So I don't want to bore/bother you about the lack of a decent seized tank,seat for the missus,centerstand,practical underseat storage and luggage rack again...
But I always thought with these "sensible options" the new S would have been a very desirable sport-(tourer) bike and successor to the old R11S not only for boxer-trixsters...
But anyways it got some good press but always there was a slight undertone that it was wrong to deny BMW spporttouring minded folks the list of usual options and retrospect looking at the sales they were right or better the factory pokered and lost... (otherwise dead cert buyers)
Of couse "Fast Bikes" is way over the top critizising the S in this way on the merits on being a sportbike alone...
"Don't be fooled by claims this is a sportsbike.Ride it back to back with a GSXR750 and you'll see the light"
"BMW R1200S-257th,I actually choose the BMW to ride up to the test purely for the legroom and heated grips on a four hour motorway slog with vans in tow.Any other time you can keep it.It's slower than a 600 and heavier than your house.The brakes couldn't stop a pen from rolling off your desk and it handles like a broken wheelbarrow.The fueling is terrible,the transmission shunts and the gearbox is poor.One day they'll nail it,but that day hasn't come yet.The brutal truth I'd rather walk than ride the R1200S.That's ok,because after reading this I'd be amazed if BMW even let me on their webside again,let alone on one of their bikes"
"Verdict,it's basically a rolling generator to power the heated grips and definately not a sportsbike.+fairly comfortable,but it's not the sportsbike BMW claimed it would be.- too mch too list.4/10"
Looks too me appeasing the journos on the backs of a lot of loyal customers did not work.
So my question is real,why does "Fast Bikes" seem to hate BMW's???
I remember they had nothing good to say about the R1100S,either...
Otherwise,paper really doesn't care what gets printed on it,does it?
Do you?
Who cares...
Save your money
