT and did all the maintenance my self. I love my LT more and my wife will ride with me now (wouldn't go back). Although I would like something smaller and sprintier in the stable as well for those days I get a wild hair. I must say that the wrenching on the LT intimidates me some what, but I am getting over that.

[Trullion]

Re maintenance it depends on what K you are dealing with. The old 8 valve K100 and K75 bikes were simple to maintain because the shims were located above the buckets. The later 16 valvers needed the cams to be removed to adjust the valves. In my experience the old 8 valve Ks were virtually bullet-proof; much more so than any oilhead. However, the riding experience on an oilhead is much better in my view than it was on a K, which was good on motorways but not particularly nimble on twisty roads. The newer, transverse Ks are a different matter (and price range) entirely and I am unable to comment on them or the hexheads from experience.

[Kathy R]

I'm in a quandary, as those are my two favorite consonants.

[Mister Tee]

The "R" bike is for all intents and purposes uniquely BMW. If you're considering a "K" bike, you would likely compare it to other similar transverse 4 cylinder water cooled bikes like the FJR and the C14. I did.

[kmac]

I have ridden a K1200LT and it was very smooth and very powerful. My it just different. I like it too for the most part.

 

I have sat on both the new R1200RT and the similarly styled K1300ST and while the styling and the ammenities and the seating position is quite similar the ergonomics of the ST are just not as comfortable for my body as the RT is. But that is a personal thing. I would not hesitate to own both the R or the K models.

[cali_beemer]

Paul did a good job if summarizing. I have had several K's and R's. I prefer the road manners of the K as well as the power, torque and smoothness. However, I would much rather work on an R and I prefer the handling characteristics of the R in tight turns as well. The tight handling difference changes though, once you are discussing the newer K engine.

[FlyingFinn]

They don't make a K-GS so this is a moot question.

 

--

Mikko

[tallman]

K GT original version.

Modest performer in tight twisties but shines everywhere else.

Biased opinion.

But I do have 30+ years of Boxer experience.

 

Compare the K wrenching and R forums for issues.

 

Do what makes you happy.

[Dietrich]

K is higher performance, R is more relaxed. K is better on high speed sweepers, R is better on tight twisties. K maintenance is more involved but longer intervals, R is easy but more frequent.

In the end, get the bike you like to ride best.

 

Dead on! I tried both. loved the K1200GT buy found myself always with one foot in jail. Just hard to keep near speed limit. The R is just all-round better suited to my riding style. And the DIY maintenance is a big factor too.

[ka5ysy]

K is higher performance, R is more relaxed. K is better on high speed sweepers, R is better on tight twisties. K maintenance is more involved but longer intervals, R is easy but more frequent.

In the end, get the bike you like to ride best.

+1

 

I might add "In the end get the bike you like to ride and like the look and feel of best."

 

+2. The R bikes go and go and love twisties. The K bikes go like hell and will mostly do anything you have the balls to try!

 

You are advised to use the cruise control, especially on the K's, because they love to seduce you into going very, very fast and it does not feel like it !

 

You are much more likely to collect tickets on the K than the R, but the R is equally happy running way in excess of legal limits quite comfortably.

[cali_beemer]

Compare the K wrenching and R forums for issues.

 

 

If you are in reference to the wrenching forums on this site, then I think thats an unfair comparison. This site is by far dominted by R bike riders and the R11XX/1200RT in more specific. There are other sites a bit better for K bike stuff in great detail. Using that advice, one would get the impression K bikes have no issues, but if you go to a K-bike forum you will find they have just as many issues, some the same as the R, while others are unique to the K bike.

[RichEdwards]

The only answer to the R vs. K dilemma is provided by getting one of each.

[boatzo]

The only answer to the R vs. K dilemma is provided by getting one of each.

 

BTDT, got my T shirt and sold the R.

[OlGeezer]

K is higher performance, R is more relaxed. K is better on high speed sweepers, R is better on tight twisties. K maintenance is more involved but longer intervals, R is easy but more frequent.

In the end, get the bike you like to ride best.

 

Great summary, Paul.

 

Is the maintenance on a Camhead more similar to an Oilhead or to a K now that it has overhead cams with shim adjust valves? What is the frequency of check/adjustment of Camhead valves?

[BMW_RT]

 

I know it's an older discussion, but it's new to me.

 

I think the comments above have all been really good.

 

I rode a K1200GT before I bought the RT. The K is an outstanding bike. Very smooth, very sophisticated. It rolls up the horses and still lets you peer into the bottomless depths of its power. Very cool.

 

The R was a bit cheaper for a similar vintage, but ultimately it was a more comfortable position for me, and had a bit better wind protection.

 

As far as the engine itself goes, I just like the feel of the R more. It's more of a classical, old-style motorcycle feel. I like the instant jump of the shaft with a twitch of the throttle. I like the steady thrum out on the road. It just feels more like a motorcycle should feel-- or so I think. I've got a 750 four-banger in the stable, and it's cool, too, but, I do prefer the twin.

 

The newer K's are pretty reliable, as I understand it, but the simpler R set-up seems more reassuring for the long haul.

 

Definitely the boxer's a better set-up than a V-twin for a motorcycle, I think. So, a V-twin might not be as appealing. I've never ridding a Ducati or even one of the V-stroms, though, so maybe I need a wider sample.