Posts
Buell Releases Factory Racer
Buell 1125RR Racing Bike
Buell’s 1125 has been racing for a couple of years now, and not without some success. The race bike version, the 1125rr has been limited to the various Buell racing teams, though. Until now.
Buell has announced that the 1125RR is now being released as a factory racer. It won’t go to the general public, but it will be available to licensed racers. So, you won’t be seeing it on the street, but you could be taking one out on the track, if you have the appropriate credentials.
How does it differ from the regular 1125? Well, according to Buell:
The Buell 1125RR features a modified Helicon 1125cc 103mm bore x 67.5mm stroke liquid-cooled 72-degree V-Twin engine. Power increases come from components including a larger airbox and intake manifold, revised valves and camshafts, a higher compression ratio, titanium exhaust system and other weight-reduced components.
Now, I’m not all that interested in a race bike–most people aren’t, after all, but I really like the looks of that fairing. It’s about 1,000 times better than the street version’s odd fairing and forward scoops. That’s not an uncommon complaint, and if you have a Buell 1125, maybe you’re thinking I’d rather have that fairing than the stock one on my bike.
Well, you can. It’s Buell part number M2000B.08AZ. Apparently it’s some high-quality, lightweight fiberglass deal. At least it better be high-quality, since it costs $1,499.00. But if you want it, you can have it on your bike.
Interesting Bookmark
Have you ever wondered about how your bike’s street performance might stack up against another bike. Well, the folks over at Motorcyclist Online are there to help you out. They have the actual dyno results and performance numbers of every bike they’ve tested.
I was reminded of that again, because, after my test ride of the BMW’s, I really wanted to see how they stacked up to each other in street performance. The results are interesting, because one of my concerns about buying an RT–assuming my insurance settlement is enough to cover it, of course–was whether I’d find the performance anemic compared to my FJR.
According to that actual tests that Motorcyclist has performed, the results are:
| Bike | HP (HP @ RPM) | Torque (lb. – ft. @ rpm) | 1/4 Mile (sec. @ mph) | Top Gear Roll-On (60-80 MPH) |
| BMW R1200RT |
101.1 @ 7500 | 78.0 @ 6250 | 11.68 @ 118.8 | 4.30 |
| BMW K1200GT |
127.6 @ 8900 | 79.3 @ 8100 | 11.30 @123.7 | 3.80 |
| HD V-Rod | 109.3 @ 8250 | 74.3 @ 7000 | 11.31 @115.0 | 4.05 |
| FJR1300AE | 127.2 @7900 | 89.6 @ 6800 | 11.86 @ 118.8 | 4.02 |
Well, I must say this comes as a surprise. First, it seems that the AE is slower off the start than the RT, with a 1/4 time that’s 2/10 second slower than the RT. Where the RT loses out is in the grunt at rolling from 60-80 in 6th gear, as the FJR does it 3/10 second faster rolling on in fifth. I suspect that a 5th gear roll-on would be closer on the RT.
Another surprise is how close the performance between the K1200GT is to the Harley V-Rod. That’s about a dead heat. I suspect the K1300GT has some performance increase though. But for a cruiser (sport-cruiser?) the V-Rod is pretty hot.
But, based on the numbers above, I don’t see that the performance difference between the RT and the FJR AE model, like I have, would be particularly noticeable. And based on handling alone, I can already see that I can hustle the RT faster through the corners than I can the FJR.
Can you hear me talking myself into it?
I really want to know what that insurance settlement is gonna be, now.
Finally?
So, every year, you hear the rumors: “There’s a new VFR on the way.” “It’ll have five cylinders.” “It’ll be a 1,000cc V-4 superbike.” Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
There’s something about the venerable Honda VFR that provokes fanatical loyalty from it’s fan base. And, for years, they’ve lived on rumors that the VFR will be upgraded in some fantastic way, and that the 782cc V-Tec equipped V-4 would get a new, massive power injection. Or another cylinder. Or something. whatever it is, it would be wonderful. Sadly, they’ve never gotten it.
Until now.
Honda VFR1200 Development Bike
It appears that Honda is lining up a 1200cc V-Tec bike,, not only as a replacement for the VFR, but perhaps, according to some high-ranking Honda officials, a new line of bikes.
There’s only a few spy shots of it so far, but it seems to have gotten the VFR fans into an absolute tizzy, despite the fact that the headlight looks like the head of some sort of South American jungle toad.
Anyway, it sounds impressive.
The new bike is said to be a sport-touring mount powered by a V4 engine with displacement around 1200cc. It is claimed to have variable cylinder technology, allowing it to “turn off” two cylinders (presumably the rear bank) while cruising in order to save fuel. European publications are claiming that the engine will have power “approaching 200 horsepower”, but considering Honda’s corporate philosophy and the intended market, we seriously doubt it.
Snarky asides about Honda aside–true or not–this is an interesting development. Not only does it call into question just how powerful the new VFR will be, it also calls into question the future of the venerable ST1300, with its 125HP V-4 (but non V-Tec) powerplant.
The ST1300 could certainly use a more powerful engine to push its massive weight down the road, and for touring purposes, variable cylinder technology implies the possibility of 50MPG at 70MPH. Combine that with the ST1300′s 7.8 gallon tank, and you have a highway cruising distance of 390 miles between fill-ups. A lighter, more powerful ST1200 V-Tec would seem to be the perfect reply from Honda to Kawasaki’s Concours14 and Yamaha’s FJR1300.
And, it doesn’t need to have 200HP. 165 is enough to make all the C14 riders green with envy.
BMW R1200RT Second Thoughts
So, now that a day or two has gone by, I find myself having some second thoughts about the R1200RT test ride I took. But, not second thoughts in the way you might expect. What I keep remembering about the K1300GT is that when I went back into the dealership after my test ride, my first word to the salesman was, “Ick.”
Pure Bavarian Pleasure...in black.
I really can’t get over how much I didn’t like that bike compared to the RT. I came back from the RT test ride with a huge grin on my face.
And, keep in mind, I was the first person to take that bike on a ride. It had 7 miles on the odometer, and brand new tires. BMW hadn’t even given the clearance for that bike to be used as a test bike, though the dealer had submitted the paperwork. The sales guy had to call the owner to get permission for me to take it out, which he graciously granted.
So, I didn’t really get to wind the bike up to see what it would do. I kept the RPMs down below 5k (though my understanding is that is where the bike really takes off)m and I had to keep it very restrained in the twisty segment I took it on, because of the new tires.
And I still came back with this big, old, stupid grin on my face.
So, my second thoughts have really been on the order of:
1. I don’t need the crappy 30-watt BMW stereo for $2,000. For $400-$500, I can get an audio shop to stick in some marine speakers, a hefty amp, and hookups for my portable XM unit and iPod.
2. The dyno results for the stock RTs I’ve seen show that they have about 102HP at the rear wheel, and about 80 lb/ft of torque. So, let’s say I put a high capacity K&N filter and a Remus or Staintune full exhaust. What will that get me? Maybe 107HP and 83 lb/ft of torque? Is it worth the 1300 bucks? I dunno.
3. What would the bike feel like if I could ride out with my regular FJR style? Would it feel wimpy in comparison? Again, I dunno, but I’d like to find out.
Still, even with the relatively sedate paces I put it through, I really liked it far better than the GT.
I’m thinking black would be the best color…
Test Rides: BMW K1300GT and R1200RT (Updated)
I spent the afternoon test riding both the K1300GT and the R1200RT. I rode the same route I take to work, which, as I’ve mentioned before, is 1/3 city streets, 1/3 highway, and 1/3 twisty country roads.
Here are my impressions.
Both bikes have far superior handling to the FJR. It’s not a matter of “hey, this is pretty nice”. It more a matter of “Holy SH!t! So this is how a motorcycle is supposed to handle!” The FJR is a nimble bike for its size, but the handling of the BMWs made the FJR seem like riding a…uh…thing that doesn’t handle as well.
Sorry, the simile well ran dry, there.
The RT handles far better than the GT. The GT handles really nice, but on the RT, going through the twisties, it was like the bike knew where it was supposed to go without me doing anything. It runs like its on rails. It falls right into the precise line you want, just when you want it to. The GT was as obedient to steering input as you could ask for, but unlike the RT, it didn’t seem to anticipate. The RT handled like it was reading your mind, not just obeying your inputs. I think I could ride the RT or the GT equally fast in the twisties, because the RT is a step better in handling. I just wonder where in the RT BMW installs the demon that reads the road ahead of you and prepares the bike to turn.
The GT has a superbly smooth engine. It responds instantly to throttle input with no hesitation. Twist, zoom, “oh, look, we’re doing 110 miles per hour.” The RT responds much slower, and the Boxer engine has far more vibration. It also has tons of torque in every gear. If you’re stopped at a light, leaning on one leg, and you blip the RT’s throttle, the bike stands up straight as the torque hits. It’s really noticeable. Still, with the RT, you can sneak up on 110MPH without really trying either. Just not as fast as the GT or FJR. The RT engine growls, the GT engine screams.
But I now understand what the RT guys are talking about when the speak of the “character” of the boxer twin. It growls and vibrates at low RPM, and burbles happily at freeway speeds. Kick it down to fifth on the highway, twist the throttle, and it passes smoothly. Shift back up into 6th, and it’ll just cruise along at 90MPH without a complaint.
The GT has a really touchy throttle. Touch it, and you’re at 6000 RPM instantly. That’s a bit unnerving at first, and really makes you pay attention to clutch control. The GT accelerates faster than than the FJR, but there’s something…boring about it in comparison. It’s as if the GT is saying, “Yes, I can go from 0 to 100MPH in 5 seconds. Big deal. It’s what I do.” There’s all this acceleration, and…it just doesn’t impress you like the FJR does. I can’t really describe it, other than to say the GT was more boring than I thought it would be, speed notwithstanding. That was the biggest surprise of the day. The FJR is just a more fun bike than the GT. I wouldn’t have thought that would be true, but there you go.
The GT sucks in the comfort department. The narrow seat just jams itself up your crotch. It’s every bit as comfortable as sitting on a split-rail fence. Well, that’s probably not a totally fair comparison. The GT doesn’t leave splinters. But other than that, it’s the same. The pegs are also too high for real comfort. It’s not different enough from the RT to notice it just sitting in the showroom, but after 45 minutes on each, the seat and higher pegs begin to irk you noticeably. The FJR is a far more comfortable bike to ride than the GT, but the RT edges out the FJR in comfort. The RT is Cadillac comfortable. With the GT, you sit perched on top of the bike, like a canary riding the shoulder of an insane pirate. With the RT, you feel like you’re inside bike, luxuriously cosseted in a comfy, smooth saddle that gently massages your bum.
Other than sheer acceleration, the RT struck me as a superior motorcycle to the FJR in almost every other way.
Except the rear-view mirrors. Great mirrors on the GT; in the perfect position. The RT, on the other hand, has the mirrors set low, giving you a perfect view of the ends of the handlebars. Perhaps the BMW engineers wanted to be sure you could check your gloves frequently, so you would notice if a bug hit your knuckle armor, causing an unsightly soil on the leather. Or perhaps to check and see if a flying stone struck your bar ends, leaving behind a nasty scratch on the perfect black enamel. Because other than that, the rear-view mirrors on the RT are essentially useless.
But, frankly, that’s a fairly minor quibble.
I went into the test rides today, firmly convinced that I wanted a K1300GT. I rode the RT mainly as a favor to the sales guy who said I really owed it to myself to compare the two bikes. I came back from the RT test ride with a huge grin on my face, utterly surprised to like everything about the bike. I came back from the GT test ride thinking I’d rather have my FJR. I am still a little bit amazed at how much I like the RT, and how underwhelming the GT actually was to ride.
UPDATE: I took another test ride of the R1200RT the following week, and added more detailed impressions of the RT here.