Bike mag reviews of our sporty boxers, are they ever fair ?

kfrogzx7 · Post by **kfrogzx7** » Tue Dec 27, 2016 8:18 pm

I've spent my spare time over Christmas digging through my many boxes of old bike mags finding old tests of our bikes.

I'd already sorted out the R1100s tests but was after ST articles this time.
Anyway, I found about half a dozen tests, some first rides others back to back tests with contemporary sports tourers ( Triumph ST, Ducati ST3/4, VFR, Blackbird amongst others ) in various mags, Bike, Fast Bikes, Superbike, Two Wheels and Ride mostly.

So I settling down with some Chateau Neuf by the fire and got reading, and a sorry experience it proved to be !!

None, NONE, of the jounos rated our bikes at all !! Particularly in back to back comparisons on group tests where the Triumph Sprint ST beat the 12st into fourth and last place out of four twice and the VFR beat the 11s into last place at least twice out of four or five !!

Now I know our boxer sports tourers are a bit idiosyncratic but I just refuse to believe that they really deserved this level of slating. These journos just didn't seem to get it at all and of course group tests in sports bike magazines do tend to put undue emphasis on performance, but I felt aggrieved on BM's behalf that they didn't get a fair hearing.

Beemers are "different" I know but surely judged objectively in the round and in the long term they stack up as great real world bikes don't they ?

For example the initial lauding of the Sprint ST has worn a bit thin now hasn't it, now it's not rated as a VFR beater and time hasn't been that kind to it has it ?

Okay, rant over, I'm sure everybody thinks their bike is underrated by experts ?

slparry · Post by **slparry** » Tue Dec 27, 2016 10:38 pm

mcn like them

http://www.motorcyclenews.com/bike-revi ... 100s/1999/

Herb · Post by **Herb** » Wed Dec 28, 2016 12:41 am

I don't recall reading an unfavourable review of the R1200s. Given the general positivity it's a surprise they didn't sell more.

Despite the favourable reviews, I do sometimes wonder if the journalists have ever ridden a 12s. They don't half come out with some rubbish.

fontana · Post by **fontana** » Wed Dec 28, 2016 12:57 am

Herb wrote:I don't recall reading an unfavourable review of the R1200s.

Here's one

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/mot ... ation.html

Herb · Post by **Herb** » Wed Dec 28, 2016 7:38 am

fontana wrote:
Herb wrote:I don't recall reading an unfavourable review of the R1200s.
Here's one

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/mot ... ation.html

Actually I do remember that review by Kevin Ash. He's still much missed I think. The quality of his technical articles was especially good. I had some written correspondence with him once and he ended up sending me a signed copy of his book on BMW.

Britisherspy · Post by **Britisherspy** » Wed Dec 28, 2016 10:17 am

The men n motors reviews on YouTube are pretty fair I thought. The sprint st 955i is a much faster and I thought more comfy bike, with a 200 mile range tank. Poor build quality though and the panniers leak. The VFR 750 has a lovely motor and great build quality but pretty aggressive riding position although no different to any of the above.

I have had two sprints, 1st one had the paint peel off the swing arm and looked well rough after a few winters. Valve clearance needed doing too. Nice motor though, well punchy with a turbine like noise. Plastic tank started to swell up with ethanol. 2nd one I bought to sell on to be fair. Unbeknown to me the motor was going and had to be replaced about 6 months after I sold it.

VFR was good, very nice to spin the motor up. Good on track too. Fuel pump was iffy but outside the tank. Very expensive exhaust system.

fontana · Post by **fontana** » Wed Dec 28, 2016 10:26 am

Herb wrote:
fontana wrote:
Herb wrote:I don't recall reading an unfavourable review of the R1200s.
Here's one

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/mot ... ation.html
Actually I do remember that review by Kevin Ash. He's still much missed I think. The quality of his technical articles was especially good. I had some written correspondence with him once and he ended up sending me a signed copy of his book on BMW.

I had the privilege of chatting to Kevin Ash many years ago.
He was a true motorcycling enthusiast, and all round great guy.
Of topic slightly, there is still a lot of mystery surrounding his death at the BMW GS launch event.
BMW apparently haven't released all the information.
They've just said it was a tragic accident,
I think in most other countries, all of the evidence, and investigation would have been handed over to the authorities, but apparently that didn't happen here.
it seems like common sense that an independent investigator is employed to check the bike after a rider is killed riding it, more so in such mysterious circumstances.
Allowing BMW to do their own investigation on the bike before a forensic mechanic examines it is a bit bizarre, don’t you think?

kfrogzx7 · Post by **kfrogzx7** » Wed Dec 28, 2016 10:26 am

slparry wrote:mcn like them

http://www.motorcyclenews.com/bike-revi ... 100s/1999/

But that's really what I mean, sure the 11s is slightly grudgingly rated when revisited years later, but at the time it was very very unfavourably compared to the VFR.

The reviewers just couldn't see past the switchgear and a lack of a top end power surge when riding beside their colleagues on multi-cylinder bikes.

The shaft drive for example was never rated as a positive feature for a sports tourer, to me it patently is a big advantage ?

As for the 12s, I must admit that I haven't read many contemporary tests of it against it's direct competitors but I'd be very surprised if it really fared that much better overal. I feel that the testers mindsets were fundamentally sceptical about sporty Beemers of the late 20th and early 21st C.

1200boxer · Post by **1200boxer** » Wed Dec 28, 2016 10:50 am

Well the man had a point about the flimsy plastics and weather resistance. The R1200S stickers on mine are not varnished over and one of the brake discs bolts is rusting despite the bike never having seen a rainy day and living in the Algarve.
I never found that the bike vibrates harshly at all,in fact I like an engine that shows it's presence.
It may not be a track tool but I find I can go unreasonably fast on mine and the handling is amazing. I could never understand this rubbish about the lack of feel of the telelever . Maybe it's there at extreme levels of riding but I don't do track days and try not to get killed on the road so the bike has so far been great and also unique,so much so that after getting a practically new RC8 I decided to keep both.

dave the german · Post by **dave the german** » Wed Dec 28, 2016 11:22 am

I can relate to the quality of the finish - my first BM, an R65, had hand painted pin striping and not stickers and the paint was much "deeper" and that was ridden all year round for the brief few years that I owned it - still scrubbed up well when the Waxoyl was removed. The front of my BCR is manky and that has never been out in Winter and I've had it from 1 year old and just under 1500 miles on the clock.

The throttle on the 12s isn't as it should be but that has been discussed at length here and most people have improved it by various means - did all 1200s of this era have the non linear throttle and if not is it possible to mix and match parts from other models to improve this?

I've never found the 12s to be that vibey - got tingly fingers with my VFR800.

I always got the impression that BMW were on a hiding to nothing when journos tested them - something to do with the pipes and slippers brigade? and this only really started to change with the introduction of the K1200s. But, we all love them and that's all that counts

boxerscott · Post by **boxerscott** » Wed Dec 28, 2016 1:23 pm

I think in general, that the reports are pretty accurate to some extent in comparison terms but who cares as long as you like it is the point that matters.The boxers age well then they become wanted for projects or nostalgia. The others mentioned start to look dated and then end up in a skip. I would say the two up characteristics of the boxer are far superior and that is where journo reports do not go.

Blackal · Post by **Blackal** » Wed Dec 28, 2016 1:43 pm

boxerscott wrote:I think in general, that the reports are pretty accurate to some extent in comparison terms but who cares as long as you like it is the point that matters.The boxers age well then they become wanted for projects or nostalgia. The others mentioned start to look dated and then end up in a skip. I would say the two up characteristics of the boxer are far superior and that is where journo reports do not go.

Correct - The journalists probably just gave their honest opinion on the brief test they had, which upset a lot of R1100s owners, I suspect.

You see the opposite - in reviews on some forum, where the mark of a "great review, Mate!" - is if it validates "matey's" own choice of bike........

Al

milleplod · Post by **milleplod** » Wed Dec 28, 2016 1:59 pm

I can't remember the last time I read a truly objective road test of a bike, or a car for that matter. Is there any such thing? I only ever read them to glean info about reliability/glitches, that sort of thing - any comments about performance, handling etc I take with a huuuge pinch of salt.

Pete

Grip Fast · Post by **Grip Fast** » Wed Dec 28, 2016 4:24 pm

My second bike, after I got back into biking, was a VFR750fr, bought because of all the rave reviews. I got bored with it quite quickly and swapped it for an Aprilia Falco, which I loved and kept for almost 10 years. The journos didn't rate them. It looked as good when I sold it as it did at 2 years old when I bought it, and it never let me down.

I swapped the Falco for my R12S, which I bought from a Triumph dealer when I went to buy a Sprint ST, but couldn't see past the R12S looks. A test ride sold it to me, and I still love it after 5 (or is it 6) years. But that Kevin Ash review is not far off the mark. It's just my taste is different, I guess and the Beemer just suits me.

I did go to trade it in for a Tiger 800 in 2015, but couldn't let go of it, so I still have the R12S for fun rides and the Tiger is the practical workhorse (it's a lot of fun too, but then it's 2 wheels and an engine and that's what it's all about in my book - well, with the possible exception of the VFR which I didn't gel with).

dave the german · Post by **dave the german** » Wed Dec 28, 2016 5:32 pm

same thing with my VFR800 - it was an alright bike, BUT and it's a huge but - I just couldn't get away with it - sure, it served a purpose. It was cheap and reliable but I just didn't gel with it and after about 2 minutes on my 12s I knew it had to go. I do agree with the pillion comments - how many testers ride 2 up? Maybe the later long term tests are more informative but as Chris said it's a personal thing. As much as I thought Kevin Ash was one of the better, I usually disregard reports and buy on impulse (looks etc). I bought my BCR without riding it and have no regrets