Cycle News - Archive Issues - 1990's

·COMPARISON BMW R1100RT vs. Honda ST1100 Photos by Kit Palmer I ~ 0\ ~ 00'" I-< Q) "S ~ z 12 t is safe to say that Honda had the luxury sport-touring market cornered for quite some time with its elegant ST1100. No other motorcycle really came close to matching the ST's silky-smooth and powerful 1084cc V-4 motor, its well-balanced suspension and posture-friendly ergonomics. It truly was in a class all its own. Was? Yes, was. There's a new kid on the block ready to take on the STllOO in hopes of ending Honda's long dominance in the luxury sport-touring class, and that motorcycle is the all-new RllOORT, featuring the company's "new-generation" Boxer motor. Officially, BMW claims the RllOORT wasn't really designed to dethrone the ST, claiming the RT to be the company's number-one full-on touring machine. Still, with so much emphasis put on handling and agility, the RllOORT suddenly finds itself in direct competition with the ST1l00, intended or not Ever since we first swung a leg over the new RllOORT (see issue #38, September 27) we couldn't wait to compare it head-to-head with the Honda ST1l00, and not long ago, we got our wish. Honda offered uS a 1995 STllOO for our comparison test; we would have preferred a '96 model, but considering the fact that the only differences between the '95 and '96 models are an upgraded ABS system, the addition of a linkedbrake system (similar to that of the CBlOOO) and a few minor bodywork changes, and that we would have to wait considerably longer for the '96 model to arrive, we chose to move on with our riding comparison with the '95 model. Close enough. The STllOO and RllOORT share many of the same basic features, such as ABS, shaft drive, hard (detachable) saddlebags, nearly identical engine displacement (1084cc for the ST and 1185cc for the RT) and long-range gas tanks. The BMW offers significantly more in the way of standard equipment than the Honda, such as heated grips, electronically adjustable windscreen, adjustable seat height and shift lever, power sockets, a rear luggage rack, and an AM/FM (Above) The Honda ST1100A (left) and the BMW Rl1 OORT (right) might come from opposite ends of the world but are remarkably close when It comes to performance. Both bikes are outstanding sporttouring motorcycles but definitely have their advantages and disadvantages. (Right) The silky-smooth operation and hearty acceleration of the ST1100's big, Iiquidcooled, 9O-degree, V-4 motor is unrivaled In Its class. cassette stereo. The ST, on the other hand, offers traction control (as well as a linked-brake system on the '96 model), the RT does not. Despite the extra goodies, the BMW weighs significantly less than the ABS/TCS-equipped Honda. BMW claims the RT weighs in at 563 pounds dry, while Honda claims the ST weighs 659 pounds. (The non-ABS/TCSequipped Honda is claimed to weigh 634 pounds). This clifference-in weight no doubt has a lot to do with the fact that the BMW is hauling around two fewer cylinders than the ST and has no liquid-cooling system. Our month-long comparison test included a head-to-head, two-day ride tooling around the deserts of Southern California and Arizona, which included an overnight stay in the crispy-cool mountains of Prescott, Arizona. In those two days alone, we tallied well over 800 miles on the two motorcycles, most of which was accumulated on wide-open desert highways and twisty, back- . canyon roads. Perhaps the most noticeable difference between the two bikes is vibration the BMW does, the Honda doesn't. The BMW shakes heavily at idle but smooths out significantly as you start climbing through the gears and gaining momentum. At cruising speed, the vibes aren't as offensive, but compared to the buzz- . less HOJ~da, well, the Jow-frequency pulsation becomes more evident on the BMW. Plus, the annoying torque-effect that tweaks the BMW to the right every time you rev up the motor (highly prominent when completely stopped or traveling at slow speeds) is non-existent with the Honda, despite the fact its crankshaft also runs along the same longitudinal axis. Horsepower-robbing counter-balancers prevent any noticeable torque-effect on the Honda. Obviously, the BMW has no such counter-balancers. As far as power, both bikes get along pretty good, but the Honda simply runs away and hides from the BMW. We did numerous roll-on drags on many open desert roads, and the ST won every bout. The RT, however, held its own off the bottom, but from midrange on up, the ST would consistently kiss the Beemer good-bye. No contest. We also discovered during these roll-ons that the RT demands quality gas: the higher the octane, the better. Under a heavy load, burning 89 octane, the RT pinged and detonated badly at hign rpm with the throttle held wide open. The Beemer's owner's manual is serious aboufrunning "Super" fuet. With the good stuff, 92 octane, we experienced no such problems. The Honda, on the other hand, runs fine with the more pocket-bookfriendly 89 octane petroleum flowing through its veins. WhiJe the Honda easily ate up the BMW on the long straights, the RT had no problems hanging with the ST on the short jaunts between turns, where the BMW's excellent torque comes into play. The Beemer approves of being short-shifted, while the Honda prefers to be revved ou t before catching the next cog. And speaking of shifting, the Honda changes gears light and accommodating; the BMW, heavy and defiant. The RT's five-speed gearbox is often reluctant to shift from neutral, to first at rest, and overall shifting is just plain notchy. Nothing new here. The BMW's clutch, on the other hand, works just fine, as does the Honda's. Both bikes corner well for big and bulky 6OO-pound (plus or minus) motorcycles, though the BMW felt a touch

• Cover