Will buyers of the 2015 RS miss the Telelever front end?

[Dr. Curve]

While going over the new, very trick, RS that BMW will reintroduce this coming year, I was struck that the bike will revert back to standard forks instead of continuing the development and production of the proven Telelever design. I, like many of us, have been waiting for a new water cooled boxer "S" unit but it is not to happen in 2015 as once expected. Instead, the RS will be back, with many wonderful improvements, 125HP, 92 foot pounds of torque, and the latest in safety designs for traction and such.............but gone is the telelever which has been opted out in favor of a very strong looking, but traditional, fork design. Is this all good, or might it have been better to stick with the telelever for long run, serious pavements eaters, like the RS unit riders have been known for? Thoughts on the new RS from the brothers, just curious.

I for one, who always said that the 1000RR was just too much for us older riders........may well spring for one of the new 2015 units, especially after seeing all the improvements they have made for their flagship performance unit. Now with 199 peak HP and 9 full pounds lighter, the new RR also is the first to offer ABS especially tailored to be used while in the corners if necessary. BMW remains the absolute leader in high performance bikes that are also the safest, two wheel units made by anyone. Any thoughts on just how many more points BMW can improve their sales...........which continue to break all past records. What a wonderful year of new models they have offered us faithful and I know in time a Water Cooled Boxer "S" will appear................but not until they decided to up its HP well beyond the 125 they are putting in the WC units now in the showrooms, or soon to be. The new "boxer S" when we see it should put out at least 145 HP, don't you think?

[VetteRacer]

I asked a few people and nobody at the BMW booth had ridden it yet. They did say that the R9T and S1000R were both very nice in the front end. I would assume the electronic gizmo on the forks will help with dive. Telelever came out 20 or so years ago right? Suspension has improved greatly since it was introduced, and with electronic control the telelever might be a solution to a problem that no longer exists?

I think a new S would be fantastic. 145hp sounds like it would make it fun! Haha. R12S was 122, HP2S was 130 I think? Maybe a new HP2S will come too! We can dream...
Matt

Sent from my Xoom Wifi using Tapatalk

[Chris Canning]

I run two BM's with telelever and two with normal forks and swap between them no problem but if pushed I'll go with the forks everytime and anyone who has every bought a German bike mag will see the first thing the racers do is take the front end off and fit conventional forks

My question to BMW is why have the customers had to weight 8 years for this bike they could have built exactly the same in 2006 with the air cooled R1200 motor it's not as though there is any new techknowledgy is there I've no doubt the motor will feel both pleasant to ride and feel more sophisticated but anyone who buys the new bike thinking they are going to ride away from a well sorted 1200 or HP2s will be very disappointed I fear.

[Milepost]

Originally Posted by Dr. Curve

While going over the new, very trick, RS that BMW will reintroduce this coming year, I was struck that the bike will revert back to standard forks instead of continuing the development and production of the proven Telelever design. I, like many of us, have been waiting for a new water cooled boxer "S" unit but it is not to happen in 2015 as once expected. Instead, the RS will be back, with many wonderful improvements, 125HP, 92 foot pounds of torque, and the latest in safety designs for traction and such.............but gone is the telelever which has been opted out in favor of a very strong looking, but traditional, fork design. Is this all good, or might it have been better to stick with the telelever for long run, serious pavements eaters, like the RS unit riders have been known for? Thoughts on the new RS from the brothers, just curious.

I for one, who always said that the 1000RR was just too much for us older riders........may well spring for one of the new 2015 units, especially after seeing all the improvements they have made for their flagship performance unit. Now with 199 peak HP and 9 full pounds lighter, the new RR also is the first to offer ABS especially tailored to be used while in the corners if necessary. BMW remains the absolute leader in high performance bikes that are also the safest, two wheel units made by anyone. Any thoughts on just how many more points BMW can improve their sales...........which continue to break all past records. What a wonderful year of new models they have offered us faithful and I know in time a Water Cooled Boxer "S" will appear................but not until they decided to up its HP well beyond the 125 they are putting in the WC units now in the showrooms, or soon to be. The new "boxer S" when we see it should put out at least 145 HP, don't you think?

I really hope we see another "S" Boxer with 140-150 hp down the road but I doubt it will happen. I hate to admit it but the Boxer is so far behind in the the engine performance department compared to the S1000 packages that the average buyer will go for the four instead of the big twin. IMO the R1200RS biggest competitor is the new S1000XR. Both bikes compete directly against each other. Similar styling, size, weight and ergonomics. I bet the prices will be within a thousand dollars of each other too.

My reasoning is this: Let's assume that you try to keep the same engine width as on the current boxer. If you design in a truly performance oriented head design for the boxer it will be have to be taller thus adding width. Making more power also means more rpm. BMW boxers with 2 bearing cranks have durability issues after 9000 RPM. Making the engine completely water-cooled would help but the keeping opposed twin design would be then simply be for aesthetics only. Yes, I'm sure there are still small improvements that can be made to the big twin but other than increasing the bore size ...


IMO... The main reasons we are attracted to the Boxer style is it's inherit teutonic simplicity in design and the ability to work on it yourself. Same goes for the the telelever and the driveshaft. It's a little quirky, different and stands out amongst the other UJM's out there. I'm afraid that the day is coming soon that the boxer no longer "LOOKS" like a boxer and becomes just another appliance with a zillion techy farkles added on for marketing sake. Yeah, I'm sure I will have one of those high tech appliances in my garage some day but it will have to share the space with my 05 BCR and 1200S.

[Chris Canning]

The XR will compete against one bike even the BMW lot will tell you that including price.

BMW S 1000 XR 2015 | Specs, Price, Availability - YouTube

[Milepost]

Originally Posted by Chris Canning

The XR will compete against one bike even the BMW lot will tell you that including price.

BMW S 1000 XR 2015 | Specs, Price, Availability - YouTube

Chris, when BMW set out to design the XR the only game in town for in the USA for large displacement adventure sport touring market was the excellent Multistrada. Now we have the new Caponord, Versys 1000 and V strom 1000. All these bikes are mostly sport tourers oriented for the paved roads. Yes, I agree BMW set there sights squarely on the MS but so did everyone else. No matter what some head of marketing says at a show there are a lot of choices out there now.

Don't get me wrong I love the new RS Boxer but If you compare both bikes on the BMW Motorrad Web site you will see just how much they overlap each other. BTW-I hope to check out both bikes this weekend at the International motorcycle show in Seattle.

[Jozef Schumann]

Originally Posted by Chris Canning

The XR will compete against one bike even the BMW lot will tell you that including price.

BMW S 1000 XR 2015 | Specs, Price, Availability - YouTube

Already own the bike it will compete against - Looking forward to tossing a leg over this unit for an objective comparo.

J.S.

[trader220]

I have been seriously looking at the S1000R, S1000XR and the new R1200RS. The issue with the Telelever front is where to put the radiator in a WC motor.

At 50 years old I dont need the 200bhp S1000RR, and I dont want to ride in a full crouch, especially when I am out for a full days ride or multi day run. I have a Ducati ST4S thats pretty tricked out and it fills all the rolls I ask of it. On the other hand I would like a more modern bike with some of the nice new technology.

I would really love a chance to ride all three back to back to back but I dont see how thats ever going to happen.

[Chris Canning]

Originally Posted by Jozef Schumann

Already own the bike it will compete against - Looking forward to tossing a leg over this unit for an objective comparo.

J.S.

I saw a great post from a guy on another forum who went o Milan to have look he owns neither and it was interesting that he said the Multi is clearly a MK2 version and with a lot of nicks and knacks changed from their first attempt were as he thought the XR was clearly a first effort.

Non of which will effect the RS sales it's just that most 1100s owners left when the 1200s came out and BM have to get them back.

[lkchris]

It's a cost cutting move more than anything.

Means one radiator instead of two.

I'd be surprised if it's not the case there's only shock absorber action in just one fork leg.

The 1100R, 1150R, and 1200R have been slow sellers, not really justifying top flite spec this time maybe.

The last RS was called ST and wasn't well received, so maybe treading lightly with this one.

[lkchris]

Originally Posted by Milepost

My reasoning is this: Let's assume that you try to keep the same engine width as on the current boxer. If you design in a truly performance oriented head design for the boxer it will be have to be taller thus adding width. Making more power also means more rpm. BMW boxers with 2 bearing cranks have durability issues after 9000 RPM. Making the engine completely water-cooled would help but the keeping opposed twin design would be then simply be for aesthetics only. Yes, I'm sure there are still small improvements that can be made to the big twin but other than increasing the bore size.

Here's another--and I think more realistic--way to look at this.

I remain to this day 100% convinced that BMW fully intended to replace--not supplement--the boxer twin with the K-bike in 1984.

Thing is, the boxer is a "comfortable" engine and the first K was a buzz bomb and completely the opposite. One test ride was all it took for me to never consider a K or any other 4-cylinder bike ever again.

The Oilhead appeared due to customer demand, and the demand only increased due to the disaster that was the first K.

It's also important to remember that the boxer now powers the R1200RT which has for many years and in previous displacements as well been the world's police bike. Over the years the police have had plenty of opportunity to adopt K-bikes and they haven't.

Pretty much nobody cares that the boxer twin isn't a hyper engine and most probably prefer it as a comfortable engine instead. It's really only Ducati attempting mega performance from a twin and even then their MotoGP engine is a V4. Maybe there are some police Ducatis somewhere, but I'm sure very few.

[MaineRoads]

Some will like it, some won't.

[bradzdotcom]

the telelever on the front took me a while to sort out.
it took even longer to get used to the anti-dive, but as many others have said, it can be an advantage on braking later & harder into corners.

for the type of riding i like, corners are where the fun is won or lost, and it's very rare to even see a lengthy straightaway at over 100 clicks.

i do miss the feedback of upside down forks. there's also a wider selection of internal do-dads that you can fiddle with, and you're not breaking trail in the process.

there's a lot going on in front fork suspension these days. air forks, single spring forks, magnetics and some different approaches to damping.

if they can just get rid of the front end dive under hard braking, i'd be a happy camper.
as it is, when i ride a conventional fork bike, i go home with sore wrists from the frequent forward weight transfer that you just don't get with the telelever.

[Mark R 1200 S]

Telelever is inherently more forgiving than male-slider type front suspension, arguably the former more desirable of a touring model.

Some R NineT owners have stated preference for telelever-equipped front end type on their previous BMW motorcycle(s).

(In retrospect, perhaps the R 1200 S should have been equipped with motor, front suspension, instruments and wheels of HP 2 Sport, canceling production of latter type model. Perhaps the S would have sold better had they done so.)

Of a bigger concern, possibly, are that repeats of the new model RT and RR fiascos doesn't afflict the new RS. The RT came with a potentially catastrophic rear shock and all bikes were withdrawn from road for much of summer 2014 awaiting deliveries of replacement rear suspension component. Recent model year RR models were all subject to recall for crankshafts replacements. First year liquid-cooled GS had some minor kinks, as well. Hopefully all will be satisfactory for first year RS.

Dealers are expecting RS to be delivered March 2015. Final weight of production model is said to be determined by then. It's also expected optional luggage weight will be an order more than S type, as well as factory crash guards.

[sgoodwin]

Originally Posted by bradzdotcom

if they can just get rid of the front end dive under hard braking, i'd be a happy camper.
as it is, when i ride a conventional fork bike, i go home with sore wrists from the frequent forward weight transfer that you just don't get with the telelever.

Gettin' old Brad or maybe "all" that weight transfers trying to tell you a diets in your future?

They tried anti-dive on forks in the "80's, sorta turned the front end into a strut, not good. Fortunately newer designs have bunches more adjustability for dampening so you can tune that dive so it isn't a total nosedive & electronic dampening control would hopefully prevent slamming the front down fully also. I always found the dive enhanced feel & grip into corners.

[bradzdotcom]

Originally Posted by sgoodwin

Gettin' old Brad or maybe "all" that weight transfers trying to tell you a diets in your future?

both!
well kinda.
definitely older than a year ago, but lighter too.
mostly just spoiled by the anti-dive benefits, both in giggling when a sport bike guy can't shake me, and because it's comfy to ride in a spirited mode.

[Jozef Schumann]

Originally Posted by bradzdotcom

mostly just spoiled by the anti-dive benefits

Off on a tangent and referring to the benefits of the unconventional. Brad, you recall Leitner's odd A-Track gizmo with uber long chain coupled to that weird rear brake? - I remember him giving me some pre-Rotax, Honda powered contraption explaining the virtues of his Rube Goldberg-like invention. We're both from the same neck of the woods and I'd visit him in his motorhome down in OC way back when he was a struggling nobody. He instructed me to roll the front end up against the wheel of his Winnebago and pop the clutch

J.S.

[poldar12s]

Make telelever MTBs. It will sell more.

[bradzdotcom]

Originally Posted by Jozef Schumann

Brad, you recall Leitner's odd A-Track gizmo with uber long chain coupled to that weird rear brake?

Horst has always had his own zipcode. i thought the combocountershaftsprocketreardiscbrake (austrian spelling) was brilliant.
never really fell in love with the ATK.
there's guys like him, joe bolger, richardson, steve simon, ribi...all moto wizards with weird ideas that were actually a much better solution than what we ended up with.

[sgoodwin]

You don't remember the Hossack front forks? There was a true Rube Goldberg front end. A friend of mine lusted over one of those (a Girvin I think) for his bike, we were all like "are you for real". Over complicated doesn't even begin to describe it.

https://www.google.com/search?q=hossack+fork&biw=1366&bih=767&tbm=isch&imgil=DYbRmm5bqIUbwM%253A%253BjTEXoXrm1Ug0PM%253Bh ttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.tonyfoale.com%25252FAr ticles%25252FSteer%25252FSTEER.htm&source=iu&pf=m&fir=DYbRmm5bqIUbwM%253A%252CjTEXoXrm1Ug0PM%252C_&usg=__FdvPsDJGtq2UD_9nazKtkkWtoDk%3D&ved=0CCsQyjc&ei=pu5sVJXgLqjmyQO_hIGICg#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=tWThlNmkpI0o2M%253A%3BrWp0syEcz3k2vM%3Bhttp% 253A%252F%252Fcyclesdeoro.com%252Fevents%252FNAHBS %252F2009%252Fkimori_12.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Ff orums.mtbr.com%252Fframe-building%252Fgirvin-fork-552513-4.html%3B733%3B768