BMW R1200RT/R1250RT Forum

Quiet period of the year so plenty of time to think about just how things work. One thing that has always puzzled me is the unique BMW Telelever front Suspension. Looking at various drawings on the net and indeed looking closely at my own bike it looks like the only way that the fork sliders move up and down is due to the Ball Joint which attaches the Trailing Arm Link to the Fork Bridge. As the Trailing Arm moves in a constant radius and the Fork Sliders move in a straight line it is the Ball Joint which allows the effective length of the Trailing Arm to be constantly changed. Or are there some other "physics" at play !!.
So then I am wondering about the service life of this vital component. Does anyone have any experience of this ?.

I had to have it replaced on my previous 1600 after 15k miles, mostly on Spanish mountain roads, that was down to the bike's weight though, the RT being much leaner is probably going to last longer.

I have known them to go at a very young age but very few.  The vast majority go on and on and on.  It's sealed for life .  Test by holding on the brake and try rocking back and forth.  Alternatively lift the front shell and feel for play.  There should be none.

K1600 changed out at 9000 miles. Have now heard of a good few which have not lasted very long.
Dealer said it's quite common, it's also just over £600 for parts and labour

Jim wrote: K1600 changed out at 9000 miles. Have now heard of a good few which have not lasted very long.
Dealer said it's quite common, it's also just over £600 for parts and labour

Crikey, that's a shed load of cash and although the K1600 bike do have two joints (top and bottom) the cost of each at around $200 each does seem very very expensive. The single joint design of the R1200 bikes seems a bargain at around $150 for the joint. Thoughts on a grease nipple anyone !!.

Telelever ball joints are covered under warranty as part of the suspension.

Not a fair comparison with the 1600 which as well as having 2 joints on its duo lever set up has considerable more weight on it.  You cannot compare the two RTs either.  on the LC it looks like the ball joint is an integral part of the cross brace and has no seperate part number.  That's going to add to any replacement cost but hopefully it's an improved design.  But if it's covered by extended warranty I for one won't loose any sleep over it's lifespan.

DaygloDavid wrote: Telelever ball joints are covered under warranty as part of the suspension.

This may well be the case and will indeed offer comfort for those who do have the a current warranty in place. However it does seem that failure of this vital component is at best spasmodic and unrelated to mileage. So in reality one could be the owner of an "out of warranty" bike with a relatively low lileage which suffers failure.
I do remember many years ago when I owned a Rover 2000TC which required one of the front suspension Ball Joints replacing. A local independent Rover Specialist in the as it was then, West Hartlepool removed the new joint from it's box, carefully eased back the rubber boot to show me the lack of grease contained therein.( You could just picture someone on some component assembly bench with a pot of grease and a stick putting a "dab" on one side of the joint.) The mechanic completey packed the new joint and boot with grease before fitting to the car. Not saying that BMW don't have their components properly greased but the rather random failure record could point to inconsistant component assembly practices.

RTman10 wrote: Not a fair comparison with the 1600 which as well as having 2 joints on its duo lever set up has considerable more weight on it.  You cannot compare the two RTs either.  on the LC it looks like the ball joint is an integral part of the cross brace and has no seperate part number.  That's going to add to any replacement cost but hopefully it's an improved design.  But if it's covered by extended warranty I for one won't loose any sleep over it's lifespan.

Just had a look at the Parts fiche and you are indeed correct. It does look like the Cross Brace and Ball Joint are supplied as an assembly(at a cost of $510) Out of interest it would be nice however to have a good look at at actual bike to see just how the Ball Joint is attached to the Cross Brace. (Photo Anyone ?).

If you got the price from Real OEM it's all boll...k and is normally nothing like the true price.  In this case though I can believe it.

Not easy to photo on a frosty morning but it looks a much heavier/larger joint than the earlier version.  it seems to be an integral part of the cross brace .

RTman10 wrote: If you got the price from Real OEM it's all boll...k and is normally nothing like the true price.  In this case though I can believe it.

http://

Prices from Max BMW http://www.maxbmwmotorcycles.com/fiche/fiche.aspx

Judging by the prices listed for my recently replaced Handlebar Switch I have found Max BMW listings to be a good guide.
Thanks for the picture, as you say it does look like the Ball Joint is indeed integral with the Cross Brace.

Not surprising they went to a unit. 

If you look at a-arms on cars now the ball joint is part of the a-arm and that is how you replace the ball joint.

Easier and faster to replace the whole a-arm then pressing out/in new ball joint.