).Right, had an R1200R on loan for a couple of days and covered about 270 miles, mostly on one tankful, which was impressive. Took it on A-roads, d/c, London and some b-roads (both with and without panniers&pillion).
My overall impression : Gawd, it's a bit dull innit. :dozey:
Handling is good, brakes very good, engine has plenty of poke and the gearbox is the lightest BM box I've used yet, and yet.... and yet.... it's boring. Probably the first BM I've ever found boring. Yes, it does everything pretty well, yes it's well finished and has the usual toys: ESA, Info computer(Ambient Temperature, Range, ESA settings, two readouts that I assumed were mileage and reserve, but didn't seem to work
), Telelever, Paralever, Big panniers (the new style RT ones); and looks "ok" (more about that later), but it's utterly un-inspiring and a pleasure to get off. 
The main issue I had with my bike, which incidentally had a natty little flyscreen which I thought was actually quite effective, was the seat. It's a hoot PLANK and induced buttock ache within 30 minutes on every ride. BMW seats have been steadily getting worse these past few years, and aside from a pet consipiracy theory I have that the designer responsible has shares in Corbin, Sargent, Airhawk, and the people who make those odd sheepskin covers; I am at a complete loss to explain it. BMW seats made 30 years ago where good for multiple hundreds of miles in the saddle without stopping, the new ones would be better off being used for armco at racetracks and the riders left with the (probably more forgiving) frame rails! Message to BMW : hoot SORT IT OUT!!!
My other issue with the R1200R is the detail design. The overall concept I can understand, but (as with the Ducati 999) I cannot comprehend some of the industrial design that has gone into the bike (or maybe it hasn't!). The clocks for example, quite apart from the fact that they're dingle, hard to read (athough the gear selected display is VERY clear
); why the hoot are they stuck up in the breeze as if they were an afterthought!! I can quite genuinely see the very proud designer at BMW say to his Boss: "Here iz ze new klassic shape vor BMV, ve have lowered ze headlight to lower ze overall look ov ze machiner, and kreated a zlick image, ja!", only for the gruppenfuhrer to observe half-way through the pre-production run: "Vere's the instruments, Dumpkopf!" :rolleyes:The one spark of interesting riding I had out of the bike was when a TLGP on the first day got a bit heated and I neglected to change up through wanting to get away rapidly: the revs climbed up above 6K just as I got on the throttle properly and the front promptly lifted 2 feet without warning. (obviously the presence of pillion & panniers had nothing to do with this, ahem.
). I got the engine spinning up hard a couple of times on subsequent rides and there is a definite step in the output at 6K. Whether this is enough to make the bike interesting I'm not sure. I'm also not sure if it's appropriate in this bike. The R1200R is a bike for genteel riding by riders "of a certain age", and hooligans simply will not be interested by a bike that looks "like your Granny could ride it" (Thanks to Mitzi for that one. 
)I don't really know how well BM will do with this bike, I'm sure they'll sell a few, but I seriously doubt it'll be as popular, or as successful as the R1150R, and to be honest, I don't feel that it deserves to be as successful as that machine.
Normally I'd urge most riders to go to their nearest BM dealer and take a test-ride to see for themselves that BMs can be a real alternative to their usual choices, but in this case, I really don't feel that I can. The R1200R is a disappointing bike that I really didn't like.
)I love wheelies, unanticipated or not-my major gripe with the Rockster, you have to work at them. The r1200GS we had in NZ was much better; tho the big, laden givi topbox hanging out over the back doubtless helped 
