Circulating the net is this drawing of a BMW Boxer sport bike created by the German BMW aftermarket tuner/parts supplier Wunderlich. The photo coincides with speculation by the German magazine Motorrad that BMW may soon introduce a Boxer twin sport machine to go along with its ferocious inline four S1000RR, which has been a big hit on the showroom floor.
Of course, unlike the engine powering the now discontinued HP2 Sport, the current Boxer motor employs at least partial liquid cooling, meaning the 132, or so, horsepower put out by the old HP2 could conceivably reach into the mid 140s with a tuned version of the new engine. Nothing to concern Ducati, of course, but a pretty healthy output for a BMW Boxer. If the bike materializes as a 2016 model, expect to see it unveiled at one of the big shows this Fall. Stay tuned.
Discontinued BMW HP2 Sport
To everyone saying the S1000RR is the cure all, you aren’t 6’5″. There is a need (at least with me) for a larger framed, little easier ergo’s “sports”bike. Yes I would prefer the 1000RR motor in this dream bike, but at this point I am dying for a faster replacement to my Sprint ST 1050… BMW Please build a new K1300S… I’ve been a good boy this year….
I’d be very surprised if they built this bike. Hypersports are already covered by the S1000RR. If I were them I’d reserve the boxer for touring and sport touring. It can’t compete with the fours.
R1200S was wonderful but didn’t sell here in the US because it wasn’t what the Beemer folks were expecting nor wanted. Much more performance can be had from a 600 but they did ooze character. I loved mine and miss it. I rode mine 1200 miles in 2 days and enjoyed every minute of it.
There’s really no need for this as the S1000rr is class leading in almost every category, and its motor is by far its best strength. I would however love to see them fix the hideous asymmetrical headlight crap by using a front fascia similar to this one.
The amount of money they spend on development must be gigantic. The commitment to engineering, apparently just for the sheer satisfaction of it is admirable, to me anyway. Especially as opposed to Harley where the company and its legions or riders are stuck in layers of nostalgia and attitude.
Sure Harely’s do what they are supposed to do and pretty darn reliably too and the company is profitable but……………
I’ve heard some complaints about major reliability issues with BMW’s that are related getting new designs into production. Since they are so expensive to start with it would be a bitch to have to sit around without wheels during the season, even if the cost is minimal because or warantee.
I don’t know anything about BMW reliability, but no question – down time in the riding season sucks. There’s no amount of free or warranty service that makes up for that. One of so many reasons a person needs more than one bike. 😉
In the May issue of Consumer Reports we find, for the first time, owners feedback on the reliability of motorcycles as well as cars. During the first four years of ownership, 11% of Yamaha owners experienced a failure requiring repairs. It was 26% for Harley owners, and 40% for BMW owners.
So which brand had the fewest failures per mile ridden (rather than years owned)?
Love the no sided swing arm!
Lol good eye
Good eye? The pictures are of two different bikes… one a drawing and the other the HP2
One picture is a drawing, the other is the HP2 bike. Two different bikes.
BMW made a switch last year to put the drive shaft on the kickstand side of the bike for all shaft bikes. The rendering reflects the change whereas the discontinued HP2 shown in the second image had it the old way. This is purely for aesthetics with the bike parked. It does make servicing the rear drive a little more difficult though.
re: “This is purely for aesthetics with the bike parked.”
close, this is for cost savings in manufacturing. the K bikes switched over to left hand drive 10 years ago. now the K and R can use the same swingarm, and final drive assemblies with the only thing changed being maybe the gear ratios and the torque arm.
I really do miss my R1200S, even did some track days with it!
A new sports flat-twin would be more then welcome!
This bike is only for the Boxer Twin Faithful.
The engine characteristics are unique and once appreciated they become as hard to shake as a red head (in some circumstances).
In all but a few cases, this would be parked next to a GS or RT in the garage.
re: “This bike is only for the Boxer Twin Faithful.”
+1.
it’s also even more redundant than the original HP2 was. many don’t realise the HP2 actually introduced the true DOHC boxer engine vs R12S which was a hex-head, so at least it had that going for it.
but now that the whole engine’s been made over into the water boxer, and the HP4/S1RR exists, a tarted up R12S is all they would need to do if (and that’s one big IF) Bavaria were going to do anything.
I prefer the underside exhaust on the HP2. I think Buell had got it right. I don’t care for the upswept exhaust on this one. Otherwise it looks great.
Underseat?
that upswept exhaust is from that sweet “roadster” concept (or whatever it was called?) from a few months back. they’ll prolly produce that before this.
ok, yes it was called roadster…
http://www.motorcycledaily.com/2014/05/bmw-concept-roadster-displays-boldness-of-design-with-function/
It would be more reasonable for the street than the s1000rr.
Its probably just an ‘styling exercise’ considering The 200HP S1000RR and R1200RS with the new ‘Water Head’ Boxer…
Although, there must be some die hard Boxer Enthusiast who’d give away anything to lay their hands on a motorcycle with ‘The World’s Most Powerfull Boxer’! Lets see… (Fingers Crossed)…
The 2015 1200RS makes 125 hp @ 92#. It has a much higher bar is more comfortable. You’ll probably pay dearly for the extra HP if this artist rendition ever makes it to market. The power the RS develops is plenty for the street.
More so than the power difference, an S would save lots of weight. And suspended and chassis tuned for more aggressive riding. Back when I had an R1100s, that bike was night and day compared to simmilar era RS or ST or whatever they were called. Yet the 1100S was a very mild sportification compared to the later 1200 and HP2. Both of which were genuinely proper sportbikes, more than quick sport tourers.
I have also come to realize that as long as leg room is limited, a more pronounced forward lean is often less fatigue inducing than sitting more upright. When leaning forward, you naturally start employing your posterior chain more, helping counterbalance the quadriceps recruitment that inevitable results from a tight kneebend. But except for on full on race bikes (675 Daytona et al), my knees are always what limits my riding endurance. For those who are limited more by neck, shoulders and perhaps back, I would assume less forward lean may be more comfortable.
I really like bikes that are multi-functional. Even my 2-stroke dirt bike has blinkers and a license plate.
As exciting as bikes like the new R1 or Panigale are, that isn’t what I would go out and buy even with track days in mind. I’d opt for something like this or one of the 150hp naked bikes available. Ride comfortably to the track, try not to wad it up, meetup for tapas with friends downtown after the track, ride home. Maybe throw on some soft luggage and head over to the next state the following day.
I don’t know where you’d be able to fit much luggage on this one. A Panigale has a more spacious rear seat/cowl. If they build this, people will buy it. While certainly fast, German, high tech and sporting a roundel, the S1000 is sufficiently different from the boxers many Beemer fans grew up with that I bet quite a few would be happy to get a bike with 90% of it’s “performance,” in a package retaining a more traditional feel. Even as high strung I4 sportbikes go, the S1000 leans to the extreme side.
I’m sure it will take some SW Motec soft bags just fine, though the question raises a good point in that this bike may not be much tamer ergonomically if at all from the current crop of specialized track tools. The original HP2 Sport was a pretty comfortable bike from what I’ve read, but that doesn’t mean a new iteration would be.
I always thought that the two advantages of boxer engines were (1) efficient air cooling and (2) lower centre of gravity. The first one is not as important these days with the added liquid cooling, and the second is eliminated by having to raise the motor for increased cornering clearance.
they may be all of that but man, are they insipid. i took the RT90 for a 45 minute test ride. its a good looking motorcycle and i really wanted to like it but it was such a boring ride. i took it back to the dealer and just shook my head. the sales guy didnt understand. i did nothing to stand out to me. no exceptional brakes, handling, acceleration… it was just… meh!
45 minutes probably isn’t enough on bikes like the flat twin beemers and Guzzis. When I took a BMW for test ten years ago I asked how long could I have it for. “All day if you like – but we do close at 5:30”. And so I ook a BMW for an all day ride…..now I didn’t buy it but the whole experience at the dealers was fantastic. The answer when I told them I would not be buying a new BMW – “Hey thanks for giving us a shot anyway – and maybe we will have something in the lineup next year for you!”, And I got cofffe and CAKE. CAKE!
I’m a long term Guzzi person and always tell people you need 100 miles in the saddle before you really know.
i disagree, i can pretty much tell right away whether a bike resonates with me or not. things like comfort, sure i agree, a day in the saddle will sort that out and tell you things good or bad. but a bike either excites me or it doesnt and the RT90 did not.
you are so right about dealers though. they really welcome you into the experiance,
that was very positive! they even had a selection of helmets, gloves and jackets for demo rides, though i had my own.
Yeah forgot to say Strat that if you really don’t like a Guzzi, you REALLY don’t like it and it doesn’t matter how far you ride, you won’t change your mind. But if you think..”yeah maybe…not sure” thats when a longer ride works. The whole dealer experience at BMW was great – and I did continue to call in thier for coffee and cake over the next few years – nice people. The Guzzi dealer I go my bike off had wine and espresso – but was a great deal less organised than the BMW guys. Everything was last minute and a rush. Still, I bought the bike…
The “low” COG was never more than a myth.The heaviest part of the engine is the crank, clutch etc. Which sits rather high in a Boxer compared to in an upright engine.
What many likely mistake for a low COG, is a tight vertical concentration of engine mass, close to the bike’s roll center. This makes for easier and more precise turning and less bending force applied to the chassis. Current Inline sportbikes lift the engine up between the spars in order to achieve a similarly high and centralized COG, but the boxer kind of always had that feature, even before anyone thought about purposefully designing bikes that way.
oddly it doesnt work out that way as BMW twins tend to be slow and numb in the handling dept to me. at least back to back with my bike anyway. RT90 vs 990 Super Duke
thats the way its going be though I think – the flat twins – no matter which one – are made for a LONG ride and are probably not as sharp. Mind you the KTM is not as sharp as a Moto3 bike… 🙂
Outside of the HP2, IMO the R1200s was the sexiest boxer produced to date, especially the yellow one from 2007. It milked an extra 12% hp from the standard hexhead boxer engine and the bike came in at under 500lbs soaking wet. Following in that vein that would give the current water cooled engine approx 140 crank HP with about 90ft-lbs torque.
God help us all if they go so far as to bring back the HP2.
I’d reverse the order of the 12 and the HP, but am otherwise in complete agreement. The R1200S still remain an absolute work of moto art, and IMHO the ultimate high point for BMW. The HP2 was lightened to the point where it, at least to me, started to feel almost brittle.
If it’s too much for me to risk at a track day then I can’t afford it.
I agree. There might be a market but those that grew up with and appreciate the characteristics of this motor are older now. I feel this bike will be priced out of its ability to be successful in today’s market. I like unique and appreciate this design but my current inline triple has me won over for some time. I
They’re older, but a subset of them are much, much richer. While the remainder are largely destitute. This is a completely different market than that of the broad based consumer society of 2+ decades ago. Nowadays, you either sell a $7K bike to someone for whom that is his sole posession, or a $20+K bike to someone who already have 10 others parked next to his 7 series< Rolls Ghost and 911. There is no middle ground.
What BMW is successfully doing, is giving the few haves a reason to stop by their dealership every so often, then convincing them that there may just be a piece missing from their current portfolio of bikes. Something for those days when the RS is too heavy, but you're feeling in a twin kind of mood. No need to walk across the street to that garish red Italian shop, sir. Just like you no longer need to slum it down in Japantown in order to get a cutting edge I4 sportbike….. We've got all your needs covered right here. With proper German engineering.
This may (still, but not for long) be a slight exaggeration, but nowadays, you're either being paid by the Fed to clutter up the Forbes list, or you're in the same market segment as a slumdweller in Bangladesh.
I’m not seeing the market for this bike unless it replaces the just released RS. Anything with more sport and less touring in the equation, than the current RS, bumps into the limits of the boxer layout. It would thus compare poorly against the inline fours in the same showroom. There are lots of fans of BMW boxers, but what proportion are looking to put up with the negative attributes of a sportbike while getting less acceleration than is available from many less expensive and more practical mortorcycles?