The New And Improved Unofficial R65 Forum V2

General Category => Chit-Chat => Topic started by: Helix910 on January 12, 2007, 09:10:50 AM

Title: R65 vs R65LS?
Post by: Helix910 on January 12, 2007, 09:10:50 AM
As someone who would like to own an R65 some day, and is actively looking, I would like to know what are the differences between a "regular" R65 and the R65LS?

I can see that they look different, but are there any significant differences in their specifications?

Seat height, for instance, or weight?  

How about ergonomics; seating position, seat comfort, handlebar reach and spread?

Any differences in engine performance, brakes, suspension, gas tank capacity?

In other words, what are the hidden differences, if any, between the two models, other than their appearance and, possibly, market value?

Thanks in advance for your help.


Doug in NC
Title: Re: R65 vs R65LS?
Post by: NC Steve on January 12, 2007, 09:46:53 AM
Doug, mechanically the 2 are identical, beyond the LS having dual discs that most regular R65s lack. The differences are primarily cosmetic and ergonomic, such as the LS having shorter, flatter bars, a different seat, black exhaust, unique wheels, etc.
For a good owners overview of these things, you might want to check out the link below.
Good luck!

http://www.roadkill.com/~davet/moto/R65.faq.html
Title: Re: R65 vs R65LS?
Post by: Rob Valdez 79 R65 on January 12, 2007, 10:06:53 AM
And I have seen so many LS' that have the higher, US handlebar.  I would have thought they all came with the low bar.
I guess they were doing what ever it took to move them off the showroom floor.
My dealer thought I was looney when I insisted on having the low bars installed.  I guess I am a stranger in a strange land (Indiana).
Title: Re: R65 vs R65LS?
Post by: nhmaf on January 12, 2007, 11:11:34 AM
All US-destination models got the high handlebar as std equipment - you had to order a "european"
low bar if you wanted that installed instead, whereas all the Euro model got the lower bar as standard.

When I bought my LS, it still had the original "high" bar, which looked weird and felt kinda weird on
what is essentially a cafe style bike.

I think that European marketing folks felt that US riders all like the pullback "chopper" look on everything, or that
our spines wouldn't bend...

 ;D
Title: Re: R65 vs R65LS?
Post by: NC Steve on January 12, 2007, 03:26:34 PM
Doug, here's another site where you can click each bike by model and get factory specs, on the entire BMW line looks like.
Turns out there are some very minor differences in things like seat height, weight, etc., but nothing really significant.

http://www.bmbikes.co.uk/bmwmodels.htm
Title: Re: R65 vs R65LS?
Post by: Justin B. on January 12, 2007, 10:47:14 PM
The ratty LS I picked up has low bars on it  but I think nhmaf is correct.  Seems I remember reading somewhere that the US specific bikes came "standard" with the touring style bars because BMW was under the impression that all US riders preferred an upright seating position.  An LS with high bars just looks goofy!  :P  

Oh, welcome to the forum!  8-)
Title: Re: R65 vs R65LS?
Post by: SCJJR65 on January 13, 2007, 08:17:44 AM
As someone who doesn't like "chrome" much, I always thought the matte black trim of the LS looked better than the standard chrome trim that most R65s have.  Plus, the famed auto/bike designer Hans Muth is responsible for the look of the LS, which will make it more valuable as time goes on.  I put black mirrors on Britta, and if I could get a set of black mufflers to replace the chrome Zeuna ones that are on there now (without spending a fortune), I'd do it in a skinny minute!  ;)
Title: Re: R65 vs R65LS?
Post by: Justin B. on January 13, 2007, 11:19:29 AM
Send your mufflers off and get them black ceramic coated...
Title: Re: R65 vs R65LS?
Post by: MrRiden on January 14, 2007, 11:21:34 AM
Besides what has all ready been pointed out the LS has a slightly different tail section on the seat which makes it unsuitable for adding a rear rack as seen on some R65s. The angular style of the front nacelle is the most obvious difference and tho dated in appearance lends a certain cachet to the LS model along with $500 or more to its resale price. At least thats my opinion.
Rich    who is still looking for low bars.
Title: Re: R65 vs R65LS?
Post by: milkman on January 15, 2007, 08:24:03 AM
I have the LS, but unfortunatle without the original fairing. I have an R series biking fairing of a higher cc model as it has the larger headlight hole (8 inch?) so therefore has different dash (without the surround) and so I'm not sure if my bars are teh right ones or not? How do I tell?

Still interested in the complete replacement for that area if anyone comes across it......the search continues.
Title: Re: R65 vs R65LS?
Post by: Helix910 on January 15, 2007, 10:39:17 AM
Thanks, everyone, for the detailed replies including the useful links.