saw my first BMW k1600glt on the road

[TMUS]

Seen my first at a dealer in Grand Rapids Michigan this past week end, looked nice. I like the valve stem location, what a great place to place them.

 

[Blue STreak]

Finally saw one in person parked in front of the grocery store. Looked at it on the way in but couldn't find anyone inside who seemed to be a rider to talk to about it.
If you stripped off all the BMW roundels (and the bazillion places where BMW is cast or engraved into metal parts) there's be no doubt that it's a BMW, which is a downer for me as I do not care for the design aesthetic of BMW bikes. BMW designs some gorgeous cars but their bikes are not in the same league. The K16 has a face only a mother could love. )

Funny as most auto journalists would tend to see the flip of your observation... with the Bangle era not a much loved period for the four wheel division and the David Robb design aesthetic has shown to produce some of Motorrad's most successful and admired designs (GSA, 1150RT, 1100s, K1200s, new S1000RR, K1200LT, F800GS and ST to name just a few).

With very few exceptions, I find all the recent BMWs, both Bimmers and Beemers, to be pretty darn ugly.

In another train of thought this month's Bike magazine has an in-depth test of the K1600GT, not the press release rides they gave in South Africa, but alot of miles under several riders on all kinds of roads. For Petes sake they rode it 1000 miles in 24 hours in one section. It is the King of the Hill. Anyway, in one section they reviewed what it is like to tote a passenger on it. For comparison they choose non-other than our beloved ST1300 as the best passenger toter to date. I thought that was a nice compliment paid to the nearly decade-old ST1300.

So far the only road test I've seen of this bike that I put any faith in is the one in MCN. MCN identified a number of things they felt were weaknesses of the bike that all the other magazines either ignored or sang hosannas about. One example: the vaunted adaptive headlight system. To get it to work right, MCN said, you need to be going way faster, and leaned way further, than makes any sense on a dark curvy road. And its self leveling feature means you can't see more than a few feet in front of you going up a steep hill.

None of the magazines that take BMW advertising dollars said anything about the adaptive headlight except for what a great invention it was. Don't look for honest or objective information from Motorcyclist, Rider, or any of the other mainstream mags. The "Chinese Wall" between advertising and editorial staffs got knocked down a long time ago.

 

[Chris Parker]

One example: the vaunted adaptive headlight system. To get it to work right, MCN said, you need to be going way faster, and leaned way further, than makes any sense on a dark curvy road. And its self leveling feature means you can't see more than a few feet in front of you going up a steep hill.

I subscribe to MCN (for 10 years now) and agree with it's product evaluations. As to the issue with the K1600's adaptive headlight, I can't speak on that aspect of it, but I can assure you this, in 90-95% of it's use in the way of normal tracking like other motorcycles (including the ST1300), it pretty much spanks other bikes for illuminating the road up ahead due to the Xeon headlight (I have ridden at night a K1300GT with the Xeon headlights and it is a wonder of technology in a bike). I would think that the expectations of just how much it lights up in the turn are what is off here. But I reserve final judgement when I have my K1600GT with this feature.

 

[dduelin]

So far the only road test I've seen of this bike that I put any faith in is the one in MCN. MCN identified a number of things they felt were weaknesses of the bike that all the other magazines either ignored or sang hosannas about. One example: the vaunted adaptive headlight system. To get it to work right, MCN said, you need to be going way faster, and leaned way further, than makes any sense on a dark curvy road. And its self leveling feature means you can't see more than a few feet in front of you going up a steep hill.

None of the magazines that take BMW advertising dollars said anything about the adaptive headlight except for what a great invention it was. Don't look for honest or objective information from Motorcyclist, Rider, or any of the other mainstream mags. The "Chinese Wall" between advertising and editorial staffs got knocked down a long time ago.

I doubt you read Bike magazine because if you did than you would know they don't pull any punches in reviews and aren't worried about offending ad buyers. They are funny, irreverent, and relevant. Based on what you say about mags you mentioned ... you would like Bike.

Except for the Bike review I mentioned all the other K1600 reviews I have seen (I don't get MCN) were based on short test rides at the official press release of the bikes in South Africa, which included Bike and every other magazine or motojournalist that happened to get an invite. These were the first ride reports/reviews we have seen for about 3 months now. BMW did not allow any of the test bikes to be ridden at night in SA for fear of hitting baboons so none of the writers got to see how the adaptive headlight really works in the real world. Maybe that is why they didn't write about it.

Like the way I get my other news I don't get it all from one source and trust my ability to read or listen to different views and make up my own mind. I feel that folks that say they "don't believe the mainstream [fill in your blank] so I don't read or watch it" have very little chance of getting any view other than the one(s) that fits their already fixed view of the world.

 

[Bones]

Xeon headlight...and it is a wonder of technology in a bike). I would think that the expectations of just how much it lights up in the turn are what is off here. But I reserve final judgement when I have my K1600GT with this feature.

Good headlights make a huge difference. The difference between my one bulb Versys and my two bulb ST is enormous. Xenon lighting is better still. As I read Dave Searle's comments on adaptive lighting, MCN's issue is not with how much light is being created but with where it is being pointed, specifically not where it's helpful. Here's the whole section of the MCN comment about the adaptive headlight, which they described as "very clever but not without issues":

"While this is definitely a long-overdue advance in lighting, it can't anticipate a turn. Given a particularly black and narrow, bumpy country lane lined with fallen trees as a nighttime test route, we found the system essentially required that we charge into turns at significant speeds and lean angles to have any noticeable effect. Is that how you'd ride an unfamiliar narrow winding road in the dark? Also, because the system self-levels -- a blessing when the chassis attitude changes after being heavily loaded, for instance, it also keeps the headlight level when going up or down hills. When descending steeply, this means the road ahead is not adequately illuminated, and when climbing, the headlight points too steeply down (use the high beams). Frustrated by the speed needed to experience its steering effect, we found that by simply turning rapidly from side to side on a straight road, we could see it in action, but the reality wasn't everything we hoped it would be. In fact, all the K1600GTLs at the event were equipped with the optional LED driving light package which also serve to fill in dark corners."​

Hopefully BMW is paying attention and the next iteration will work better.

 

[Blue STreak]

I subscribe to MCN (for 10 years now) and agree with it's product evaluations. As to the issue with the K1600's adaptive headlight, I can't speak on that aspect of it, but I can assure you this, in 90-95% of it's use in the way of normal tracking like other motorcycles (including the ST1300), it pretty much spanks other bikes for illuminating the road up ahead due to the Xeon headlight (I have ridden at night a K1300GT with the Xeon headlights and it is a wonder of technology in a bike). I would think that the expectations of just how much it lights up in the turn are what is off here. But I reserve final judgement when I have my K1600GT with this feature.

Sorry, but your conclusion really isn't justified. Because the K1300 Xenon headlight is wonderful, doesn't automatically mean the K1600 Xenon headlight is wonderful. If, in fact, the comments MCN made about the self leveling feature are accurate, it may well be worse than a standard tungsten filament headlight. It doesn't matter how bright the light is, if it's only lighting up the road 6 feet in front of you.

 

[Blue STreak]

I doubt you read Bike magazine because if you did than you would know they don't pull any punches in reviews and aren't worried about offending ad buyers. They are funny, irreverent, and relevant. Based on what you say about mags you mentioned ... you would like Bike.

Except for the Bike review I mentioned all the other K1600 reviews I have seen (I don't get MCN) were based on short test rides at the official press release of the bikes in South Africa, which included Bike and every other magazine or motojournalist that happened to get an invite. These were the first ride reports/reviews we have seen for about 3 months now. BMW did not allow any of the test bikes to be ridden at night in SA for fear of hitting baboons so none of the writers got to see how the adaptive headlight really works in the real world. Maybe that is why they didn't write about it.

Like the way I get my other news I don't get it all from one source and trust my ability to read or listen to different views and make up my own mind. I feel that folks that say they "don't believe the mainstream [fill in your blank] so I don't read or watch it" have very little chance of getting any view other than the one(s) that fits their already fixed view of the world.

You're correct that I don't generally read Bike, but incorrect that no one else has reported based on real world experience. MCN has ridden the bike at night. See the quoted article above.

But my comments should be taken in the context of the mainstream American motorcycle rags, which have become little more than advertising supplements in the way they review products. Yes, they may rate bike "A" better than bike "K", but they do it without really saying anything bad about bike "K". You'll not learn about real-world issues from the American bike rags until it's way too late to influence your purchase.

 

[dduelin]

You're correct that I don't generally read Bike, but incorrect that no one else has reported based on real world experience. MCN has ridden the bike at night. See the quoted article above.

But my comments should be taken in the context of the mainstream American motorcycle rags, which have become little more than advertising supplements in the way they review products. Yes, they may rate bike "A" better than bike "K", but they do it without really saying anything bad about bike "K". You'll not learn about real-world issues from the American bike rags until it's way too late to influence your purchase.

I was only saying that the reviews from magazines other than the current Bike and the MCN report were based on day rides only so we couldn't reasonably expect them to say anything one way or the other about the headlight. That is correct as it comes. Only now we will start seeing reviews where they actually had the bike for more than a few daylight hours. BTW, Bike did report some things unflattering to the big Beemer but the headlight wasn't one of them.

 

[Chris Parker]

It doesn't matter how bright the light is, if it's only lighting up the road 6 feet in front of you.

Not to get in a pissing match here, but I would think that BMW's approach would be that it's minimum standard for illumination would be what it's normal headlight setup is on other Xeon equipped bikes. And it would be beyond 6 feet as you exaggerate. What I read from the MCN first impression article was that in certain conditions, the bike's lighting did not make the advancements as well as BMW claimed in their intro videos online and in sales literature. To design a system which does not effectively give SOME of the advertised attributes and is significantly worse in ALL conditions would not make it past the testing phase, no matter how people who lament BMW technology think that would happen. Just not gonna happen.

 

[Bones]

As I read David Searle's comments, it seems his biggest issue with the adaptive headlight is it doesn't light up the curves ahead, which is what it's designed to do. To create any noticeable effect requires more speed and lean angle than he would use in the conditions where such a feature would prove valuable. That certainly doesn't jibe with the marketing claims or the nifty video.

BMW's adaptive headlight is a first on a bike and no doubt a hugely difficult feature to design and implement. BMW will certainly work at making it better and others are likely to copy the concept and try to improve on it.

 

[dduelin]

To design a system which does not effectively give SOME of the advertised attributes and is significantly worse in ALL conditions would not make it past the testing phase, no matter how people who lament BMW technology think that would happen. Just not gonna happen.

What? Like the gas level strips that replaced floats to measure fuel level? How many have been replaced on your RT?

 

[Chris Parker]

Mine went out at 50,000 miles... about double the mileage of what my thermostat on my ST1300 did, if we are keeping score : )

 

[Blue STreak]

Not to get in a pissing match here, but I would think that BMW's approach would be that it's minimum standard for illumination would be what it's normal headlight setup is on other Xeon equipped bikes. And it would be beyond 6 feet as you exaggerate. What I read from the MCN first impression article was that in certain conditions, the bike's lighting did not make the advancements as well as BMW claimed in their intro videos online and in sales literature. To design a system which does not effectively give SOME of the advertised attributes and is significantly worse in ALL conditions would not make it past the testing phase, no matter how people who lament BMW technology think that would happen. Just not gonna happen.

Did you even read the quote from MCN? Yes, 6 feet may be an exaggeration, but they essentially said the headlight sucks. And, unlike you, they've actually ridden the bike. In the dark. No offense intended, but I'll take the word of someone who's ridden the thing over someone who's making assumptions. BMW has made plenty of bad decisions on bikes in recent years. Their vacuum assisted power brakes were a disaster, but their advertising made it sound like the second coming. I don't think I need to mention their well documented sealed rear drive failures, or all the alternator drive belt failures in past IBRs. Their first generation of bikes with the Hossack front suspension worked great on glass smooth roads, and loosened your fillings, and the front tire's traction, on rough pavement. Excuse me for not sharing your unbridled faith in BMW's engineering talent.

 

[dduelin]

Mine went out at 50,000 miles... about double the mileage of what my thermostat on my ST1300 did, if we are keeping score : )

Yours is unusual to only have needed one by 50,000

 

[MileHigh]

This one was at WeSTOC in Nelson a few weeks back.



Never did get to meet or talk to the owner.

Truth be told, I was more interested in this bike than the GoldWing & VFR1200 Honda had on display. :bmwkick1:

 

[Chris Parker]

Did you even read the quote from MCN?

Uh, about four times, once when I got the issue and noted what they said, second when Bones posted several weeks ago, and I remembered it from the first time, and in this thread, two more times.

Funny, it just goes to show you how people can read the same text and get two different reads on it. I read it thusly: they did not think the lighting worked as advertised in that the adaptive lighting feature SWIVELING into turns wasn't that dramatic/useful/working as advertised. In no part did I read that under normal riding conditions that the lighting wasn't adequate... and in my estimation, from one who has ridden BMW's with the Xeon lighting it is, pardon the pun, the difference is between night and day. If I read Dave Searle's gripe right, the usefulness of the system is only apparent at high speeds and in level road conditions... it does not suck as you put it from a lighting standpoint as compared to other bikes, it just does not meet the expectations of the advancements BMW has placed on it in regards to moving into a turn. So, it appears that BMW has some refining to do.

And as to your other points, if you read my posts here in the past, you will see that I am not a BMW apologist when it comes to their issues, but you bring them up to justify that their engineering prowess in this one area is suspect. I applaud their innovation in thinking out of the box... and that is what you get for leading at times... arrows thrown at you. BTW, I happen to LOVE my servo-assisted brakes, both on my 1150RT and now 06 1200RT. The only reason for BMW going away from this is not any failure rate on the brakes but rather the motorcycling community not liking the "feel i.e.-sensitivity" of their performance, you ride with them day in and day out, you get used to them as I did... these comments usually are the same folks who rather hated the much more ergonomic BMW turn signals that BMW had up until 2010. I just chalk it up to different strokes for different folks. Final Drive Failures are there, I give you that... I would however like to note that both would be in the minority of bikes and also in my 120,000 miles on my three BMWs, not a problem between them. Duolever suspension is fine for me... as I have stated earlier, I have ridden both the 1200 and 1300GTs and other than a slight vagueness to the front end compared to my Telelever on my RT, I didn't experience any harshness on the front end.

So, that is my take on your take of my take... make sense?

Peace out.

 

[Throttlejockey]

Why so much hate on the BMW's? I'd rock one of those GLT's in a heartbeat.

 

[Blue STreak]

OK, here's my take: If you live in a place with almost no hills, and no tight curves, the new BMW headlight is great. If you have to go up and down hills the self-leveling system decreases your vision, rather than improving it. And if you ride twisty roads at night the adaptive headlight either 1) doesn't really do much to help you see or 2) forces you to ride faster than is really safe after dark. I'm fortunate to ride in places with lots of curves and quite a few elevation changes.

 

[Chris Parker]

Well, a little balance to MCN's evaluation of the Adaptive Headlight on the new K1600s. Today I was in at my local dealer (Touring Sport BMW in Greenville, SC)... being friends with the General Manager (BTW, a fan of the ST1300 because he used to run PowerSports Honda up until this past Spring), I asked him what his thoughts were on the new K1600 headlights as he has done extensive riding on the bikes (and more importantly done about 80 miles in the dark). He says that the lights work as advertised... they are the real deal and when I told him about Dave Searle's comments about driving fast into turns to take advantage of the lights ability to turn, he said that is nonsense. The thing that gets the lights to bank is a sensor that reads the lean of the bike and you don't have to be riding any faster to get the light to point in the direction of the turn. I even asked if he was using the auxiliary lights to supplement the lighting and he said no, didn't need to except when he was riding in the rain. He said that more bikes will eventually be using a version of this system as it is a markedly improved lighting breakthrough that all touring bikes will want to emulate. He road the bike from Greenville to Abbeville SC in some back roads and was impressed. I take him at his word. The final word will be my trying it out for myself on a GT.

 

[bmcdonau]

I doubt you read Bike magazine because if you did than you would know they don't pull any punches in reviews and aren't worried about offending ad buyers. They are funny, irreverent, and relevant. Based on what you say about mags you mentioned ... you would like Bike.

Except for the Bike review I mentioned all the other K1600 reviews I have seen (I don't get MCN) were based on short test rides at the official press release of the bikes in South Africa, which included Bike and every other magazine or motojournalist that happened to get an invite. These were the first ride reports/reviews we have seen for about 3 months now. BMW did not allow any of the test bikes to be ridden at night in SA for fear of hitting baboons so none of the writers got to see how the adaptive headlight really works in the real world. Maybe that is why they didn't write about it.

Like the way I get my other news I don't get it all from one source and trust my ability to read or listen to different views and make up my own mind. I feel that folks that say they "don't believe the mainstream [fill in your blank] so I don't read or watch it" have very little chance of getting any view other than the one(s) that fits their already fixed view of the world.

I love the Brit mags, Bike, Rider and the classic mags like Motorcycle Mechanics and Classic Bike. Head and shoulders above US mags.