New R1150RS

[Huggy70]

Well BMW have presented their new R1150RS...RT engine but the same styling!!!!
What a joke,

Hugo

http://www.edisport.it/edisport/motociclismo/News.nsf/175e9c958a9c4625c12567b60062f771/4f45178527cdfcc0c1256a99004f7ce0/$FILE/57K.jpg

[roger albert]

Well,

I'll agree it's probably a diappointment for the guys wanting a lot of change, but we couldn't realistically have expected anything radical only a few months after nearly all new R and RT, and revised KRS, KLT, and S models. That would be expecting too much. The staff can't redesign everything at once. I'm pretty impressed that they did this on top of the above mentioned efforts. No small engineering feat!

It may not win any converts, but for the many people with 7 year old RSs, it will be a nice freshening (after all, most like the old fairing) They'll be looking at new motor, ecu, brakes, transmission, and wheels. Those things pretty much define a bike, so on some levels, it is a big change. The same tweaks certainly improved the R. Why not the RS too?

So, it's no big deal to me, but I wouldn't go so far as to call it a joke. I think the target audience will be pretty happy (though it probably won't steal many Futura sales)

later
roger

[Rapt]

Isn't this freshing more of a parts swap than a redesign? Seems to me that the 1150 engine should just drop in, IF they were HALF smart in the design group. So the real work wasn't in the new versions of the biks but itneh systems themselves. Since the 1150 engine already existed it was more a matter of mating the GS engine with the S gearbox and playing with the ratios, or it should have been.

I know that BMW would of course not be apt to admit that was that sraight froward on the engine side but knowing how companies work I'd lay odds it was pretty near that straight foraward.

That leaves the brakes as the only major design effort, and it IS major.

Personally I think the styling remaining the same has mroe to do with tooling costs and the amortization of existing tooling. That stuff is most likely the single most capital intensive part of the manufacturing of the bike, after development costs. The engine tooling woudl be comparable as a whoel but its shared between MANY different models while the bodywork is unique to one.

Besides if they made it look too good it would cut into S sales.

[This message has been edited by Rapt (edited 07-30-2001).]

[Conrad (RAD) Sudduth]

Well, I must admit I am disappointed. First that there is not a new model, there still could be one coming?, but more with the redesign. I was a RS owner and did love the bike. It has a lot of pluses and tours great for a bike that handles pretty darn good. I got rid of mine because it was about to get its 3rd transmission in 36K miles. There is no question that the RS faithful that I deal with will be in heaven regarding this bike. It is exactly what some have told me they want. The RS with updated engine, tranny, wheels and fuel injection. It can’t be possible for BMW to sell enough of these to keep it around after the first purchasing round by the RS faithful is completed. I can only think that BMW has mistakenly concluded from the huge success of the GS redesign that it will happen with the RS. In the states where marketing and sex appeal is everything this bike will attract no one new to BMW. With updated visuals This bike could have competed with the Aprila and Duc in the sport touring market.

[Bails]

I too am an X RS owner, thought the bike was a good tourer, and handled reasonably well. I would not go back to it for this upgrade though, especially after riding the S.
Why?
Handling
Motor Response
Looks

Just not enough changes to make it a bike I would conider , or should I say re consider.

Bails

[Rapt]

"With updated visuals This bike could have competed with the Aprila and Duc in the sport touring market. "

While I agree that it won't pull a lot of new blodd into BMW, I totally disagree that reskinning the Rs would have provided ANY competition for Aprillia and Duc inthe sport touring market. The S is the competitor there and its fighting for its place there and has PLENTY of sex appeal. The RS would ALWAYS be bottom of the heap, with less power and inferior handling. The S has MORE power than the RS and still is low man on the heap BUT at least it really handles. Take that away as in the RS and you'd be kissing ANY sport-tour sales goodbye.

[roger albert]

I think Rapt is right about the costs. The fairing changes would be expensive. The more that stays the same, the lower the certification costs too. When you look at each country that has to happen in, it REALLY adds up. The motor and tranny and ecu and wheels and to some extent, the brakes, are straight from the RT. Even the brakes wouldn't be too tough, as endpoints are well defined by the new RT and updated S. Just have to pick the correct midpoint.

I personally wouldn't buy it with that old fairing which I never liked, but enough will.
I would be suprised to see an updated RS in less than 2 years, probably 4. They just don't operate faster than that.

I agree the old visuals will hurt it, but with the power of even the new 1150, most Futura and ST4 riders wouldn't consider it (those bikes are closer to the S) anyway, since it would still be a fair amount slower. Viewed in that light, _maybe_ BMW made the right decision (i.e. don't bother with better body if you can't come up with more muscle)

I'm really curious what it will do for sales.

[Romain]

Two possibilities. The bike was revamped to make the distance before a complete new design hits the road or BMW just did, what they thought the bike needed most. The 22000 units sold from 1993-97 do not make it a topseller, but the RS has found a community which is very satisfied with what the bike delivers. That the RS is still on the market since all those years is prove, that there is enough demand - not prove for amortization of tooling. It's still the customer who generates the demand. And proposing the same bike with latest technology available is surely a smart thing to do.
The RS has been improved exactly there, where it was somewhat outdated. Taking advantage of the parts in your stock is allways an economically smart move. From a production point of view, you want to keep the number of different pieces to stock/produce low, so you dump the 1100 engine and 5 speed gearbox, brakes, CPUs etc and put the "standard" parts in your models.
Not changing design on a yearly base like the japs do it is one of the reasons why Beemers still sell at a bucketfull of $$$$ - check out the market value of a K100RS aged 15 years, or an R1100RS 94.

And never forget that a lot of Beemer riders do not care what others think of their ride (call it arrogant ;-)), or what this years top model is (a lot do not even care what is going on on the bike market) - the R1100/50GS is an ugly bike but is in fact the most sold bike in Germany.
Hope to see the R1150RS soon on the road.

Maybe I can retrofit this 23 liter fueltank???

[Conrad (RAD) Sudduth]

Rapt

You could be absolutely correct that the RS could not really compete with a new skin.

I tour on my S, do 1,000 plus mile days on it and will cross the states from coast to coast on it a couple of times in late September yet I don’t classify the S as a real sport tourer. To me it is far more sport than tour that is why I like it. The Futura on the other hand appears to be far more tour than sport. I just felt that BMW missed an opportunity to have the RS be their answer to the new tour oriented sport tourers on the market.

Enough from me on the subject
rad

[MarkC]

I saw the new RS at a large BMW dealer in Stuttgart today and thought it odd that BMW didn't offer updates to the body (save for clear turnsignal lenses and a slightly larger windsheild and it's mounting system). Having owned an RS for three years (mostly for sport riding and track riding) I must say that it handled quite well once I changed the front shock and installed solid bar mounts. I see the new RS as nothing more than an R1150RT with the old RS body...Nothing new (different from what's available now) and nothing really invested by BMW it seems. This leads me to believe BMW has the *real* *new* 'RS' waiting to be released in a couple of years...Perhaps even 2003. I'd certainly consider buying this new one (as I have found memories of my old RS) but I'm not sold on the new integrated ABS system (the main reason why I choose a year 2000 R1100S over a new one).

MarkC

[johnty288]

I like this approach and it is not untypical of BMW. To refine an existing design speaks well of the original and doesn't obsolete the older model. If you want the latest you can upgrade, if you don't you don't have to feel abandoned. I think the RS design looks as fresh and current today as when it came out. I like it much more than the Futura. With what looks like magnesium valve covers and S wheels, I wonder how much weight they shaved off it?

[E30klassic]

Hey what about change our 1100 engine for the newer and more torque 1150 along with the new motronik computer, i believe it's the same size.......

[AxisRider]

Meet the new RS, same as the old RS.

<sigh>

What a waste.

[JPF]

as fresh and current today as when it came out??? are you kidding.. the design was five years behind then!

hell, now the design sticks out like a car with fins... this bike needs a complete cosmetic make over as well as some serious wind tunnel time under the guidance of someone from one of the italian marques! all new r1150rs.. give me a break. looks like it was designed in 1987 for F#@% sake.

next thing you know they're gunna re-issue an all new K1 (NOW ONLY 900 Lbs.!!!).

please.

[Spiralgalaxy5]

Originally posted by JPF:
as fresh and current today as when it came out??? are you kidding.. the design was five years behind then!

Disagree with you JPF, one word: Telelever.

Tim

[JPF]

I agree that the telelever was major, but the cometic design was always very box like in it's shape. i never really cared for it. I have ridden it and as a touring bike I like it a lot. big seat for a fat as$. short reach to the bars, comfortable upright riding position, nice. but not for me... maybe when I'm 60.

anyway i passed along some of the comments to a friend in marketing at BMWNA and he said to pass this along:

The writer(s) characterized the bike perfectly: a RT with an RS body. The old
bike
had one of the best fairing designs in motorcycle history. There isn't a
lot
to do to improve on it, so why try? Why not put your resources into areas
of new conquest?

The amazingly petulant comment that BMW is sitting by the wayside is one
with which I violently disagree, and all you have to do is look at the LT,
the new F 650 CS, and the integral braking system, quite apart from
developments over the last decade
so numberous I will lose any of today's riding time listing them if chose to
do so.

(NOTE TO READER: RIDING IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN COMMENTARY TO L. - MY KIND OF MOTORCYCLE EXECUTIVE!)

And unquestionably, BMW is working on the future of engine development,
which they are not about to tell any of us about until they decide that they
are ready.

It's human nature to assume that the world's going to hell because our own
particular desire isn't being catered to. When BMW stopped making the K 75
because
everyone stopped buying them, people started to squawk, saying it was "the
best bike BMW ever made."

We have already too many "sport touring" bikes, the smallest bike
category in the U.S. and even internationally. It did not make sense to
spend
the resources on a wholly new R sports-tourer when the RT does the job
admirably
and the S in a more sporty way. This is why Yamaha isn't bothering to bring
the
new FJ 1300 to the U.S., and Honda's virtually stopped bring in the ST 1100.
Their vision of a sport touring bike is now a sport bike with bags attached.
Why? Because even for the Japanese, sport-touring is a dead end, with
insufficient
volume to justify the expense involved.

I suggest that the writer ride the new RS before he throws rocks at it. If
he wants
a really insane fast bike, I recommend a Hayabusa. Just don't expect it to
hold
up in the real-world riding conditions every BMW rider experiences...

[Romain]

I fully support JPF's statement.
I like the way BMW acts and where they put their R&D money (and in the end the money I pay them). They did more innovation in the bike world in the last 10 years than all other producers together (ABS (even for the F650), Telelever, Fuel injection, Catalysator, even the urban geneous mini bike C1 is a BMW).
The jap bike world puts most of their money in developing image bikes like GSX-R, R1 and so on. It's only Yam who shows a bike like the new 1300. Main focus is POWER and FASTER, the rest of their catalogues uses designs 20 years old. This is one thing you will not see with BMW as they deliberately lock their cars at 250 km/h and will probably do so for their bikes if ever one happens to be faster (I do not consider the K12RS with top speed of 252 km/h being faster).
Why do people actually want BMW to copy japs high performance bikes or change the design of a bike every couple of years? Pure consumerism? It's way easier to buy japs in first place... It's not pure luck, that BMW is on the winner's road since years, they are very smart in making their decisions and are highly competent in marketing.

Riding BMW is just a different approach to the bike world - maybe it's a more closed world, but we see more of these worlds, like the HD, Bueller, Ducati etc...

Time to put some miles on my S

[zx9rmal]

when I read the first articles on the new R1150RS, the pictures appeared as if there were some subtle changes to the bodywork.

Is the bodywork exactly the same as the older model?

Mal

[johnty288]

Not sure but the windshield looks a little different (taller?).There is a bulge above the cylinder that I don't remember being there. I wonder if they changed anything on the lower fairing piece in back of the exhaust pipe, this used to blister regularly on my RSL.
Also just noticed that they are using the S footpegs and lighter looking bracketry for this.


[This message has been edited by johnty288 (edited 08-01-2001).]

[Huggy70]

The interesting thing is the statement from BMW about the lay-out of the bikes.
The S frame consists of 3 pieces: a front, rear and central frame with the engine/gearbox acting as a structural member.
The RS consists also of 3 pieces, the front rear and(!) the engine acting as a supporting member (like the original RS)...I thought the new gearbox could't handle that (hence the small plates you can see on the new RS).
I'm just wondering about the vibrations of the new RS....if they're less then maybe the frame of the S is acting like a giant tuning fork?

Hugo