BMW K 75
Tales from the past
 |
| BMW K 75 |
After
a few years of experiencing BM's middleweight twin the time had
come for a change Should I go for a R100RS, or a K or throw reason to
the wind by plumping for an FJ1200; and to hell with the quality of
Germany's finest. After
some
soul searching for a few months, I decided on a K 75 - so far I don't
regret it one bit.
My
first impression was to wonder how something made by BMW could feel
so different from the R series. The bike actually feels lighter
despite weighing more than the twins, it's easier to pop on and off
the stands, which look as if they will actually hold up the bike. The
|top-up handle really takes the effort out of lifting it onto the
main stand, the only problem comes when trying to use the prop stand
whilst seated on the bike — dismounting first was a lot safer than
dropping the bike after the side stand shoots back up
The
K75 felt right as soon as I mounted it. A nice comfortable seat and
natural riding position. The bike fires up straight away with no
choke necessary, an even, steady tickover immediately achieved
unlike the twins that need 3 miles to stop coughing and spluttering.
Virtually no back end lift from the shaft drive on take off, the
engine feeling sweet and smooth, thanks to a three cylinder OHC
engine with a balance shaft. My first problem was at the first
junction. Why did BMW have to radically alter all the switches?
Nothing like anything I'd ever ridden before. A first for me was the
two indicator switches, one each side and a cancelling button on the
right.
Not
easy to find, initially. There seems to be about three switches on
each side of the bars and I've yet to hit the horn in hurry instead
of the lamp flasher; and vice-versa. Next impression was, what good
front brakes - one or two fingers will squeal the front end. Too good
for the forks, in fact, as they take a dive all the way down onto the
stops under the slightest provocation. The rear drum is good, in so
much that I didn't want a disc at the back (in my view, never
necessary, and they all seem to expire from crud and leaks). It's not
as fierce as the one I had on the twin, so it doesn't lock up easily
in the wet. The excellent Metzeler tyres suited the bike perfectly
and I'm going to stay with 'em.
The
bike was four years old when I bought it and had not been cleaned for
as many years - it was so bad that the wife advised me not to buy it,
but I'd had a pleasant test ride and wasn't to be dissuaded that
easily. A little rub with my finger on the alloy revealed that it was
as new underneath, and the paint apart from two dents in the tank,
also appeared in good trim under the dirt.
The
next three weeks were spent stripping the cycle parts down. One
packet of brillo pads and two tubes of Solvol, three toothbrushes and
four hours hard labour on the alloy wheels had them looking like new.
Try that with Jap alloy. Three coats of Scientific Coating's finest
had them looking even better and they now seem to throw the dirt off
rather than attracting it The bike had a really silly flyscreen,
neither practical nor attractive, which directed the wind straight
into my face, so I soon pulled that off.
Further
work included some BMW knee pads (not cheap at £35 - didn't we used
to get these free on old British bikes), a DIY BMW comfort seat, the
front forks were stiffened with stronger springs and fork oil was
changed to SAE 5, and a set of panniers and top box, again from BMW.
Brake dive was a thing of the past, although comfort levels were not
impaired. I spent many hours figuring out how to get the panniers on
and off the frames. I spent a whole afternoon trying to learn
the knack and then they suddenly clicked on but wouldn't come off
again. All was revealed when I found the small tab
Back
on the road, I was well impressed by the excellent, light, gearbox
action; could this really be a BMW? There is little shaft drive
reaction in normal riding, and even really pushing the bike held few
of the terrors associated with riding BMW boxers. The engine is
both smooth and has plenty of torque, allowing the bike to pull from
less than 30mph in top gear. A four speed gearbox would've been more
than sufficient, it was quite usual to go for many miles without
having to think about changing gears, such was the production of
torque throughout past
the ton on the clock. In fact, it felt slower than my XT350 and
ridiculously underpowered for a 600.
Best
points were the superb front brake (twin discs) and the headlampi The
brakes were the most powerful I've ever tried, including a FJ1200 and
R100RT that I subsequently acquired. Similarly, the headlamp is the
most powerful I've ever come across.
 |
| BMW K 75 |
The biggest failing was its lack of comfort.
Basically, the seat lacks sufficient padding and the bars are too low
and narrow for me - although in the bike's defence, I am a strange
shape, a six footer with short legs and a long back.
Only RT BMWs and large trailsters suit ma
Certainly in town the bars were a real pain, as was the slowest
practical speed in top gear of 40mph. It averaged only 58mpg
regardless of how it was ridden - a function of the strange carbs,
balance shafts and fat piston?
 |
| BMW K 75 |
Handling, thanks to a rigid frame and low
mass, was just fine. On short runs through the twisty stuff the bike
could be scratched with the best of them, braking left to what would
be suicidal moments on fatter bikes.
Nothing ever touched down and the bike was
only upset when the going got really bumpy when the back end failed
to cope. Overall then, I was greatly disappointed by the SRX. The
riding position and poor economy ruled it out as a practical
hack.
BMW K 75The lack of speed ruled it out as a fast
plaything. Only the style of the big single, as a sort of modern
version of a Goldie had anything going for it, but then those old
Brit bikes never had much of a reputation for practicality. Higher
bars, a better seat and some more power might've made it more usable.
No comments:
Post a Comment