BMW1200LT
#41
12-10-2007, 03:08 AM
RE: BMW1200LT
ORIGINAL: Rastus
I've owned 2 k1200lt bikes. By far probably the most comfortable bikes I've ever owned. I could ride all day and not be fatigued. I would ride with harley riders that usually would stop about every 100 to 150 miles to stretch there legs and such. My wife loved the seat on the 1200lt much more than any Harley I've owned. The 1200 lt has a 300+ mile range for fuel opposed to the 200+ mile range Harley has. A stock 1200lt if ridden properly will smoke any stock touring Harley in a race. The BMW is a much more refined motorcycle than any Harley. The ergonomics of the BMW is much better for long rides. I once rode an 860 trip in just a tad over 12 hours and did not feel the least bit fatigued when I got off the bike. There is a reason most Iron Butt riders ride these bikes. Never had any major mechanical problems and did all my own service.
Now for the downfalls of the bike. I think in order to handle the bike properly you need at least a 33" inseam as the bike is tall. I have a 30" inseam. With all the plastic trim on the bike it seems like a giant sail making navigation through cross winds somewhat tedious. Slow speed handling (parking lot speeds) are challenging on the pre 05's. You need a lot of confidence in high speed cornering with the bike because of the top heavy feel the bike has. It will corner a lot better than a Harley you just need to build up the guts to go for it. The bike has zero personality and often times on long rides I felt as though I could fall asleep because it's so smooth and uneventful. The side stands on the BMW K1200lt suck always use the center stand.
I'm no longer riding like I used to 6-7k miles a month and that is the reason I no longer ride the BMW's. I'm riding about 1k a month and my Harley RG is just fine for that. The Harley seems to be a little better bike around town in fact handles like a moped compared to the BMW in congested conditions. The Harley has been more than adequate on my short trips of 4 or 500 miles and has been a delight to ride as it has a lot of personality. I will say though, if I was going to do some serious riding and put a ton of miles on I would have to reconsider a BMW.
I've owned 2 k1200lt bikes. By far probably the most comfortable bikes I've ever owned. I could ride all day and not be fatigued. I would ride with harley riders that usually would stop about every 100 to 150 miles to stretch there legs and such. My wife loved the seat on the 1200lt much more than any Harley I've owned. The 1200 lt has a 300+ mile range for fuel opposed to the 200+ mile range Harley has. A stock 1200lt if ridden properly will smoke any stock touring Harley in a race. The BMW is a much more refined motorcycle than any Harley. The ergonomics of the BMW is much better for long rides. I once rode an 860 trip in just a tad over 12 hours and did not feel the least bit fatigued when I got off the bike. There is a reason most Iron Butt riders ride these bikes. Never had any major mechanical problems and did all my own service.
Now for the downfalls of the bike. I think in order to handle the bike properly you need at least a 33" inseam as the bike is tall. I have a 30" inseam. With all the plastic trim on the bike it seems like a giant sail making navigation through cross winds somewhat tedious. Slow speed handling (parking lot speeds) are challenging on the pre 05's. You need a lot of confidence in high speed cornering with the bike because of the top heavy feel the bike has. It will corner a lot better than a Harley you just need to build up the guts to go for it. The bike has zero personality and often times on long rides I felt as though I could fall asleep because it's so smooth and uneventful. The side stands on the BMW K1200lt suck always use the center stand.
I'm no longer riding like I used to 6-7k miles a month and that is the reason I no longer ride the BMW's. I'm riding about 1k a month and my Harley RG is just fine for that. The Harley seems to be a little better bike around town in fact handles like a moped compared to the BMW in congested conditions. The Harley has been more than adequate on my short trips of 4 or 500 miles and has been a delight to ride as it has a lot of personality. I will say though, if I was going to do some serious riding and put a ton of miles on I would have to reconsider a BMW.
#42
12-10-2007, 05:40 AM
Tourer
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wilmywood NC
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: BMW1200LT
I rode on a BMW 1200LT this weekend and it is an incredible bike. Totally different ride from the harley touring bikes. The BMW is built to be a touring bike for sure. It was very smooth and you felt like you could ride forever. 85 mph on the interstate and my pants legs werent even blowing in the wind. And the electric windshield is a pretty cool trick too. But when I asked the owner if it was his favorite bike ---- his street glide won out again! He said as far as looks and an overall bike that met all of his needs in one - it had to be his street glide. But then again he owns both and he has the option of riding either one!
#43
12-11-2007, 11:18 AM
Seasoned HDF Member
#45
12-13-2007, 04:08 PM
#47
12-13-2007, 07:13 PM
RE: BMW1200LT
I had 5 BMW's in the last 20 years and I liked all of them. Howevery, their dealer network is much smaller (4 hours away) I decided on a 07 RKC last spring. There is an HD dealer here in town. Very happy with the bike and all of the improvements over the last several years...finally enough power with the 96 and the 6th gear is really nice. A very confortable bike in the 70-80mph range on long trips.
#48
12-13-2007, 09:06 PM
RE: BMW1200LT
ORIGINAL: Jinks
I owned a K1200LT for 5 years. Traded it in on my RG. Of those 5 years, 3 were spent waiting for BMW to solve some of the problems with the LT. None of the problems were major problems, but added together they just made the bike less than I wanted.
The motor, while smooth, is small. 1171cc (if memory serves) is about 72 ci. It gets it's power from RPM. The LT is never ridden below 2500 rpm, & normally at 3000 to 4000. Real power is generated above 6000. That's just a little too busy for my personal touring preference. On rides with Harley mounted friends I had to anticipate their passing in traffic & gear down one or two gears to get the LT to respond with them. Of course when they pulled back into the right lane I was gaining at considerable speed & had to ride the brakes. That made group riding a little more effort. Single bike riding on interstate highways was a different story, the LT is difficult to beat. Pick a speed, any speed, set the cruise control, adjust the electric windshield, relax & enjoy the ride.
Another of the LT's weak points is the height of the seat & the center of gravity. It's a tall bike with a high center of gravity. Makes low speed handling more challenging & any surface other than paved highway extreemly difficult. I have a couple of scary memories of gravel roads! Even on pavement any lean at low speeds usually means you'll be pickin' the 800 lb + beast up.
BMW went through 3 modifications of the throttle cables before they got a version that didn't bind, but even then the throttle return springs seem to have come from a car. It always felt like there was a bowling ball on the end of the throttle. Cruise control is the only thing that made a long ride tollerable. On my RG, I forget that I have cruise.
I know I'm giving you all the faults of the LT, but it's actually a great bike. Smooth, fast, stable, & comfortable in it's element. It's problems lie where it gets out of it's element. For me Harley offers a broader set of riding parameters. If you have time to study the differences you should take a demo ride on an LT, & spend a little time on the LT forums. Like here, they're full of knowledgeable riders & good information.
I owned a K1200LT for 5 years. Traded it in on my RG. Of those 5 years, 3 were spent waiting for BMW to solve some of the problems with the LT. None of the problems were major problems, but added together they just made the bike less than I wanted.
The motor, while smooth, is small. 1171cc (if memory serves) is about 72 ci. It gets it's power from RPM. The LT is never ridden below 2500 rpm, & normally at 3000 to 4000. Real power is generated above 6000. That's just a little too busy for my personal touring preference. On rides with Harley mounted friends I had to anticipate their passing in traffic & gear down one or two gears to get the LT to respond with them. Of course when they pulled back into the right lane I was gaining at considerable speed & had to ride the brakes. That made group riding a little more effort. Single bike riding on interstate highways was a different story, the LT is difficult to beat. Pick a speed, any speed, set the cruise control, adjust the electric windshield, relax & enjoy the ride.
Another of the LT's weak points is the height of the seat & the center of gravity. It's a tall bike with a high center of gravity. Makes low speed handling more challenging & any surface other than paved highway extreemly difficult. I have a couple of scary memories of gravel roads! Even on pavement any lean at low speeds usually means you'll be pickin' the 800 lb + beast up.
BMW went through 3 modifications of the throttle cables before they got a version that didn't bind, but even then the throttle return springs seem to have come from a car. It always felt like there was a bowling ball on the end of the throttle. Cruise control is the only thing that made a long ride tollerable. On my RG, I forget that I have cruise.
I know I'm giving you all the faults of the LT, but it's actually a great bike. Smooth, fast, stable, & comfortable in it's element. It's problems lie where it gets out of it's element. For me Harley offers a broader set of riding parameters. If you have time to study the differences you should take a demo ride on an LT, & spend a little time on the LT forums. Like here, they're full of knowledgeable riders & good information.
#50
12-14-2007, 12:00 AM
RE: BMW1200LT
I've had an R1200RT, a K1200GT, I own a K1200S, I just traded an Ultra and now I own a FLHRSE4, or CVO Screamin Eagle Road King. I have ridden the K1200LT extensively. First the downsides of the LT:
1. Poor low speed handling - you WILL lay it over one day
2. Engine makes its power at higher revs
3. Engine has an annoying rattly rough spot between about 1,500 - 3,500 rpm
4. Lacks character
5. Lack of adjustability - very difficult (if not impossible) to adjust handlebars
6. Late in its model cycle, with likely very poor resale
Good points:
1. Stellar brakes
2. Great high speed handling
3. Good stability
4. Good ergonomics
5. Sophisticated suspension
6. Great creature comforts, like heated seat, electric windshield, heated grips, etc
In short, it is a rather soulless machine good at eating up superslab at high speed.
Now for the Ultra:
1. Looks stunning
2. Character, soul and charisma
3. That wonderful "potato potato potato" exhuast note - better than any iPod, CD or MP3 soundtrack
4. Excellent resale
5. Endless aftermarket and H-D accessories
6. Loping comfort
7. Feels good just going to the supermarket, but even better when you travel 350 miles to get an exciting destination
Not so much:
1. Poor ground clearance - you'll scrape early and often
2. Engine performance is not that exciting
3. Suspension crashes over harsh bumps
4. Luggage is clunky and inefficient
5. Umm... that's about it
To me, the Harley is like a WW2 F4 Corsair with tons of rumbling, snorting, grunting character - but with total reliability and superb build quality. The Beemer is like a Cessna 350 - very efficient, modern, capable - but lacking in personality. You can also most hear it say, "I am ze Bee Emm Double-U, Direcktor of Modorzycles - you vill ride now!"
No-one NEEDS a motorcycle, that's why you oughta get the one that's the most fun. For you, that is.
Choosing is fun - riding even more so... [sm=happy046.gif]
1. Poor low speed handling - you WILL lay it over one day
2. Engine makes its power at higher revs
3. Engine has an annoying rattly rough spot between about 1,500 - 3,500 rpm
4. Lacks character
5. Lack of adjustability - very difficult (if not impossible) to adjust handlebars
6. Late in its model cycle, with likely very poor resale
Good points:
1. Stellar brakes
2. Great high speed handling
3. Good stability
4. Good ergonomics
5. Sophisticated suspension
6. Great creature comforts, like heated seat, electric windshield, heated grips, etc
In short, it is a rather soulless machine good at eating up superslab at high speed.
Now for the Ultra:
1. Looks stunning
2. Character, soul and charisma
3. That wonderful "potato potato potato" exhuast note - better than any iPod, CD or MP3 soundtrack
4. Excellent resale
5. Endless aftermarket and H-D accessories
6. Loping comfort
7. Feels good just going to the supermarket, but even better when you travel 350 miles to get an exciting destination
Not so much:
1. Poor ground clearance - you'll scrape early and often
2. Engine performance is not that exciting
3. Suspension crashes over harsh bumps
4. Luggage is clunky and inefficient
5. Umm... that's about it
To me, the Harley is like a WW2 F4 Corsair with tons of rumbling, snorting, grunting character - but with total reliability and superb build quality. The Beemer is like a Cessna 350 - very efficient, modern, capable - but lacking in personality. You can also most hear it say, "I am ze Bee Emm Double-U, Direcktor of Modorzycles - you vill ride now!"
No-one NEEDS a motorcycle, that's why you oughta get the one that's the most fun. For you, that is.
Choosing is fun - riding even more so... [sm=happy046.gif]