Why are R65 bike cheaper?

[kneedrachen]

I've noticed when browsing the ads that R65s tend to be cheaper than most other models of airhead bikes. Is there any particular reason this bike is cheaper? Reliability issues? Parts availability?

[20774]

650cc?? Probably perceived as not powerful enough for "real" touring or 2-up riding. They were also somewhat of an oddball WRT to the rest of the Airhead line...some parts don't cross over as well as the other models.

My guess...

Kurt in S.A.

[RandyB]

Since I started the research to rebuild my RT, I've found the R65 is significantly different from the other models. As Kurt noted, that may have something to do with it. It's cured me of looking at them.

[Kbrick]

650cc?? Probably perceived as not powerful enough for "real" touring or 2-up riding. They were also somewhat of an oddball WRT to the rest of the Airhead line...some parts don't cross over as well as the other models.

My guess...

Kurt in S.A.

I remember when they were first imported and the word on the street was they vibrated more than a 750cc or 800cc machine. Something about harmonic balance or something.

In Europe there was a 450cc machine too based on the 650 motor. It could have been the other way around too, the 650 made from the 450.
When new there wasn't as much of a price saving to be had with the smaller bike. So they sat, fine machines though.

One of the hot setups was to rubber mount the front engine mount like an Isolastic Norton Commando, well kinda any way.

[srb]

The R65 is the bastard step-child of airheads.

It has a different stroke than all the others. You could put a 1000cc topend on a 750 and get away with it, not so with the R65. That is also why there was a vibration issue. Legend has it that the vibration is not as prevalent traveling at higher speeds as the Germans built the bike for autobahn type speeds. Aside from the stroke, the front forks are a smaller diameter, 18 inch front wheel vs. 19, and if I'm not mistaken a shorter wheelbase than it's contemporaries. I think the engine is not designated as a type 247.

BTW--I am a bastard step-child, so no complaints please.

[rinty]

My specialist has mentioned to me that you can't get parts for them as quickly as you can for the other airheads.

Rinty

[srb]

Those R45s in Europe were made for a specific insurance class, sub 37hp. Graduated licensing (sp) and all that.

I think BMW still capitulates to that insurance rating by producing R850 oilheads that are detuned.

[AntonLargiader]

I think BMW still capitulates to that insurance rating by producing R850 oilheads that are detuned.
I think you mean 'caters' to that rating.

The R65s that I have ridden have been very nice, smooth bikes. Other people find them buzzy; maybe these were just good examples.

However, as the saying goes, "There are Airheads and then there are R65s." The frame, seat, tank, block, cylinders, heads, exhaust, and a few other things are unique, which makes the normal "find a spare so-and-so on eBay" a bit difficult. But for a nice machine where you don't need to overhaul it, the R65 is a perfectly nice bike. Due to the low power they have a very low final drive ratio, so they are a bit revvy. I put an R100 motor into a customer's R65LS, and with the R65 final drive he quickly pulls to redline in fifth.

BTW I have found, in a past life in manufacturing, that when a company known for a premium product makes a 'budget line' product, it's rarely a cost savings. I suspect the R65 was like that for BMW. It wasn't just an insurance ploy; it was a venture into a downscale market.

[DarrylRi]

It worked for me. An '81 R65 was my first new bike, and first BMW. I've bought 4 other new BMWs since then. My R65 was a great bike to start out on, and because I was a know-nothing newbie, I didn't know I couldn't sport around on it, or tour on it, or ride two-up on it. I still smile when I think about it.

[kneedrachen]

but being they are still airheads is maintenance still they same minus the manufacturing changes or are they completely different beasts altogether?

[20774]

I know of no reason that maintenance would be any different...

Kurt in S.A.

[dbrick]

The early R65 machines (1979 to 1984) were built on a slightly smaller frame than the other airheads. The motors had a shorter stroke, and different vibration characteristics. I had one for 60K miles and loved it. Floating the front engine mounts in rubber (327 Chevy motor mount rubber fit) was OK unless you were a corner-carver, in which case a front fork brace was needed, too.

The 1985-87 machines were built on the regular, larger airhead chassis, which, by that time, had the single-swingarm rear end.

[37071]

I have an 79 - 80 R65 that I am carefully keeping. When I can no longer comfortably push my K bike around in the garage and driveway, then I will have my R65 - about 1/3 less weight. It will allow me to ride for a couple more years.
All the parts I will need will be batteries, tires and oil. Hope my plan works. ;)

[wildwilly]

My '80 R65 is my first BMW; bought pre-owned in 1983 from a dealer in McAllen, TX. To this date, it has accumulated over 127,000 miles. About the only thing I've had to replace outside of routine wear and tear has been a speedometer (which I found on Ebay). And the air filter is no longer a drop- :usa in item. An air filter from an R80 has to be modified to fit.

It's a venerable old machine that just refuses to die.

[GlobalRider]

650cc?? Probably perceived as not powerful enough for "real" touring or 2-up riding.

I remember the president of my local club calling it a girl's bike.

Whatever anyone calls it, my R65 took me on 10 years worth of touring Europe and the Alps without any issues, sometimes 2-up, and on a budget.

I've seen sights on it that others can only dream of.

[boxermaf]

While it definitely has less torque than my 88 R100RT did, my 82 R65LS doesn't do badly, especially in tight twisty backroads. I think the engine was rated for the same HP, but less torque, than the same period R80s were. The R65s definitely rev up faster with a shorter stroke, and mine is electric-motor smooth at 4500 RPM and above til about 6600 RPM.

However, the smaller frame is a bit small for me (6' 2")
and would suit a shorter rider much better. Until I can find a way to sneak in an R100 to replace the 88 R100RT that I foolishly sold some 7 years ago, this little R65 is alot of fun and quite underrated. The main issues/difference are the wheels/forks, and, due to shorter rear shocks, luggage rack mounts from the larger airheads won't always fit right.

[kneedrachen]

thanks for the info, was looking for a smaller airhead and the r65 caught my eye, just struck me as odd at how low their prices seemed to be compared to other airheads...have an 86 80RT now and after some surgery i'm worried i won't be able to handle such a large bike...just doing some advanced planning...

[iRene]

I've noticed when browsing the ads that R65s tend to be cheaper than most other models of airhead bikes.

This is so there is an affordable, entry level BMW to learn on!

[PHMarvin]

Hi,
As was said earlier, the earlier frames were different, changing to the "large" frame with the 1985 models. The gearbox was the same as the other airheads of that year; the engine was very different. The early (up through '84 models) frame, forks, tank, seat, instruments, etc. were different. The maintenance parts (oil filters, air filters, spark plugs) are the same as the other airhead engines of the same year; the repair parts are different (engine, brake pads, forks, etc.). Now, there seems to be no problem with parts. In the future, there were many more "other" airheads built than the R45/R65 bikes, so I would expect parts to be more available, and longer.

[GregFeeler]

but being they are still airheads is maintenance still they same minus the manufacturing changes or are they completely different beasts altogether?

All the service work is the same. In fact, the differences discussed here are dimensional, not qualitative. I've owned one R65 ('87 large frame) and ridden several others of the "real" R65 and I think they are a blast. The short frame is just a half-inch longer than a short wheel base /5, but with much better forks and brakes. With the short stoke engine, a well setup R65 can be the most fun you can have in the really tight twisties on an airhead IMO.