My Bike runs, handles and brakes great! 125 lbs ft of torque from a 4 valve 2 cyl engine is nothing to scoff at. You should test ride one before you say that I obviously don't appreciate performance! From what I can see, the BMW is only rated at 129 Lbs Ft of torque with all of those extra cylinders flying about? Torque is where it's at. Ask the 1970 Buick Gran Sport 455, only 350 bhp but 510 lb ft of torque. Fastest production muscle car in 1970 and one of the heaviest.
And Brother let me tell you, if you didn't have a little of that same cantankerous mojo left in your bones, then you would be posting on a Honda Gold Wing forum and not a Custom Vehicle Operations Harley Davidson Site.
I can assure you the performance difference in the two bikes is far greater than you illustrated. Had a guy with a pumped up Dyna keep screwing with me. Finally i got on it a little, literally blew him away.
The K1600's is only 1620cc, in a extremely well engineered straight 6cyl vs a much bigger twin.
The horsepower difference is dramatic without loosing low end torque.
You would be surprised at how many Harley owners really like the new B or bagger and GA grand America. K1600's designed for the American market here in Los Angeles by American Rolland Sands. My local BMW dealer has a 19 CVO Limited with roughly 500 miles. Traded in on a new K1600 B GA.
Seriously now; I've owned CVO's and still like the style. Not knocking them at all. As they say, a different kettle of fish. Designed with different objectives and target markets. Doesn't make one better than the other, just built for different buyers.
I'm happy seeing riders ride. What they choose is there choice, good for them.
Enjoy that beautiful CVO, just don't race a K1600

Sent from my SM-J327T using Tapatalk