Attitude towards kms on bikes

[tigertim20]

I was thinking today, I know, I know, an unusual and painfull occurrance in my world:crazy:
anyway I was thinking about the kms we put on bikes, and how this reflects in peoploes minds at purchase time.

So heres the question. at what point, do kms matter. heres the scenario:
two bikes, the same year, make and model. Both NZ new. Both have full service history. Both have been looked after exceptionally well, and neither have been raced, thrashed or binned. In fact, every aspect of the bikes is idenetical, except one thing. the trip meter.
The asking price on both bikes is the same.

The question is, how big of a difference in travelled kms on the bike, before you would start to favour one over the other?

For me, its probably around the 15k mark. Im not worried about slightly higher kays bikes, but I know some poeple who think 30k on a sportsbike is really high :eek5:
and I know people that think any bike which has travelled less than 100k is barely run in :gob:
what say you? how big (or small) of a difference in kays would lead ou to one bike over the other?

Oh, and as for the 'hot kays vs cold kays debate', lets say both bikes have only ever been on long rides, minimum of 200km.

[cowboyz]

well if they are both exactly the same apart from ks... then Id chose the lessor one. just so I can get more riding in before I run it to 100k!

I dont care about ks at all. Its just not important.

[White trash]

I was thinking today, I know, I know, an unusual and painfull occurrance in my world:crazy:
anyway I was thinking about the kms we put on bikes, and how this reflects in peoploes minds at purchase time.

So heres the question. at what point, do kms matter. heres the scenario:
two bikes, the same year, make and model. Both NZ new. Both have full service history. Both have been looked after exceptionally well, and neither have been raced, thrashed or binned. In fact, every aspect of the bikes is idenetical, except one thing. the trip meter.
The asking price on both bikes is the same.

The question is, how big of a difference in travelled kms on the bike, before you would start to favour one over the other?

For me, its probably around the 15k mark. Im not worried about slightly higher kays bikes, but I know some poeple who think 30k on a sportsbike is really high :eek5:
and I know people that think any bike which has travelled less than 100k is barely run in :gob:
what say you? how big (or small) of a difference in kays would lead ou to one bike over the other?

Oh, and as for the 'hot kays vs cold kays debate', lets say both bikes have only ever been on long rides, minimum of 200km.

I bought my HSV with 382000km on the clock above three we looked at between 165 to 220. Purely based on condition and the previous owners obvious pashion for his pride and joy. The glovebox literally could not be closed with the receipts for work and maintainence done right down to the exact kays he rotated the tyres.

Kays don't mean shit.

I'm riding an RF9, done 83 and it's smoother than any new one I rode, uses no oil and pulls like a schoolboy.

[Gibbo89]

i would say it is kinda relevant to the type of bike you are talking about. i.e a single cylinder commuter or a high revving machine. would you buy a 18,000 rpm screamer that had done 200,000k's?

[tigertim20]

i would say it is kinda relevant to the type of bike you are talking about. i.e a single cylinder commuter or a high revving machine. would you buy a 18,000 rpm screamer that had done 200,000k's?

its not relevant at all.
im asking about the difference between the two examples, not the total kays travelled.
i.ei one has 21k, and one has 25k or
one has 15k, and the other has 23k
etc etc

To above posters, i agree, the cbr600 I had, i took around to 140k roughly, and its still a fuckin beast!

im starting the thread because, in IMO, people put wayyyyy to much weight on the kms when balancng between two similar vehicles

[Gibbo89]

ahh i see. mis understood :pinch:

[SMOKEU]

It depends on the bike really. A bike with kms that seems suspiciously low, especially a JDM may be worth less to me than the same bike with higher kms provided it's in a good condition. A bike that has been sitting at the docks in Japan for a couple of years without being started surely can't be a good thing.

[tigertim20]

It depends on the bike really. A bike with kms that seems suspiciously low, especially a JDM may be worth less to me than the same bike with higher kms provided it's in a good condition. A bike that has been sitting at the docks in Japan for a couple of years without being started surely can't be a good thing.

read the first post and try again.

[meteor]

I bought my HSV .... glovebox literally could not be closed with the receipts for work.

LOL . Ya should have bought a Ford...

Sorry dude... couldn't resist it!

[98tls]

LOL . Ya should have bought a Ford...

Sorry dude... couldn't resist it!

Ya beat me to it.:pinch:

[98tls]

End of the day would be silly not to go with the lower km one eh.Fwiw from my selling cars days a year or 10,000 kms used to equate to a $1000 at retail time between similar vehicles,

[schrodingers cat]

I bought bike with 140,000k on the clock.
The price was right BUT the previous owner had kept meticulos records of maintanance and had compiled a massive dossier of technical info. The fact that he really cared sold it for me. He had never really thrashed it

Force (and wear) multiplies expotentially. If a bike has been given endless hidings with mega rpm then the wear is high. If they've just plonked around and opened it up occasionally then the mileage doesn't count for much.

Look for the widest 'chicken strips' and wear on the footpegs :eek5:

[tigertim20]

I bought bike with 140,000k on the clock.
The price was right BUT the previous owner had kept meticulos records of maintanance and had compiled a massive dossier of technical info. The fact that he really cared sold it for me. He had never really thrashed it

Force (and wear) multiplies expotentially. If a bike has been given endless hidings with mega rpm then the wear is high. If they've just plonked around and opened it up occasionally then the mileage doesn't count for much.

Look for the widest 'chicken strips' and wear on the footpegs :eek5:

note to self, sell bike with new tyres and pegs.:yes::yes::woohoo:

[98tls]

Pretty hard to apart from the obvious to tell if a bikes been thrashed if its been maintained and cared for at the same time,ive had my TLS for over a decade now and ride the thing less and less it seems as the years go by but in its lifetime its been ridden bloody hard at every opportunity,in fact abused would be a better term (thats the only way to ride one really) its been dropped twice but i defy anyone to pick it,i simply replaced the broken bits with new.I had a bloke wanting to swap his SV for it awhile back and his comment was "better than new".If only he "knew".;)

[Hitcher]

Given a choice between a bike with 9,000km and original tyres versus one with 20,000km and new tyres, all other things being equal, I'd go for the one with the new tyres.

Two reasons for that: I'm cheap and don't like having to spend more money than I need to; and because most OEM tyres can generally be bettered.

[neels]

2 identical bikes I'd go for the one with lower k's, for the same reason as stated above that it gives me more to play with before I'm trying to sell a 'high' mileage bike.

In fact I've just sold a bike for that reason, before it gets into the too high mileage category in peoples minds. After all, would you buy a 20 year old 600 with 100+k's on it? (I would, but there are also other things I buy that leads people to the conclusion that I'm slightly mad)

[NinjaNanna]

End of the day would be silly not to go with the lower km one eh.Fwiw from my selling cars days a year or 10,000 kms used to equate to a $1000 at retail time between similar vehicles,

Interesting - in reference to this thread with all other things being equal I would have said $250 for every 2500Kms, which is spot on with your car guide.

The reality is KM's directly equate to chain wear, tyre wear, proximity to next major service, km related failures etc, etc, etc

[tigertim20]

. After all, would you buy a 20 year old 600 with 100+k's on it? )

hehe, I did, then I put 40,000k on it, and then sold it in as good, if not better shape than I bought it!!!
good insight htough, it seems that people who themsleves dont see kms as a big issue themselves, worry about what the next buyer after themselves will think, reckon my questions pretty well answered

[PrincessBandit]

Pretty hard to apart from the obvious to tell if a bikes been thrashed if its been maintained and cared for at the same time,................ in its lifetime its been ridden bloody hard at every opportunity,in fact abused would be a better term (thats the only way to ride one really) its been dropped twice but i defy anyone to pick it,i simply replaced the broken bits with new.I had a bloke wanting to swap his SV for it awhile back and his comment was "better than new".If only he "knew".;)

While kays have always featured as an important statistic with any vehicle we've purchased (our bikes were from the show room floor, so talking more about cars here) Balu is very much a "how has it been looked after" type of guy.

What sorts of things can you see with bikes to tell you how they've been ridden? (And not talking about cosmetic damage from a drop necessarily).

[Dodgyiti]

I think that the engine is only a small part in why lower kms are better. Really when you are talking under 30,000 there is not a lot in it but the suspension and brakes have a bigger bearing on my choice.
Rear shocks (or shock) start to lose their damping fairly early, brake discs are generally a big ticket item so less kms is better as far as they go and forks wear as well.
Modern engines, even on sport bikes are pretty good. Lets face it- we are not talikng old British bikes here where they need reconditioning every 30-50,000 so the engine is not the area that would be of concern or really even a factor.
From buying a bike new most owners don't notice the rear shock losing performance but if you rode two bikes in the km range you are talking there may be a noticable difference between the two as far as suspension performance goes.
The other factor is other people's views on kms and the general thinking is that lower is better- keep that in mind for your own resale of what you buy.

[tigertim20]

While kays have always featured as an important statistic with any vehicle we've purchased (our bikes were from the show room floor, so talking more about cars here) Balu is very much a "how has it been looked after" type of guy.

What sorts of things can you see with bikes to tell you how they've been ridden? (And not talking about cosmetic damage from a drop necessarily).
to answer your question:
lots of things, service history for one.
looking at chains and sprockets. if they are getting quite worn, its a sign that the owner has done the basic stuff, bust hasnt paid attention to details, like how are the cush drives, is the steering head bearing still tight, but not notchy, same for swinger and wheel bearings. What color is the brake fluid, has it ever been changed or flushed?
Take a look at the oil, and the colour of the water in the radiator, this will also be a sing of how much attention they have paid to detail in its services.
What is the condition of the forks seals and dust caps. How much static sag is there in the front and rear suspension, are the springs due for replacement?, does the rear shock need a service? rebuild?
have a good look around all the engine casings, are there any signs of slight oil leaks? other little things can be looked at as well, like is there slack in the cables, a sign they are stretched/worn, and may need replacing. you can do all tht without touching any tools.

Anyway, the original questions was both bikes identical in every way, except in kms, but It seems people will also go for the lower kays, period.

[st00ji]

wouldnt you be silly not to take the lower kms bike in your highly hypothetical situation? certainly there is no benefit to having higher kms, especially with your removal of the 'hot miles' business.

personally i'd be happy to buy a higher kms bike if the price and condition is right, but the price needs to take the kms into consideration, almost regardless of condition - after all, a bike is worth only what someone else is willing to pay for it, and even those professing not to be bothered by higher kms would still take the low km example - if only for resale value.

[avgas]

K's don't always matter. But often do for me.
For simple facts that I understand some stuff will require replacing at certain intervals.

Cam-belts are a classic. If I had the choice between 2 $2000 cars, and one has k's closer to the cambelt replacement time, I will pick the lower km one.
Chances are I will replace the cambelt eventually anyway - but on the off chance that 2 months later I have to sell the car again, it would not have cost me that $$$ bucks in the short term.

Likewise if someone offers me a cheap bike with super high km's......I will look very seriously at it, but evaluate as if parts are going to fall off.
I might neglect lots of this if it has low km's. But I guess this is human nature.

[wysper]

The question is, how big of a difference in travelled kms on the bike, before you would start to favour one over the other?



With the proviso that all other things are equal, if it is only a few thousand different I would go for the colour I liked better, if it was more I would try to wangle a deal on the higher k one.
Can't hurt to try.

If it is over 20k difference I would definately expect a different price.

More a mental thing probably, although there was a good point made about major service intervals and if any big costs were coming up because of that.

[tigertim20]

wouldnt you be silly not to take the lower kms bike in your highly hypothetical situation? certainly there is no benefit to having higher kms, especially with your removal of the 'hot miles' business.

personally i'd be happy to buy a higher kms bike if the price and condition is right, but the price needs to take the kms into consideration, almost regardless of condition - after all, a bike is worth only what someone else is willing to pay for it, and even those professing not to be bothered by higher kms would still take the low km example - if only for resale value.

I think what I was asking has been lost in translation a tad. eg, sometimes a seller appearing very up front and honest seals a deal for me, getting a good 'vibe', bith from the bike and from the seller.

If the bikes were 500m apart, would it matter, 1km apart, 1000km apart? 3000km apart?
for me, if the difference was 10,000km or less, I would go on the vibe i get from the seller and the bike. It seems somepeople are stuck steadfastly on taking the bike with an odo of 25000, over the one with 25600, all other things being equal.

[Gremlin]

well, with identical bikes bar km, there is nothing else to compare. Who wouldn't take less km, once you remove servicing, type of km etc... I do big km, but workshop knows, if it needs to be done, or scheduled, then do it...

[oldrider]

Hmmm topical subject (sort of) currently being thought about in our house! :yes:

Got a car and my bike coming up for sale, both would probably be considered high mileage. (car 180,000km bike about 50,000km+)

Our vehicles never do short running or standing idle time, shortest regular run would be over 100km away.

Consequently the vehicles conditions belie their individual mileage on the odometer especially when compared to a similar city based vehicle.

Lots of life left in them both but ACC hikes mean we have to trim our motoring overheads and habits or stop eating! :eek5: