Please talk me out of a used K1600GT
Discussion
Plenty of these about for under £10k, completely unnecessary for the kind of riding I do or would even like to do. Unreliable and with horrifying repair bills no doubt. But something about it being sheer extravagance while also oddly functional, like it's a 2 wheeled Lear jet, make it almost irresistible.
zomething about the k1600 in one of the mags this month?
from memory, avoid pre 2013. Check for engine corrosion. Check it has bars protecting the engine -- a simple slow speed drop can write off the engine apparantly.
I find them great to ride. But they are big. And heavy. Wonderful for USA. Or Continental Touring. But not really a sensible day to day bike in UK, I'd suggest
from memory, avoid pre 2013. Check for engine corrosion. Check it has bars protecting the engine -- a simple slow speed drop can write off the engine apparantly.
I find them great to ride. But they are big. And heavy. Wonderful for USA. Or Continental Touring. But not really a sensible day to day bike in UK, I'd suggest
Steve Bass said:
Go ride one and you'll see why there's so many available.
Hateful pieces of shyte.
Are they bad because BMW have executed the idea poorly, or is it just that it is too big and you don't like tourers? Just curious.Hateful pieces of shyte.
They look and sound great, but my K13GT is about the maximum weight I am happy heaving around my garage by hand. (that said, it might be easier if I had reverse .............)
Funny enough I have an old used buyer's guide for these and glanced a few days ago.
I only remember that engine finish is bad, and you absolutely must check the oil use, many engines were changes by BMW, so bad it could use a litre between petrol stops apparently but that may just have been the author being colourful! Also the drive shaft can fail. It's £1,000 for the part and that's if you're lucky to find one at a breakers as they're like rocking horse s
t. So some big expensive parts there, but I guess you would asssume that.
They had one at the local S1000R launch and it was lovely though, and these magazines tend to go off internet forums which can be a bit doom and gloom!
I only remember that engine finish is bad, and you absolutely must check the oil use, many engines were changes by BMW, so bad it could use a litre between petrol stops apparently but that may just have been the author being colourful! Also the drive shaft can fail. It's £1,000 for the part and that's if you're lucky to find one at a breakers as they're like rocking horse s
t. So some big expensive parts there, but I guess you would asssume that.They had one at the local S1000R launch and it was lovely though, and these magazines tend to go off internet forums which can be a bit doom and gloom!
s2kjock said:
Steve Bass said:
Go ride one and you'll see why there's so many available.
Hateful pieces of shyte.
Are they bad because BMW have executed the idea poorly, or is it just that it is too big and you don't like tourers? Just curious.Hateful pieces of shyte.
They look and sound great, but my K13GT is about the maximum weight I am happy heaving around my garage by hand. (that said, it might be easier if I had reverse .............)
Things like.....
The TFT screen. Neat idea but way too small and masively cluttered. Impossible to see at a glance on the move what's being displayed or any new info.
The throttle. Whatever it's attached to it isn't the engine.... Twist it and it takes forever to actually do anything.
The gearbox. Jusus titty f
king christ what a turd. Clunky, baulky, terrible. I know BMW aren't reknowned for their boxes but this is a real stinker. The motor. Yes, it's smooth, but it stops at 8500, has nothing below 3 to 4 k and just seems insipid. So you're left with 4 to 5 thousand rpm's of usable rev range.
The controls. Think Fischer Price and you'll be about right.
The gearing. Seriously.. try to overtake anything, or ride on anything but a dead stright and flat Autobahn and you need to be up and down the box more than should be necessary. Which takes up back to the previous point about the gearbox... And kind of defeats the object of a big cc inline 6 cylinder engine.
As for its weight, it hides it very well. I rode it with the GF on back and it was fine at walking pace, but I'm a slow speed God
And whilst the heft dent's the performance, thee's really not enough to begin with. I'm not arguing it should be a sports tourer but really, with 1600cc and six pots it should go much better than it does.
Prof Prolapse said:
Funny enough I have an old used buyer's guide for these and glanced a few days ago.
I only remember that engine finish is bad, and you absolutely must check the oil use, many engines were changes by BMW, so bad it could use a litre between petrol stops apparently but that may just have been the author being colourful! Also the drive shaft can fail. It's £1,000 for the part and that's if you're lucky to find one at a breakers as they're like rocking horse st. So some big expensive parts there, but I guess you would asssume that.
They had one at the local S1000R launch and it was lovely though, and these magazines tend to go off internet forums which can be a bit doom and gloom!
Funny you should say that about oil. My R1200RT (gear changes are like stomping grapes) goes through about a litre every 2500miles. Probably not that much but more than I'd like. A friend of mine has a current BMW 4.4l twin turbo M5. It uses about a litre every 1500miles. Some of them on the forums are going through a litre every 800-1000miles. Apparently BMW see that (on an M engine!) as being "within tolerances". My bike is my second BM, the previous one was a E90 325i. BMWs are nice, no doubt, but the ownership experience throws up just as many issues as having literally anything else I've owned and in many cases, more. I only remember that engine finish is bad, and you absolutely must check the oil use, many engines were changes by BMW, so bad it could use a litre between petrol stops apparently but that may just have been the author being colourful! Also the drive shaft can fail. It's £1,000 for the part and that's if you're lucky to find one at a breakers as they're like rocking horse s
t. So some big expensive parts there, but I guess you would asssume that.They had one at the local S1000R launch and it was lovely though, and these magazines tend to go off internet forums which can be a bit doom and gloom!
That said, I rode a K1300GT and it was awesome, I loved it. But for slow speed, which half my riding is, it wasnt as practical as the RT and if it was speed I wanted, I'd have the 1300S. Maybe the 1300GT is a worth a look?
By the way the wheel control on the handle bar of the BMW is woeful. Its too wide so you no longer reach the horn with your thumb, many times when you go for the indicator you also skip a track or station on the radio, the operations for the heated grips and seats are now needlessly complex and on a menu you need to look at and scroll through, instead of just locating a button and pressing the desired number of times according to heat requirement. Etc etc. Some of it "you get used to it" type stuff, but the extra work needed now to adjust the heated seats and grips (plus some others) is a criminally backwards step in usability.
One of the worst bikes I've ever ridden! Throttle does a different thing every time you twist it. Gearbox is the worst I've ever used, suspension is either rock hard or way too soft. Not actually that comfortable nor does it feel fast or torquey. There was literally nothing I liked about it. An R1200RT is much better at everything.
I came across a report from a K1300GT owner who took his bike in for a 35000 mile service and also asked for new pads and discs and a handling issue to be investigated. The service itself came to £500 odd and the brake consumables about the same. Other bits and pieces mainly to do with suspension at both ends came to another £4000, most of this was necessary just to get it through an MOT.
On the other hand Simon Hargreaves explained in Ride magazine that the K1300 (maybe K1200 can't remember) is a much better tourer than the R1200RT because it only takes half as long to get from 90 to 120 in top gear.
So hardly my kind of bike. Though admittedly probably less extreme than the K1600.
On the other hand Simon Hargreaves explained in Ride magazine that the K1300 (maybe K1200 can't remember) is a much better tourer than the R1200RT because it only takes half as long to get from 90 to 120 in top gear.
So hardly my kind of bike. Though admittedly probably less extreme than the K1600.
Dr Jekyll said:
I came across a report from a K1300GT owner who took his bike in for a 35000 mile service and also asked for new pads and discs and a handling issue to be investigated. The service itself came to £500 odd and the brake consumables about the same. Other bits and pieces mainly to do with suspension at both ends came to another £4000, most of this was necessary just to get it through an MOT.
On the other hand Simon Hargreaves explained in Ride magazine that the K1300 (maybe K1200 can't remember) is a much better tourer than the R1200RT because it only takes half as long to get from 90 to 120 in top gear.
So hardly my kind of bike. Though admittedly probably less extreme than the K1600.
120 is nigh on vmax on the RT, so I'm not surprised. I think they are quite different design briefs. If I had to pick one or the other to go around France, I'd take the 13GT. If I had to do narrower roads at slower speeds in heavier traffic (closer to England), I'd want the RT. Interestingly, the RT also won the Mrs' seat 'o the pants comfort-o-meter. On the other hand Simon Hargreaves explained in Ride magazine that the K1300 (maybe K1200 can't remember) is a much better tourer than the R1200RT because it only takes half as long to get from 90 to 120 in top gear.
So hardly my kind of bike. Though admittedly probably less extreme than the K1600.
308mate said:
My R1200RT (gear changes are like stomping grapes) goes through about a litre every 2500miles. Probably not that much but more than I'd like. A friend of mine has a current BMW 4.4l twin turbo M5. It uses about a litre every 1500miles. Some of them on the forums are going through a litre every 800-1000miles. Apparently BMW see that (on an M engine!) as being "within tolerances".
My 1971 VW Beetle uses less oil than that!It's now on 113,000 miles, still on the original engine / bores and aircooled beetles aren't exactly renowned for saving oil...
Rubin215 said:
My 1971 VW Beetle uses less oil than that!
It's now on 113,000 miles, still on the original engine / bores and aircooled beetles aren't exactly renowned for saving oil...
Air cooled engines have far larger tolerances than the new liquid cooled ones because they have to operate in wider band of temperatures, thus metals expand more, wider tolerances needed. So, modern engines are cleaner and more efficient because there is for example, less oil sneaking past the rings and valves.It's now on 113,000 miles, still on the original engine / bores and aircooled beetles aren't exactly renowned for saving oil...
So, exactly, wtf is your beetle doing using less than a brand new technological marvel
Gassing Station | Biker Banter | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff