Modern BMWs

[Dizerens5]

I'm a bit worried about today's new BMWs. I certainly won't be buying one -- they are way beyond my retired-grand-dad's financial scope and anyway they look too much like something Judge Dredd might ride -- but I am really disquieted by what I read about them. Many owners report a catalogue of electronic failures and mechanical  (often rear drive) failures. Have they just been unlucky? Or if not, what has happened to a motorcycle once famous for reliability close to 100%? Anyone have an explanation here? I mean, my R65 is over 30 years old but it doesn't break down. A new BMW should surely be as dependable, shouldn't it?

[nhmaf]

To quote a well know (future) engineer, "The more they overthink the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain."

[Barry]

A new BMW should surely be as dependable, shouldn't it?  

Well they have hard act to follow and from what I hear they don't live up to it.  

I could probably learn to live with some of the complexity if it was reliable but the shear weight doesn't do anything for me at all. If a new BMW weighed the same as an Airhead and had all the improvements of better ride, handling, performance and fuel economy then I'd be impressed. Not much chance though while the obsession with ever bigger and bigger engines persists.

[Graeme]

Checking the specs on some of the older BMW, despite having steel mudguards etc. and no benifit of the clever alloys & plastics since developed have no great weight saving than the modern bikes.

http://www.bmbikes.co.uk/bmwmodels.htm

[Bob_Roller]

They are a different way of doing things, no doubt about that .

The R65 is a WW1 biplane, the oilhead is an F-15 .

They are 'sanitized' like the Asian bikes, no 'character' or quirkiness about them .

I think if you rode one for  a while, you may think differently about them.

My R1150R is around 530 pounds, abut 100 pounds heavier than my R65, you know it's there .

The brakes are phenomenal on the oilhead, after being off of the R65 for awhile, the airhead brakes feel 'unsafe', there is that much difference between them .

Fuel consumption is around 49mpg in my normal commute to work and 58 mpg on rural interstate highways at 80 mph .

Only problems I've had with the bike, is a final drive output seal started leaking at about 1000 miles, replaced under warranty .

An instrument internal lighting failure about 3 weeks ago, if I had loosened up the wiring harness like I knew I should have, the wire would not have broke .

I had to replace fork seals a few years ago, the left one started leaking, then about 6 months later the right was leaking .

When I replaced the left fork seal, the complete job was done in 40 minutes .

For the most part, I do not regret getting the oilhead, I've had it 9 years and just turned 40,000 miles on it last week .

I also got a great deal on it, it was the last '02 bike on the showroom floor and they wanted it out of there .

[montmil]

Read Kevin Cameron's Top Dead Center editorial in the December 2011 issue of Cycle World.

And BTW, BMW's nxt-gen R-series bike is a liquid-cooled follow on to the air/oil cooled 1200GS. Article's in same Cycle World with photo of the ugly bastid. [smiley=thumbdown.gif]

Monte

[darrylri]

You guys know that I have a BMW from each decade they've been making them (except the 30s; anybody got an R66 for sale?).  Each generation just gets better and better as riding machines, but each generation also has its foibles and flaws (anybody replace a rotor or diode board recently?  How about a Hall Effect sensor?)

My modern bike is an '07 R1200ST -- if that double cyclops face doesn't have "character" (whatever that is), I don't know what does.  But it's a great bike, I have put 68k on it since new and it has never let me down.  The only time I have been stranded by it is when I hit two deer with it, and the bike would have ridden home if the oil cooler didn't have a crack.  

IMHO, it's a waste of time and energy to compare BMW: TNG with the Airheads.  The Airheads are not going to get any better, and they are going to look more and more vintage as time wears on.  What's great about them is that even though they are getting to be vintage, they still serve their intended purpose and will continue to do so.  I could write the same thing about my /2, my /3 and, I hope next September, to be able to say the same thing about my 1928 R52.

[Lucky_Lou]

Biggles calling, i like my Biplane.........but i do have the urge for "Fast Air Support" when needed.
Lou

[Barry]

You know to tell the truth I try to avoid riding modern bikes for the very reason that they are so good.

I'm scared the contrast would put me off the old one. Happened to a mate of mine who has sold all his old bikes because his new V strom is so much better.

One thing I've always enjoyed over the last 40 years is the contrast between riding and driving the car which feels like a limo after a weeks commuting on the bike.

[marcmax]

In addition to my R65's I also ride a K75s. Being 20 years old I don't think it qualifies as a modern BMW but it is worlds apart from an airhead. Much more complex and not as easy to work on as the R65 but every bit as reliable. It is also a completely different feel to ride and as much as I hate to admit it, it is also a lot more comfortable to ride a long distance. The BMW mechanic that has been mentoring my travels through the world of German motorcycles describes the difference as...newer BMW motorcycles are like appliances. You turn the key and hit the button and they go, like plugging in a refrigerator and letting it run. Always runs the same, rides the same, stops the same. But an airhead is two wheels with character, every ride is an adventure.

[Dizerens5]

Thanks everyone but my problem was not with the modern engineering which is fabulous (if way beyond my means) but with reliability. Over here there seem to be so many reports of new oilheads, GSs etc. having failures, not non-urgent ones but the kind that leave you standing by a dead bike at the roadside. Notably electronics! And someone has just reported to our local club that his failed ABS unit will cost just over £2,000, I think that's about US $ 2,200 from BMW dealer, to replace (plus cost of fitting I imagine). I can hardly believe this.  I'm wondering if these problems are simply bad luck which people complain about. It all seems very strange.

[captmdc]

 I think Bob's response is right on regarding reliability:

As one who bought a new R65 in 1982, sold it in 1997 for a new 1997 R1100RS, and then 11 years later sold the oilhead and now back to a R-65 again..... my oilhead R1100RS was reliable (granted, over a rather low accumulated 30,000 miles) - save for eating batteries in the garage (you know, the dreaded 'dit-dit-dit' sound) when not ridden frequently and an occasional ABS electrical failure which still allowed me to ride the bike though not with the ABS working.  Never a dead bike on the road, it went, handled and stopped wonderfully and was comfortable with great ergonomics (e.g. Voni Glaves of BMWOA has more that 300k of her 1 mil miles on a R1100rs).  

R1100RS was best built bike I have owned over 4 decades, and the last BMW pleasing to my eye before the creators of "Alien" came to design BMWs.  I went back to the R-65 because it is much lighter, less complex, less costly to repair, still has a 'classic' classic style after all these years and a more connected feel to the road.  No, it does not shine at 90-100mph being buffeted on the interstates, but is fine up to 75 mph and a delight on secondary roads.  Like a WW1 bi-plane, the designers of the R-65 got it right the first time!

[Barry]

....last BMW pleasing to my eye before the creators of "Alien" came to design BMWs.

Great description!  and another reason besides excessive weight that puts me off new bikes no matter how good they are.  Motorcycles in my book should look substantially like an engine on wheels.

I wouldn't argue that new technology can be reliable but I am with Constellation in having an aversion to paying out huge sums of money if something does go wrong with one of the unfixable black boxes. We have to hope that in the long run back street entrepreneurs arise that can fix the black boxes at much more modest cost. There is some evidence that that is already happening in the automotive world.

[Dizerens5]

This is getting interesting! I don't think the comparison with a WW1 biplane is a very good one, because I suspect that the biplane could not equal the capabilities of a modern light aircraft, except maybe for very short flights in summer daytime with good visibility, while for normal road use an R65 will give about the same ability as a modern rig. Far from equal in top speed, braking, acceleration and gadgets, certainly, but in normal riding, town and country, those extra capabilities of the modern bike are normally only marginal for most riders, or not used at all.  A sailing yacht might be a better comparison? An old one would be wood instead of plastic, would not have a wind generator or electronic aids, but if still in good condition you could sail it round the world just as well. But I must admit I would be happy to have a reliable ABS!  

[donbmw]

From 1998 to 2003 I was the Service Manager for a Honda Yamaha dealer. I rode all the new bikes and most of the time the bikes the techs worked on. After this I still will keep the BMW's that I have. They have been the only ones that I have ever wanted since started riding in 1978 and even before this. I have had two models of Jap bikes and neither were what I would have had as long as I have had my BMW's. I look at all of the new bikes they all look the same and none have any appeal to me to want to buy a new bike.