BMW R1250RS 2023

[manxie49]

Subjective and personal opinion of this bike, formulated after taking it for a test ride on Friday.  I didn't have it for that long and only covered around 70 miles.  The weather was warm, dry and sunny, with light winds.  Roads and traffic conditions ranged between urban and open countryside.  A mix of both "A" and "B' roads.

 

2023 BMW R1250RS

 

THE GOOD   I’ve always been a fan of the Boxer engine so I may be a little biased here.  The engine is solid, loads of torque with plenty of grunt.  The shift cam technology is brilliant, and although being a big bike, it makes riding at slower speeds much easier.  It’s a very manoeuvrable bike, due, IMHO, to its low centre of gravity.  It actually felt more like a 600cc bike as oppose to a 1250.  I would say that the bike is more tourer than sports, it certainly isn’t the sort of bike you could go scratching on.  At 6’2” I didn’t feel cramped on the bike, and that was with stock seat and handlebars, and I felt that I could quite happily tour some distance on this machine in relative comfort.  Wind noise, with the screen in its upper position was acceptable, there was no major buffeting, and if I dropped my head down an inch or so I found that I was pretty much in clean air.  The electronics are comprehensive, and fairly intuitive, with the TFT screen being very clear and easy to read.  I loved the electronic suspension, put it in auto mode and just forget about suspension settings, although that maybe just me being lazy …. Or rather not an expert when it comes to suspension.  The quick shifter was efficient, but not as smooth as I’ve experienced on other bikes.  I felt that everything on it was where is should be and was easy to use.  The brakes are excellent, and there’s also a lot of BMW electrickery on this machine to help keep you shiny side up.

 

THE BAD There isn’t a great deal that I could say is actually bad about this bike.  If I was being critical, I would say that the riding position, for me anyway, put a lot of pressure on my wrists.  This may become a comfort issue on longer rides or tours.  I only had it for a 70mile test ride, so difficult to say.  Wind noise with the screen in its lower, sports position, was on par with the Tracer, in other words not good.   I would also argue the stated 50mpg fuel range.  I personally don’t think I was getting anywhere near that, and I wasn’t pushing the bike.  Engine protection bars are a must have, especially with those big cylinder heads sticking out, very prominently, either side of the bike.  Drop the bike and it’s going to be expensive, and I don’t know why BMW don’t put these on as standard.  I never took my wife for a run, but she did have a sit on the back.  IMHO, for two up touring, it isn’t going to be ideal.  We felt a little cramped on it and I think it would start to become uncomfortable after a while.  I found the engine quite noisy / mechanical, but in fairness that always seems to have been a thing with the Boxer engine and doesn’t detract from its reliability.  The seat is ok, but I think it would become uncomfortable on longer journeys.  I was starting to get a numb backside after about 50 miles.  Finally, I would say that the quick shifter could be improved.  For a premium priced motorcycle, the QS isn’t as smooth as some cheaper bikes that I’ve ridden, it works, but that was all I could say.

 

THE UGLY  This again is subjective, but the first thing would have to be the price.  The machine I test rode was over 17k, and that’s a big outlay.  The second issue for me is luggage.  BMW market it as a sports tourer, fit luggage carrying brackets to it, but don’t even give you a back box.  These are all aftermarket accessories.  If you go for the BMW luggage, you’re looking at the best part of 1.5k.  I would also argue that engine protection bars are a necessity, not just a nice to have and should, IMHO, be installed as standard, not as an aftermarket accessory.  If that bike goes over it’s easy to see what’s going to take the brunt of even a low-speed slide.

 

CONCLUSION  This is a very capable sports tourer, shaft driven as well, which in my opinion is always a bonus when touring.  I would argue that this bike would be suited to all experience levels of rider.  It’s very easy to ride and very forgiving.  It would definitely be suited more to the touring range of its spec, but I feel it would also be a bike you could live comfortably with on a day-to-day basis, even commuting would be fine.  It comes in different specs, all with different levels of refinement, but bear in mind, as with most things BMW, it will cost!  Overall, lovely bike, relatively comfortable and smooth, good solid mechanics with the time proven Boxer engine.   If looking for a sports tourer I would definitely add it to your list.  Sadly, not for me, the PX value on my bike just didn’t cover the shortfall I’d be left with when bying the bike, and wanting to add things such as luggage ….. I need to win the lotto, or sell the wife! 

[keith1200rs]

I cannot see your post which I assume is black text on a black background which is a shame as I was interested. After 3 years with the R1200R and 2 with an R1250RT I have just ordered an R1250RS. 

[Gerontious]

9 hours ago, keith1200rs said:

I cannot see your post which I assume is black text on a black background which is a shame as I was interested. After 3 years with the R1200R and 2 with an R1250RT I have just ordered an R1250RS. 

 

Is this better?

Quote

 

2023 BMW R1250RS

 

THE GOOD   I’ve always been a fan of the Boxer engine so I may be a little biased here.  The engine is solid, loads of torque with plenty of grunt.  The shift cam technology is brilliant, and although being a big bike, it makes riding at slower speeds much easier.  It’s a very manoeuvrable bike, due, IMHO, to its low centre of gravity.  It actually felt more like a 600cc bike as oppose to a 1250.  I would say that the bike is more tourer than sports, it certainly isn’t the sort of bike you could go scratching on.  At 6’2” I didn’t feel cramped on the bike, and that was with stock seat and handlebars, and I felt that I could quite happily tour some distance on this machine in relative comfort.  Wind noise, with the screen in its upper position was acceptable, there was no major buffeting, and if I dropped my head down an inch or so I found that I was pretty much in clean air.  The electronics are comprehensive, and fairly intuitive, with the TFT screen being very clear and easy to read.  I loved the electronic suspension, put it in auto mode and just forget about suspension settings, although that maybe just me being lazy …. Or rather not an expert when it comes to suspension.  The quick shifter was efficient, but not as smooth as I’ve experienced on other bikes.  I felt that everything on it was where is should be and was easy to use.  The brakes are excellent, and there’s also a lot of BMW electrickery on this machine to help keep you shiny side up.

 

THE BAD There isn’t a great deal that I could say is actually bad about this bike.  If I was being critical, I would say that the riding position, for me anyway, put a lot of pressure on my wrists.  This may become a comfort issue on longer rides or tours.  I only had it for a 70mile test ride, so difficult to say.  Wind noise with the screen in its lower, sports position, was on par with the Tracer, in other words not good.   I would also argue the stated 50mpg fuel range.  I personally don’t think I was getting anywhere near that, and I wasn’t pushing the bike.  Engine protection bars are a must have, especially with those big cylinder heads sticking out, very prominently, either side of the bike.  Drop the bike and it’s going to be expensive, and I don’t know why BMW don’t put these on as standard.  I never took my wife for a run, but she did have a sit on the back.  IMHO, for two up touring, it isn’t going to be ideal.  We felt a little cramped on it and I think it would start to become uncomfortable after a while.  I found the engine quite noisy / mechanical, but in fairness that always seems to have been a thing with the Boxer engine and doesn’t detract from its reliability.  The seat is ok, but I think it would become uncomfortable on longer journeys.  I was starting to get a numb backside after about 50 miles.  Finally, I would say that the quick shifter could be improved.  For a premium priced motorcycle, the QS isn’t as smooth as some cheaper bikes that I’ve ridden, it works, but that was all I could say.

 

THE UGLY  This again is subjective, but the first thing would have to be the price.  The machine I test rode was over 17k, and that’s a big outlay.  The second issue for me is luggage.  BMW market it as a sports tourer, fit luggage carrying brackets to it, but don’t even give you a back box.  These are all aftermarket accessories.  If you go for the BMW luggage, you’re looking at the best part of 1.5k.  I would also argue that engine protection bars are a necessity, not just a nice to have and should, IMHO, be installed as standard, not as an aftermarket accessory.  If that bike goes over it’s easy to see what’s going to take the brunt of even a low-speed slide.

 

CONCLUSION  This is a very capable sports tourer, shaft driven as well, which in my opinion is always a bonus when touring.  I would argue that this bike would be suited to all experience levels of rider.  It’s very easy to ride and very forgiving.  It would definitely be suited more to the touring range of its spec, but I feel it would also be a bike you could live comfortably with on a day-to-day basis, even commuting would be fine.  It comes in different specs, all with different levels of refinement, but bear in mind, as with most things BMW, it will cost!  Overall, lovely bike, relatively comfortable and smooth, good solid mechanics with the time proven Boxer engine.   If looking for a sports tourer I would definitely add it to your list.  Sadly, not for me, the PX value on my bike just didn’t cover the shortfall I’d be left with when bying the bike, and wanting to add things such as luggage ….. I need to win the lotto, or sell the wife!

 

 

of not then this might work.

Edited May 15, 2023 by Gerontious

[keith1200rs]

Thanks, both of those are fine.

[Steve_M]

Good assessment, especially considering the short test ride.

 

I considered the R1200RS when looking to replace my FJR1300, and took it for a test ride. I was impressed but a couple of the points you noted concerned me. The riding position was very similar to my old VFR800fi which was perfect for me at the time but the “sportier” riding position caused me some aches and pains on long tours.  We never got to try the pillion but it didn’t look like a place  my good lady would want to be for long periods. And, finally, the luggage capacity was less than we would have liked - we do not travel light.

[keith1200rs]

I agree with most of the review.  I don't agree with crash bars but that is personal choice.  If I crash I won't be worrying about the cyclinders!  A low speed drop will cost you around £200 for a new cylinder head cover, fitted - less than the cost of crash bars.  With a high speed crash there will be considerable damage to most motorbikes.

 

The R1250RS can be ordered with tubular bars which raise them a little.  My wife found both the R1200R and R1250RS more comfy on the back than the R1250RT.  The main problem she has is to do with knee angle rather than the seat comfort.  Either a peg lowering kit or airhawk style seat cover seem to alter the knee angle enough to fix the problem.

 

It is not obvious but the screen has two sets of mounting holes so you can raise it a couple of inches for tall riders (and you still have two positions when riding).

 

Quick shifters on all the boxers seem jerky when shifting up (but better if you are really reving it) but are great on the way down heading into corners.

 

I don't tour so cannot comment on multi-day long rides but if I did, I would probably pick an RT.  The panniers are bigger and you can get a huge top box.  The only proviso would be that if you are going somewhere hot you need some good gear to keep cool.  With the sports screen on the RT at its lowest setting you get a decent amount of air to the head but nowhere else so it gets hot.  With the R or RS you don't have this problem.  The problem with the R is wind pressure at speed with no screen or buffeting with the sport screen at speed.  This is based on the R1200R though - the 1250 has a different screen so may be better (or worse).  The RT has the electric screen whcih is great and never has any turbulence at any position.

 

 

[manxie49]

1 hour ago, Steve_M said:

Good assessment, especially considering the short test ride.

 

I considered the R1200RS when looking to replace my FJR1300, and took it for a test ride. I was impressed but a couple of the points you noted concerned me. The riding position was very similar to my old VFR800fi which was perfect for me at the time but the “sportier” riding position caused me some aches and pains on long tours.  We never got to try the pillion but it didn’t look like a place  my good lady would want to be for long periods. And, finally, the luggage capacity was less than we would have liked - we do not travel light.

You're like us, I travel light but my wife doesn't!  Two up comfort was going to be something I was very critical about,  it really isn't in the same league as the GS or RT.  I really think that the sore point for me was going to be my wrists after a long ride.  Nice bike though, just didn't quite tick all the boxes.

[manxie49]

38 minutes ago, keith1200rs said:

I agree with most of the review.  I don't agree with crash bars but that is personal choice.  If I crash I won't be worrying about the cyclinders!  A low speed drop will cost you around £200 for a new cylinder head cover, fitted - less than the cost of crash bars.  With a high speed crash there will be considerable damage to most motorbikes.

 

The R1250RS can be ordered with tubular bars which raise them a little.  My wife found both the R1200R and R1250RS more comfy on the back than the R1250RT.  The main problem she has is to do with knee angle rather than the seat comfort.  Either a peg lowering kit or airhawk style seat cover seem to alter the knee angle enough to fix the problem.

 

It is not obvious but the screen has two sets of mounting holes so you can raise it a couple of inches for tall riders (and you still have two positions when riding).

 

Quick shifters on all the boxers seem jerky when shifting up (but better if you are really reving it) but are great on the way down heading into corners.

 

I don't tour so cannot comment on multi-day long rides but if I did, I would probably pick an RT.  The panniers are bigger and you can get a huge top box.  The only proviso would be that if you are going somewhere hot you need some good gear to keep cool.  With the sports screen on the RT at its lowest setting you get a decent amount of air to the head but nowhere else so it gets hot.  With the R or RS you don't have this problem.  The problem with the R is wind pressure at speed with no screen or buffeting with the sport screen at speed.  This is based on the R1200R though - the 1250 has a different screen so may be better (or worse).  The RT has the electric screen whcih is great and never has any turbulence at any position.

 

 

Like I said, my opinion is subjective and personal.  Crash bars have saved my machine in the past from expensive damage, and that was following a low speed off on the ice, so I'm a fan of them.  They're a marmite item though, you love em or hate em.  The QS was usable but nowhere near as smooth as my old MT10 or Tracer.  For the cost of the machine I'm sure they could have gone the extra mile in their R&D department to address that minor niggle.  IMHO for touring the RT or GS is a better option,  my mate even uses his GSA daily for the work commute.  The RS is definitely a nice bike, not for me though.

[Steve_M]

46 minutes ago, keith1200rs said:

I agree with most of the review.  I don't agree with crash bars but that is personal choice.  If I crash I won't be worrying about the cyclinders!  A low speed drop will cost you around £200 for a new cylinder head cover, fitted - less than the cost of crash bars.  With a high speed crash there will be considerable damage to most motorbikes.

 

The R1250RS can be ordered with tubular bars which raise them a little.  My wife found both the R1200R and R1250RS more comfy on the back than the R1250RT.  The main problem she has is to do with knee angle rather than the seat comfort.  Either a peg lowering kit or airhawk style seat cover seem to alter the knee angle enough to fix the problem.

 

It is not obvious but the screen has two sets of mounting holes so you can raise it a couple of inches for tall riders (and you still have two positions when riding).

 

Quick shifters on all the boxers seem jerky when shifting up (but better if you are really reving it) but are great on the way down heading into corners.

 

I don't tour so cannot comment on multi-day long rides but if I did, I would probably pick an RT.  The panniers are bigger and you can get a huge top box.  The only proviso would be that if you are going somewhere hot you need some good gear to keep cool.  With the sports screen on the RT at its lowest setting you get a decent amount of air to the head but nowhere else so it gets hot.  With the R or RS you don't have this problem.  The problem with the R is wind pressure at speed with no screen or buffeting with the sport screen at speed.  This is based on the R1200R though - the 1250 has a different screen so may be better (or worse).  The RT has the electric screen whcih is great and never has any turbulence at any position.

 

 

The engine crash bars serve an additional purpose in that when the bike has a little lie down to rest (as mine has twice at standstill), the bike doesn’t fall over so far so is much easier to pick up. 
 

After my short test ride of the RS I was persuaded to try the GS, which I did a little reluctantly. I now own a GS.

 

I did consider the RT but they just look too bulky (yes, I know, they’re a great bike, and the GS is hardly a “looker”).

[keith1200rs]

15 minutes ago, Steve_M said:

I did consider the RT but they just look too bulky (yes, I know, they’re a great bike, and the GS is hardly a “looker”).

The GS is also as heavy as the RT and taller. For some reason I  didn't find the GS as comfy as the R/RS/RT and neither did my pillion. I don't know why, but it stopped me buying one.

 

I think the quick shifter on BMW four cylinder bikes are smoother, eg the S1000XR. The boxers always seem clunky going up gears.

[Steve_M]

7 hours ago, keith1200rs said:

The GS is also as heavy as the RT and taller. For some reason I  didn't find the GS as comfy as the R/RS/RT and neither did my pillion. I don't know why, but it stopped me buying one.

 

I think the quick shifter on BMW four cylinder bikes are smoother, eg the S1000XR. The boxers always seem clunky going up gears.

And therein lies the answer. We each find differing things work for us. For example,  I like sitting high and upright, particularly when touring. Something  I found when I swapped from my VFR / ST1100 options to the Triumph Tiger1050. The RT may well do the same job just as well (a mate regularly does 600 mile days on his) but I’m not a fan of its bulbous appearance. 

[Ian Frog]

Totally agree and I will be the first to admit you sometimes don`t know what works till you encounter it.

We found 2k plus on the Tiger 1050 was much better than expected and led directly to the new Tiger which is great.

For someone who always rode sports or naked`s this was an eye opener.

Cheers

Ian

[Capt Sisko]

"The machine I test rode was over 17k" Okay, but we all know when BMW (or any other manufacturer, car or bike) have a demonstrator it's never the basic L model is it. They start from £13,140. Agree what you say about it needs panniers either as standard or a cheap option.