BMW Luxury Touring Community banner

1 - 20 of 40 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
119 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Any discussion on BMW coming out with the next Generation RT?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
543 Posts
tkirklan said:
Any discussion on BMW coming out with the next Generation RT?
How much does the bike have to change to be a new generation?
I can't think of anything I would want to be improved, other the price of the maintenance and the cost of tires.
Ellie
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
"Rumor" has it that BMW has been working on the evolution of the 800 F twin series being:

07: S & the ST
09: GS
11: R (S discontinued)
13: RT (ABS II, Belt Drive, cruise, electronic windscreen, heated grips, panniers with 90hp.)

Sounds like an twin RT lite.

We shall see...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,697 Posts
I heard they were going to transition to belt drive, move to a v-twin configuration, wet clutch, with forward controls and quite a bit lower and heavier... probably slower too and would then handle like a pig... who knew?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
254 Posts
hopz said:
I heard they were going to transition to belt drive, move to a v-twin configuration, wet clutch, with forward controls and quite a bit lower and heavier... probably slower too and would then handle like a pig... who knew?

...............and get rid of the can-bus

Mick
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,710 Posts
Next big issue of RT's will be water cooled. It may be as early as next year.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
492 Posts
beech said:
Next big issue of RT's will be water cooled. It may be as early as next year.
I have heard that they are bringing out a water cooled rt aswell also last months ride magazine over here hinted on a new cruiser aswell.The guy from bmw said they had given up to early on the cruiser and to watch this space.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
726 Posts
hopz said:
I heard they were going to transition to belt drive, move to a v-twin configuration, wet clutch, with forward controls and quite a bit lower and heavier... probably slower too and would then handle like a pig... who knew?
Ok, I will say it... Ahhhh sounds like a HD :histerica
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,408 Posts
Mick-F said:
...............and get rid of the can-bus
Why? Because you have to go to the effort of installing a bypass for your Battery Tender and other accessories (which should be on a separate fuse box anyways)?

KEEP the CANBus! It has/will enable many integrated functions by allowing disperate components to communicate with one another, while reducing wiring complexity and weight.

Much of the most recent advances -- traction control, electronic cruise control without a separate cruise actuator, GPS integration, latest generation ABS integration with traction control and lean angle sensor, electronically-controlled suspension, use of a multi-controller to operate several systems, rather than a Gold Wing-like proliferation of literally dozens of operating buttons on the bars/tank/fairing, etc., etc. -- would simply not be possible without a CANBus architecture.

And no, CANBus doesn't make the bikes harder to service -- they are still mechanical devices with electrons moving about, and there are only a few things you really *need* a dealer's diagnostic machine for (and even most of these can be handled by aftermarket devices such as the GS-911-- something which is true for both CANBus and non-CANBus electronics-equipped BMWs in the last two decades). If anything, CANBus makes reading codes and narrowing in on a problem easier.

/Rant Mode ON/
I have to say I get pretty tired of the anti-technology cries -- people want lighter, faster, lower cost, lower maintenance, more reliable bikes, but heavens forbid that is achieved with technologies with which they are unfamiliar or uncomfortable.

(FWIW, before someone pipes up with it: The option of re-starting production of airhead boxers is simply untenable: besides being uncompetitively expensive to produce (that tunnel-block airhead motor is quite costly to cast and machine), they simply cannot meet today's current and soon-to-be-applied emissions and noise requirements, regardless of cost.)

The fact is, the advances *most* people want -- and compliance with current and future every-tightening emissions and noise regulations -- will *only* come with the addition of electronics. And the better integrated, the lower the cost and the greater the opportunity for synergies between components and functions.

If you don't want these advances, no problem -- I truly understand the desire for simplicity (see my current bike list, below). However, the reality is going forward, your only option is going to be an older bike -- flying brick, pre-'05 boxer, early F-series, or an airhead, as BMW will likely never produce another non-CANBus road bike (and they shouldn't! -- too many benefits outweigh buckling under to luddites, even if they could meet the tighter regulatory requirements). And if they don't their competition will quickly leave them in the dust.

Some will argue that the older mechaincal systems on these bikes are more reliable -- bull hockey. Today's electronics have FAR lower MTBF numbers than the older bikes, and it is *exceedingly* rare to hear of a true, electronics-killed on-the-road immobilizing failure.

The truth is, despite their vaunted repuation for reliability, in reality the airheads were/are more likely to have an immobilizing event on the road than today's BMWs, misty-eyed rememberances notwithstanding. Are airheads easier to get going when something fails? If the modern bike has a true electronic module issue (unlike a failure such as a mechanical wiring issue with the ignition Hall sensor -- something which is not CANBus related, as it effects leater airheads, K-bikes, oilheads, etc.) Yes. But you're much more likely to not have such an issue with a modern electroncs-equipped bike in the first place.

FWIW -- I have three airheads, and oilhead and a flying brick currently in the garage, as I await the arrival of a K16GTL. Obviously, I appreciate the value of simplicity. But I also appreciate that each of these vehicles is limited in its performance in one or more ways that electronics overcome (e.g., leaking and frequent-maintenance, wear-prone carbs vs. precise closed-loop fuel injection, mechanically-reliable but maintenance-requiring points vs. electronic ignition, no traction control, etc.). I am willing to accept these limitations for the ride they provide. But they are not my first choice for day-to-day, rock-solid reliable commuting and touring. Keep the advances coming BMW, and continue to stay ahead of the competition.

/Rant mode OFF/ :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,710 Posts
I agree with the above. I too have had my share of airheads and moved on, I still love them though. But...what I say and with no malice intended, is that if someone truly wishes for the past to return, go buy an airhead of choice. Plenty still out there. Take it home and completely rebuild it to new with OEM parts or equals. Get everything from wheel bearings, rear brake bushings, transmission, engine with hard valve seats, get new brake hydraulics, put a new wire harness on it, maybe one of those 450 watt alternators, get it painted. Just do a 100% renew/rebuild, spare nothing. This will bring you to the cost of buying a new bike and you will have a new bike unless you cheat. I think it will be a nice machine but you will be in it for 12 grand if you are lucky and have the ups/&downs of the older machine. I think that they are not as safe as a modern bike and you will never get me to travel cross country or other long rides I like on a bike with tube tires. It surly is a mixed bag. :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: (I am trying not to be negative here just moving on. Once my wife was on my case for years, she wanted an old VW. So finally I bought one, fixed it up $$, then after a winter went by she was upset because the windshield wipers were not too good, the heater and defroster was poor, the car was damp etc. that wistful dream shattered.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
277 Posts
beech said:
Next big issue of RT's will be water cooled. It may be as early as next year.
I've heard this for years, there's no way. Why would they add additional components, weight and problems when the current design works so well.

I'd prefer they keep air cooled, it's the only bike I've ever ridden in August that didn't add to the driver heat problem. Simply amazing.
:corn:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,710 Posts
It's not that simple. Emissions controls.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
254 Posts
mneblett said:
Why? Because you have to go to the effort of installing a bypass for your Battery Tender and other accessories (which should be on a separate fuse box anyways)?

KEEP the CANBus! It has/will enable many integrated functions by allowing disperate components to communicate with one another, while reducing wiring complexity and weight.

Much of the most recent advances -- traction control, electronic cruise control without a separate cruise actuator, GPS integration, latest generation ABS integration with traction control and lean angle sensor, electronically-controlled suspension, use of a multi-controller to operate several systems, rather than a Gold Wing-like proliferation of literally dozens of operating buttons on the bars/tank/fairing, etc., etc. -- would simply not be possible without a CANBus architecture.

And no, CANBus doesn't make the bikes harder to service -- they are still mechanical devices with electrons moving about, and there are only a few things you really *need* a dealer's diagnostic machine for (and even most of these can be handled by aftermarket devices such as the GS-911-- something which is true for both CANBus and non-CANBus electronics-equipped BMWs in the last two decades). If anything, CANBus makes reading codes and narrowing in on a problem easier.

/Rant Mode ON/
I have to say I get pretty tired of the anti-technology cries -- people want lighter, faster, lower cost, lower maintenance, more reliable bikes, but heavens forbid that is achieved with technologies with which they are unfamiliar or uncomfortable.

(FWIW, before someone pipes up with it: The option of re-starting production of airhead boxers is simply untenable: besides being uncompetitively expensive to produce (that tunnel-block airhead motor is quite costly to cast and machine), they simply cannot meet today's current and soon-to-be-applied emissions and noise requirements, regardless of cost.)

The fact is, the advances *most* people want -- and compliance with current and future every-tightening emissions and noise regulations -- will *only* come with the addition of electronics. And the better integrated, the lower the cost and the greater the opportunity for synergies between components and functions.

If you don't want these advances, no problem -- I truly understand the desire for simplicity (see my current bike list, below). However, the reality is going forward, your only option is going to be an older bike -- flying brick, pre-'05 boxer, early F-series, or an airhead, as BMW will likely never produce another non-CANBus road bike (and they shouldn't! -- too many benefits outweigh buckling under to luddites, even if they could meet the tighter regulatory requirements). And if they don't their competition will quickly leave them in the dust.

Some will argue that the older mechaincal systems on these bikes are more reliable -- bull hockey. Today's electronics have FAR lower MTBF numbers than the older bikes, and it is *exceedingly* rare to hear of a true, electronics-killed on-the-road immobilizing failure.

The truth is, despite their vaunted repuation for reliability, in reality the airheads were/are more likely to have an immobilizing event on the road than today's BMWs, misty-eyed rememberances notwithstanding. Are airheads easier to get going when something fails? If the modern bike has a true electronic module issue (unlike a failure such as a mechanical wiring issue with the ignition Hall sensor -- something which is not CANBus related, as it effects leater airheads, K-bikes, oilheads, etc.) Yes. But you're much more likely to not have such an issue with a modern electroncs-equipped bike in the first place.

FWIW -- I have three airheads, and oilhead and a flying brick currently in the garage, as I await the arrival of a K16GTL. Obviously, I appreciate the value of simplicity. But I also appreciate that each of these vehicles is limited in its performance in one or more ways that electronics overcome (e.g., leaking and frequent-maintenance, wear-prone carbs vs. precise closed-loop fuel injection, mechanically-reliable but maintenance-requiring points vs. electronic ignition, no traction control, etc.). I am willing to accept these limitations for the ride they provide. But they are not my first choice for day-to-day, rock-solid reliable commuting and touring. Keep the advances coming BMW, and continue to stay ahead of the competition.

/Rant mode OFF/ :D


Ahhhhh, that was just a bit of a joke response to HopZ post. But you probably feel better now.
But, then again, Dad never did get over the loss of his job at the Buggy Whip Factory.

Mick
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,277 Posts
beech said:
Next big issue of RT's will be water cooled. It may be as early as next year.
Actually they will be using liquid hydrogen cooled superconductor magnets for a new maglev drive system. No tires, oil changes, FD, etc to worry with. A true dual sport or tourer configured by selection on the multi-controller menu. Adaptive skins adjust the fairing to whatever speed and on/off-road configuration you happen to be in. Small fusion power reactor for main power to the engine, Million mile range to replacement.:rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,229 Posts
hopz said:
I heard they were going to transition to belt drive, move to a v-twin configuration, wet clutch, with forward controls and quite a bit lower and heavier... probably slower too and would then handle like a pig... who knew?
It looks like the Hexhead's will be a classic soon...... :D
And get rid of the sensor ring for the key....That can leave you stuck.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,687 Posts
tkirklan said:
Any discussion on BMW coming out with the next Generation RT?
Probably a 1250-1300cc liquid cooled version of the dual cam. Probably would have throttle by wire too. At least that could take care of sync adjustments.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,229 Posts
Ponch said:
Probably a 1250-1300cc liquid cooled version of the dual cam. Probably would have throttle by wire too. At least that could take care of sync adjustments.
I rode a Bagger last summer. The TBW felt....lagging. Is that common?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,687 Posts
OU812 said:
I rode a Bagger last summer. The TBW felt....lagging. Is that common?
Don't know what a TBW is, but a bagger can be a slow bike....
 
1 - 20 of 40 Posts
Top