New R and RS

[BrianT]

My understanding is they had to jettison the telelever to accommodate the radiator. Remember, this thing has a radiator!

So they compromised suspension for looks? The RT has a radiator too.

[tallman]

Who me?

 

Missed the spanish signs, musta been south Florida.

[walton66]

Gotta find the secret road down here then.

[beemerman2k]

Well, the RT has that big fairing on it where they can tuck the radiator under one of the fairing panels. There's either one on one side, or one on both sides. Hey, I'm not defending BMW, I'm only theorizing why they did what they did.

 

I'm sure the extra power is nice and all, but I have always enjoyed the lack of a radiator on these machines, so if I had it my way, it wouldn't be there and telelever would be.

 

But, strangely, nobody axed me

[mneblett]

My understanding is they had to jettison the telelever to accommodate the radiator. Remember, this thing has a radiator!

So they compromised suspension for looks? The RT has a radiator too.

As does the GS. And the earlier R1150R and R1100R had split oil radiators.

 

BMW could have keep the Telelever on the RS if they wanted.

 

I suspect the forks are not radiator-driven, but rather cost- or styling-driven (or both) as they continue to chase new demographics.

[russell_bynum]

My understanding is they had to jettison the telelever to accommodate the radiator. Remember, this thing has a radiator!

So they compromised suspension for looks? The RT has a radiator too.

 

 

"Yea the new RS is light years better looking than the last time they tried that cyclops version ST."

 

 

Looks matter.

[EffBee]

My understanding is they had to jettison the telelever to accommodate the radiator. Remember, this thing has a radiator!

So they compromised suspension for looks? The RT has a radiator too.

 

 

"Yea the new RS is light years better looking than the last time they tried that cyclops version ST."

 

 

Actually it's kinda cute.

[TedG]

 

 

"Yea the new RS is light years better looking than the last time they tried that cyclops version ST."

 

 

Looks matter.

 

Oddly enough, my ST gets more compliments from non riders than any other bike I've owned (Ks Rs, various Japanese sport bikes). Go figure.

[Mike]

 

"Yea the new RS is light years better looking than the last time they tried that cyclops version ST."

 

 

Looks matter.

 

Oddly enough, my ST gets more compliments from non riders than any other bike I've owned (Ks Rs, various Japanese sport bikes). Go figure.

 

No kidding, I've had the same experience. It's often difficult to discern whether something that deviates from the norm will be considered revolutionary-beautiful or revolutionary-ugly. Among the BMW owners, the early buzz that took hold was "ugly" and that became the entrenched opinion. Those who don't know what their opinion is supposed to be approach it with a different mindset.

 

Anyway, it's a strange phenomenon. I don't claim that my ST has anything but a face that only a mother could love, but I repeatedly get "Wow, that's a great looking/beautiful/cool bike" comments.

[StuGotz]

After listening to the exhaust note on the vid...especially on decel...yuk!

 

Does look nice though.

 

Maybe we can get Phil back.

 

MB>

[Firefight911]

After listening to the exhaust note on the vid...especially on decel...yuk!

 

Does look nice though.

 

Maybe we can get Phil back.

 

MB>

 

I've said the same on FB. Other than the badge on the bike, I haven't found much I don't like about the RS. I loved my ST and it is truly one of the bikes I should never have gotten rid of.

 

Only time will tell, but there ain't NO way under this God's green Earth I would buy it in its first year. I will be paying attention to it as time moves on and I do plan on stealing the keys to one once they hit the street.

[Limecreek]

After listening to the exhaust note on the vid...especially on decel...yuk!

 

Does look nice though.

 

Maybe we can get Phil back.

 

MB>

 

I've said the same on FB. Other than the badge on the bike, I haven't found much I don't like about the RS. I loved my ST and it is truly one of the bikes I should never have gotten rid of.

 

 

I remember you chasing me in the Texas hill country on your ST, er should I say holding you up in the hill country.

 

As for first year concerns - there really is not much that is first year on that bike other than the seat, windshield and plastics. The motor, brakes, drive train, suspension, switchgear has been out a couple of years now.

 

But I have to admit, if someone could screw up a first year bike, it would be BMW.

 

Cheers!

[Jake]

Hey Greg, is that my Street Triple in your avatar?!! Man I need a breakfast taco and some pie.

 

/hijack

[sardineone]

 

"Yea the new RS is light years better looking than the last time they tried that cyclops version ST."

 

 

Looks matter.

 

Oddly enough, my ST gets more compliments from non riders than any other bike I've owned (Ks Rs, various Japanese sport bikes). Go figure.

No kidding, I've had the same experience. It's often difficult to discern whether something that deviates from the norm will be considered revolutionary-beautiful or revolutionary-ugly. Among the BMW owners, the early buzz that took hold was "ugly" and that became the entrenched opinion. Those who don't know what their opinion is supposed to be approach it with a different mindset.

 

Anyway, it's a strange phenomenon. I don't claim that my ST has anything but a face that only a mother could love, but I repeatedly get "Wow, that's a great looking/beautiful/cool bike" comments.

 

+1 Same experience for me as well. Also I doubt if many bikes can match a ST's headlight on a dark highway as well!

[Limecreek]

Hey Greg, is that my Street Triple in your avatar?!! Man I need a breakfast taco and some pie.

 

/hijack

 

Yes it is and you do need to come out for a pie, taco and BBQ fix.

 

Steve left Torrey and headed to MI for business, but I am sure he would agree with me.

[BrianT]

My understanding is they had to jettison the telelever to accommodate the radiator. Remember, this thing has a radiator!

So they compromised suspension for looks? The RT has a radiator too.

 

 

"Yea the new RS is light years better looking than the last time they tried that cyclops version ST."

 

 

Looks matter.

LOL I'm all for looks but not at compromising ability. I'm function over form, not form over function. That cyclops headlight had nothing to do with function, just a styling choice. Quoting Sport Rider Magazine about the new R1200R and RS who in their first look at the bikes here Sport Rider Magazine First Look said "The chassis on both bikes remains a tubular steel design but now with a 45mm inverted front fork. According to BMW, the change was based on the "Excellent steering precision, directional accuracy, handling and braking rigidity" offered by a traditional telescopic fork as compared to the Telelever front end." I'm trying to understand how if this is the best way of doing it, why wasn't it done on the GS or RT? Sounds like it had nothing to do with the lack of fairing.

[russell_bynum]

My understanding is they had to jettison the telelever to accommodate the radiator. Remember, this thing has a radiator!

So they compromised suspension for looks? The RT has a radiator too.

 

 

"Yea the new RS is light years better looking than the last time they tried that cyclops version ST."

 

 

Looks matter.

LOL I'm all for looks but not at compromising ability. I'm function over form, not form over function. That cyclops headlight had nothing to do with function, just a styling choice. Quoting Sport Rider Magazine about the new R1200R and RS who in their first look at the bikes here Sport Rider Magazine First Look said "The chassis on both bikes remains a tubular steel design but now with a 45mm inverted front fork. According to BMW, the change was based on the "Excellent steering precision, directional accuracy, handling and braking rigidity" offered by a traditional telescopic fork as compared to the Telelever front end." I'm trying to understand how if this is the best way of doing it, why wasn't it done on the GS or RT? Sounds like it had nothing to do with the lack of fairing.

 

Stop trying to understanding marketing BS. Especially from BMW.

[BrianT]

Oddly enough, my ST gets more compliments from non riders than any other bike I've owned (Ks Rs, various Japanese sport bikes). Go figure.

No offense intended, the rest of the bike is spot on perfect, it was just the headlight that threw me off. I went so far as to look into aftermarket headlight replacements to see if there was something I could do to clean that up. Love the bike, just not the headlight.

[russell_bynum]

Oddly enough, my ST gets more compliments from non riders than any other bike I've owned (Ks Rs, various Japanese sport bikes). Go figure.

No offense intended, the rest of the bike is spot on perfect, it was just the headlight that threw me off. I went so far as to look into aftermarket headlight replacements to see if there was something I could do to clean that up. Love the bike, just not the headlight.

 

You can't see the front of the bike when you're riding it.

 

Well...

[tallman]

There is/was a front headlight change that turned it into 2 lights. (for the ST)

I think they changed the front end to get Russell to buy one.

[Scotto]

http://www.motorcyclistonline.com/news/2015-bmw-r1200rs-first-look?src=SOC&dom=fb

[FlyingFinn]

I REALLY like this new RS. It's exactly what I hoped BMW would come up with.

Except for one thing...

 

It has too small fuel tank. The fuel range will be under 200 miles, and that really sucks. I don't like to plan trips around gas stops.

 

Mikko

[John in VA]

http://www.motorcyclistonline.com/news/2015-bmw-r1200rs-first-look?src=SOC&dom=fb

 

Looks like there's a new RS-only top case. The rear rack doesn't look compatible with current R top cases.

[BrianT]

I REALLY like this new RS. It's exactly what I hoped BMW would come up with.

Except for one thing...

 

It has too small fuel tank. The fuel range will be under 200 miles, and that really sucks. I don't like to plan trips around gas stops.

 

Mikko

That was my problem with the first K12GT based on the K12RS. Sometimes I had to squeak by on fumes getting to a gas station taking some back roads. Hopefully the 4.8 gallons on the new R12RS is usable volume.

[jcheston]

I am sorry to say that the new RS leaves me cold. Whilst I welcome the return of a sports tourer to the boxer range, the details available suggest that this is not a true successor to the seminal R100RS.

 

If you were to discard the engine and roundels, the design could have emerged from any of the Japanese factories. The 'bars look to be too high and wide for my tastes and, if you are going to fit a fairing, why not design one that gives decent protection to the hands?

 

I haven't come across details of the dry wet, but the quoted wet weight is 2kg more than that of the ST whilst the fuel tank is 3 litres smaller, both retrograde steps in my view unless the engine is exceptionally efficient.

 

And surely there is a market for the option of narrower panniers - like the old city cases available in the '80s - to ease urban commuting?

 

Just my thoughts - I should get to see the bike in the metal next month and my dealer will no doubt be keen to offer a test ride in the new year.

 

[mneblett]

I am sorry to say that the new RS leaves me cold. Whilst I welcome the return of a sports tourer to the boxer range, the details available suggest that this is not a true successor to the seminal R100RS.

You are not alone. My first thought was "that's not an RS, it is no more than an S"

[DougM]

As a previous owner of an R1100RS, an R1150RS, and a Suzuki SV1000S I turned into a sweet ST bike, and current owner of an R1200ST, "sport-touring" obviously speaks to me and encompasses most of my riding time. Emphasis on sport on 1-3 week rides as often as I can... which is never often enough.

 

Regarding the much-discussed ST appearance, I'm with the others who have mainly received complements on the bike. Ok, I added a Wunderlich mask to divide the cyclops light into the appearance of being 2 separate lights, which helps. It's been a great bike and I've been hoping BMW would update it.

 

This new RS looks great to me. My biggest reservation is weight--I read one spec that noted 520 lbs. I hope that's "wet" weight. My ST is 505 "wet" and yes I know the RS is water cooled but I believe (and wish) BMW could have come in under that. Conventional forks are fine by me although I don't mind the Telelever. I don't see the need for Gear Shift Assist. 4.8 gallons should allow 200 miles, which is enough for me between stops.

 

All considered I really like this new RS and the biggest benefit for me over my ST will be losing the despised EVO brake system and gaining some power and electronic bits. I see one in my future.

[ScottT]

 

It has too small fuel tank. The fuel range will be under 200 miles, and that really sucks. I don't like to plan trips around gas stops.

 

Mikko

 

Were I still an "RS guy" the tiny tank would be a show stopper for me. Not only don't I like to plan trips around gas stops like you, in many places in the US you can get into deep trouble if you don't a decent sized tank. A 200 mile fuel range means you're looking for fuel by 150. There are places out west you can go well over a 100 without finding gas if you don't want to divert. With such a small tank you may be too far from a station when you do decide to divert.

 

My 1984 R100RS had a 6.1. gallon tank and my three oilhead RSs had 6.7 I think. I have gotten 8.1 gallons into my current RT. 4.8 gallons on a RS??? Really? Ridiculous.

[Guest Kakugo]

"The chassis on both bikes remains a tubular steel design but now with a 45mm inverted front fork. According to BMW, the change was based on the "Excellent steering precision, directional accuracy, handling and braking rigidity" offered by a traditional telescopic fork as compared to the Telelever front end." I'm trying to understand how if this is the best way of doing it, why wasn't it done on the GS or RT? Sounds like it had nothing to do with the lack of fairing.

 

Take it with a fair bit of caution but from what I've heard there are two main reasons why BMW opted for a conventional fork over Telelever.

1)A conventional front end is cheaper to manufacture. And those forks don't look like high end units.

2)They needed to find room for the radiators while at the same time not using a relatively expensive dual installation as on the GS/GSA and RT.

Personally I believe these two considerations came first and styling came later.

 

Regarding the RS tank range. Make no bone about it: this bike is aimed squarely at old VFR owners whom Honda has not appeased by putting the old VTEC back in production with a different look and who are wary of the VFR1200F weight and wheelbase.

Given how a gas guzzler the VFR has always been, this bike should have no problem outperforming it in the mileage department.

 

 

[tallman]

Doug,

the later RS/RSL bikes were, AFAIR 23 litre tanks.

 

But, reports of R1200 versions getting north of 45, so 180+ miles might be reasonable?

 

Not 200+, but few bikes are.

 

Who knows, perhaps a constant run on the new RS get close to 50

so over 200 doable...

[BrianT]

Take it with a fair bit of caution but from what I've heard there are two main reasons why BMW opted for a conventional fork over Telelever.

Oh trust me, I know that BMW didn't make the change because it improved the handling. It's either cost cutting like you said or weight savings as some have already noted the weight of the bike, which would only be more with the Telelever.

 

I was hoping for an RT light with this bike, but the more information comes to light the more it's looking like RT compromised.

[Firefight911]

I was hoping for an RT light with this bike, but the more information comes to light the more it's looking like RT compromised.

 

I'm thinking the same. The gas tank size is a complete killer on this. I always wanted a little extra for my ST. No way this new RS is gonna be able to do what I want with a smaller tank, regardless of any perceived efficiency improvement. I'll still ride it and try it but I am highly doubtful of this one now ever finding its way in to my stable.

[tallman]

The oilhead RS/RSL always had a smaller tank than the RT AFAIR.

 

BMW keeping with tradition there.

Maybe not here, but around the world I think the 180-200 mile range is ok.

 

I think many riders are ok with that even over here.

Granted this board is different in that many want to go multiple 250 mile tanks, but don't think they/we represent the average rider or even perhaps the target RS buyer.

 

Don't know, so many end up w/the LCGS these days that perhaps the R/RS are window dressing.

[Dieter30]

I would like to say something about the new RS: I think that there is more focus at sportiness than at journey-friendliness when you consider that there is no analog tachometer, no telelever, no splash guard and no cover of the rear spring strut.

 

Too bad ... a little more balance between "sport" and "travel" would have been nice.

[freedomforgreg]

An area salesman told me that the fork suspension was necessitated by the placement of the radiator. Also that the fuel mileage was expected to be 60+ at cruising. No pricing available and bikes coming in the second quarter. He sat on one at a show so it must be true....

[StuGotz]

BMW keeping with tradition there.

Maybe not here, but around the world I think the 180-200 mile range is ok.

 

I think many riders are ok with that even over here.

Granted this board is different in that many want to go multiple 250 mile tanks, but don't think they/we represent the average rider or even perhaps the target RS buyer.

.

 

Tim, you hit it on the head here. This board is NOT the world norm and BMW isn't really interested in what WE want as a range.

 

In so far as others commenting on tank and range, no matter what bike I am on, I'm ALWAYS planning stops around fuel, no matter what size tank I have. If you had a 400 mile range, wouldn't you still be looking for fuel eventually? I plan my stops according to what bike I'm on, period.

 

I'm surprised no one's bitching about the seat or colors available...

 

 

I like the new RS. Kinda like what the RS used to be about. Sport.

 

MB>

 

 

[Ponch]

BMW uses color?

[CruisinCruzan]

As long it can be made from black and white they will give you any color you want.

[ScottT]

Kinda like what the RS used to be about. Sport.

 

No, it really isn't. The original RS and oilhead RSs were about sport and long distance touring. The original sport touring bike. I know. I've owned four of them and put a combined 337 thousand miles on them.

 

1984 R100RS - 6.3 gallons. 250 mile range

1994 R1100RS - 6.8 gallons. 275 mile range

1998 R1100RS

2001 R1150RS

 

The bike that became the real R100RS successor is the R1200RT. I handles better, goes lots further, fantastic weather protection, and it's faster than any of my RSs were.

[tallman]

Scott,

My '96 RSL had a 23 L tank, 6.08 gallons.

Best I can recall.

My mpg ranged from 38-48 but 90% of riding below 40mpg/

 

AS always, YMMV.

[Matts_12GS]

Scott,

My '96 RSL had a 23 L tank, 6.08 gallons.

Best I can recall.

My mpg ranged from 38-48 but 90% of riding below 40mpg/

 

AS always, YMMV.

 

No, it had 4.2 gallon tank...

 

Remember, we bought it...

[tallman]

6.08 gallons

scroll down

 

Maybe that is where I left the $50,000, in the tank, hmmm.

[Matts_12GS]

6.08 gallons

scroll down

 

Maybe that is where I left the $50,000, in the tank, hmmm.

 

 

I'm thinking that was a typo, because I could not get either of the RS's we had to take more than 4.5 gallons. Ask Computer Bob, I sold him the faster one, you know, the red one... and I'm pretty sure his experiences were the same.

[Dennis Andress]

We saw the RS Saturday, at IMS in Long Beach. Wow!

 

BMW is claiming 506 lbs, wet.

Dynamic ESA has a connector on the left fork leg to control damping.

The windshield has two positions. The K13S windshield makes a lot of wind noise, the fairing on the RS is a little wider, especially at the top of the windshield. Hopefully it's quieter.

There's a mount for BMW's GPS that attaches to the rear of the handlebar mount. It positions the GPS underneath the instrument panel, where you can see them both in one glance.

The bars don't feel as high as they look. This may be because the tank/airbox area is rather long, like an inch or more than the K13.

The pegs felt high, the mid-height seat felt low, but I'm 6'4". There are 3 seat heights available. The seat sucked.

I don't think the bike didn't have a center stand.

 

We both are waiting for a test ride...

[Jake]

I'm surprised no one's bitching about the seat...

 

The seat sucked.

 

Harmony and bliss returns.

 

 

[TEWKS]

I'm surprised no one's bitching about the seat...

 

The seat sucked.

 

Harmony and bliss returns.

 

 

And it also confirms that BMW just cashed the checks from.....

 

1 Corbin

2 Sargent

3 Russell

4 Bill Mayer

5 Rick Mayer Oops, still in the mail.

 

Pat

[Motors]

Looking forward to seeing the new RS is the flesh at the Chicago IMS. If anyone who has actually sat on it could give some more impressions on the fit it would be appreciated.

 

Thanks.

[Dennis Andress]

I'm 6'3" 215 lbs with size 15 shoes (I find all of that matters)

 

The bars felt pretty nice. Certainly flatter and wider than my KS. The seat to bars reach was comfortable for my long arms. I think I mentioned above; the "gas tank" seems to be longer than the KS.

 

I didn't pay any attention to footpeg placement, either because it felt good enough not to stand out, or because I forgot all about it.

 

I thought the fairing was perhaps too small. There was nothing to keep the elements off my hands. Which is fine until it rains. The back fender is going to suck in the rain too.

 

I still want one. Hopefully BMW sells lots of them and makes a "rev B" version in a couple of years.

 

The BMW rep said the R won't get Dynamic ESA.

[fourteenfour]

So reading the accessory page, the bags are not water proof? Or are the liners being noted as water proof just an additional feature for the liners?

 

Is there a price yet? Betting that putting bags on it aligns price too close to RT

[Dennis Andress]

The bags looked every bit as good as the ones currently on an RT. I guess that means they are waterproof.

 

The rep said BMW prices bikes to be competitive in the market segment the bike plays in, and that would be the S1000 RR and K13S. The rep also said the RS would be available with different option packages. My guess would be that the top option package would be comparable with an RT - in price and features, and the bare bones package would be under 16K. (Go to the BMW site, look at the K1300 S "Build Your Own" doohickey. )