BMW K1100LT impressions

Hm. I'm rather impressed actually.

Maybe for me in three years time when I've finally got over the sports
bike thing.

Well, I still have the Duacti.

Still miss my old R80RTs barn door like coverage but I prefer the K
series engines. Might swap the K75S in for something like yours
eventually.

I always liked the 75S.

Although I'm acutely aware of the weight of the beemer now that I've
been using the lightweight japanese thing.

It feels lighter than the Triumph.

"Tankful" may be very subjective, depending on how far you drain it :-)

According to some BMW promo I've kept, the '92 LT should consume 4.9
l/10km at a steady 90 km/h, whilst the RS figures were 4.7 for the '92
(16v) and 4.3 for the'88 RS (8v).

In real life, I got a 54 mpg average during a 2000+ mile trip to and
around the Alps this summer. 200 miles: red fuel tell-tale light on,
230: must find somwhere to fill up . . .

I've seen little difference between the K1100 and the K100.

My 1100 has averaged 42mpg over about 5,000 miles.
My K100's have averaged 39mpg over 50,000 miles, 37mpg over 7,000 and
42mpg over 6,500.

What this means in terms of miles per tankfull is that I've got jumpy
when I get close to 140 miles. I have seen 210 miles once but I was
very, very careful.

I'll find out what the K75's like shortly 'cos I've got one on the way,
ex Plod doesn't look that bad:

stylish luggage... Which will soon be off I think.

Hog, if I fit a K100RT rear bevel box to a K75 will that lengthen the
gearing significantly enough to be worth bothering with?

Fascinating to compare it with the now departed Trophy 1200. The Beemer
doesn't have quite the grunt of the Triumph, but the difference is
minimal, and the lower gearing of the K masks it to an extent. You can
still just roll it on from 35 in top. On the Trophy, though, I'd
sometimes roll open the throttle, find the transmission starting to
snatch, and realise I only had 1000rpm or something on the clock. The
Trophy is still the Torque Monster.

Overall performance - Triumph, by a whisker. Slightly faster, but I
don't think the difference between 130+ and about 140 makes too much of
a difference.

Handling - Triumph again. You can crank that Trophy over like you
wouldn't believe. I haven't explored the BMW's limits yet, but the more
upright riding position, the wider bars and (especially) the rubber
mounts for the bars make the front end a bit lighter and more remote.

Brakes - BMW. The Trumf's brakes were always adequate, but no more than
that. The BMW's are a bit better, plus you have the ABS.

Fairing - BMW knocks the Triumph into a cocked hat. Utterly brilliant
shielding, and the leccy screen is a marvel. You can set it *exactly*
how you want, for any riding position or stance. Lovely. I've just
ridden through an M25 downpour and not got wet.

You are coming late into this discovery! One can spend countless hours
fiddling with the screen. It's all in the timing of course but you
should have bought my white one, it was *so* sorted. Shane got a really
good bike there.

Comfort - a draw, if you ignore the fairing issue. They've both got
utterly superb seats and riding positions.

Finish - a draw. The Trophy has been through three winters in my hands
and the finish is still excellent. The BMW is much older, and still
looks brand new, but I suspect it's been cossetted to a greater extent
than the Trophy.

Equipment - BMW, for sure. The Trophy also had heated grips, but the K
has better instrumentation, including a temp gauge and fuel warning
light as well as a gauge, plus that ABS. The K also has a top box,
which was only ever an option on the Trophy. The speakers for a radio
are fitted in the fairing, so adding sound shouldn't be too hard,
whereas the Trophy had no provision whatsoever. Not that I want a
radio, though. Only things I don't really like on the BMW are the
indicator switches, and the fiddly steering and filler cap locks.

Touring ability - yet to be decided, but I suspect the BMW will win.
The Trophy's Achilles heel is its ridiculous thirst. It's got a useful
range of about 160-180 miles, and riding like a nun can get this to 200
miles, but generally you're refilling every 170-odd miles, at a cost ov
well over =A320 per tankful. I suspect the BMW will have a similar range
but require less fuel.

Here was me thinking I was riding like a nun for getting 137 miles out
of the CBR (15.54 litres = 40 mpg yahoo!). Come to think of it the K75S
used to only manage the same range and I wasn't riding it at 150 mph
everywere.

I've had 150 miles from the Daytona before the fuel light has come on,
then it only needs approx 15 litres in the 21 litre tank. That's quite a
tank range for a sportyish bike.

200!! my god but you boys ride slowly

Oh, and the best bit. My insurance is due for renewal in three weeks'
time, and two renewal quotes dropped onto the mat at the same time. The
first was for the Trophy, Ducati and CD250, fully comp, =A3408. Not bad.
The second was a revised quote, removing the Trophy and replacing it
with the BMW. =A3289. So it's saved me =A3120 on my insurance.

So yeah, I'm a happy bunny. I liked the Trophy, but I wouldn't have
another. If Triumph were to produce a decent shaft-driven tourer,
addressing the main faults of the Trophy (which was, after all, one of
the original early-1990s bikes), I might be tempted.

I could somehow see TOG blatting around on one of those.

I could almost see myself on one, as it happens. At least it'd be
guaranteed not to stoppie the front and spit me off...