BMW R1200 RS: PH2 Review
A bike for all seasons and a typically solid performer from BMW
There is nothing wrong about being seen on a boxer BMW, the dealer network is excellent and if you use a bike day in, day out, then BMWs come with a lot of plus points such as high residual value and easy finance options. So why do over 40s like the RS and under 40s the R? The R says "I still like to be a bit silly" as it doesn't have a fairing where the RS is certainly a bit more of a sensible option for the more practically minded. Which is no bad thing at all.
R or RS, what's the difference?
The bare bones of the R and RS are identical and the RS is basically an R with a half-fairing, different bars and slightly altered geometry. Price-wise there is hardly anything in it and they both offer the same level of accessories and options. The base model RS has ABS as standard and basic traction control, the Sport version adds dynamic traction control, gear shift assist, Pro riding modes and a bit of bling while the Sport SE is the full monty with semi-active suspension and cruise control added to the party along with some more practical extras such as luggage racks. That said, BMW reckons 70 per cent of the UK's sales will be the SE model as virtually nobody buys a base BMW and you can always spec your bike as you wish anyway.
Competent performer
Like the R version PH2 tested recently, the RS is a very hard bike to criticise as, in typical BMW fashion, it does everything extremely well. The riding position feels almost identical to the R aside from the slightly different bars and it is all-day comfortable with a decently padded seat (which has various height options) and low pegs. The dash is the same LCD as on the R so you get a variety of display options if you fancy prioritizing rpm over mpg and although the numbers on the analogue speedo are a little jumbled and small it's a smart cockpit.
The new half fairing has a screen that can be adjusted into two positions by hand and then altered on its mounting points to give two further heights. It's not electronic and at anything over walking pace you can't alter it while on the go due to the wind pressure and overall it wasn't hugely effective. Naturally BMW sells a taller aftermarket item and it doesn't detract from the bike's practicality too much.
Surprisingly sprightly
Testing the bike on the excellent roads around southern Spain the RS proved considerably more nimble than most would expect from a boxer engined BMW. The geometry is certainly more aimed towards stability than agility, and at 236kg the RS is quite a heavy bike, but that doesn't mean you can't enjoy the bends.
With the wonderful semi-active suspension set to two people mode (adding an imaginary pillion increases the shock's spring preload, sharpening the handling) the RS turns reassuringly into corners and then sits there totally planted thanks to its relaxed attitude. Then, when it comes to powering out, the boxer engine delivers huge drive and the dynamic traction control deals with any slides with minimal interference. I know some riders aren't keen on electronics on bikes, but I would always spec a BMW up to the hilt as its systems are excellent and can be turned off at the push of a button should you wish. That said the gear shift assist is less convincing and I tended to find myself using the clutch on downshifts.
Too competent?
Having spent a day riding it at various speeds and on straight as well as twisty roads, I find it very hard to say anything negative about the RS. It is a brilliant bike that does absolutely everything you ask of it with minimal fuss and maximum efficiency.
However, I can't help but feel it is missing something. It's not a bike that leaves you excited or thrilled, mainly down to the fact it is so ruthlessly efficient. Is this a bad point? Not really, it's more the sign of a thoroughly well sorted machine, but some may crave more excitement. Yes, the RS's engine sounds amazing, the boxer is stacked full of torque, the electronics are outstanding and I really like the look, but it does feel a little too much like a workhorse to me where the R has a bit more of the fun factor about it. That said, I'm still under 40 and really enjoyed the R1200R so maybe I'm just not quite ready to be that sensible yet...
BMW R1200RS
Engine: 1170cc boxer twin, 8v
Power: 125hp@ 7,750rpm
Torque: 92lb ft@ 6,500rpm
Top speed: 155mph (est)
Weight: 236kg (wet)
MPG: 50mpg (est)
Price: £10,835 (Sport £11,060 / Sport SE £12,915)
 |
 |
 |
 |
R - Yes, RT - Yes, RS - neither fish nor fowl.
I can state that the RS bikes have been the most overall fun and practical. No, they are not as good as something that has less weight, but for traveling long distances with your gear, very hard to beat. I enjoyed all these bikes on both long highways as well as twisty bits in the mountains, all over the Western and up through Colorado here in the U.S.
Of them all, hands-down the R11S was the most fun to ride since it had the frame brace over the swingarm pivots, as well as better aftermarket shock/spring units. Not quite as comfortable but sometimes more "comforting" when going quickly. Still practical though!
If I was getting a big BMW utility bike, I'd find it hard to get anything other than a K1600, as good as the 1200 bikes are.
If I was getting a big BMW utility bike, I'd find it hard to get anything other than a K1600, as good as the 1200 bikes are.
I can state that the RS bikes have been the most overall fun and practical. No, they are not as good as something that has less weight, but for traveling long distances with your gear, very hard to beat. I enjoyed all these bikes on both long highways as well as twisty bits in the mountains, all over the Western and up through Colorado here in the U.S.
Of them all, hands-down the R11S was the most fun to ride since it had the frame brace over the swingarm pivots, as well as better aftermarket shock/spring units. Not quite as comfortable but sometimes more "comforting" when going quickly. Still practical though!
Have yout twins been trouble-free? The K11, which I still have, is an ultra-reliable, fast (for it's age, and in a straight line) dinosaur but totally bland and uninvolving. A twin would be more fun, but would it stand up to the occasional oil change and little else in the way of TLC?
I would also suggest that in the previously mentioned accidents, there was no where near 130bhp being deployed yet TC would very likely have saved the day.
This past weekend, it never lacked for power and happily maintained a good lick of speed leading a group of 6 of us to the Ring and Eifel Mountains - 2 x twin spark Multistradas, a 1098, V4 Tuono, Hayabusa, and the GS. BMW's LC twin is a fantastic engine for anything but track use. It could benefit from an extra 30hp to help high speed Autobahn work when riding over 120mph, but how often is that?
Any new machine is geared up to compare with the others and it would seem brave or foolish if they are to be different. I think it centers more on styling of if you are comftable with the brand at my age 54.
I have a 1998 916 with out any tc, abs etc. A moto guzzi california II 1984 shaft and plodder. I have been to Italy and back, toured the roads over there including the stelvio pass. No back ache or wrist ache for the few k covered. If it can be done on a old bike then these newer models with more toys would be easier but could i see myself sitting on one? im not sure the looks are there yet.
Vinny
Sadly it also looks boring.
Quite fancy a Diavel and lots of hassle when touring!
Gassing Station | Biker Banter | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff