Why buy an old bike that may break often and pay huge ins. Find something cheaper on ins and spend the saved money on a newer one. A drz or ktm or klx etc. will wheelie just as well.
|
|
|
1998 gsxr
- Thread starter Paveal94
- Start date
TK4
Well-known member
Sigh - for a first street bike you're setting your sights way too high.
Buy something smaller that's easier to maintain, operate and insure then spend your extra $$$ on a race school or two (or three).
Get some good gear.
You'll learn more and be a better rider over the long haul.
Buy something smaller that's easier to maintain, operate and insure then spend your extra $$$ on a race school or two (or three).
Get some good gear.
You'll learn more and be a better rider over the long haul.
Last edited:
I have two older bikes, a 1997 and a 2000. Believe me, if you don't want to spend Monday to Friday evenings wrenching so you can ride on Saturday, look for something newer.
Luckily when one old jalopy doesn't start usually the other will, but that's not always the case.
Luckily when one old jalopy doesn't start usually the other will, but that's not always the case.
I understand I own a couple gsxr's. If you must have one buy one for the track and do track days. You can do 2 to 4 track days a month for the amount you will spend on insurance. Gsxr's are fast enough to have your vehicle impounded and your license suspended in 1st gear. Then you will never afford ins. again.
For what you're looking to pay for in insurance it would make more sense to buy a newer more reliable bike. Like it's been stated parts can be hard to find and who knows how many hands this bike has been through and what its maintenance history is like. I'd spend the extra bit of money to get something 10 years newer.
JTR
Well-known member
Ok, so you like the looks of those bikes. Every level of CBR looks pretty similar. CBR500R or CBR 650R are going to get you the same look with crazy lower insurance. The insurance savings is probably quite literally the payment on a brand new 650R.
(I'm trying to avoid the usual "you're gonna die" stuff, nobody ever heeds that business. Same with "it's more fun to ride a slow bike fast than a fast bike slow.".)
(I'm trying to avoid the usual "you're gonna die" stuff, nobody ever heeds that business. Same with "it's more fun to ride a slow bike fast than a fast bike slow.".)
I dunno... if your 20 yr old bikes aren't reliable, why don't you make them reliable?
My daily rider is a '89 Honda. It starts and stops as good as new.
My daily driver is a '84 Olds. It starts and stops better than new.
mostly I change the oil and drive the things. There is no great maintenance load. They just "GO".
I'm working on a 1970 Norton Commando, that whenever we can travel, I am planning on taking to New Brunswick.
Hell I have '56 Norton that'll start on the third kick... after it's been sitting for years... doesn't even need the battery charged. MAGNETO POWER BABY!!!)
If your post 1975 bike is unreliable, I would say that's on you, not the bike.
I agree 100%. My KLR is a 2006 and I consider it new. Not too long ago I sold my 1986 Goldwing after watching it 100K. Like bitzz if we could travel and I still owned it I wouldn't have thought twice about loading it up and heading for the Smokies with the Squeeze.
I'm putting a 76 Honda 750 back together (slowly) but when it's done I'll head out anywhere I'd take a newer bike.
I'm looking for a new (to me) 2 upper. As long it's comfy for 2, has lots of lockable storage and is "sportier" than wing I'll buy it regardless of age.
Is that with or without a crowd watching.....
One of my bikes has a parasitic electrical draw that I"ll eventually track down and deal with. My interim fix for it will be a master battery cut off switch (once I get around to it) so if I don't remember to put it on a tender, it wont have enough power to start the next time I want to use it.
The other bike starts all the time. I usually don't need to worry about it.
|
|
|
|
|