U.S. Specs difference?

[Hoffner]

How does the U.S. spec R90S differ from bikes sent to the rest of the world? Does a U.S. version differ in desirability?

[darmahman]

If you really want to know, get Ian Fallon's R 90S book from AMAZON. It is the best R90S book out there and they just republished it a few months ago. $30.00

[kirkpatrick3890]

ROW, for "rest of world" bikes are bikes not meant for the US but for all other locations. The differences are minimal; mph versus kph (except for he UK and a few other mph places
Under seat and cockpit stickers in different languages, US bikes had front and rear DOT mandated reflectors, the "big pipe" 40 mm exhaust bikes did not come into the US through the dealer network after the 1977 model year, but continued for years later for other countries, and different locations elected to import their own color combinations. Plus ROW and US bikes have their own unique serial numbers. Other countries may have had greater availability of kick starters, and certainly some models were shipped to some countries but not others (late R80G/Ss went to S. Africa for instance, but not elsewhere.)
I think that is all.

[srankin]

Mac pretty much covers it.

The R90S in its three year run was the same spec for the US and "the rest of the world".

Engine differences didn't come into play until 77, Then, things got different but by then the R90S was gone. I would think part of its demise was due to the new and stricter US emissions rules coming into play. St.

[schrader7032]

It was my understanding that the EPA standards were required beginning January 1, 1978. I think part of the detuning was changing the degrees BTDC of the timing marks. There may have been some initial changes that began in the later parts of the 1977 model year but I'm not aware.

[srankin]

I most likely have my EPA date wrong.

I know the DOT had some changes kicking in as well. For example in 78, the headlight always on was mandatory.

There is no denying the pre 78 BMW bikes had the most power and ran the best.

I wonder why the R90S only ran for three years? Was it the cost to build? I would say that is the number one reason.

The R100S bike to follow had cheaper carbs, cheaper paint, but the purchase cost was close to the R90S.

The quality and performance of the R90S cannot be denied, nothing BMW has come out with matches or comes close. The R90S was a bike head and shoulders above anything on the market. The bikes that followed with a few exceptions, became more and more like the other maker's bikes.

Today's BMW is a shadow of the R90S high tech yes, but, not as different in quality tech and performance as the rest of the market. St.

[schrader7032]

St -

I'm sure that "bean counters" were involved in the evolution of the brand. But I suspect that the demand for a larger engine at 1000cc was a wide request from owners. Plus, Hans Muth's newest creation, the R100RS was waiting in the wings. As ground breaking the R90S was, the R100RS sent BMW off in a whole 'nuther direction. For the better? Only in the eyes of the beholder!

[srankin]

Considering my favorite BMW is the airhead RS, it is a thought.

Bean counters are involved in any project, the problem today is they are too much involved and overshadow what made BMW bikes great. St.