Rockster or Regular?

[Beaze]

I've found myself between a "Rockster and a hard place"...pardon the poor excuse for a pun. I found a 2005 R1150R Rockster LOADED with goodies and only 6,300 miles on it. It just had a full 6K service and new Metzler Z6's installed. It's coming with luggage and Ohlins shocks front/rear. Really it's got too much to list.

The second bike, the "hard place", is an '04 R1150R with full luggage, including Givi top-case with a back rest. This bike has 13,400 miles on it and has just had the 14K service done. It does not have new tires that I know of either.

Basically I'm trying to figure out what, if any, difference there is between the two and what do you guys think is the best buy?

Background on my past rides has been mainly aggressive sport bikes (RC51,916,CBR 929, etc..) and I'm transitioning onto something that will still be sporty and fun but also server as a touring bike for my wife and I to escape on. I love both bikes and BMW seems to be the only brand I can find that fits the bill. If only I could have both!

[MikeCam]

The significant differences between the Roadster and the Rockster are suspension, front forks, handlebars (thus riding posture) and rear wheel width. Engine, transmission (either a .70 or .80 6th gear ratio), driveline, brakes and frame (less front forks) are the same. There are other less significant differences such as self-canceling turn signals on the Rockster and a selection of paralever torque arms in different lengths. The '05 model line for both models had small enhancements to the fuel map, both had SS brake lines and the servo-ABS works the same on both.

Based upon recent resales and my own opinion the base value of the Rockster is always about $500 more than a similar Roadster. For 2004 models, the base is about $6000. Add for ABS, up-to-date services, never dropped, wheelied or stoppied, low mileage (based on 6000 miles per year), and whatever value you attach to the various windscreens, system cases, top boxes, electrical farkles (Kisan, BRAKE!, Hyperlights, MotoLites, PIAA, etc). Despite some owners' claims, there are no "rare" or "hard to find" paint schemes.

You've given insufficient information to help get a recommendation of which of those two are a better deal, but hopefully my input helps quantify your decision somewhat.

[Dr. Strangelove]

ergos are slightly different, so riding each will help that.

Some people like the looks of the rock vs the roadster, personal decision there. I prefer the RR's.

There is no 14k service, but there is a 12k svc, so if the rr didn't have that on schedule, maybe??? it wasn't cared for as well??? pure speculation there

What I see as an advantage of the rockster, though, is the size of the rear wheel. It will accomodate the VERY COMMON tire size 180/55, while the rear of the RR takes the 170/60. This does limit the number of different tires you can use.

Otherwise the same bike and imho 6300 miles vs 14,000 makes no difference whatsoever.

My Stella! is at 40+k and counting. I wanted to put Pirelli Scorpion Syncs on her, but no 170/60 sizing. I went with PR2s which I am VERY happy with thus far--about 300 miles.

Hope this helps

John

PS and +1 on the MikeCam version of this

[harrisphil]

here in the Uk the rockster is usually cheeper than the std bike on the 2nd hand market but I like the quirky looks so that swung it for me

IMHO The Ohlin shocks will be a great investment and worth paying extra for
both bikes have luggage so no difference there and a top box is cheep

The most significant difference between the 2 bikes on ergonomics is the handle bars
if price isnt an issue
and you are happy with the loud paintwork and the sports bike riding position go with the newer better suspensioned rockster

[sweatmark]

No doubt, get the Rockster. We have both Roadster and Rockster, and my suggestion is based on 15k+ miles on each version, with a prior crotch rocket history.

You'll feel more at home on Rockster, e.g. ergonomics with Rockster handlebar is more akin to your prior bike roster, without the clip-on wrist aches;

More front end feel from Rockster - likely to feel vague though, since Telelever will be a radical departure from what you've ridden;

As already stated, 180 rear tire on the Rock lets you choose favorite tires;

Same drivetrain/electrics/brakes/guts on both bikes - everything works well, and it's all about the torque;

Same touring capability for both bikes - identical subframe, system cases, megawatts charging system for heated gear & gizmos;

Same two-up capabilities;

Your Rockster option is still "new"' at 6k miles, and Ohlins are a big plus.

[Beaze]

Thanks for the responses! I just went and test rode the Rockster today. He's put roadster bars (still has the originals) on it so it's got a more upright riding position than I had anticipated. It feels great and seems like it'll be more than comfy for me and the ol' lady on a day trip or two hundred . I was unaware of the service interval, thanks for pointing out the 12k/14k difference! I think I"m going to go with the rockster due to the lower mileage (just because ) and amount of accessories going with it. The service folks actually gave it a quick look-over while it was being serviced and he just had the state inspection done. The real deal-clincher in my mind are the fresh fluids (all) and new tires. I can't wait to get it out for a day trip soon. If only this winter weather would break....oh yeah, it's got a power outlet

[lionlady]

If only this winter weather would break....oh yeah, it's got a power outlet

They usually come with the accessory plug.

Welcome to the fold!!

P

[bubbac45]

Congratulations
I have the '04 rockster. The 1150r bars, touring screen and peg lowering made all the difference.
Welcome
B

[Beaze]

I like the roadster bars for sure and the bike keeps growing on me the more I look at it. I don't think I'll shake this bike, it'll be around for awhile...kinda like when I met my wife