Such information may well exist, but I see nothing in you post saying it backs your points. I'd also be intereted to see what sort of mileage these bikes get. Cetainly the majority of BM riders I have known over the years as a courier, as a traveller and a general biker has been that of above average miles and brand loyalty. Now why is that, if they are so bad?


That is the reason they gave, but I think you'll find that KTM reliability, being a marque based on engines that are rebuilt before the next race, have a pretty bad record by modern standards, and they are only just starting to get to grips with this and that is why they backed out. With significant engine issues within 6 months of ownership being a regular would you have offered your bikes up for the slaughter? I think this is far more likely an explanation.

They had plenty of backing from other companies, too and if they had never finished the odds are the programme would never had been aired anyway, so not so much to loose after all.

Same old story.
I, certainly, have never said that a GS would perform like a CRF450 in the dirt. That does NOT make the GS a bad bike. And for all E & C's newbie overland mistakes about packing there is no way a "Jap dirt bike" on the market at the time of that programme would have stayed in one piece with all the crap they carried. Basically there was NO viable Japanese alternative at the time. As for the KTM option, I have far more doubts about a KTM surviving out there on 85 octane than the GS.

Bottom line, even if it was not as easy as gliding over the mud on a svelte 250 2-stroke, THEY STILL FINISHED on schedule, on GSs.

The same way that I, a complete novice at off-roading had a trouble free trip on my "PIG", two-up with a fully loaded weight of about 450kgs in Argentina, including about 450 miles of off-road. Considering its robust build, I'd say the GS is an astoudnig bike to take what it does, in its stride.

Some of it was hard work, but I can say it was hardest because of my inexperience: the bike just shrugged it all off.

By all means dislike BMs, but I find you attitude so rigid, I can well believe BMW winning every championship, and you'd still claim they are crap.

I dislike some brands compared to others, but its never absolute, so please, restore may faith and help me believe you points of view are at least a bit objective:
Tell me something you like about BMW bikes...

__________________
Adventure: it's an experience, not a style!
(so ride what you like, but ride it somewhere new!)

I am simply providing industry feedback. Goes to credibility. What this says is that BMW are last in reliability based on numbers of warranty claims filed repeat dealer visits for recurring problems, or Lemon Law buy backs.

You hear a lot of smack online hacking up BMW, this just puts it in perspective with numbers from a credible organization.

BMW riders do big miles on their bikes. This is well known.
But they are not the only ones. As stated, see Gold Wing, V-Strom and a few others over the years. And don't forget HD! But this has been brought up before too. It's also well known they spend about three times the money on service and maintenance than a typical Japanese bike owner.

Brand loyalty? I never said ALL BMW's had problems .... just about 30% to 50% on average since 1995. So that leaves a fair amount problem free .... Like Margus's bike ....that apparently does not even need fuel! Did you see him ride that deep sand! Wow, my hero!
Jeeesheesh! Two Estonians in one day!

Sadly, based on what I've seen, and following KTM since the 80's, I have to agree with everything you have said. And also agree that its' only recently they are getting better.
Like the GS, I like the bikes (I've owned a fee KTM's and ridden many)

BTW, I am in industry and write about and test bikes part time.


Yes, they did finish. And managed to turn the disability of the big bike into a positive. That is good film making!
I actually really liked the 12GS. Not so much the 1100 or 1150. I've ridden them both extensively. I just wouldn't own one. About one third of the guys I ride with own GS's, but they own other bikes too. The 12GS is a fun and capable bike, quite versatile in every way. But still, lots of stupid things still go wrong. Maybe you have been lucky with your BMW's?

Well, when they manage to win even ONE championship ... then we can talk. I like a lot of things about BMW, as said
above. But overall believe they are over rated, too expensive and not as reliable as they should be considering cost.

I'll do what I can! I've personally owned about 45 bikes since 1962 or so. I've tested dozens more. I've raced flat track, desert races and enduro and moto cross over the years. Plenty of time on the racetracks too. But mostly I'm a street rider.

I love all bikes. Read my review of the R12GS sometime to see me gushing on about it. But I am not afraid to point out faults. The Germans hate this. I've been to intro's and seen it. Its ugly. The Japanese have a very different style.

I've also talked to some very senior guys in the four Japanese companies and met the chief engineers and CEO at Ducati. The Japanese don't tell a "Gaijin" much, but still, until you've visited a Japanese factory in Japan .... well you just have to see how they operate. (I was at Yamaha) I've also been to Triumph, BMW (and Mercedes).

I try to be objective. But I also get paid not to lie or sugarcoat a problem, which is hard to do sometimes. I hate to pan a bike. Like the 620 Ducati Monster, Triumph Bonneville America, or the Guzzi California, or several Jap cruisers or early KTM four strokes or Yamaha's TDM 850, which I owned and still panned. When journalists get together and don't like a bike, a feeding frenzy ensues. Ugly. But mostly the published result is far far milder version. Advertising revenues, you understand.

Patrick

__________________
Patrick passed Dec 2018. RIP Patrick!

Unlike me Warthog is native in English language and summed up everything well, straight to the point. Basically the same message I wanted to forward - european bikes are very reliable these days and every bike has problems, even Japanese bikes. And I also find it strange when someone tries distinctly to paint the world into black-and-white, by saying this is s*it and this is good. This is where I normaly get into arguing.

Looking all the discussions here also I now can clearly say Mollydog is just a BMW-hater, with no real data to back his sayings up (as always), only his "hunch": i.e. I've seen this and that, my riding friends etc scenarios where he gets his "reliable" data and figures.

While he hasn't owned any modern BMW himself. Ironic, isn't it?

Bollocks. With data taken from the thin-air. Where do you get your industry feedback? Are you the boss of consumer protection organisation? Details please!

Also complete false. My BMW has proven twice the cheaper to run than my japanese bikes thanks to it's long service interval, simplicity (dry clutch, shaft, oil-cooled). I hear the same tendency from other BMW riders. The cost may vary, but it's definitely not 3-times more expensive averagely!


Oh really? Why then all of your previous "BMW breakdown data" has been different in our previous discussions in various threads - do you have constantly changing numbers in your mind?


And another wrong fact - my bike takes 32 liters of fuel, haven't said anywhere it doesn't need fuel. Glad to be of help to be your hero



Wow, if I was the editor of the mag you write in and see how you, as a person, speciefically bash one brand around the forums I wouldn't let the articles go through seeing how radically anti-biased you are IMHO.

Maybe you should stick to writing thriller stories with random thoughts and emotions coming into your mind, with self-generated data. Apparently realistic and balanced things aren't your field.

Well OK me being as a regular everyday rider can be biased (and no doubt I am!) is maybe forgivable, but to be a biased bike mag writer (especially anti-type to one brand) to provide the message to wider audience, is it the right thing?



What happened now, trying to say a drop of positive about BMWs too in all that ocean of negative?


And so is the jap reliability over rated.

Price hasn't ever dictated reliability. Be it $50K customized HD with seized engine or a $50K limited-edition Honda with a broken camchain.



But you still haven't owned any modern BMW yourself in a long term to provide us the complete and realistic picture as a user. Changing bikes like socks don't get you far in understanding your bikes throughoutly. Especially in terms of reliability.


But you still lie. Why?

once the "Cardanshaft" splittered into pieces on my K100.
Every 10k KM the rear axle leaked all its oil (R1150). "Radialwellendichtring" the bill said.
The same R1150 had serious engine knocking probs. Couldn't be solved. Occured so often apparently that
bmw decided to introduce twin-spark from 2003 onwards... Bad luck for those with models '99-'02.

Two friends missed a motorcycle holiday respectively, because of a broken bmw gearbox (one R80, one R1150).

Another friend also needed a new R1150GS gearbox.

Unfortunately we trusted bmw, and didn't know the essential info that the only reliable bmw twin, is the R1100 built after '97.

My Suzuki had burnt electrics, friend of mine with complete burnt ECU. Suzuki electrics are legendary for me.

How about rectifiers on Hondas, or fuel pumps? Clutches on V-Stroms, broken rear frames on Yamahas, bent or twisted valves on Kawasaki bikes?


2 of the guys I know had output shaft grinded on Africa Twins after harder riding - needs complete engine crankcase split to replace the bits ($$$).

Just some time ago a Kawasaki went with 3 gears grinded in the gearbox. It's good he could ride on in 5th gear only (after 3 days of work on the road completely spliting the engine, taking the shafts out and grinded bald the rest of the gears to make the engine to rotate again)

Or did they perhaps all blindly believed and trusted all the japanese reliability hype that goes around?

R1100GS model is built from 1993 to 1999. And definitely it's not the only reliable twin from their line. Some stunning mileages and superb reliability reported on most of models, from R65 to R1200, UKGSer is a good reading from owners point of view. As said '97-'99 spec model has proven itself very reliable for me as an owner - not a "third party" speaker who hasn't had any direct experiences with it.

To sum up: you can always select out the bad examples and hype them up, on any maker. But to know the real-data about the reliability of different bikes is just too complex picture to handle, and frankly quite pointless discussion as pointed out by Warthog and others. It'll depend on the build quality, owner's riding style and maintenance regularity-quality, but there are also dozens of other factors in play. By claiming: "hey, that guy had a broken down bike, I saw it myself, and it was a BMW (or a Jap bike)" analogy gets you nowhere in overall picture of the things.

It’s a shame that you have problems with BMW Uganduro, especially since Uganda is a country suited for big powerful offroad bikes.

Uganda, a few days after the mileage exceeded 100 kkm, all internals engine, gearbox, cardan ++ are still original (except for a clutch change prior to the trip because I didn’t expect the clutch to last the entire trip).




BTW: It’s a 1996, mileage is 202kkm and gearbox never opened….

This is a very odd phenomena! BMW riders seem to need to justify not buying the Yamaha, Japanese riders seem to want to defend against not buying the BMW. The physcologists would have a ball! Purchase guilt?

As an ex-BMW owner I have no hard and fast feelings. Yes I hated BMW switch gear throughout both R1100's I had and both broke down through various bits of totally rubbish quality. Likewise I loved both my F650's and only had problems with the last one. So four BMW's and I sold three for reliability issues and one because I was stupid and though more power was a good thing. This is a very small sample!

I've owned (still own) MZ's and Urals. The former are a dream if you like two strokes the later a nightmare, but in the right circumstances I can see myself owning one of the new Urals just for the technology. I love my Triumph but no way is it flawless, the wiring is **** and the silencers should come with a dustpan and brush for the rust flakes. I wish I'd kept my XT it's only flaw was a really cheap exhaust system. I've had a lot to do with Guzzi's but would have another Triumph simply because they are easier to live with day to day because more people bought them.

There is no right answer for me until you look at the purchase price. The BMW's are overpriced by at least £2000 and to me that IS trading on the badge and the myth of better reliability. Others may have different stories and will make different choices but I won't pay the extra when I know the bikes have similar issues to the cheaper Japanese or other European version.

The black stories thing is common enough. I used to work in the truck brake industry even having some dealings with BMW on car stuff. The way any corporation manages issues is very similar. First you deny everything because most problems ARE caused by misuse and stupid customers or dealers. Second you can't do anything as solutions take time to develop so you wait. Finally you need need a controlled introduction of the fix that matches what you have available. From the customers point of view you look like you don't care, then you look like you don't know, then you seem to sneak out a solution. My German colleagues were always very poor at this and very slow which added to BMW's "reliability image" will get people talking. The Japanese were much slicker but lower key at everything, mostly the presentation, but in reality achieved roughly the same. Hence BMW can look like sneaky muppets and Yamaha sell factory tours to US businessmen who have quality issues of their own!

Bottom line though is back to the physcologists. Don't feel you need to justify your purchase. If you bought a BM and like it that's great, if you like the yam that's great too.

Andy

Did i say anywhere that japanese bikes are more reliable than others?

I only said there are similar mileage record setting bikes of all brands & countries.


Did I say anywhere that bmw doesn't know how to make reliable bikes?

On the contrary, I said the K75/K100 really are admirable.
(but the japanese copy is also very, very good (honda ST1100))
The rotax F650GS also appears impressive - though i appreciate the simplicity of an aircooled engine.


I do feel bad when people engage me in intellectually unfair discussions by wanting to have it both ways.
One can't at the same time:
- call someone a liar because he bases himself on industry reports (which do exist, also at bmw) and not on "personal experience".
- call arguments based on those very "personal experiences" pointless/useless because one would miss "the whole picture";
& disregard hundreds of "personal experiences", gathered and weighed in rider reports & forum polls.

But you're not. You have not provided anything, despite me asking for facts previously. This is only hearsay, at present.

Wow, two models! Well, I stand corrected. Two models from Japan have managed big miles: I must be wrong, then... As for HD. They are grotesquely under-tuned. 60bhp from a 1.3 litre engine? no wonder they keep going , although the Electra glide we met in Argentian had nothing but problems...
And I must say, do not know if you speak for the US market or world-wide, but US roads are hardly the most taxing on the vehicle, are they?

Not so. Admittedly Dealer costs are high, but that is a franchise dealer: the bikes them selves do not require you to go to a dealer. That said, I have been fleeced by a few Jap franchises too: that is a western view on customer service rather than the bike manufacturer. So no points to either on that count.

My boxer twin had oil changes every 6000 miles to the regular 3-4K for Jap bikes. Spares such as pads, filters and the like were very reasonalby priced compared to the ridiculous Jap spare prices. But then this is how Jap manufacturers make their money: from spares, rather than only initial bikes sales, but then you know, this being in the industry...

In all honesty, ALL BIKE running costs are now ridiculous, in my opinion. When an indicator lense costs you £16 for a bike, but £6 for a car, you know you ar getting shafted....

DO NOT PANIC! You are not being targeted by a small EU nation. I am merely an Estonian resident. I am of Anglo-Franco stock...

That statement does not make any sense, i'm afraid. They never said it was a breeze: they admitted on camera that the bikes were very heavy, but the bikes got them, Ewan and Claudio (off-road novices like me) through Siberia, carrying shed loads of, no doubt, pointless, kit. End of. There was no sly fim making. They left on BMs in London, 3 months later they arrived in New York on said BMs: I don't see how they are supposed to have pulled the wool over our eyes and on what count.

What does racing have to do with making good bikes for the real world?!?
I just don't get it.

The whole championships business: now there is a marketing ploy and you seem to be falling for it...
Renault are a very successful race team in F1, as are Ferrari. Neither can be said to make a particularly relaible road car manufacturer.
Winning races is not the Holy Grail of building good quality bikes for the consumer market: look at Ducati: beautiful, go like the clappers, but add a spot of rain, etc....

Is this why you dislike their product so? You don't like their style? As for the alleged Jap, quasi-racist attidtude to the non-Japanese.... I don't see how this affects a bike's build, but i can see how it might affect your view of a brand.

But I'm afraid I do not feel objectivity in your statements and points. This is why I have reacted to them: they are very strong points of view and not always backed-up with fact, so far, and so I feel I need to call you on that one. There is very little give in your view of BMWs. It also takes away credibility, something you claimed to be up-holding, when you make derogatory statements about the owners of BMs like they are dimwits of some sort.

From another thread I believe:

You can't expect people to take your opinion as objective, as a journalist, no less, with those sorts of deep-rooted pre-conceptions. As I responded last time: I am not a rich wannabee: I worked my @rse off for 3 years, to buy my bike, kit it up, ship it and ride it.



A good point and an interesting spectacle, but I'd like to make my own position clear: I have owned a number of bikes. Liked some and disliked other. Most were Japanese and they make excellent bikes, then there was the BM and now the Ural. These too are excellent bikes, but they are not the same market.

I do not actually feel that BMs are any better than Jap bikes, and vice versa.
What gets my back up is when I see an arguement that does not seem reasoned or objective: prejudiced in a word. A mite strong, perhaps, but its what springs to mind....

__________________
Adventure: it's an experience, not a style!
(so ride what you like, but ride it somewhere new!)