Monolever vs. model just before

[acruhl]

Hello all.

I'm kinda thinking of getting an R65 (or maybe one of the other R bikes, but the 65 seems nice) to replace my dreary SV650S.

Anyways, I see the "Monolever" ones started in about 1985, and they seem pretty nice. The ones just before have those elaborate aluminum wheels, and there seem to be a few more of those around. I found one of these "pre Monolever" ones, and '81 I think, in town for sale.

I think I like the idea of the Monolever bike, but I'm not sure.

Any reason why I should have one over the other?

I'm not afraid of working on bikes, I wouldn't mind rebuilding the engine for the fun of it let's say. I've got a few other bikes I work on as well.

[Justin B.]

The only thing I can compare is R100s.  I have a monoshock and a dual shock R100.  The mono feels to have a bit lower seat height, has sealed wheel bearings, tubeless rims, no rear wheel splines to grease, engine already should have unleaded compatible exhaust valves/seats, and it feels to me like it handles better.  As far as the dual shock, the only thing that "feels" better is a bit more grunt out of the engine.  Both are fine bikes, for their age, and I wouldn't hesitate to snatch-up a good deal on either.

[Motu]

The Mono will be newer of course.....that's if that means anything to you.Also it will be easier getting parts....the R65 mono is the same as the R80 apart from the engine.Particularly second hand parts,you don't have to look just for R65 parts - any mono parts will be worth a look....and even some K parts.I have a spare set of wheels....the front wheel is from a K100.

Going on released figures,the mono R65 seems to have a wider spread of torque....max torque is at 3,500rpm,with max hp at the same revs as the twinshock bike.This may be to make the R65 ride like the R80...it will pull from lower revs possibly better than the twinshock....although I don't know,I've never ridden a twinshock R65.

[steve hawkins]

Twin shock bikes have a frame/forks of their own, whereas the mono's share the frame/forks with the rest of the range (i.e. R80/100) of the time - post 85.

The R65 was originally introduced in 1978/9 as a medium capacity bike with some sporting pretentions (you may laugh, but it was as good as it gets with BMW at the time).  They handled better than their larger capacity machines as they were slightly lower (1/2 inch) and had a decent set of forks/yokes etc.

They were improved in 1981 with a useful weight reduction and power (such that it is) hike.  45 -> 50 bhp and 30lbs less weight.

The twin shock R65 has a reputation for handling better than its larger twin shock brothers, but with the advent of the mono's that advantage was nullified.

The Mono was taller again and they all handled the same (R65/R80/R100) - better apparently than the twin shock? - certainly better than the larger capacity twin shocks bikes (R80/100), and they were all styled and weighed the same.

If going for a monoshock - then it could be argued that you might just as well go for the larger models??  BMW came to this conclusion themselves as they dropped the R65 engined Mono soon enough, as otherwise the bike was the same as the R80/100 except for the engine - so it was rationalised out of the lineup to save money.

I actually like the twin-shocks.  But I do not see enough Mono R65's to make a call as they are rare in the UK.

Either way, if the bike available locally was in good order and priced right and it is an R65 you want, I would go for it irrespective.  A bird in the hand......

Steve H

[Motu]

Depends on if you see an advantage in the 650cc engine over the larger power units.Personally I do.The R65 is a very oversquare engine for a pushrod two valve twin,especially for that era.Piston speed is down,so it's happier at higher revs.It's more stable under engine braking and downshifts...no squat,and no rise under power.Smoother shifts.I'm not interested in endless hours of high speed straight roads - motorcycles are about going around corners for me.....the mono R65 is perfect for my riding style and the road conditions in New Zealand.

[acruhl]

Wow, good info.

Here's yet another decision I made based on the R range, and what I see available:

I'm trying to buy a bike based on what I think I could get if I sold my '04 SV650S, which should be around $3k or so.

I'm not interested in the GS models, they seem too expensive.

The R80 is usually (or always?) an RT model, which is not really what I want. It's going to be a commuter to work, for running around town, maybe the odd light tour and 2 up ride with my wife. I don't need a big fully faired bike for that.

The R100 seems nice, but they are usually thousands more on the used market. For good reason I'm told, that engine makes it better for 2 up riding, long distance, etc according to others.

So this kind of by default leaves me with the R65. Also because a twin shock one is actually available near me, and I found a few Monolever models that I'd have to travel to pick up and ride home (which seems like half the fun).

As for going around corners, I already have other bikes for that
(Can't post a photo yet because I'm too new, but the avatar is a hint.)

However, I never turn down the opportunity to enjoy a corner on any bike.

I'm hoping to look at the '82 today, I may have more discussion about it when I do.

Thanks for the replies, this place is great!

[montmil]

1981 and > R65s have the electronic ignition rather than points. Both systems have their aficionados.

There's a couple Arizona-based R65ers on this site. They'll chime in after they get up from their morning nap

Good condition R65s are available at <3K.

Monte

[fastcataz]

I haven't ridden enough miles on a mono to give a blow by blow account of the finer points of cornering , but I love my 84 twin shocker. Up in the hills around Globe it is perfect. Try to get one with a rack and bags, if you wish, much easier than getting the pieces after.
 I wasn't napping, I was resting my eyes.

[Danie]

Since 1981 the torque, as well as Kw output have been increased slightly on all R65 models - which means that the engine performance of monoshock models (manufactured afterwards) do differ slightly from all other pre- 1981 models.

The slight difference in engine performance did not cause any difference in overall performance though........

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_R65

[acruhl]

Another question:

It seems like some have 2 discs on the front, and some have 1. Was this an option, or maybe only certain models had this?

Thanks.

[acruhl]

This is more of just a commentary than a question, but I went to look at the bike in town today.

It's a black '81 with about 30,000 miles on it. I noticed that it was leaking a bit of oil from the base gasket on the rider's right cylinder, and it was weeping a bit from the valve covers on both sides. There were 2 discs on the front, but the lever came back to the bar. It probably needs bleeding. It's in pretty decent shape, I'd say, for a 28 year old bike. The owner wants $2800 for it which seems fair. I suppose I'd have to put a few hundred in for this and that.

I couldn't ride it because the battery is dead. We jumped it from a car battery but it wouldn't run without that battery. The "Gen" light was not on, but I don't know if that means the charging system is good or not.

Anyways, I have some thinking to do.

[Rob Valdez 79 R65]

The twin-shock R65's have a "real" cast aluminum top triple-clamp.
The monos (for whatever reason...) continued using BMW's flat steel top plate that has been used on the big-framed bikes since 1970.

You should know that the twin-shock "snowflake" wheels are designed to use tubes.  Some folks have ridden snowflakes for decades and 100K's of miles without an incident.
The monos were tubeless.

[montmil]

...It's a black '81 with about 30,000 miles on it. I noticed that it was leaking a bit of oil from the base gasket on the rider's right cylinder, and it was weeping a bit from the valve covers on both sides.

Gaskets for the cylinder crankcase joint and head gaskets plus a pair of rocker box gaskets. You'd want to replace the pushrod seals -four total- if you pull the jugs. Might as well do both and be done with it.

...There were 2 discs on the front, but the lever came back to the bar. It probably needs bleeding.

Yes, the entire system will need service with a complete cleaning and fresh fluid. May need a new hydraulic brake line and brake pads. Calipers would need a good look-see.
 

...I couldn't ride it because the battery is dead. We jumped it from a car battery but it wouldn't run without that battery. The "Gen" light was not on, but I don't know if that means the charging system is good or not.

Battery may be really dead and need replacing. With engine running the GEN light should be off; indicating a functional charging system. With the key on and engine off, the GEN light should be on.

...It's in pretty decent shape, I'd say, for a 28 year old bike. The owner wants $2800 for it which seems fair. I suppose I'd have to put a few hundred in for this and that..

30K miles on an 81 is not bad. Also get the bike on the stand and, with each tire off the ground, grab the tire at top and bottom. Try a push-pull -towards you and away. Any wiggle or rocking would indicate wheel bearing issues. Check tires; if they're rock hard, they'll need replacing.

If you can't ride the bike, the price needs to come way down. I bought my '81 and immediately dropped $500 into it.

[acruhl]

I think I'll be able to ride it at some point.

I didn't grab the wheels but that's always something I do on cars, never thought to do it on a bike but it makes sense.

The tires are new as of about 3 years ago, and it's been sitting since then. They seem fine.

Mind elaborating on what the $500 was?

[montmil]

...Mind elaborating on what the $500 was?

Since my bride isn't peeking over my shoulder and, if Bengt and Justin will keep their pie hole shut, ... Bought the bike for 2K after negotiations began at 2.6K.

Spark plug wires, caps and NGK plugs; Fork seals, felts and fluid; Front brake hydraulic line; Dyna ignition coil- Bosch Crack-O-Matic was; Rear wheel bearings, oil seals, thrust bushings; New tires- Bridgestone Spitfire; Fuel cap. And some additional bits that were purely cosmetic and discretionary decisions.

The short list got the bike safe to ride. I continue to upgrade and regular service. The $500 just got me started... Now, the '83 has become the money sponge.

Monte