K1200GT: a few days in purgatory.

Topics related to the ownership, maintenance, equipping, operation, and riding of the R1150R.

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
riceburner
Basic User
Posts: 3809
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 7:54 am
Donating Member #: 0
Location: Hiding in your blind spot....
Contact:

K1200GT: a few days in purgatory.

Post by riceburner »

There comes a point when you're riding a bike that you realise that no matter how efficient, well-built, or comfortable it is : you hate the thing. :(

That's how I currently feel about the loan K1200GT I am using at present.

It's a superb piece of machinery, highly technologically advanced and super efficient at whisking you from A-F via B, C and D. The large IL4 engine, the pinnacle of the "Flying Brick" series of laid flat IL4s, is smooth as silk and very, very quick once you spin it up. The fairing can protect you from nearly 99% of windblast at the top of it's electrically controlled movement, and the heated grips and seat will keep you cossetted for hours.

But. For each benefit there is a drawback, and this is what kills the bike as a serious proposition. The engine may well be powerful, but at very low engine speeds there is hoot ALL torque - I stall it pulling away from the house EVERY DAY because it won't pull away under 4K when it's cold. The super efficient fairing may well kill all the windblast - but the riding position is semi-sporty, which NEEDS a bit of windblast to keep the weight of your wrists and support your shoulders. So you can ride around at 3 figure speeds but it feels like you're doing 10mph in a potholed London street. The only riding position that makes any form of sense is that adopted by police where you shove your hips forwards and arch your back - very healthy I'm sure - but NOT comfortable, and it makes you very susceptible to forward / back movement on braking and acceleration.

Which brings me to the brakes. :roll:

They're servo-powered and extremely powerful when engaged from high speed. Which is Good. Very good. :D Except for the delay. When you are doing 40/50 ish and the car you're passing on the dual carriageway suddenly decides that no, HE is going to pullout first, you need brakes, quickly.

The BMW thinks different. It gives you brakes, you smoothly squeeze the lever and you slow, rapidly.... AFTER you have a heart-stopping moment of No brakes whatsoever while the servo's get up to speed. :eek: The ABS also has a disconcerting habit of killing the brakes temporarily if you hit a pothole with more than a whisker of braking effort on. Very worrying in city streets. :(

So it's not a good town bike, which is not really a surprise, but the fact that it's also not good out of town DID come as a surprise, especially when I happened to be heading home later than usual one evening. The headlights are the worst examples of wishy washy, pathetic road-illumination I have ever seen. The 6v electrics on a Vincent Comet would beat this thing's full-beam! Normally flipping the headlights OFF makes the road go dark!! For a bikes supposedly designed to travel at high speeds on Autobahns two up with luggage, they're ridiculous and I seriously hope BMW have improved the lights on their latest bikes because you'd have difficulty reading Dr Seusses Cat in the Hat by this light!

Overall, if you want to do long distance riding (because to suggest the Ka1200GT is an option for anything else is ludicrous), say London to Cannes, buy an R1150RT, or a K1200S, or a K1200RS, or a Bentley - anything you want in fact - just don't buy a K1200GT because you'll get there with crippled wrists and a heart condition and the bike will end up decorating the arse end of one of Abramoviches yacht anchors. :(
Non quod, sed quomodo.

A Rockster Life
Russ

K1200GT: a few days in purgatory

Post by Russ »

Some interesting points. Some I disagree with. I own a 2003 GT and a 2004 R.

I agree the lighting is pathetic. I commute about 60 miles a day. I work a rotating shift, so night riding in a heavy deer populated area is a weekly occurance. The R's lighting is superior and I like the fact I can adjusted the R's beam easily.

Disagree on the low end torque. I have never stalled the GT starting out with a cold (or a hot) engine. I live 1/8 mile off the pavement, so I started out on uneven dirt/gravel road. Though, I definitely prefer the R when my road is muddy. (I have 33k miles on the R and alot them are dirt/gravel)

The paved road I travel does not have pot holes, but it does have a rough railroad crossing and a few other rough spots. I stand up on both the GT and the R on the rough. I do not live near a big city, so my city driving is limited. But I do not understand the problem, 600 lb plus bikes are not fun to drive in the city?

I also do not find the seating position to be as harsh as you. I happen to like both the riding position of the R and the GT. (You are right, the GT position is better when you are traveling in the triple digits)

The R is non-ABS and I love their feel. But I don't find the problems with the ABS as you list them.

Russ
BobFV1
Basic User
Posts: 830
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:26 am
Donating Member #: 0
Location: Fairfax County, Virginia

Post by BobFV1 »

I agree with you on the riding position - that's why I got an RT. Can't wait for the next generation GT with goosed-up engine!
Bob
2006 R1200GS ADV "Five Charlie"
User avatar
riceburner
Basic User
Posts: 3809
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 7:54 am
Donating Member #: 0
Location: Hiding in your blind spot....
Contact:

Re: K1200GT: a few days in purgatory

Post by riceburner »

Russ wrote:Some interesting points. Some I disagree with. I own a 2003 GT and a 2004 R.

I agree the lighting is pathetic. I commute about 60 miles a day. I work a rotating shift, so night riding in a heavy deer populated area is a weekly occurance. The R's lighting is superior and I like the fact I can adjusted the R's beam easily.

Disagree on the low end torque. I have never stalled the GT starting out with a cold (or a hot) engine. I live 1/8 mile off the pavement, so I started out on uneven dirt/gravel road. Though, I definitely prefer the R when my road is muddy. (I have 33k miles on the R and alot them are dirt/gravel)

The paved road I travel does not have pot holes, but it does have a rough railroad crossing and a few other rough spots. I stand up on both the GT and the R on the rough. I do not live near a big city, so my city driving is limited. But I do not understand the problem, 600 lb plus bikes are not fun to drive in the city?

I also do not find the seating position to be as harsh as you. I happen to like both the riding position of the R and the GT. (You are right, the GT position is better when you are traveling in the triple digits)

The R is non-ABS and I love their feel. But I don't find the problems with the ABS as you list them.

Russ
to be frank - most of my points ARE subjective, I personally HATE having control of a vehicle taken away from me - which the servo brakes and ABS do, but that's a personal thing.

RE the City riding - the weight makes the bike difficult to filter with accuracy (lane-split) - I'm often aiming for gaps that are only inches wider than the bike in both moving and stationary traffic - the weight and clumsy turning circle don't help at all.

The stalling problem could well be that I haven't gotten used to the clutch bite point yet - but I doubt it - I swap bikes regularly (including onto old British classics like a Matchless G3 and Vincent Comet) and never have problems like this.
Non quod, sed quomodo.

A Rockster Life
nemt1150r
Basic User
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2005 6:35 pm

K1200GT: a few days in purgatory

Post by nemt1150r »

I am wondering if it is the particular GT you are riding. I have not had the stalling problem you are encountering.

Russ[/img]
rchop
Lifer
Posts: 231
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 11:11 pm
Donating Member #: 0
Location: Murphysboro, IL
Contact:

Post by rchop »

I don't think you can write an accurate review of a particular model of bike just from a few hours or days with a loaner.
The only thing I agreed with was the seating position. That was easily remedied with a set of bar-backs and a peg lowering kit. I had taken many test rides on the K1200RS and GT before buying my GT. I researched the seating position modifications before I decided to buy.
The power band on this engine is endless...it pulls from 2k to redline smoother and with increasing "grunt" more than any bike I have had before. I have never had a problem with the clutch activation that you have described and I haven't heard anyone with that problem on the K1200 boards. The same with the brakes...what's this delay you are describing? I have to use 2 fingers low on the brake lever (towards the pivot) to keep the family jewels intact :? I have only activated the ABS once and I'm glad I had it!
The GT seems to come with the headlight aimed too low and a simple adjustment remedied the need for more light. I ride mine to work every day, leaving in the dark and negotiating a combo of 2 lane back roads, city streets and freeway traffic at rush hour including my share of lane splits. No scratches or missing parts yet.
The GT is a long, heavy motorcycle that is surprisingly nimble when you get used to riding it. I did 1800 miles on it in May with a 500+ mile day with no aches, pains or monkey butt.
Again...read the first sentence. I have grown to really enjoy the GT as I have gained the experience that comes with spending many hours and miles on it.
I have been riding for more than 35 years and I will agree that the GT is not the easiest bike to ride at first but, if you a willing to spend the time to learn how to handle it, it will be a rewarding experiance.

All that being said....I think there must have been a reason that particular bike you were riding was a loaner :P

Image
Expert

Nailed It

Post by Expert »

I think you nailed it.

In my experience, 30-40% of K-RS/GT riders have exactly the same review of those items as you.

And 30-40% have the other views.

And 30-40% don't have a clue about it.

I owned and rode a KRS for over a year. First 90 days was as you experienced. Then I got used to it - brakes, low speed handling, riding position, engine quirks. Shifted from that 1st 30% to the middle group in my opinions.
User avatar
riceburner
Basic User
Posts: 3809
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 7:54 am
Donating Member #: 0
Location: Hiding in your blind spot....
Contact:

Post by riceburner »

rchop wrote:I don't think you can write an accurate review of a particular model of bike just from a few hours or days with a loaner.

Tell that to the Magazines. ;)



rchop wrote:The only thing I agreed with was the seating position. That was easily remedied with a set of bar-backs and a peg lowering kit. I had taken many test rides on the K1200RS and GT before buying my GT. I researched the seating position modifications before I decided to buy.
The power band on this engine is endless...it pulls from 2k to redline smoother and with increasing "grunt" more than any bike I have had before. I have never had a problem with the clutch activation that you have described and I haven't heard anyone with that problem on the K1200 boards. The same with the brakes...what's this delay you are describing? I have to use 2 fingers low on the brake lever (towards the pivot) to keep the family jewels intact :? I have only activated the ABS once and I'm glad I had it!
The GT seems to come with the headlight aimed too low and a simple adjustment remedied the need for more light. I ride mine to work every day, leaving in the dark and negotiating a combo of 2 lane back roads, city streets and freeway traffic at rush hour including my share of lane splits. No scratches or missing parts yet.
The GT is a long, heavy motorcycle that is surprisingly nimble when you get used to riding it. I did 1800 miles on it in May with a 500+ mile day with no aches, pains or monkey butt.
Again...read the first sentence. I have grown to really enjoy the GT as I have gained the experience that comes with spending many hours and miles on it.
I have been riding for more than 35 years and I will agree that the GT is not the easiest bike to ride at first but, if you a willing to spend the time to learn how to handle it, it will be a rewarding experiance.
I agree it's a lovely engine, and I don't know what's up with the stalling problem - maybe a fuelling glitch?

Re the Brakes - I'm used to having braided line brakes without ABS/Servos and having them bled up so tight they're good enough for race-use. Compared to that, when you "grab" a handful (emergency or semi-emergency braking) the servos have a slght delay before they kick in that is scary. I get just enough time to think "What the? No Br...." before they slam on and I'm virtually thrown through the screen. You do end up stopping or slowing in roughly the same distance, but it's not as controlled.

I agree the lights are probably badly aimed - but I've ridden virtually every early 2000's R-series BMW going (R-RT/RS/R/Rockster/S/GS/GSAdv) and the full-beam are dire on all of them except the "R". I was hoping the K-GT/RS series lights would be better - but they don't seem to be. Why can't they be accurately aimed direct from the factory?

I agree the K-GT is surprisingly nimble at speed - but in heavy traffic (lane-splitting) it's still a heavy weight.


I do agree that after a year or several thousand miles I'd probably grow accustomed to the bike, and ride /work around the deficiencies it has when it comes from the dealer - but I wouldn't go out and buy one as it stands.
rchop wrote:All that being said....I think there must have been a reason that particular bike you were riding was a loaner :P

The dealership I go to maintains a fairly large loan and test-ride fleet and this bike is a new this year bike with less than 3000 on the clock - it's not a hack. ;)



oh yeah - Im also a bit miffed today cos my Rockster panniers don't fit onto it and I was hoping to pick up some gear for my forthcoming wedding - have had to dig out a pair of old soft-panniers. :(
Non quod, sed quomodo.

A Rockster Life
Leno

Post by Leno »

"oh yeah - Im also a bit miffed today cos my Rockster panniers don't fit onto it and I was hoping to pick up some gear for my forthcoming wedding - have had to dig out a pair of old soft-panniers."

You might want to take it steady with the wedding cake on the back. :D
Guest

Post by Guest »

Tell that to the Magazines. ;)

The only magazine reviews I pay any attention to are the long term ride reports. You might notice that the overall impressions on those tests usually change from start of the test to the finish. The one day, track day or pre-release tests...take them for what they are worth. Kind of like the "so-called" movie expert reviews.

I agree the K-GT is surprisingly nimble at speed - but in heavy traffic (lane-splitting) it's still a heavy weight.

Again...I say that it is what you are used to. After many miles and hours on it, the bike doesn't feel like a heavyweight to me. I don't think I'm adjusting to it's deficiencies, I'm just learning how to be more comfortable with the heavier bike.



The dealership I go to maintains a fairly large loan and test-ride fleet and this bike is a new this year bike with less than 3000 on the clock - it's not a hack. ;)


They have obviously missed something on that bike...I haven't heard any of the throttle/clutch problems or the brake delay/grabbing problems on the K1200 forums. As you know, these problems would common posts if they were widespread.

It's just a matter of perception...I think
User avatar
geechie
Honorary Lifer
Posts: 179
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 11:03 am
Donating Member #: 0
Location: Charleston, SC

Post by geechie »

Interesting thread, this.

I have no personal experience with the GT. I do have a friend from Indianapolis who really likes his a lot — and he went to it from an 1150GS. It is a studly looking machine, no doubt.

Rchop used a phrase something like: 'grown to like it', and that says a lot. To use a word found often in the "magazines" with regard to our bikes, they are "quirky". It takes time to adjust to BMW's way of doing things. Some folks, not you Mr. Burner, simply aren't sufficiently adaptable. Personally, I think that quirkyness adds to the appeal of beemers in general.

At any rate, hope you get your own bike back soon!

George
Member #191
Carpe momentum... y'all
User avatar
riceburner
Basic User
Posts: 3809
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 7:54 am
Donating Member #: 0
Location: Hiding in your blind spot....
Contact:

Post by riceburner »

geechie wrote:. Some folks, not you Mr. Burner, simply aren't sufficiently adaptable.

ooooh - good thing I re-read that before typing what I WAS going to type..... ;)
Non quod, sed quomodo.

A Rockster Life
rchop
Lifer
Posts: 231
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 11:11 pm
Donating Member #: 0
Location: Murphysboro, IL
Contact:

Post by rchop »

Sorry, I didn't realize I wasn't logged in :P

Anonymous wrote:Tell that to the Magazines. ;)

The only magazine reviews I pay any attention to are the long term ride reports. You might notice that the overall impressions on those tests usually change from start of the test to the finish. The one day, track day or pre-release tests...take them for what they are worth. Kind of like the "so-called" movie expert reviews.

I agree the K-GT is surprisingly nimble at speed - but in heavy traffic (lane-splitting) it's still a heavy weight.

Again...I say that it is what you are used to. After many miles and hours on it, the bike doesn't feel like a heavyweight to me. I don't think I'm adjusting to it's deficiencies, I'm just learning how to be more comfortable with the heavier bike.



The dealership I go to maintains a fairly large loan and test-ride fleet and this bike is a new this year bike with less than 3000 on the clock - it's not a hack. ;)


They have obviously missed something on that bike...I haven't heard any of the throttle/clutch problems or the brake delay/grabbing problems on the K1200 forums. As you know, these problems would be common posts if they were widespread.

It's just a matter of perception...I think
Post Reply