New guy: 50/2 or 60/2 - WHICH WOULD YOU BUY?

[jeffrey]

Hello! I'm brand new to this group (thanks for having me) and I'm searching for my first vintage BMW.

I've owned 6 different BMW's in the past and now have my sights set on either a 50/2 or a 60/2 (or a cheap 69/S if one falls out of the sky LOL)

I've done some homework on both bikes, but there's no substitute like hearing from owners of both as to why they'd pick one over the other, so...

Which one would you you rather have?

My riding will be mostly day trips around Northern California with occasional overnight trips and one or two multi-day tours per year.


Thanks!

[thanson]

Definitely the r60/2. More power.....these bikes didn't make much power to begin with.....at least with the R60/2 you can for the most part keep up with modern traffic. They cost the same to work on, why not get more displacement?

[malmac]

Jeffrey

I have owned two of the models and ridden all four options.

If the options were all in an equal state of preservation I would make the following comment.

R50/2 - the sweetest motor
R50s - sporty but with limited real world performance
R60/2 - you can't go wrong with this one - the compromise model of them all
R69s - sporty with reasonable power - but this is not real performance by modern standards

Which one would I buy?

I would look for the most complete and best running option, unless you really just want a project for the shed.
Any of the models in poor condition will cost a pocket full of cash to get good and any of the models in good condition will be a pleasure to own and ride.

I hope that helps just a little.


Mal

[schrader7032]

Agree to focus on the R60/2 for casual putting. The R69S is more sporty, more power, but can be a bit more finicky. I'd try to get one as late as possible in the year range...something built in 1968 or 1969. Then it will have the latest "upgrades".

Note that during the late period 1967-1969, the R60/2 could also come with US forks, or the type of fork that was later going to be used on the /5 in 1970. If you like that sort of thing, something to consider. But it can be "cooler" to get an Earles fork from this period...just to have the pleasure of owning the last of its kind.

Be aware of the "butterheads"...some of the metal finishing during the 1967-ish period resulted in problems with the rocker towers in the heads. If you can find a head with the letters "LK" molded near the spark plug hole, then those are not butterheads.

https://w6rec.com/heads-and-butterheads/

[DanAtsma]

I’ve owned all three, currently have two R69S’s and a R60, I enjoyed the R50 but felt like I was always struggling to hold 60 mph (to be fair I’m a big guy), cost wise the R60 is your best buy but the R69 is likely the best investment. I honestly don’t feel much difference between performance between the R69’s and the R60 and they will run 60 all day long

[miller6997]

Personally, if I had to choose I would go for the R50 because is such a pleasurable ride. But I already have an R69S, so I have the additional distance cruising capability when I want it. If I had no /2 at all and the R69S was out of reach, I would buy the R60 for the reasons already expressed. Duane Ausherman, regarded by many as a font of /2 wisdom, has always argued that the R60 is failure prone (piston seizure most often), but not everyone agrees with him.

(Side note: My brother has two unrestored R50 models moldering in his garage, and one of these days I will persuade him to put them into my deserving hands.)

[jeffrey]

Thanks for the comments, folks. I think an R/60 would be my first choice, but I'm curious about just HOW slow an R/50 is by comparison. I'm not looking for something speedy, but I would like to keep up with and feel safe in traffic.

I'm kinda ruling out a 69/S mostly because the prices I'm seeing are crazy high. Worth every penny, but the wallet has it's limits...

[miller6997]

We all weigh risks in different ways. In my view, present-day traffic is nuts and I just try to stay the hell away from it as much as possible, even on the R69S. The fact is, on any /2 you simply cannot keep up and feel safe in heavy, fast traffic. The modest added power of the R60 over the R50 will make little noticeable difference in 70MPH+ traffic. Nor will your brakes serve you very well when you need them most. I live on the northern edge of the Los Angeles basin and can quickly escape into the mountains and desert. When I'm on two wheels, that's where I go. On back country, two lane roads, any /2 would be just fine, as long as you don't have a pack of knee-and knuckle-dragger sport bikes passing you in a curve.

[Beemer100]

I would agree with Jon. Any /2 can make a 60mph for as long as the driver can make it. The R69S has most reserve power, the R69 a bit less but IMHO a way smoother engine. I own both and I would always pick the R69 before the S.
Then we come to the "bred and water" versions of the /2, the R50 and the R60. If you want to put a sidecar to the bike, the R60 is the choice due to the extra punch. Solo, IMHO, it doesn't really matter. My wife rides a R50/2 which makes 145kmH high speed without any problems and as Mal said ... super smooth engine.
Anyway, all of this is only valid, if you stand in front of all of them and you can pick and choose. But this situation is rather unrealistic. So, I would pick them according to the budget you have. Then make sure you get best quality for your bucks. Some comments above were made about butterheads. This is very important. If you know someone who knows these bikes, bring him!
Investment grade ...? Not sure I would use this as a shopping argument. When the time comes you want to separate, there won't be anyone left who knows how to drive a motorcycle and on the other hand, there will be tons of black little beemers for sale ... what I want to say: God knows what happens to the value of our bikes but it doesn't really matter if you have fun between buying and selling!

my 2 cents
Klaus

[schrader7032]

Owners manual has published performance information...see pages 11 and 12 for maximum speeds and acceleration info:

https://bmwdean.com/1966-owners-manual.htm

Strange that the R50 is faster in time to 100 kph. Guess it's the different rear ends. R50/2 supposedly has a 35/11 (3.18:1) while the R60/2 has a 27/8 (3.13:1).