Jump to content
IGNORED

Consumer Reports MC Reliability Survey


Hank R1200RT

Recommended Posts

I'm a bit jaded against CR. They claim to be independent and not influenced by advertisers. They also claim their methodology is better than anyone else. But yet they won't reveal what their methodology is. "It's our super secret sauce." You can't claim to be the best and yet give no way to measure that success.

 

They also don't "weigh" issues. So if you bring your BMW in for a simple issue with your IPhone, it has the same value as your engine blowing up. An incident is an incident to them.

Link to comment
Rider1200RT

 

They also don't "weigh" issues. So if you bring your BMW in for a simple issue with your IPhone, it has the same value as your engine blowing up. An incident is an incident to them.

 

+1!

 

Link to comment

I find CR's results useful when they actually test products or vehicles -- not definitive but useful and generally unbiased.

 

For this report CR didn't actually test motorcycles. It's simply a detailed but rather subjective and unscientific opinion survey of 11,000 riders who chose to participate. I didn't participate in it but having owned 5 BMWs over the years I would have given a pretty low rating for reliability and high cost of repairs ($2400 for an ABS module??) so I'm not surprised at the survey results.

 

Every owner's experiences are anecdotal until they are compiled in some reasonable way to show trends or tendencies. Despite my experiences I still keep buying BMWs -- under warranty -- because I enjoy them.

Link to comment
Missouri Bob

Many years (decades) ago, CR "reviewed" some motorcycles. No, I don't remember which ones. What I do remember is a bike suffering in the comparison due to its side-stand. CR's people didn't like some aspect of the design, and penalized the bike accordingly.

 

At the time, I was struck by the strangeness of CR's evaluation priorities. It seemed as if no one involved in the article had any experience with motorcycles.

 

I can well imagine a comparison of mustards, and jar design being treated as important as taste.

 

Off rant.

 

Bob

Link to comment

One can only wonder, if BMW built a motorcycle that had little fancy electronics, and threw the wasser boxer in it, basic turn signals/horn/luggage, how it would compare?

I think most issues were "electrical".

So, switch issues. and fuel strips would be accurate problems.

But survey ended '14 models, I think, so seems things are getting a lot better.

 

Now if they surveyed the actual ride qualities...

 

 

Link to comment
Dave_zoom_zoom
Motorcycle.com has an article on the Consumer Reports motorcycle reliability survey:

 

http://www.motorcycle.com/top10/the-10-most-reliable-motorcycle-companies.html

 

Cutting to the chase, BMW was ninth.

 

Hope this has not been posted before, please excuse me if It has.

 

Did any of you participate in the survey?

 

 

 

 

OUCH!!!!

 

Number 9? That's going to kill some sales!

 

Dave

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Dave_zoom_zoom
Link to comment

After many years riding BMW's from airheads to "K" bikes to oilheads I recently decided to drink the cool-aid and purchased a low mileage (900 miles) pristine FJR1300A. To say that BMW bikes are over engineered and complex compared to Japanese bikes is, imo, just plain BS! Take a look at how the rear shock is mounted on an FJR sometime and the associated routine maintenance this system requires.

 

I decided to find out why my generation2 FJR is so hard to put on the center stand compared to a generation3 bike. The reason is that the gen3 CS is about 1/2" shorter than a gen2 CS. So, I invested $128 in a gen3 CS and spent 2 freaking days installing it. I won't go into the details of the installation but it was an eye opener for sure.

 

If I could only own one MC with my choice being my 2010 FJR or my equally pristine '93 R1100RSL it would without doubt be the RS with simplicity and ease of maintenance being the main reasons. As to which bikes are more reliable I'm not sure Consumer Reports is at all accurate in their recent evaluation and I question their conclusions and how those conclusions were arrived at. It would be interesting to know what problems were reported in this evaluation from CR.

 

Oh, another example is simply accessing the air filter on these two bikes then tell me about simple design or not! I could go on and on and...............

Edited by JamesW
Link to comment

This is old news, and was discussed in 2015, when the CR reliability survey results were first published. Never quite understand why people get so defensive about these sorts of things. While you may not like the results, or question CR's methodology, can anyone point to any other motorcycle reliability survey of actual owners? If they exist, I've never seen one. Even if you accept the results at face value, it says nothing about the basis on which people buy bikes, nor does it represent the result of testing competing brands/models. Do many purchasers even consider reliability in reaching a decision on what brand of bike to buy? If they do, on what basis can they compare brands' reliability? Anecdotal evidence, based on what they read on the internet? I, for one, am glad CR did this, and I hope they do more.

Edited by marcopolo
Link to comment
I just gave my BMW GS away/couldn't take any more "bad news". :rofl:

 

 

:rofl:

 

We never had a BMW offered in trade that we could not assign value to.

And, each and every one was resold.

 

Now, other marques, quite another story.

We used NADA values, and some folks got offended.

 

A 20 year old Suzuki cruiser had no value, basically, regardless of

farkels or appearance.

True for almost every Japanese bike, except "those" few exceptions.

A 20 year old BMW had value, regardless of mileage.

 

HD's, almost always upside down in the bike, expecting too much for their folly.

(Not knocking marque, addressing a new owner who puts $XXXXX into one and expects tp get it back, plus.)

 

Other Euro bikes, some yeah, many nay, depending on availablity of parts, model, etc.

Sold one Moto Guzzi Le Mans 4 or 5 times.

 

BMW's had, have, and will have pros and cons.

One big pro is availability of parts, and riders who can maintain the macines, and value the

experience, Good and bad.

 

YMMV

Link to comment
Shiny Side Up

I've had a few two wheeled vehicles and also had an FJR (2003).

I think Yamaha forgot that it needed a battery so they jammed it in on the right front of the motorcycle by the mirror...

You could bake a cake in two minutes from the heat off the engine and the heat was unbearable in the summer.

That said - it handled well and had plenty of power - too much for me!

 

I've never put much weight in CR for all the above mentioned reasons.

That said - problem??

A lot of that depends on what kind of "problem" and how many of these "problems" derive from how the motorcycle was ridden - and how was maintained.

 

I can go to any forum on the Internet and find all kinds of "problems" with any motorcycle, no mater where it's made or who makes it. I'll stick with my RT - most comfortable ride I've ever had on any MC.

Link to comment

They did solve the heat problem and at least my gen2 is okey dokey in that department.

 

The first time I went looking for the battery was interesting to say the least, NOT!

 

The valve check is at 26K miles which sounds good but not when you consider it's a two day job at least for first timers.

 

Yup, I do like my BMW. This experience has served to remind me why I like the marque so in that regard it was instructive.

 

All this said I do kind of like that FJR motor with its super smooth snort at any RPM.

Link to comment

The sad part of all this is that motorcycle.com had to recycle a two-year old article of questionable value in order to generate enough material to surround with advertising - about 25 ads for each of the ten pages.

 

The only thing sadder is that many of us clicked on the bait.

Link to comment

James,

BMW has made, and continues to make plenty of options that will

provide more than enough snort, at any rpm.

For example, your 2010 FJR has a top speed listed of 150mph.

My era '03-05 K RS/GT have top speeds 155-150.

And those were the previous generation K bikes.

Then the K's moved into the 160-175 mph range.

World Speed Records

 

And then they got faster.

If you've never ridden a 1200/1300 with duo-lever, ESA, light weight compared to previous K models (or any FJR), well...

 

Among the best ever, IMO.

Planted, fast, nimble, comfortable.

 

So yes, the FJR has positives, no doubt.

 

But if it is snort you want, try a K 1200/1300 S model.

I know they did well north of 160, with a passenger.

Best wishes.

:Cool:

Edited by tallman
Link to comment

I generally agree with the statements posted. What is sad to me is the fact that with increased "Social Media" we are becoming a society of Lemmings. I ride a Beemer because I like the bike and it is the most comfortable for me. Granted other brands I have owned in the past had fewer technical problems at less cost for repair, but I like my Beemer. If I were part of the Lemmings, I wouldn't even test ride a Beemer if I based my judgement on what others think (after reading that article).

 

It should also be said, I did not read that article.

Link to comment

So I rode back from the Fontana MOA Getaway Sunday morning, in a deluge. 14 hours in non-stop, pouring rain, with about 2k for the trip.

 

All the while, my 2004 RT with 95k didn't miss a beat. It was utterly comfortable (new Sargent seat is very nice) and nothing acted up during the monsoon. Even the brakes acted as if they were dry.

 

The five day trip took us on some amazing backroads in OH, KY, TN and NC. Tach bouncing off the rev limiter at Deal's Gap.

 

Checked the oil once I got home and still at the center dot.

 

I guess it's time to dump this POS!

Link to comment
So I rode back from the Fontana MOA Getaway Sunday morning, in a deluge. 14 hours in non-stop, pouring rain, with about 2k for the trip.

 

All the while, my 2004 RT with 95k didn't miss a beat. It was utterly comfortable (new Sargent seat is very nice) and nothing acted up during the monsoon. Even the brakes acted as if they were dry.

 

The five day trip took us on some amazing backroads in OH, KY, TN and NC. Tach bouncing off the rev limiter at Deal's Gap.

 

Checked the oil once I got home and still at the center dot.

 

I guess it's time to dump this POS!

 

I tried to give mine away with no takers. Go figure! :rofl:

Link to comment
Shiny Side Up

RPG - Marty

 

I'll take that crap off your hands - but you have to pay the shipping...

 

Well... Ok - I'll give you both 10 bucks each. I hate to see fellow riders suffer. :cry:

Link to comment

Hi Tallman, You will get no arguments from me. There is a price difference of about $5K between the '17 FJR1300ES and the '17 R1200RT and the old adage "You get what you pay for" is applicable. If I were in the market for a new bike and could afford that 5K the BMW would be my choice. The Consumer Reports article would not influence me in any way because, imo, it doesn't tell the whole story. Conversely, if I were in the market for a new sport touring bike and couldn't afford the $5K then it would be the FJR but I wouldn't try and fool myself into thinking the two machines are apples and apples.

 

My '93 R1100RSL just fits me and I do appreciate how it handles. I accept that the M93 transmission or the final drive, because of the single sided swing arm, could fail and be expensive to fix because to me a motorcycle is a hobby and something I enjoy and not a necessity in any way.

 

I'm also aware that BMW also builds and has built some serious go fast machines that can give an FJR a run for its money just look no further than the K1600. By saying I like the FJR's smooth power delivery in no way was meant to demean BMW.

Edited by JamesW
Link to comment

I have to say I've read reviews on things I'm interested in but I've never gotten into CR for my purchases. That being said I've ridden a lot of motorcycles and owned a few. I've been a long time Honda rider. I was introduced to my BMW and put off riding it as I just wasn't sure about it. Once I rode the bike, I knew it was the bike for me. I guess what I'm saying is I have owned certain bikes because I liked the way the felt to me, not because of what someone else thought of them.

Link to comment

James,

 

Yes, and I didn't take it that way.

:)

 

Just conversing about bikes w/snort...

When the K1200 S came out, it set some world record for the class, and then a record for 2up.

Memory :dopeslap: around 170 mph for the 2up.

:Cool:

I've been out of the game a while and haven't ridden the 1600.

Barring a miracle, not likely, so I enjoy hearing those who do

tell the tale.

 

The techno.logy BMW puts on machines is staggering.

Not always first to do so, but often.

Does it have problems sometimes,

Certainly.

But some bikes seem to avoid any issues.

 

Since you enjoy the RSL riding position, one day, you have to

try a K1200/1300 S.

Just for giggles.

:wave:

Link to comment
Marty,

 

If only your bike wasn't black, maybe then...

:wave:

 

Yeah, 3 guys said they would take it if I changed the color. :rofl:

 

Hey Tim.

Link to comment

I worked in the retail appliance industry for 16 years and I also found that CR seemed to favor whomever was gracing the palm of their hand got the best reviews because their reports frequently did not line up with what we experienced in the field.

Link to comment
I worked in the retail appliance industry for 16 years and I also found that CR seemed to favor whomever was gracing the palm of their hand got the best reviews because their reports frequently did not line up with what we experienced in the field.

 

That is quite a statement.

Link to comment
I worked in the retail appliance industry for 16 years and I also found that CR seemed to favor whomever was gracing the palm of their hand got the best reviews because their reports frequently did not line up with what we experienced in the field.

 

Morning Rick

 

That is the reason behind their testing, CR has a very specific testing cadence & what THEY find is what they report regardless of how their data match's up with the product companies data.

 

I can't speak on the appliance testing part of CR but sure can on the automotive end & they don't bend to anybody's threats or other attempts to change their reviews.

 

What I can say is they are pretty thorough & even fair as I have worked out of their auto testing set-up garage a few times troubleshooting a vehicle that isn't performing up to what they expect it should. But you don't install a new or updated part, or twist a wire, or make an adjustment without them watching every step & recording every part number, they expect documentation on a failure if a new part is installed to correct a problem. If a part gets installed with a different part number or even a suffix (-)(.) or letter change then you best be showing them documentation that the new part is either now in, or shortly going into production vehicles. (as far as I know the company I worked for never threatened, tried to intimidate, tried to bribe, or tried to influence CR in any way). We never wanted to piss-off the bear (even a little).

 

CR test ratings means a LOT to the auto industry so that unfortunately drives some re-design or even new designs to get an automobile to appeal to them more than appeal to the general public. If you spend some time around the CR test facility you will more than likely see some of the auto companies actually testing their new & future offering automobiles on the same roads that CR uses to make sure the automobiles perform as expected on the roads that CR tests on.

 

I can't say that CR testing & reviews are always in line with what the customer sees or expects but it is what it is so if a company wants a good review they better build & sell something that performs well on CR's test schedules.

Link to comment

Ok, just released. Here is another reason I can't stand CR.

 

http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/26/technology/tesla-model-s-consumer-reports/index.html?iid=hp-stack-dom

 

So they gave the Tesla Model S a highly favorable rating because of a feature that wasn't even available yet? WTF? So BMW will have auto braking on the RT "someday". Let's give them a good rating NOW.

 

You can't say a product is awesome because of a feature it doesn't have yet.

 

If Ford would have said they need a favorable rating because of upcoming auto braking features, they would have been laughed out the door. But yet CR seems to favor certain companies like Honda, Toyota, and now Tesla. They give them the benefit of the doubt on brand new models with no real data coming in yet. Total BS.

Link to comment
Ok, just released. Here is another reason I can't stand CR.

 

http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/26/technology/tesla-model-s-consumer-reports/index.html?iid=hp-stack-dom

 

So they gave the Tesla Model S a highly favorable rating because of a feature that wasn't even available yet? WTF? So BMW will have auto braking on the RT "someday". Let's give them a good rating NOW.

 

You can't say a product is awesome because of a feature it doesn't have yet.

 

If Ford would have said they need a favorable rating because of upcoming auto braking features, they would have been laughed out the door. But yet CR seems to favor certain companies like Honda, Toyota, and now Tesla. They give them the benefit of the doubt on brand new models with no real data coming in yet. Total BS.

 

Afternoon 92Merc

 

I'd be willing to bet Ford, Chevrolet, FCA, would have been treated the exact same way. CR might have taken Tesla's word with some basic operation data & pre-production testing data or it's possible the Tesla allowed CR to drive & evaluate an existing prototype or test car to evaluate the auto braking function (this isn't unusual)

 

But as Tesla found out just don't lie to CR as they will pull your rating & boldly print the reason why they did.

 

That is one thing that I like about CR, they are not a cover-up type of operation. Due to the vehicle complexity & lead times needed with modern automobiles plus the print lead-time requirements, at times they will take a promise on future product function or accessory additions. (over the years they have done it for all the motor companies). Most companies have a fully functional & operational prototypes or engineering development vehicles to demonstrate to them so they can write about it in a knowledgeable manner but it looks like Tesla didn't keep their promise so CR slapped them on the wrist & downgraded their rating.

Link to comment

CR should never have given them a higher rating to begin with. So basically now you have CR holding this "downgrade" over Tesla's head, forcing Tesla to get it out sooner.

 

Basically the tail wagging the dog here. Points should be granted based on something the current vehicle has, not will have. And most people will realize a pre-production vehicle isn't typically as good as the final product. So even if that is the case, CR is rating ahead of the game.

Link to comment
CR should never have given them a higher rating to begin with. So basically now you have CR holding this "downgrade" over Tesla's head, forcing Tesla to get it out sooner.

 

Basically the tail wagging the dog here. Points should be granted based on something the current vehicle has, not will have. And most people will realize a pre-production vehicle isn't typically as good as the final product. So even if that is the case, CR is rating ahead of the game.

 

Afternoon 92Merc

 

In a perfect world that would be desired but it's the real world & auto purchasers don't want to read test results about last years model, or read about CR testing on a new automobile that they have already owned for 4 months.

 

Readers want the review BEFORE they buy the vehicle so with extensive CR testing time figured in & magazine print & mailing times figured in sometimes CR has to get a little ahead on the testing.

 

Sure every now & then they get bit by something like Tesla's deal but they were probably correct on the other 200 things that they trusted the automakers on being included or functioning correctly.

 

Link to comment

Example dishwasher X's normal cycle is 120 minutes while y's is only 90 minutes. X gets a higher rating because it washes 30 minutes longer on normal. If, however the test had been based on minutes washed then y would have performed as well if not better. One and only one refrigerator report lowered a reputable top three performer to about 8th when the test showed that it did a poor job of cooling when the freezer compartment was filled with cabbages....really who stuffs a freezer with cabbage! Perhaps the auto industry has a better rapport with CR than the appliance industry. DR I do see your point and observation. I may have been a little quick on the draw.

Link to comment
Example dishwasher X's normal cycle is 120 minutes while y's is only 90 minutes. X gets a higher rating because it washes 30 minutes longer on normal. If, however the test had been based on minutes washed then y would have performed as well if not better. One and only one refrigerator report lowered a reputable top three performer to about 8th when the test showed that it did a poor job of cooling when the freezer compartment was filled with cabbages....really who stuffs a freezer with cabbage! Perhaps the auto industry has a better rapport with CR than the appliance industry. DR I do see your point and observation. I may have been a little quick on the draw.

 

Afternoon Rick

 

You just have to play their game-- if your company wants a top rating on their refrigerator & they KNOW that one of tests is going to be a freezer full of cabbage then they best re-design their next refrigerator to operate good with a freezer full of cabbage.

 

That is how we do it in the auto industry-- if we know from past history that an automobile is tested for a certain trait or on certain road surfaces then we incorporate those requirements into the new vehicle design.

 

It's their (CR's) tests & their magazine so if a good CR rating is important just build a product that CR likes. (sometimes CR testing forces changes to a product that the general public really likes & eventually appreciates & sometimes CR forces a change to a product that people could care less about but end up paying for anyhow)

 

 

Link to comment

Spent a full day in the Tesla factory with my daughter and her friend who is a Tesla exec. Truly impressed by the quality of the cars!

Link to comment

 

I use the data in CR for initial comparison of automobiles. I don't use there overall scores. I look at their scores for particular aspects. While they often don't share their detailed methodology, they do often tell readers what attributes they use. For a coarse cut at thinning the herd, it is often good enuf.

Disclosure, I was a long time subscriber until they went to far left of center (for me) in some of their causes.

Edited by Red
Link to comment
marcopolo

This thread has gotten a bit side-tracked. Wow, that never happens. :grin:

 

This MC report was about reliability -- as reported by owners responding to a CR survey. It was not CR testing MCs and reporting their conclusions/evaluations.

Link to comment
realshelby
This thread has gotten a bit side-tracked. Wow, that never happens. :grin:

 

This MC report was about reliability -- as reported by owners responding to a CR survey. It was not CR testing MCs and reporting their conclusions/evaluations.

 

And that in essence why I don't pay much attention to Consumer Reports any longer. Reliability? Is that how many times your phone didn't pair to the bluetooth at startup, or is it when the bike quit running at 70 mph going down the road and it had to be towed home?

 

Surveys are easily skewed, several unhappy owners will respond for every happy owner. How many of each brand is sold compared to the next brand? There are many GS BMW's sold for every Suzuki V STrom for instance. How do you separate that into a reliability or causes for concern for a bike brand?

 

If Consumer Reports wants to buy a bike and keep it a year and put miles on it, then write about how that went, I am 100% with them!

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...