Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 57

Thread: RT vs GTL

  1. #16
    BMW Rider
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    750
    Quote Originally Posted by EMSimon View Post
    Here you go!
    Ponch, I have experience selling and servicing these bikes:

    1) K16's weigh 20% more than RT's based on dry weight plus I've pushed these things around inside a store I don't know how many times - Verdict: I'll take an RT any time
    2) Seat height on a GT is comparable to RT but the comfort just doesn't seem to be the same when it comes to peg to seat height - Maybe I'm wrong on this?
    3) GT has better ergonomics for tall people - Apparently I'm missing the boat here somewhere
    4) The E-throttle requires some practice - Had a number of customers complain about drive line snatch - BMW service rep's response? That's the way the bike is designed - I then asked him the benefit of designing that in and he had no answer - Read into that we've made a mistake but are unwilling to admit to it - As for me the snatch is a minor issue
    5) That's hear-say. People have 13,000 miles on a set of Michelins - Respectfully disagree - Can some folks get 13k on their tires? Maybe, but I saw tires being worn out with less than half on them - Horsepower combined with weight is known for short tire life although this is not true 100% of the time
    6) In-line 6? Didn't Honda do that years ago?So? How many cars have V6es? Is that a point against it? BTW, Benelli had the first street 6-Cylinder - The following is pure personal preference: Having ridden Gold Wings primarily for many years I am over huge motorcycles - Riding an RT for the 1st time was a pure pleasure - As stated the K16 is perhaps a better choice for someone who is going to live on an interstate and/or consistently carry a passenger - All around use the RT excels in my opinion

    8) Requires more effort to back out of garage see 1) - Sorry, I've moved too many around inside a store to agree here

    Irregardless of my opinion people need to purchase what they are interested in and not necessarily my choice of ride.

  2. #17
    Ponch ponch1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Fountain Hills AZ
    Posts
    895
    Quote Originally Posted by billy walker View Post
    Ponch, I have experience selling and servicing these bikes:

    1) K16's weigh 20% more than RT's based on dry weight plus I've pushed these things around inside a store I don't know how many times - Verdict: I'll take an RT any time
    2) Seat height on a GT is comparable to RT but the comfort just doesn't seem to be the same when it comes to peg to seat height - Maybe I'm wrong on this?
    3) GT has better ergonomics for tall people - Apparently I'm missing the boat here somewhere
    4) The E-throttle requires some practice - Had a number of customers complain about drive line snatch - BMW service rep's response? That's the way the bike is designed - I then asked him the benefit of designing that in and he had no answer - Read into that we've made a mistake but are unwilling to admit to it - As for me the snatch is a minor issue
    5) That's hear-say. People have 13,000 miles on a set of Michelins - Respectfully disagree - Can some folks get 13k on their tires? Maybe, but I saw tires being worn out with less than half on them - Horsepower combined with weight is known for short tire life although this is not true 100% of the time
    6) In-line 6? Didn't Honda do that years ago?So? How many cars have V6es? Is that a point against it? BTW, Benelli had the first street 6-Cylinder - The following is pure personal preference: Having ridden Gold Wings primarily for many years I am over huge motorcycles - Riding an RT for the 1st time was a pure pleasure - As stated the K16 is perhaps a better choice for someone who is going to live on an interstate and/or consistently carry a passenger - All around use the RT excels in my opinion

    8) Requires more effort to back out of garage see 1) - Sorry, I've moved too many around inside a store to agree here

    Irregardless of my opinion people need to purchase what they are interested in and not necessarily my choice of ride.
    EMSimon contended your comments for the most part. All I would say is look at cycle-ergo.com and compare ergos. As far a Michelins go, I have over 9000 miles on mine and have may be 1500 left and I am no lightweight.
    My Motorrad
    BMWMOA 162849 | BMWRA 41335 | VROC 8109-R | VBA 19

  3. #18
    Registered User ras100's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Greenfield Center, NY
    Posts
    10
    I owned 2 RTs before buying a 2012 K1600GT. There is nothing like an RT in the motorcycle world. It's a beautifully designed bike with great wind protection and ergonomics. I decided to move up to the GT for the performance of the 6 cylinder engine. I wanted to have a fast bike with a comfortable seating position that handled well. Sportbike acceleration and handling. I couldn't be happier with my GT and would never want to go back to the RT. Another factor for me was the technology offered by the bike. I love the adjustments that can be made to the suspension and throttle control with the push of a button. I also have the bluetooth/satellite system, adaptive headlight (they're great), alarm, GPS, etc. that makes the bike a pleasure to ride in all kinds of weather and road conditions. Zero problems with almost 7200 miles.
    2012 K1600GT (Big Red)

  4. #19
    No longer a member here
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,432
    There is a large community among the BMW owners/riders who strongly resist any substantially new model and they will talk it apart anyway they can. Do any of you remember what happened when BMW introduced the "Flying Brick"?
    All the Airhead die-hards predicted the world would come to an end. For some, there is not other BMW motorcycle POSSIBLE than a boxer.
    No matter what, they find real bad things about anything else.
    I bought a new K16GT and I kept my R1100RT. Directly comparing the two bikes is just a waste of time.

  5. #20
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    socal
    Posts
    385
    Sorry I do not have a RT, have ridden one though. I my humble opinion things get a bit busy above about 75mph same as my 1200GS did. My 1600GT doesn't know 55 from 140mph very smooth. Would like to ride the 2014 RT if its as different as the new GS to the old one. One may be in my future

  6. #21
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Scranton, Pa.
    Posts
    197

    RT vs K1600

    Having owned both K bikes and R bikes I have the following observations:
    1. As a rule, the K bike engines were great; my 2 K75s were flawless in that regard, I also had a K1100RS, a K1100LT a K1200GT and a K1200LT.
    Very fuel efficient and packed with usable power as well as more top end than the boxer motors. That having been said, the K1100RS and the K1200RS had real heat management problems. Both put so much engine heat on my legs that I would not ride either one when the temperature got above 85. While the new 1600 is a wonderful engine, I've talked to dealers as well as other owners who complain about engine heat on their feet. IMHO BMW needs to become aware that America is not Germany and it gets hot as hell here! I am sure that 100mph on the Autobahn will keep you relatively cool in 70 degree weather but that ain't Texas in June. Where the K powerplants fall flat is their poor heat management.

    2. I have also owned a plethora of Boxers, both 247 air cooled and 259 oil cooled:
    ZERO heat management issues.
    Less will go wrong when there is less to go wrong.
    The design lends itself to better cooling characteristics rather than Rube Goldberg fixes on the more complex engines to compensate for extreme engine heat.

    3. The 1600s have F15 like shocking power which is most assuredly like a drug in my experience; the potential problem here is that if you are in the twisties in the rain and due to the smoothness of the 6 find yourself in a lower gear than you realized, too much throttle could send you into the trees given the high-reving nature of the 6.

    4. The boxers by comparison have a more even powerband which I find to be a bit safer.

    5. The boxers are lighter; were I Hulk Hogan, I expect a 1600 would be just right for me, but I'm done with 800 lb motorcycles. I recently changed from a K1200LT to an RT for that reason.

    FWIW

    Regards,

    Will

  7. #22
    BMW Rider
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    750
    Quote Originally Posted by will3hawks View Post
    Having owned both K bikes and R bikes I have the following observations:
    1. As a rule, the K bike engines were great; my 2 K75s were flawless in that regard, I also had a K1100RS, a K1100LT a K1200GT and a K1200LT.
    Very fuel efficient and packed with usable power as well as more top end than the boxer motors. That having been said, the K1100RS and the K1200RS had real heat management problems. Both put so much engine heat on my legs that I would not ride either one when the temperature got above 85. While the new 1600 is a wonderful engine, I've talked to dealers as well as other owners who complain about engine heat on their feet. IMHO BMW needs to become aware that America is not Germany and it gets hot as hell here! I am sure that 100mph on the Autobahn will keep you relatively cool in 70 degree weather but that ain't Texas in June. Where the K powerplants fall flat is their poor heat management.

    2. I have also owned a plethora of Boxers, both 247 air cooled and 259 oil cooled:
    ZERO heat management issues.
    Less will go wrong when there is less to go wrong.
    The design lends itself to better cooling characteristics rather than Rube Goldberg fixes on the more complex engines to compensate for extreme engine heat.

    3. The 1600s have F15 like shocking power which is most assuredly like a drug in my experience; the potential problem here is that if you are in the twisties in the rain and due to the smoothness of the 6 find yourself in a lower gear than you realized, too much throttle could send you into the trees given the high-reving nature of the 6.

    4. The boxers by comparison have a more even powerband which I find to be a bit safer.

    5. The boxers are lighter; were I Hulk Hogan, I expect a 1600 would be just right for me, but I'm done with 800 lb motorcycles. I recently changed from a K1200LT to an RT for that reason.

    FWIW

    Regards,

    Will
    And, that is why I personally think the R1200RT is the best motorcycle on Planet Earth. Will, well said!

  8. #23
    Ponch ponch1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Fountain Hills AZ
    Posts
    895
    Quote Originally Posted by will3hawks View Post
    Having owned both K bikes and R bikes I have the following observations:
    1. As a rule, the K bike engines were great; my 2 K75s were flawless in that regard, I also had a K1100RS, a K1100LT a K1200GT and a K1200LT.
    Very fuel efficient and packed with usable power as well as more top end than the boxer motors. That having been said, the K1100RS and the K1200RS had real heat management problems. Both put so much engine heat on my legs that I would not ride either one when the temperature got above 85. While the new 1600 is a wonderful engine, I've talked to dealers as well as other owners who complain about engine heat on their feet. IMHO BMW needs to become aware that America is not Germany and it gets hot as hell here! I am sure that 100mph on the Autobahn will keep you relatively cool in 70 degree weather but that ain't Texas in June. Where the K powerplants fall flat is their poor heat management.

    2. I have also owned a plethora of Boxers, both 247 air cooled and 259 oil cooled:
    ZERO heat management issues.
    Less will go wrong when there is less to go wrong.
    The design lends itself to better cooling characteristics rather than Rube Goldberg fixes on the more complex engines to compensate for extreme engine heat.

    3. The 1600s have F15 like shocking power which is most assuredly like a drug in my experience; the potential problem here is that if you are in the twisties in the rain and due to the smoothness of the 6 find yourself in a lower gear than you realized, too much throttle could send you into the trees given the high-reving nature of the 6.

    4. The boxers by comparison have a more even powerband which I find to be a bit safer.

    5. The boxers are lighter; were I Hulk Hogan, I expect a 1600 would be just right for me, but I'm done with 800 lb motorcycles. I recently changed from a K1200LT to an RT for that reason.

    FWIW

    Regards,

    Will
    What about someone built like Bulk Hogan?
    My Motorrad
    BMWMOA 162849 | BMWRA 41335 | VROC 8109-R | VBA 19

  9. #24
    BMW Rider
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    750
    Quote Originally Posted by ponch1 View Post
    What about someone built like Bulk Hogan?
    Even the so-called "best" doesn't mean a particular model will be suitable for everyone.

  10. #25
    Ponch ponch1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Fountain Hills AZ
    Posts
    895
    Quote Originally Posted by billy walker View Post
    Even the so-called "best" doesn't mean a particular model will be suitable for everyone.
    I have yet to own a bike that worked perfectly out of the box.
    My Motorrad
    BMWMOA 162849 | BMWRA 41335 | VROC 8109-R | VBA 19

  11. #26
    BMW Rider
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    750
    Quote Originally Posted by ponch1 View Post
    I have yet to own a bike that worked perfectly out of the box.
    I'm pretty easy to please and have no real issue out of the box. I am the exact opposite of a farkle dude. I hate all that crap on my handlebars. I especially hate bells hanging off motorcycles. Never have been able to understand that one in particular. Of course, I am in the minority which is good because I don't mind selling it as it puts food on my table . To each his own.

  12. #27
    Ponch ponch1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Fountain Hills AZ
    Posts
    895
    Quote Originally Posted by billy walker View Post
    I'm pretty easy to please and have no real issue out of the box. I am the exact opposite of a farkle dude. I hate all that crap on my handlebars. I especially hate bells hanging off motorcycles. Never have been able to understand that one in particular. Of course, I am in the minority which is good because I don't mind selling it as it puts food on my table . To each his own.
    I am not a farkle dude either(I am super cheap), but I've had to modify almost every bike I have owned for ergonomics.
    My Motorrad
    BMWMOA 162849 | BMWRA 41335 | VROC 8109-R | VBA 19

  13. #28
    BMW Rider
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    750
    Quote Originally Posted by ponch1 View Post
    I am not a farkle dude either(I am super cheap), but I've had to modify almost every bike I have owned for ergonomics.
    I'm not cheap but I would be my own worst customer. I'm just not a consumer for almost anything. I basically just don't care to any degree about owning a whole bunch of stuff and having the old garage overflow. Like I mentioned I'm pretty easy to please.

    Ergonomics are important on a bike. If you're too short or too tall or too heavy all of that will come into play on how comfortable you are when riding. I'm 6'1" and 190 pounds so I fit pretty well on most of what's out there. My biggest issue is the 'ol posterior as I just seem to get a sore butt pretty easily.

  14. #29
    No longer a member here
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,432
    That whole discussion about RT vs GT(L) is like discussing whether to buy a Dodge Dart or a Chrysler 300. There are enough signifcant differences between the two vehicles, that it is absolutely useless to try to determine a universal preference.

  15. #30
    BMW Rider
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    750
    Quote Originally Posted by EMSimon View Post
    That whole discussion about RT vs GT(L) is like discussing whether to buy a Dodge Dart or a Chrysler 300. There are enough signifcant differences between the two vehicles, that it is absolutely useless to try to determine a universal preference.
    Significant yes but both are aimed at the touring market. It's actually very common for these bikes to be compared by people thinking about a touring bike despite the differences.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •