Advice on whether to buy an R80ST or an R90/6

[sognar]

Hi all,

I just joined BMW MOA and am about to get back into riding after 15 years without a bike. In the past I have owned many motorcycles including a 1973 R75/5 and a 1989 R100GS.

I have identified two bikes that I am very interested in and am having a hard time choosing. They are a 1976 R90/6 with 17K original miles in excellent original condition with Krauser bags for $3,100 and a 1983 R80ST with 36K miles in excellent condition with bags, both seats, etc. for $4,900.

I will mostly be doing Sunday rides and putting around town with the bike.

Please reply with your thoughts.

Thanks.

[tkpinsc]

The price on the R80ST sounds a little stiff. For $4k I'd go for the R80ST as an solo around town bike. For distance touring or two up riding the larger tank and roomier riding position of the R90 would win out.

My own bikes are a R80ST with a 9 gallon tank, R100 sidecar rig and a K1200RS. I do most my solo touring on the ST. The K is to carry my wife and pull a trailer, and the sidecar is to cart my dogs. The ST gets more miles then the other two combined.

[20774]

Before 1981 - farm equipment
1981-on - non-farm equipment

I'll let other's explain...:whistle

I don't necessarily agree...look at what I own!

[535is]

I vote for the R90 ...:lurk

[sumran]

Before 1981 - farm equipment
1981-on - non-farm equipment

I'll let other's explain...:whistle

I don't necessarily agree...look at what I own!

You've got to let it go farmer Kurt...:laugh

[osbornk]

The price on the R80ST sounds a little stiff. For $4k I'd go for the R80ST as an solo around town bike. For distance touring or two up riding the larger tank and roomier riding position of the R90 would win out.

My own bikes are a R80ST with a 9 gallon tank, R100 sidecar rig and a K1200RS. I do most my solo touring on the ST. The K is to carry my wife and pull a trailer, and the sidecar is to cart my dogs. The ST gets more miles then the other two combined.


I agree that the price of the R80 is stiff and I also agree that the R80 is best suited for solo riding. However the R80 is the smoothest of the airheads.

[88bmwJeff]

I would go for the ST.

However, I would ask you this question. Looking back, which of your previous bikes would prefer to have now? The /5 or the GS. If you preferred the /5 to the GS, then I would go for the R90; however, if you preferred the GS, then I'd go for the ST.

[bobh41]

A non-riding buddy and I had an extended conversation regarding "braggin' rights"; that "my stuff is better than your stuff" phenomenon that is so easy to get into. The behavior applies to pretty much any object be it motorcycle or music.

I don't understand why the R90 series gets a rap from anybody. It was breakthrough technology in the 70's, and served the motorcycling community extremely well. You can say it's "agricultural" but do you believe the human species has advanced so much in the intervening years that, based on innate abilities, capacities and skills it has surpassed the R90 in principle? I clearly know the R90 is not competitive in the Superbike domain, but it continues to be a very fine ride on public highways and roads.

Personally, I don't ride a new x1200xx because of the cost. If I needed one I could work it out, and I'm sure I would like it a lot, but I'm not sure I would love it as I do my R90/6.

My point would be you sorta have to get comfortable with your own kind of crazy and get the ride that fits you. They are all fantastic. If you're flexible enough you could be very happy with just about anything with two wheels. I suppose I would ride the old Wizard I had in 1956 if I had one still, except for the hills I have to traverse.

The clunk of the xmission on the R90 is part of the bike's character (as they say about Brit bikes and their oil leaks). It's okay if you want to call it "agricultural" :german it still gets through traffic just fine.

This is a good place to get a sense of what to expect from various bikes but I would propose you won't go wrong with any of the BMW series (not intending to necessarily exclude other marques).

Happy R90 rider.

[lkchris]

You can say it's "agricultural" but do you believe the human species has advanced so much in the intervening years that, based on innate abilities, capacities and skills it has surpassed the R90 in principle?

When I traded my purchased-new 1978 R100S for my still-owned/purchased-new 1984 R100RS, I was pretty certain then and remain certain today that that is indeed the case.

IIRC GM went to electronic ignition across all engines in 1974--why it took BMW until 1981 is no credit to them.

After running the new bike for a while, I couldn't even shift an older one, as I had the shift done before I got the ridiculously heavy clutch pulled.

I almost never even check motor oil on the nikasil bike because it's never ever needed any between changes--not something to be said about an iron-cylinder BMW.

I've got nothing against and think there's nothing much wrong with the pre-1981 bikes. They just aren't as good, that's all. BMW positively moved on.

To the point of this thread ... the ST and G/S are the best-handling Airheads ever. It's no contest. The bike that's overpriced in this comparison is the /6.

[89mille]

Actually, I think the wisest thing to do would be to let me hook you up with an extremely nice '84 R65 with tons of goodies, and you then hook me up with the R80ST seller.

Gotta love those STs, and the price isn't that outrageous when you consider how few of them there are, the added seat(s) and luggage, and what fine ol' bikes they really are...:thumb

Steve

[20774]

I've got nothing against and think there's nothing much wrong with the pre-1981 bikes. They just aren't as good, that's all. BMW positively moved on.

Kent -

I think you can say that about anything...designs tend to improve over time. Realizing that BMW has moved on since the airhead, you should dump those old klunker '80s bikes and buy an even better boxer, the oilhead... :laugh

It's obviously a personal connection we have with our machines. We enjoy them for what they are and what they represent...I doubt many look with disdain at their bike and see only the bad elements. Besides, my /7 is better than my /2...which would be better than a pre-war BMW...and so on... But they both provide the enjoyment and pride in owning a BMW and hopefully faithfully represent their time in the history of the marque.

[gslobosco]

It's a wonderful bike. Then send me the contact info on the R80ST so I can buy it!

[barryg]

The 1960 BMW motorcycles were the best bikes U could buy in 1960. In 1970 the they were still the best U could buy. Insert any year from the early 50's on till today and this pretty much holds true. They all had their good and not so goods points, but all were good bikes. When I ride my 94 R1100RS, it's great, still pretty modern with lots of great modern features, very competent and it's 15 years young. My '74 90/6 is apart right now, getting a total rework, but it's when back together it won't take long for it to reach 200,000 miles. When I ride it for the first time to Shakerag, Tn. ( Sunday biker hangout outside Memphis) it will draw a crowd. The Harley guys, vintage riders, everybody will get akick out of it. It's a looker and a rider. Next, I can't wait to start freshing up my R80ST. :thumb

[6659]

My test would be my butt. Comparing the R90 seat to the R80St seat, the R90 is more comfortable. The R80 seat is terrible but you can always have someone make it better for you.

[tkpinsc]

Hi all,

I just joined BMW MOA and am about to get back into riding after 15 years without a bike. In the past I have owned many motorcycles including a 1973 R75/5 and a 1989 R100GS.

I have identified two bikes that I am very interested in and am having a hard time choosing. They are a 1976 R90/6 with 17K original miles in excellent original condition with Krauser bags for $3,100 and a 1983 R80ST with 36K miles in excellent condition with bags, both seats, etc. for $4,900.

I will mostly be doing Sunday rides and putting around town with the bike.

Please reply with your thoughts.

Thanks.


I hope you didn't expect agreement among the respondents.

[lkchris]

Realizing that BMW has moved on since the airhead, you should dump those old klunker '80s bikes and buy an even better boxer, the oilhead...

Indeed, I do consider the Oilheads much better bikes than the Airheads.

I don't like the split seats and the rock hard tubeless tires, however, and my RS will still go faster than I can ride it. Rode an R1100RT through the mountains east of Cedar City, UT, and it was positively boring. No need for braking as really a LOT of engine compression braking, and there is no brake dive, which I consider a loss because it's fun. Fuel injection isn't as nice to control with a hand than is a carburetor, either, even though everything else about it is superior.

As you can see, I like the "feel" of a motorycycle and think the '81-'84 Airhead feels better than previous Airheads (by a long way) and better than an Oilhead, which sadly approaches "appliance." It 200% feels better than a buzzbomb K-bike, which I've never considered for a nanosecond after riding the first ones in 1985--when I was considering them. (It doesn't surprise me Airheads bring more as used bikes than do early K-bikes.)

But, of course, BMWs get technologically better every year.

And, I've worked on Oilheads and they're easier to work on than Airheads. '81-'84 Airheads are easier to work on than earlier Airheads, too.

I could afford one of the new ones, but I'm staying with what I have for now. Could change my mind any minute, but being in the "sweet spot" between farm equipment and appliance is pretty nice.

[lkchris]

My test would be my butt. Comparing the R90 seat to the R80St seat, the R90 is more comfortable. The R80 seat is terrible but you can always have someone make it better for you.

The only bad BMW seat I've ever encountered was on an R1100RT and that's because it's a split design and you can't avoid being backed up against it.

Otherwise, all BMW seats are fine once you ride them for a few days straight.

It's like painting your house--you hurt all over because it's something you don't do every day.

Why anyone would want to be confined to a single spot in a "bucket" type motorcycle seat is beyond me, but I suppose they feel comfortable for the first few minutes.

Yes, my stock seat feels a little bad the first day, but on long multi-day trips that's over by the second or third day. My hands even get used to it, too.

Lot of money wasted on custom seats imho. And, of course, they're no good to the next owner of your bike--be sure to save your stock seat. There's a plea (wanted) for a stock Airhead seat on IBMWR classifieds as I write this.

The R80ST seat is indeed less substantial than the /6 seat. It's certainly more compatable with the far superior flickability of the bike, too. It must weigh about 20 lbs less.

[mark1305]

+1 on the ST being a little overpriced. My first airhead is an 83 R80 ST that I bought before Christmas for well under $4K. It came with stock seat, a new Corbin, BMW cases, a good repaint in the original red (sans pinstripes), good tires and brakes, 34K miles and in really good overall condition.

It is a nimble feeling bike and lots of fun to ride. Different than the F 650 I ride and the Ducatis I have and have had... but just as much fun.

[barryg]

Kent, U got a point about the split seat. I remember when the R1100RS came out and the late Don Douglas did the review on it. He didn't like the split seat either and ordered the bench seat. I guess they were availabe in Europe,but not the US. Of course he was a pretty big guy and he waxed long and eloquently about that bench seat. The split seat hasn't been a problem for me. I bought the bike used and it came with a corbin front and back. Didn't like those and put the stock seats on, better. On long trips I add a gelpad bunz-ez. Good setup for me. I agree about the rock hard radials and at the same time U have to run max pressure for two-up as the wheels are very vulnerable to bends and breaks. Kent what's your opinion on air head monolevers. I'm on the trail of a 90 R100 Classic, just a plain bike, no fairing. I think they only came to US one year. I like the idea of airhead twin with tubless tires. Hate changing tubes and tires on the side of the road. Plug and go seems the way to go.

[r60us]

The clunk of the xmission on the R90 is part of the bike's character

Clunky shifts are one of the "farm tractor" characteristics of airheads and most pronounced on models before 1981. Clunk intensity varies with each rider. With practice, you can eliminate clunky shifting (except in front of a large crowd) simply by matching the engine rpm to the shift as big rig drivers do - wait a bit when upshifting and add a bit of throttle when downshifting. This is very easy to do with 4 -speeds, a bit more challenging with 5-speeds that don't have the improved shift cam plate and a remote gear lever. Once you've mastered clunkless shifts, hone your new found skill a bit more and you'll be making clutchless shifts.

[r11rs94]

As an past owner of the R-80 I voting for the ST. Great solo bike, easy to maintain and IMHO has much much more character than a Brick :lurk Good luck in what ever you choose.

[robsryder]

...I have identified two bikes that I am very interested in and am having a hard time choosing. They are a 1976 R90/6 with 17K original miles in excellent original condition with Krauser bags for $3,100 and a 1983 R80ST with 36K miles in excellent condition with bags, both seats, etc. for $4,900.

I will mostly be doing Sunday rides and putting around town with the bike...

You didn't indicate if you wanted to (or were capable of) work on the bike that you purchased. The R90/6 at 17k miles might have been parked for a long time and require a good deal of maintenance (e.g., replace most of the rubber bits) before being fully reliable.

I find that I really enjoy taking my time tinkering with the 70s airheads, so for me it would be a simple choice. I'd get the R90/6 and spend some time working on it. [I'm actually doing something similar with an R75/5 now].

But I have other bikes to ride in the meantime.

I agree with others that have indicated that the price for the R80ST seems a bit high. That bike is 25 years old and may also need work to become fully reliable. You might be well advised to look at each bike and see which one grabs your fancy. You could also keep looking around for something newer and/or at a better price. If you don't work on the bike yourself and have to take it to a shop for maintenance, then the costs can add up fast.

[jforgo]

for my 2 cents..
They are both old, and therefore assume something is wrong with both anyway. be at peace with what you don't discover until after you bring one home
Pricing is relative and negotiable, but it makes no sense to get a good deal on a bike which doesn't strikes your fancy
You said you are interested in around town, and Sunday rides. If around town, and Sunday to you means twisty, are most important to you. the ST might do better for you.
On the other hand, if Sunday is more lazy road-burner lotsa miles, with the bonus of more classic looks around town, the R90 might do better for you.
All things being equal, based on what you say about miles etc, the R90 sounds like the better deal
Heck, get both - cafe one, RT-ize the other! They aren't making any more of these, you know?