Newer or less k's?

**Ragingrob** · 31st January 2010, 11:30

Just a simple poll.

Picture this - You're after a new bike, you have $xxxx, you find two bikes of the same make and overall model, one is a 2000 with quite a few k's, one is a 1990 with less than half those k's, they're both asking $xxxx... Which would you go for?

Holding all other variables, such as how well the bike has been looked after, constant.

Would you go for a newer bike with more k's or would you prefer to have less k's but on an older bike?

Share any reasoning you have behind your choice!

**Taz** · 31st January 2010, 11:41

There's just so many variables to consider. I'd get the one in the best condition and offer the lowest acceptable price and start from there.

**Ragingrob** · 31st January 2010, 11:56

Originally Posted by Anthrax

There's just so many variables to consider. I'd get the one in the best condition and offer the lowest acceptable price and start from there.

And if they were in pretty much the same condition? Would the year or the k's have a bigger impact on you?

**McWild** · 31st January 2010, 12:04

If they're in the same condition outside and in, same life left in both and so on then the newer bike. Because it's probably a better overall bike.

Unless the older bike is a classic? So many variables, the question is impossible without real world examples.

**Ragingrob** · 31st January 2010, 12:10

Originally Posted by McWild

If they're in the same condition outside and in, same life left in both and so on then the newer bike. Because it's probably a better overall bike.

Unless the older bike is a classic? So many variables, the question is impossible without real world examples.

Fair enough. Out of the corner of my eye I'm glancing at these kinda bikes - 99 cbr600, 96 zx6r, 95 cbr600 and 90 zxr750.

The 750 is the cheapest but the oldest, though has less than half the k's of my current bike. But with the newer bikes the 600s would all be probably quicker than the 750 I'd think.

I guess it'd also just come down to my personal preference to which one I feel more comfortable on.

**Mully** · 31st January 2010, 12:12

I'd prefer newer with higer KMs if everything else was equal.

**shrub** · 31st January 2010, 12:48

It would depend a lot on the bike. I like classic/retro bikes, so modern technology is of little interest to me personally, therefore an older bike with low Ks is what I would look for. However if I was buying a sports bike I'd go recent because the technology improves. For example a 675 Daytona is a better bike than a 650 or 955 Daytona, and if the servicing was kept up with, there is no reason why a modern bike shouldn't give you 150,000 ks plus.

It's also worth looking at what service is coming up. For example, a major service can cost the thick end of a grand, and if a bike is a couple of thousand Ks of that, it's not as good a deal as a bike that has just had a major service. The most important thing you can do is look at the service history. I do all my own servicing, but have a diary that I note everything I do and staple receipts for oil, filters etc. It's not official, but if I ever sell my bike I can show that it has had nothing spared in keeping it sweet.

**LBD** · 31st January 2010, 13:28

the newer higher km version

**puddy** · 31st January 2010, 13:49

Originally Posted by Ragingrob

Fair enough. Out of the corner of my eye I'm glancing at these kinda bikes - 99 cbr600, 96 zx6r, 95 cbr600 and 90 zxr750.

The 750 is the cheapest but the oldest, though has less than half the k's of my current bike. But with the newer bikes the 600s would all be probably quicker than the 750 I'd think.

I guess it'd also just come down to my personal preference to which one I feel more comfortable on.

Buy an '89 and race in Posties!

**p.dath** · 31st January 2010, 14:00

I'd probably go for the newer bike. I could be reasonably confident it has been used regularly (rather than left sitting in a shed for months at a time). And you said to assume the same maintenance. Probably easier getting parts for a 10 year old bike versus a 20 year old bike.

**Ragingrob** · 31st January 2010, 14:31

Fair enough, cheers for all the comments so far!

**tigertim20** · 31st January 2010, 14:58

hmm, the same price, for essentially the same bikes ten years apart? the gap of ten years between the two would seal it for me, I would go the newer one hands down.