I think we're saying parallel things, certainly from different perspectives. You could look at it this way. Your Porsche analogy is appropriate, in that when the 993 was replaced by the 996, enthusiasts howled. The 993 was the last in line of the air cooled Boxer for the marque, after that the 996 got a fat ass. Whether you liked the purity of the 'old' 911, or the performance of the 'new' 911 was up to you. The Jeep and Range Rover also have moved from roots as a utility vehicle into a suburbanites SUV through decades of evolution. Better? That's up to you and how you use it. Personally, I don't see any 'Sport' or 'Utility' in either Vehicle line but that's me. Though you can't argue that if you cross a continent in an LR3, you'd be far more rested than if you did it in its cousin from 1963. Or, you could take the line that when Porsche (or others) launched their Cayenne SUV, it enabled the company to fund more focused vehicles in their respective lineups (Carrera, Cayman, etc). IMHO, a water cooled GS is just another bike in the segment as its caved to the market. There won't be anything unique to it once it's launched, since it's an amalgam of other bikes in its league. At that point, I will look at purchasing from all available bikes with water cooling (Triumph, Ducati, KTM) as it will be a level playing field, albeit with a shaft drive instead of chains. BMW fan boys can shout all they want and say sales number will stay the same. Maybe so, but what are you buying? The logo? What makes this bike different / better than its competition when it's launched? That's my question. Or has the GS already become the SUV of the motorcycle world? I'm not against progress and am no luddite. I just see a company whose heritage was/is about innovation copying their peers and caving to market. Seems like a knee jerk reaction regardless. The test will be in the demo ride though.