marcopolo Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 http://www.ashonbikes.com/content/bmw-k1600gt-review Link to comment
outpost22 Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 "...but simply by listing and explaining the array of new technology the bikes can boats,..." Freudian slip? Hope it handles better than one. Link to comment
AdirondackJack Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 What will be interesting is confirming which of the two models is most comfortable for long distance. The reviewer seemed to feel that the GT was more comfortable than the GTL. Looks like the range is greater on the GTL, though. 5.8 gals for the GT, and 7.1 gals for the GTL. go figure? Link to comment
TEWKS Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Looks like the range is greater on the GTL, though. 5.8 gals for the GT, and 7.1 gals for the GTL. go figure? Yeah, can't figure why they would do that with the GT. The expense of designing a smaller tank or larger for the GTL doesn't make sense to me. Who wants less range? Some beautiful pics in that article! Pat Link to comment
VinnyR11 Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Nice write up. I think the bike looks fantastic. I do however agree 100% with the reviewer that "the rest of the dash has something of a tacky, glitzy look that doesn’t sit well with the rest of the bike." With such a well done, nicely detailed, and IMO elegant design, what were they thinking when they did the dash? Link to comment
BerndM Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 http://www.ashonbikes.com/content/bmw-k1600gt-review Great Link, THANKS! As I was reading it I was more than a little surprised at this paragraph..... "The motor is a little disappointing at lower revs, especially in the 2,000-3,000rpm zone where you find yourself a lot, as the gearing is tall and the engine so smooth it will trickle down to idle even in the high gears without complaint. Given the fat torque curve you’d hope to be able to snick the smooth-changing transmission into top and leave it there until you switch off at the end of the day, but in practice typical 50-70mph (80-110kph) overtakes demand a couple of downchanges if you’re going to dispense with slower traffic rapidly. And that’s solo: with a passenger, full luggage and steep mountain roads to negotiate (which is the point of a bike like this) you’ll be using the gearbox a fair bit more than you might have expected." With 160 HP and over 100 ft/lbs of torque at a super low 1500rpm, this makes no sense to me at all. :-(( Link to comment
nazdravanul Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 http://www.ashonbikes.com/content/bmw-k1600gt-review Great Link, THANKS! As I was reading it I was more than a little surprised at this paragraph..... "The motor is a little disappointing at lower revs, especially in the 2,000-3,000rpm zone where you find yourself a lot, as the gearing is tall and the engine so smooth it will trickle down to idle even in the high gears without complaint. Given the fat torque curve you’d hope to be able to snick the smooth-changing transmission into top and leave it there until you switch off at the end of the day, but in practice typical 50-70mph (80-110kph) overtakes demand a couple of downchanges if you’re going to dispense with slower traffic rapidly. And that’s solo: with a passenger, full luggage and steep mountain roads to negotiate (which is the point of a bike like this) you’ll be using the gearbox a fair bit more than you might have expected." With 160 HP and over 100 ft/lbs of torque at a super low 1500rpm, this makes no sense to me at all. :-(( I have the same problem. Something just doesn't add up ... Link to comment
NonComp Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 I have the same problem. Something just doesn't add up ...While the reviewer says that he rode both the GT and GTL, the review is of the GT. Perhaps BMW has tuned the GT fuel mapping to be closer to the K13 GT - a more sport touring role. Perhaps the GTL is tuned more for touring. If not - big mistake. I recall an interview with the Motorad CEO boasting that the new 6 would be positioned to challenge the GoldWing. If I remember correctly, he stated that the sport touring market was dying. Maybe they had a change of heart when they decided to kill the K13 line. In any case, if it doesn't have roll-on power, it isn't going to be displacing the GW any time soon. Doesn't sound like it would do very well pulling a trailer. Link to comment
Dennis Andress Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 http://www.ashonbikes.com/content/bmw-k1600gt-review Great Link, THANKS! As I was reading it I was more than a little surprised at this paragraph..... "The motor is a little disappointing at lower revs, especially in the 2,000-3,000rpm zone where you find yourself a lot, as the gearing is tall and the engine so smooth it will trickle down to idle even in the high gears without complaint. Given the fat torque curve you’d hope to be able to snick the smooth-changing transmission into top and leave it there until you switch off at the end of the day, but in practice typical 50-70mph (80-110kph) overtakes demand a couple of downchanges if you’re going to dispense with slower traffic rapidly. And that’s solo: with a passenger, full luggage and steep mountain roads to negotiate (which is the point of a bike like this) you’ll be using the gearbox a fair bit more than you might have expected." With 160 HP and over 100 ft/lbs of torque at a super low 1500rpm, this makes no sense to me at all. :-(( I have the same problem. Something just doesn't add up ... It's not that odd. My K1300 S pulls like a banshee at anything over 3500 RPM. Below that it feels like tractor chained to a stump. I do find myself in 4th and 5th gear when freeway traffic slows down below 60. Not that the bike wouldn't deal with 6th gear, just that it's more responsive. Link to comment
marcopolo Posted February 22, 2011 Author Share Posted February 22, 2011 BTW, the same site (ashonbikes.com) is supposed to have a separate GTL review today (22 Feb). I just looked a few minutes ago and it had not yet been posted. Also, the site's author, Kevin Ash, was asked what drive mode he was in during his test ride, given his comments about low-end torque. This was his answer: "I tried all three modes and ended up in Dynamic most of the time, but none affects the low rev torque, only the initial throttle response. It doesn't feel like a heavy pig, it just doesn't pull especially hard at low rpm. I haven't done the calculations yet but I'll go through the bike's gearing and see how the 125Nm of engine torque translates into rear wheel torque, which is what really matters. The taller a bike's gearing the less the torque at the rear wheel, and this bike does 155mph/250kph at around 7,500-8,000rpm, so it is a very tall geared machine. I did ride a 1200GS the same day briefly and it felt just as punchy as the GT and GTL, if anything with a crisper response." Link to comment
NonComp Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 My friend with a 1200RT uses 6th gear as an overdrive and finds himself downshifting regularly, where my older tech ST1300 5-speed is happy to roll on pretty much anywhere. So if the K16 is a lot like the 1200RT in terms of roll-on response, I'm not seeing the advantage of all those extra cylinders. Link to comment
BerndM Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 My friend with a 1200RT uses 6th gear as an overdrive and finds himself downshifting regularly, where my older tech ST1300 5-speed is happy to roll on pretty much anywhere. So if the K16 is a lot like the 1200RT in terms of roll-on response, I'm not seeing the advantage of all those extra cylinders. Totally agree with your comment. On my 05RT, riding the freeways here in SoCal, I routinely leave it in 6th as traffic slows, even down to around 35mph. I have NO ISSUES whatsoever with the bike easily pulling back up to speed as traffic picks up again, WITHOUT needing to downshift. Link to comment
nazdravanul Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 BTW, the same site (ashonbikes.com) is supposed to have a separate GTL review today (22 Feb). I just looked a few minutes ago and it had not yet been posted. The guy announced it (in the forum area, the k1600gt/gtl thread) as an "evening production" around 8:30 pm, UK time. Link to comment
TEWKS Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 BTW, the same site (ashonbikes.com) is supposed to have a separate GTL review today (22 Feb). I just looked a few minutes ago and it had not yet been posted. Your GTL has arrived Sir! Pat Link to comment
NonComp Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 So basically the GTL is heavier, slower (governed) rides and handles more poorly than the GT, has a lower seat and has the same roll-on response characteristics, but you notice that less because you don't ride it as hard. Hmm... Link to comment
BerndM Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 Good review. Thanks! I have to ask though, what is it with BMW's asinine ASYMMETRICAL dashboards. It's the one thing, other than asymmetrical headlights, I find absolutely ridiculous. Is it just me??? I hope not! Link to comment
TEWKS Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 Any word on valve checks/adjustments yet? Be nice to see something like twenty four thousand miles. Pat Link to comment
marcopolo Posted February 23, 2011 Author Share Posted February 23, 2011 Interesting torque comparisons, and done in part (presumably) to answer questions arising from his online reviews of the GT and GTL: http://ashonbikes.com/content/bmw-k1600gt-torque-comparison Link to comment
nazdravanul Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 Interesting torque comparisons, and done in part (presumably) to answer questions arising from his online reviews of the GT and GTL: http://ashonbikes.com/content/bmw-k1600gt-torque-comparison Make sure you read also the very final part where the DOHC RT is thrown in the mix, for good measure Link to comment
Dennis Andress Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 Nice read. My thought is we name the K1600 the "Lead Sled" Link to comment
alkar Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 I'm going to be very disappointed if the roll-on on my K16GT isn't a LOT punchier than my GS. I love my GS -- more than any other bike I've owned in 40 years of riding -- but it's not a hot rod. The GT has been marketed as a superior sport-touring package. It wont be that without good roll-on acceleration, something the K13GT had in spades. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.