Talk:History of BMW motorcycles

Radial engoine 5-cylinder
During the 1920s BMW produced a bike with a 5-cylinder radial engine inside the front wheel. The crankshaft was stationary, while the cylinders spun around it together with the wheel, as in early airplanes. Can anyone update and possibly find a picture? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.71.212.133 (talk) 22:40, 12 March 2014 (UTC)


 * First of all, new sections are to be placed at the bottom of the talk page, which is where I have moved this section (The content added to the section before my reply is otherwise unaltered; checking the history will show this.)


 * Secondly, what you describe sounds like the Megola motorcycle, which was not made by BMW.


 * Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 00:42, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on History of BMW motorcycles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121114093921/http://www.motorcyclemuseum.org/asp/classics/bike.asp?id=71 to http://www.motorcyclemuseum.org/asp/classics/bike.asp?id=71
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.bmw-motorrad.co.uk/com/en/services/techniquedetail/lexicon_view/duolever.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:41, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Merger proposal
I propose that History of BMW motorcycles is merged into History of BMW, so that the motorcycles appear alongside the equivalent sections for automobiles and aircraft. Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 02:03, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose — Merging isn't necessary in order to make History of BMW as comprehensive as it needs to be, per WP:Summary style. It's not a zero sum game where one article must lose so the other can gain. We shouldn't be afraid to be redundant. The main history of BMW article shouldn't cover the lesser motorcycle history details. Not every motorcycle or motorcycling event had much on an impact on BMW as a whole. But there's no reason why anyone should hesitate to make History of BMW the best article it can be. Motorcycles should be covered in as much detail as necessary, balanced against BMW's other products and divisions, limiting the article to a reasonable size. Meanwhile, History of BMW motorcycles can go to town delving into motorcycle history that wouldn't be significant enough to be covered in the main article, or won't fit because the car and plane material requires more space, per WP:DETAIL. If it came to pass that the main history article was a paragon of comprehensiveness, even reaching GA or FA status, and yet somehow the motorcycle history couldn't find more content to elaborate and expand on that in a meaningful way, leaving it 100% redundant, then a merge would be justified. Then we could merge, but that is difficult to imagine. Consider the FAs History of Biology and History of evolutionary thought for analogs. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 04:39, 3 August 2019 (UTC)