Much may be missing, particularly quirks of '79 and '80 R65s, so please mail me (noemi@netcom.com) with comments and corrections!
The R65 was imported into the US from '79 - '87. The '79-'84 R65s are the ones that most people think of when they refer to R65s, with the smaller, dual-shock frame. In 1985, the R65 got the same monoshock suspension & frame as the other boxers, making it the same as the R80s and R100s but with a wimpier engine. Most of what is said below applies to the '79 - '84 R65s.
The R65 engine was designed from scratch and introduced in the USA
in 1979. It has a shorter stroke than the other boxers, and though
the basic desing is the same, some parts are different.
The R65's chief advantage is its light weight and short wheelbase,
resulting in quick handling. Its top speed is reported to be about
105mph, though I've never seen more than 100. In my experience the
chassis gives out in a top-speed run before the engine does. It's
geared shorter than other boxers, so cruising RPMs are higher and
you have to shift a little more often. It revs easier than other
boxers too, so while it doesn't have as much to give as the 1000cc
twins, it gives what it has more willingly.
High speed is not the R65's strength, neither in engine power
nor handling. One would be hard-pressed to think of a 600cc,
or even 500cc bike that is slower off the line than an R65 or
wobblier in a 90mph sweeper. But it's also lighter than most
of the mid-80's 500cc-600cc bikes.
On a tight twisty mountain road, its low COG, easy handling
and boxer-typical powerband make a good rider on an R65
competitive with any sportbike. It's a simple, versatile
design with little bodywork, and so is easy to work on, is
very droppable, and is decent on unpaved surfaces. Most
people in the BMW community don't consider it suitable for
long-distance touring, but if that touring involves lots of
twisties, it's great.
Non-LS R65s have cast "snowflake" wheels. Most people run
tubed tires, though some wheels will hold a tubeless tire.
They were designed for tubed tires in pre-tubeless days, but
some in the BMW community say you can run tubeless tires.
Less than 40mpg is poor; 40 mpg is OK; 45 mpg is good. I've
gotten as low as 37 and as high as 51! Usually I get 42-44.
YMMV.
Sidecovers always fall off. Cable-tie them on for safety.
They cost over $70 EACH (painted) to replace.
Stock rear tire size is absurdly narrow. Most R65 owners run
120s on the rear, which will just barely clear the swingarm.
I'm told you need a spacer to get the tire to fit in the right
place, but mine doesn't have it (Ed?).
The '79 and '80 R65 seat is a hideous brown ribbed vinyl,
but is surprisingly comfortable and fine for two-up.
The R65 has one thick metal exhaust gasket on the header pipe
(under the exhaust nut). All other boxers have a gasket and a
ring. This can confuse boxer knowledgeables not familiar with
R65s. The exhaust nuts are R65-unique as well.
I had a hard time replacing the throttle cam. The stock cam
that fits the R65 throttle housing had a cable-end holder for
a dual-cable setup, but 1981-on R65s have a single cable.
Fortunately I had Kevin Caselli at Cal BMW on my side, and
he put a chain and cable-end holder for a single cable onto
a cam that fit in the R65 throttle housing. The cam should
be the same as for R80ST and GSs.
R65s are still made in Germany, though they have the same
monoshock chassis as the old twins, but with the 650cc engine.
There was indeed an R65 G/S sold in Germany, and has never
been imported into the USA (or even exported from Germany
as far as I know).
Generally my R65 works best stock; most, but not all, other
R65 owners I've talked to (and other boxer owners for that
matter) agree. Universally agreed-upon modifications are
sidestands and front & rear suspension.
R65 forks are unique to R65s, and are most similar to R80ST
forks, with the same suspension travel and fork oil capacity.
Many parts are the same, but the R80ST has a rebound spring
inside that the R65 doesn't. Also, the R65 has a circlip
holding in the fork top caps (instead of the R80ST's hex caps).
Removing those fork top caps is the only true two-person job
I've found on the bike (one pushes down on the cap, the other
pries out the circlip).
The R65 also has the excellent thick upper triple clamp that
later appeared on K-bikes. No other boxer of this vintage
has this; and many suffer fork alignment problems as a result.
The Clymers and Haynes manuals give all sorts of warnings on
taking apart R65 forks but neglect to offer solutions for
putting them back together, as they do for other forks.
To torque the Allen screw in the bottom of the damper rod
(without using an air wrench) to put sliders back on (say,
after a changing fork seals), you'll need to take off the
top caps (a la circlip), remove the fork springs, and reach
an extender with a 13mm hex socket to hold the top end of
the damper rod. The Haynes describes this procedure for the
R80ST but not the R65, and it turns out to be the same.
Like most BMW boxers, common front suspension upgrades are
Progressive springs and 10wt oil. One of my R65s had BMW
heavy-duty progressive fork springs, and was too stiff for
me, but others have had great success with them and the
Progressives.
The stock shocks suck (say that three times fast!) The shock
length is unique to R65s, so make sure you buy R65 shocks and
not R80 shocks. Konis are a popular replacement and have
preload and rebound damping adjustments, as well as a lifetime
guarantee.
My Konis turned my R65 into a new bike. One of my R65LSs had
Works shocks on them made for a heavier rider. It handled
nicely, but was too stiff for me, and I prefer the adjustability
of the Konis.
The famous R65 engine vibration peaks at about 4500rpm.
Advantages: Some say the rubber spacers (/2 or Luftmeiser) absorb
vibration and makes a significant difference in the bike's smoothness.
Disadvantages: Some say handling under hard riding is compromised;
the already flexy frame flexes more (after all, you can't torque the
nut on the engine mount stud!). I've heard several accounts of
frames cracking, possibly from not having the support it needs.
DO NOT LOSE your stock metal spacers; not all dealers stock them
and they seem to be hard to get. If your dealer can't find them
on the microfiche, tell them to look under "footpeg."
The tang on the sidestand is under the footpeg, and unless your
foot is shaped like a U, or you have very long legs, it's difficult
to impossible to reach the sidestand from the bike. Then, since
the R65 is lower than other boxers but uses the same sidestand,
the bike needs to lean several harrowing degrees to the right for
the sidestand to clear the ground. Finally, it's the spring-loaded
self-retracting type that is just not meant to be deployed from
the bike.
As a 5'1" R65 owner, I recommend getting an aftermarket sidestand
or get good at getting off without the sidestand. I did both: I
have an excellent Brown sidestand, but never use it to get or off
the bike, since getting on and off while balancing the bike is an
important skill for someone my size (some bikes are too heavy for
me to push vertical after mounting it with its sidestand down).
Also, as a matter of sidestand safety I make it a rule not to
be on the bike with the sidestand down.
But for quick stops, the Brown stand is great. I found with
my R65LS with the stock stand that when the bike was loaded
it was risky to lean it far enough to the right for the sidestand
to clear the ground, and as a result always used the centerstand.
Somewhere between 1981 and 1983 BMW changed the centerstand to
add a pedal to the end of the left centerstand tube. Older
centerstands don't have this pedal, but you should still step
on the end of the centerstand tube, not the tang, to hoist the
bike up onto the centerstand. It is still a two-step centerstand.
Watch unfamiliar riders with your bike so they don't step on
the tang and break it off.
I find it is easier to put my R65 on the centerstand than to
take it off. When it's fully loaded and I'm tired, I sometimes
need someone to push to get it off the centerstand, though I was
able to put it up. I routinely pivot my R65 180 degrees when
it is on the centerstand, and Kari Prager from Cal BMW says
this won't hurt it.
R65 centerstands are reported to be prone to progressive
overextension. That is, the centerstand starts out nearly
vertical, and over time, changes angle until ultimately
the wheels are on the ground, making it harder to push off
the stand. This is partly from the centerstand stops on the
frame wearing down (easily fixed with some weld) and partly
from the centerstand bending.
Some people fix this with a Reynolds ride-off stand. I don't
like them because they hold the bike lower and complicate
rear-wheel removals, and also you can't pivot the bike 180 on
the Reynolds stand. However, I can't ride off my BMW stand,
though a heavier, longer rider might be able to. Purely a
matter of preference.
See r65.beefup for comments from other owners about
increasing power on their R65s.
I'm Noemi Berry, and as of this writing I've owned my R65 for
a year and a half and have ridden it approximately 35K miles.
After months and months of longing for my Next Motorcycle (NM)
when I had my first bike, a Kawasaki CSR 305, I flew to Tucson
Arizona to buy my '83 R65LS in November 1992.
After four months and 9000 miles, I wrecked it in a crash that
left me uninjured, but bent the frame, front end, front wheel,
gas tank, fairing and countless other pieces. Heartbroken, I
bought my second R65LS (NM 2), a gorgeous red R65LS a week later.
Three weeks after that, I bought a third R65LS (NM 3) for parts,
for $700 from Eurotech Motorsports. NM 3 was a complete, running
motorcycle with 170K miles on a tired engine and in need of much
repair, but with the straight chassis I needed. I now had three
R65LSs in my garage!
The summer of 1993 was spent rebuilding the bike I'd destroyed.
I first stripped NM 3 down to the frame and wiring harness,
leaving the front end on. Then the original NM's engine,
transmission, swingarm, rear wheel, carburetors, brakes,
exhaust system, controls, instruments, electrical components
and even its locks went into the good chassis. I put on a
'79 R65 seat and tailsection that matched the champagne-colored
gas tank; and the parts bike provided a silver LS fender and
a painted-gray LS fairing.
The result of this project was re-registered with a new frame
number on July 10, 1993, and is what I ride today. As of this
writing, I have yet to paint my bike a singular color and it
remains gold-silver-gray with no battery covers. A few months
later, I sold NM 2, the lovely red R65LS I'd been riding all
summer during the NM rebuild project, and am down to one R65.
In the process of the rebuild, I un-LS'd it somewhat.
NM is a full-service BMW, not an around-town fun bike like
many R65s are. It's my daily commuter, my weekend sport bike,
my touring bike, my grocery shopper. I take it on dirt roads
and long trips frequently. Recently I took it on a trip to
Baja, where we did rough dirt roads and a 1100 mile day home.
Jeff Brody, a well-known BMW MOA member, has over 340K miles
on his R65! Most R65s don't see this kind of use.
In the year NM has been back on the road, I've ridden it 25K
miles in many, many different conditions and for the most part
haven't had any serious problems. I service it religiously
and by the book. I'm not going to say it's had Honda
reliability, but with 62K miles on it, it feels as solid
as the day I got it. Despite all this, the R65 is not my
ultimate bike, that honor belongs to an eventual R80GS.
Until I can afford my GS comfortably, NM more than serves
my needs and I'm quite happy with it.
The things I have encountered in my time with it so far,
including my "crash" course in mechanics, are what comprises
the bulk of this FAQ. I'm no expert! But I've been through
a lot with it and it was worth writing down.
CHRONOLOGY
1979:
1980:
Detuning (leaned) carburetion changes for emissions,
with no other changes to make up for it, resulting in
a slight performance loss. BMW RA calls the 1980 R65
"the worst BMW ever made."
1981:
1982:
1983:
1984:
Last year of R65LS and dual-shock R65 model.
1985:
OTHER INFORMATION
MISCELLANEOUS
REAR SUSPENSION
ENGINE VIBRATION
The solutions are:
Personally I prefer the stock metal spacers, after a trip where the
(loaded) bike wobbled so badly I couldn't go faster than 70mph.
SIDESTAND
CENTERSTAND
The R65 centerstand is another piece unique to R65s and can't be
swapped from other bikes. The R65 centerstand is a two-step process.
First find the tang to push the centerstand down to the ground;
then move your foot to the end of the left centerstand tube to
push on it for centerstanding.
POWER INCREASE
Some people love the handling but want more engine power.
There is an 850cc kit available from CC products to beef
up the HP. Most accounts I've heard of this kit says that
the result is a killer bike, but reliability and longevity
are seriously compromised. Most people who've fiddled with
their R65s end up settling on stock configuration. Some are
happy with their beefups, but I'm inclined to agree with the
statement, "if you want a faster bike, buy a faster bike."
Or take C.L.A.S.S. (California's Leading Advanced Safety School).
WHO AM I AND WHAT THE HELL DO I KNOW ANYWAY?
COMMENTS...
....from other R65 owners:
From: vos.stratus.com!Pete_Martin@cinnamon.com
To: bmw@catnip.berkeley.ca.us
My first beemer was a henna red 1984 r65LS.
Excellent handling.
...a little slow when loaded or w/ passanger.
But It is just as quick off the line,to about 50-60 mph as an r80.
(they don't lend themselves well to performance mods.
if you want a faster bike,buy one.
I went the whole 9 yards.Lightened fly,lightweight wrist pins,Lufty pipes,
Twin sparked,etc,etc,all for a gain of about 10 hp..Then it was nothing but
trouble after that.)Had about 70k when I finally got rid of it.
In stock form it is an excellent bike.
I had an 82 R65. On the plus side, the bike is light, nimble, handles well,
rides well and is comfortable. Only down side is that it doesn't have
tons of power. Still, it'll cruise way faster than any legal speed limit.
Good bike for smaller people. Easy to work on and tune.
francis ferguson
fpf@gasco.com
From: mail.bellcore.com!dje@cinnamon.com (Don Eilenberger)
PROS:
Smaller, lighter, easier to handle than most of the other boxer
twins of the era. Has a lower saddle height also, which if your
SO is height disadvantaged will be a plus! As with all boxers -
it is fairly easy to work on, and a decent home mechanic can do
at least 90% of the maintanance. Parts - while many are unique
to this model - are easy to come by - supposedly the bike is
still in production in Germany (at least I was told this by
Bob's BMW in Jessup MD recently..). Handling is good - and
better for around town use than the larger twins.
CONS:
Has a reputation for vibration - more than other boxers. It
is a short stroke engine - with a higher red line than most
boxers. Mine cruises nicely at about 4,000rpm - which equates
to about 65mph in 5th gear. Mirrors smooth out at about 75-85mph,
but this speed is not really comfortable on this bike (I don't
have a fairing - and it requires a firm grip to hang on). Many
parts for this bike are "unique" to it - making interchangability
with other models more difficult. Stock seat had a reputation as
a buns buster (mine has a "Ride-all-day" on it - the most
comfortable moto seat I've ever sat on!)
One comment I saw recently in the BMWMOA news - was about
the R65 - "as one of the worst BMW's ever made - and still
a damn good bike" - I would tend to agree with the damn good!
Since I haven't owned another, I can't speak about comparing
it to other Beemers - but so far it sure beats the other 6 or
7 brands I've owned!
=======================================
Don Eilenberger (dje@mail.bellcore.com)
=======================================
'79 R65 FrankenCycle - der Beemer
'87 535i BOHICA - der Bimmer
=======================================
DOD#1177, BMW-CCA#104316, BMW-MOA#64000
=======================================