thinking of switching from a K to a boxer

[Duane Ausherman]

You are asking the boxer nuts to tell you what you want to hear. If (big if) you are willing to make it a real hobby, then maybe an airhead is Ok.

When new, the /5 was very reliable......... because it was compared to the /2. The newer bikes are more reliable for sure.

Soul? That equates to meaning that it is a lot of trouble, but still worth it.

Are you willing to own at least one more bike worth of spare parts? No, then forget the airheads. Are you willing to do the maintenance required to have a reliable bike? You can check online to get a realistic schedule.

I don't really know if the newer ones are enough more reliable for your expectations over the old ones.

[bronzecrow]

Thanks Duane for the wake up call!
mind you i doubt a decent late model air head could be less relible than the 3year old suszuki SV650 which was my first bike the build qaulity on that bike was just a joke. Mind you i heard BMW badly lost the way with the oilheads id looked at those before getting the K and was scared off by the horror storys.

But the K has defintly got to go im just not enjoying it and whats the point of riding motocycles if its not fun? since its never safer cheaper or easier than a car.

[Manfred]

bronzecow,

I rode Japanese bikes (mostly Yamaha) from my first one in 1980 up until late 2008, when I bought my first BMW - a 1987 R80RT. As a kid in what was West Germany, on my Yamaha 50, I saw these cool Germans in matching leathers flying up and down the Autobahns.

While I've had to do some work on my bike (because I've laid her down, twice), she has not quit on me nor been much of a burden. Without a doubt, this airhead is the most fun and most comfortable bike I've owned.

Here's a picture from a camping trip last fall.

[vanzen]

I don't really know if the newer ones are enough more reliable for your expectations over the old ones.

When that "newer one" is 25 years old with xxx,xxx miles –
Only then will it be fair to compare reliability, eh ?

In 1979, I bought my only new BMW, a 1978 R100/7.
I was determined to "use" the unlimited miles 3-year warranty.
3-years, 40,000 miles later – and I never had that opportunity.

But then, none of these old bikes is "new" any more, and time takes it's toll.
To reproduce the "as new" reliability will likely require an investment of time and money.
The payment can be made up-front, or defrayed over the course of ownership,
but ultimately, the troll will get it's toll.

What an airhead in proper snuff will have working to it's advantage (vs a "newer one")
will be mechanical simplicity.
I am reminded of the writing of James Fallows in his book National Defense
where he presents an equation that relates the complexity of a machine
to it's needed down time for maintenance and repair. The quantities will be proportional.

[CVA-42]

Well, speaking from personal experience, I'll tell you one thing for sure and that is that no matter what kind of airhead you wind up with, including a fully faired RT, you'll be a lot cooler in the summer than you are on a K1100LT. Mine was a beast to ride in the summer. But - - a warm bike in the winter....

[Chuey]

I'd say that a lot of the reputation for reliability comes when a vintage BMW is compared to a vintage British or Italian bike.

My bikes have been on long trips (with the exception of the Cafe Racer, which has been on plenty of two hour jaunts with no let downs) and they have been reliable. When I leave on a trip, I like to know the bike has a fair chance, so I try to have it ready. And it is because of the relative simplicity that vanzen mentions that I'm able (with help from Boxerworks) to do that work.

To me, a "long trip" is from San Diego to the Bay Area, 450 miles one way, or to Montana, 1,200 miles each way, or to Oregon, 800 miles each way. Miles per day is between 500 and 700 typically, on those trips. It impresses me that the bikes seem to love being ridden briskly for such long days, and a few of them in a row.

Chuey