Originally Posted by SQD8R
just curious how many miles on the Norton compared to the BMW's?
Well to be honest, the K100RS has 120,000 really hard miles on it.
The GS has 60,000.
The Norton has 50,000, but I got it when it only had 8K on it. It had been sitting in a carport with a plastic tarp over it, and was a pile of rust. I tore it down, powdercoated the frame, replaced every bit of rubber, cables, put a new set of rings in it, painted it, and have rode it like it's a sport bike ever since. It's been 15 years of hard use, and while it has had it's share of problems, it seems like it's been easier and cheaper to run than the BMWs.
The Norton is my favorite ride, followed by the GS.
I'm not really complaining, I posted this just to see other folk's reaction.
It just seems like BMWs have a great reputation for reliability, but the British bikes are maligned for being unreliable.
Shaft drive is supposed to be maintainance free, just change the oil. Chains are dirty, need lube all the time, and wear out along with sprockets, and therefore more expensive.
But if I have to do spine lubes, and replace joints, it seems like the shafts are more expensive and lobor consuming to run.
And don't even ask about electrics, Bosch vs Lucas.