RT - Twin Cam or LC?

Owen Snell

Well-known member
UKGSer Subscriber
Joined
Mar 10, 2008
Messages
2,133
Reaction score
0
Location
Gainsborough, England
The Twin Cam seems to get the nod on the GS, but reviews on the RT seem to lean towards the LC. Which is the better engine in an RT?
 
Both totally different, I ride TCs and own an LC RT. Like them both, but to me, the LC RT is a much smoother ride and I like it a lot, 17k in two years. But I would own either model
 
Both totally different, I ride TCs and own an LC RT. Like them both, but to me, the LC RT is a much smoother ride and I like it a lot, 17k in two years. But I would own either model

I concur, in that i currently have one of each, which is a story in itself, but - the LC is an advancement in most departments, but I'd happily take a good TC over a not so good LC. They are both very good bikes IMO.
 
TC all the way for me, I've had 2 TC RT's and love them, I traded one in for a LC GS and traded it back in a month for the second TC RT. I've also had four TC GS's and rate them over the LC all day.
 
I ride a 2010 TC usually however I had the opportunity to loan a 67 plate RT for two days and I rode it quite a bit.

Felt fairly different to my RT, the engine felt more capable as LCs do and I would definitely say it felt more sporty in its riding. I had to watch my speed a lot more as I was having so much fun in the twisties.

However I couldn't possibly justify the price of them compared to my twincam, I do not believe its worth double the price and a bit more as the TC is already a fantastic do it all bike. If you can afford it though I'd go for the LC as I believe it is overall a better bike. Cannot comment on build quality of the new one but my RT still looks fantastic at 43k in all weathers.

Sent from my G8341 using Tapatalk
 
I had a look around at Balderston Peterborough on Thursday as I was working in the area and also because they had a K1300GT that I wanted to compare to the RT.

On the RT, my knees completely miss the scallop in the tank and sit right on the widest part of the tank. It wouldn't work without much lower pegs.

On the GT, my knees are more bent, but there is a lot of leg room around the tank. Also, from the rider perspective, it felt less bulky.

Either would need lower pegs / higher seat, but I expect to have to do some mods to a bike to make it fit me at 6'4" / long legs.

When I get a chance, I'm going back down to have a ride on the RT and on the GT.
 
I have a Gs Lc Rallye which I wouldn’t change back to a Twin Cam.
I also have a R9T Urban which has the TC motor, now while I wouldn’t want the Lc in a R Nine frame I appreciate both engines, it depends on your riding style & your ££ pocket.
Suggest you do a long road test on an Lc then decide if you can go back
 
I went over to Jefferies today because they had a TC RT in stock. The TC fits me a lot better than the LC, the fairing cut outs clear my knees with the standatd pegs, so lower pegs should make it plenty roomy for me in spite of the long legs. Going for a test ride Monday.
 
Sitting on a GSA felt really roomy, but put a raised seat and lowered pegs into the cyclo-ergo site, the RT TC is pretty close.
 
The Twin Cam seems to get the nod on the GS, but reviews on the RT seem to lean towards the LC. Which is the better engine in an RT?

Your question was about the engine.
If it is about just the engine, then the LC wins hands down. It is more flexible, more torque and more power. Also better economy.
 
Your question was about the engine.
If it is about just the engine, then the LC wins hands down. It is more flexible, more torque and more power. Also better economy.

The debate moved on from just engine because the ergonomics on the LC are cramped for a tall, long legged person. My knees don't meet the cut outs, so lower pegs would be needed just to fit. Took a 2013 TC out today for a reasonable test ride and covered A roads, motorway, urban and some narrow lanes. The general impression was of competence, but a bit meh. The engine also a bit dull. Once I had my riding trousers on, that made the knee room cramped and I'm not sure that lower pegs would be enough to address the issue. I'd be inclined to give it a go if I loved it, but I didn't.
 
The debate moved on from just engine because the ergonomics on the LC are cramped for a tall, long legged person. My knees don't meet the cut outs, so lower pegs would be needed just to fit.

I know a lot of tall riders riding the LC (see Jeff Dean on the https://www.bmwlt.com/forums/rt-series/ forum).
He has no problems with long legs, however he has added Ilium BarBacks to give him better upper body posture.
It may be worth asking the same question on that forum, because I believe there are a lot more RT riders access that forum.
 
Gearbox diffrerences

Just a point on the gearboxes of each bike.
Owning a GSA Twin Cam & an RT LC has allowed me to compare the neutral to first gear change of each bike.
The LC has a wet clutch which has s smooth almost imperceptible change when cold, but once warm there is a significant clunck into first gear from neutral which I cannot prevent.
Even holding in the clutch for a few seconds and pre-loading the gear lever before pushing in down does not seem to help.
Both these methods seem to work on the GSA TC where the dry clutch set up seems much smoother from neutral to first gear.
On the TC, I like the principle that the gearbox runs in a more specific thicker oil designed for the application.
To me, running the gearbox of the LC in 5w40 oil from the engine seems a backward step in terms of smoothness, however I know it is necessary for the wet clutch set up.
Beyond this, the gear change on the LC seems a tad smoother in higher gears & the quick shifter is sublime on the upshift.
 
The LC has a wet clutch which has s smooth almost imperceptible change when cold, but once warm there is a significant clunck into first gear from neutral
Even holding in the clutch for a few seconds and pre-loading the gear lever before pushing in down does not seem to help.
Both these methods seem to work on the GSA TC where the dry clutch set up seems much smoother from neutral to first gear.

Agreed. My '17 is exactly the same. My '03 oilhead was almost always silent neutral to first (occasionally it had a sulk and clunked, but she was a lovely girl so I accepted the odd tantrum!).
HOWEVER, where it scores is the rest of the gearchanges. On my '17 they are amazingly smooth. This is the reason I didn't buy the first Wetheads. the gearbox was too clunky in all gears (for me).
So there is a significant improvement between the early and later Wetheads.



On the TC, I like the principle that the gearbox runs in a more specific thicker oil designed for the application.
To me, running the gearbox of the LC in 5w40 oil from the engine seems a backward step in terms of smoothness, however I know it is necessary for the wet clutch set up.

Hi GSite, sorry to disagree, but you are looking for a problem that isn't there. These gears running in suitable engine oil are just fine.

Beyond this, the gear change on the LC seems a tad smoother in higher gears & the quick shifter is sublime on the upshift.

Agreed. In fact, i'd say generally, a LOT smoother and a big amen to "the quick shifter is sublime on the upshift". I don't use it often, but when I do, it's brill'.
 
Hi bandytales,
Just wondered what your thoughts are on the potential for damage or excessive wear resulting from the clunk in the long term. When stopped for example at traffic lights it is tempting to hold the clutch in to avoid putting in neutral & hence the clunk, but this can also have detrimental effects in the long term. Which is the lesser of the 2 evils ?
 
BMW's have been clunking into gears (1st through to 6th) over decades. To my knowledge there is no trend of chipped teeth or excessive wear problems.... (just embarrassment as people look at you when you select a gear)!
Fulling in the clutch has no problems because it is disengaged from the drive, It is also immersed in oil to keep things lovely!
 
Had a road test on a demo RT the other day with 2000m on clock. All gears up and down ok and lovely smooth but 1st gear when stopped and re engaging is just like some one has hammered it home with sledge hammer. Whole bike shudders and jumps as it goes in gear not good at all. Definitely not good for drive line having such a sudden load almost like knocking into first without clutch in...
To prempt the learn how to change gear they all do that etc. Have had 1100/1150RT, 1150GSA and current 1200GS along with other flavours from the BM range 1200LT, 1200GT old and newer and R1200R so familiar with the BMW clunky box. Also usually had other bikes at same time Honda, Triumph so on. This is not a clunk but produces a noise and feel like the guys who used to knock the wedges out of launching ships used to get when the hit the chain locks away. Really made me think about getting one. Going to try another couple over next week or so, see if it was just that on.
 
Hi bandytales,
Just wondered what your thoughts are on the potential for damage or excessive wear resulting from the clunk in the long term. When stopped for example at traffic lights it is tempting to hold the clutch in to avoid putting in neutral & hence the clunk, but this can also have detrimental effects in the long term. Which is the lesser of the 2 evils ?

None I would say, there are some bikes around with 0ver 80k miles and no gearbox issues, mine has done 17k in the last two years and is fine.
 
Had a road test on a demo RT the other day with 2000m on clock. All gears up and down ok and lovely smooth but 1st gear when stopped and re engaging is just like some one has hammered it home with sledge hammer. Whole bike shudders and jumps as it goes in gear not good at all. Definitely not good for drive line having such a sudden load almost like knocking into first without clutch in...
To prempt the learn how to change gear they all do that etc. Have had 1100/1150RT, 1150GSA and current 1200GS along with other flavours from the BM range 1200LT, 1200GT old and newer and R1200R so familiar with the BMW clunky box. Also usually had other bikes at same time Honda, Triumph so on. This is not a clunk but produces a noise and feel like the guys who used to knock the wedges out of launching ships used to get when the hit the chain locks away. Really made me think about getting one. Going to try another couple over next week or so, see if it was just that on.
For the once the "They all do that sir" bit is pretty accurate. I don't like it, & if waiting at a pelican crossing say, where you know you won't be stationary for too long, I do hold the clutch in, whereas previously I'd happily have selected neutral. It's how they are, as were the K1200/1300 range.
 


Back
Top Bottom