R65 vs R65 monolever

[scottyintex]

R65 production began in 1979.........in 1985 they began the monolever R65 and switched to the R80 frame.  Is the mono a completely different cycle or is it considered just a modified R65? That would mean a 14 year production run...from 1979 to 1993. That would be BMW’s longest production run ever with some 44,000 built!  Or ...are they it two completely different animals that just happen to have 650cc engines? Was the switch to the R80 frame just a production cost cutting thing or was it a better frame? Which of the two is the better machine? Seems to me the mono was a cost cutting design that isn't as quite as good.

[Rob Valdez 79 R65]

You are figuring things pretty correctly, Scotty.

Putting the 650 engine in the same frame as the R80 and R100 just offered more diversity for little cost.

While there are many advantages to the mono shock bikes, like tubeless tires and a single-sided swingarm that eliminated the final drive splines mating the rear wheel.

But other than those two things, I can't think of any improvements.

On the downside, the mono R65's lost the upper triple clamp on the steering head.  BMW just continued on with that flat steel plate as on all the type-247's...

[GrimReaper]

 IMHO switching to R80 frame was a cutting cost which was a smart move(this means more interchangable part for us from the bigger bikes)I can't compare the handling(never rode pre '85)but mono handles like champ.
  And Yes 14 years of production means a lot
 

[nhmaf]

Did they really continue with R65 powerplants in mono-frames into the 90s?  I thought that they gave up on the R65 in 1987 (at least perhaps, in the USA -perhaps still available in Europe into the 90s)??

[scottyintex]

Yep, from what I have found the R65 mono was in production until 1993.  I am assuming the R65 and R65 mono are considered the same machine. Other than the frame change in 1985 and some re tuning of the engine and minor changes;  I can’t find any difference. If they are the same, then the R65 had the longest BMW production run.............some 14 years.  That bragging rights. Says a lot for the cycle. BMW produced 8,260 mono’s, 8,398 LS models and some 29,454 R65's...... a total of 46,112 R65's produced. Seems the nimble, reliable R65 was slowly but surely killed off by the 70mph speed limit and the demand for more horse power.
                        

[suecanada]

I thought there were fewer LS's made? I found 6,389 as a production figure on one site but could be incorrect, that's for sure.

[Motu]

Seems to me the mono was a cost cutting design that isn't as quite as good.

The mono thing was possibly cost cutting,but more rationalising.Stuck with a design they wanted to drop,but which a strong customer base wanted to keep,the airhead was modernised in a retro way and brought into line with the K series.Like K model wheels and forks,and the single sided swing arm.So it was just the R80 and the R65 as the smallest BMW.When the F650 arrived,they were able to drop the R65.

Which is better? If you ride both you can decide.The mono is a later model bike....was it a backwards step? I don't think so.Engine wise the 650 was tweaked - down to 48hp from 50,and the torque down to 47.8 Nm from 52.3Nm.But most importantly the rpm max torque was produced was lowered from 6,500rpm to 3,500rpm.I think this was done so the R65 didn't feel like a big bike with a small engine - with such a wide power band it can be ridden just like the R80...and in the real world not much slower.

For my riding on very twisty and often gravel roads the mono suits my needs very well - I can put the power on at 3,500rpm,and it will powerslide out of a loose corner,and spin right up to where I dare not tell.I like the max torque at 3,500,it makes anywhere on tacho the right place to be.

[Justin B.]

I've never ridden a mono R65 but I can say that my '95 R10RT felt more nimble than my '81 R100T (RT with fairing removed).  I miss my '95...