Bike Costs

**wkid_one** · 9th January 2004, 14:47

Wow - seeing as I am now moving on to the great realm of past bikers 'Fell Off, Can't Ride, so giving it up' Club - I did a tally up to see what the priviledge of owning a bike cost me per year...well - bugger me....

Registration say $230pa
Petrol say $25pw (Only weekends - two fills 400km average)
Tyres say $600/6 months
Loan $250pfn (yes my choice)
Insurance say $100pm
Servicing say $250/6 mths

--> the loan payment is obviously higher than normal payments, but this is at my choice

This amounts to a shit load of money....$4680 excluding the loan.....this means - assuming I ride the bike once a week it is costing me $90pd to ride the bike - I am better off to hire the bike. This doesn't include the poor weather weekends where you can't ride.

Now, if I add the loan cost in to the bike - thats another $6000.

This excludes things like chains, sprockets, etc which happen. Lube etc is also omitted as this lasts ages and costs feck all.

Now - me is content with sitting in an air conditioned car with the music on, being able to carry more than a box of matches and a block of butter, being able to (if I had some) take more than one person, being able to actually just grab the keys and go without doing the 'Getting My Leathers On' Boogie, arrive somewhere in shorts and a singlet and without sweat dripping down my back.....but I still will miss biking.

The bike is now repaired - and shit I am nostalgic........but at that cost - it just isn't economic to keep it......add in to that paying the excess and my increase in insurance premiums from the accident........

**Hitcher** · 9th January 2004, 15:03

Man that is a sad story Wk1d. And here's me having left my violin at home...

**Big Dog** · 9th January 2004, 15:32

Originally Posted by Hitcher

Man that is a sad story Wk1d. And here's me having left my violin at home...

You'll be back. It aint about the money.

She's a vicious mistress is biking.

Heres 12 reasons I think you will be back, like it or not!
1. The more money you have the more she demands.
2. Some of the BEST moments in your life paid for with some of the worst.
3. A short ride can be good a long ride even better but a too long ride leaves you with sore balls and stiff thighs.
4. Quality of the ride is dependant on the time you spent preparing for the ride.
5. If she ain't lubed all through the ride there will be strange groans coming when you push it a little.
6. When you want to change jobs you have to consider her welfare.
7. The more often you ride her the less it cost you per ride.
8. Any good looking bike is also high maintanence.
9. Your wife resents your bike if you spend too much time with it.
10. If you treat your bike with care love and understanding she will never dump you, but other bikes will be jealous.
11. If you really love the ride nothing will make you let go, not money, not social stature, not even your wife.
12. If you do give her up there is a void in your heart, and it eats at you until you admit you will never be happy until you get her back.

**wkid_one** · 9th January 2004, 18:02

Wasn't intedned for sympathy - just totalled the costs is all.

Trail biking yes, racing yes, road biking never.

In rebut to your reasons: None of those really press me to ride on the road.
Racing is different however.....admittedly I was probably treating the road as a race track anyway...........but not on the road. WHY? I have a car that is paid for....I'll stick to getting my biking jollies on the track - when I am allowed

**onearmedbandit** · 9th January 2004, 21:38

Wkid One, these costs, and probably slightly more could be applied to an average performance car, say a WRX or RX-7. (More probably for insurance, tyres and fuel).

My point is that you can't unfairly single out bikes for high ownership costs, especially when you compare the relative performance factors between bikes and other means of transport. (not to mention grin factor)

**SPman** · 9th January 2004, 22:34

Just checked my data - cost me 41c / km, including fuel,
total cost of bike and all servicing and repairs, tyres, etc., over 45,500 km. - doesn't seem too bad to me for the jollies I've got out of it!

**wkid_one** · 9th January 2004, 23:38

Originally Posted by onearmedbandit

Wkid One, these costs, and probably slightly more could be applied to an average performance car, say a WRX or RX-7. (More probably for insurance, tyres and fuel).

My point is that you can't unfairly single out bikes for high ownership costs, especially when you compare the relative performance factors between bikes and other means of transport. (not to mention grin factor)

I wasn't - my god - read me post. All I was saying is this is what it cost when I added it up......I didn't pass any comment in comparison with the car - I even said I will MISS RIDING. I just said I am content driving the car.

plus if I was - me is comparing it with a company paid car....no contest.

I was merely adding up the cost for the priviledge of having a motorbike parked in my garage - no more no less. When you add it up - it is a lot of money for SECONDARY form of transport and a TOY (I don't commute - that is what work pay for me to have a car and car park for)....therefore comparing with a car is a ridiculous comparison......

**Lou Girardin** · 10th January 2004, 05:19

Good point, onearmedbandit. Compare bike costs to something close in performance, maybe a Ferrari or Lamborghini. A set of tyres for these things cost more than my bike.
Lou

**onearmedbandit** · 10th January 2004, 06:29

You were making a point about the cost of running a bike. Now to you a bike is weekend only fun, not a commuting tool. Thats fine. But if you replace that weekend only bike with a weekend only performance car the costs would probably still be more.

I wasn't trying to make a direct comparison with cars, just thats the most usual other form of vehicle that people will buy to get their thrills. Don't get your panties in a twist over it.

**wkid_one** · 10th January 2004, 10:10

Originally Posted by onearmedbandit

You were making a point about the cost of running a bike. Now to you a bike is weekend only fun, not a commuting tool. Thats fine. But if you replace that weekend only bike with a weekend only performance car the costs would probably still be more.

I wasn't trying to make a direct comparison with cars, just thats the most usual other form of vehicle that people will buy to get their thrills. Don't get your panties in a twist over it.

Ahhh- not getting my panties in a twist...was merely stating the cost of riding

**Redstar** · 10th January 2004, 13:28

I too have done the cost thing and really worked it out. I came to the conclusion that its is a myth that bikes are cheaper to run than Cars of average type. but you miss three fundemental points.

Point 1 Depreciation

Buy a car even a secondhand one and try to sell it the next day for $3000 less than you paid for it. (good luck)

Point 2 Joy

If you love the feeling of the process you'd pay for it right? if not don't do it take the Box or the Bus.

Point 3 Efficiency and ecology

If your sat in traffic burning gas and clogging up the Motorway

If you need more justification time to move on good luck

**onearmedbandit** · 10th January 2004, 18:02

Actually Wkid, you did make mention of a car, comparing it by saying air/con, ability to carry more than a matchbox and a block of butter, and lack of attire.

Anywayz, the inference from your post is that bikes are expensive to own. Correct? I thought so. My point is that compared to what cars has to offer in terms of grin factor, I'd pay twice as much as a car. But I don't, I pay more for my car.

**wkid_one** · 10th January 2004, 22:17

Ummm - people seem to be missing the point of my post. I was merely detailing the costs of owning a bike ON TOP OF OWNING A CAR. My bike is a weekend toy and as such is an expensive hobby. At no stage did I say driving a car was more preferable or that I didn't like riding a bike.

I was NEVER comparing it to the cost of owning a car - merely commenting ONLY on the cost of owning a bike.

I was merely indicating that I would have to be content with driving a car and the certain priveledges it has over riding (not discounting the opposites)....which they both have. Take today for example - I could take the missus and the dog out - in comfort for a swim - can't do that with a bike.

I love riding - and will still do it (track only) I have never discounted this nor denied it.

If YOU feel you have to justify why you ride - so be it, I wasn't passing an opinion - merely stating a fact as to my cost of bike ownership

It was the first time I had added up all the costs of owning a bike and was surprised is all at the cost.

Re Depreciation - work this out per trip on your bike?? As I only ride the bike in the weekends - depreciation to percentage of use is huge. Plus I have a company car - so depn isn't an issue. If you think bikes don't depreciate one arm you are living in a world of your own. With all the new model bikes coming out annually - your bike is depreciating quicker than you think.

Fuck - you make one simple statement and all the lunatics think you are criticising - is it a full moon or something?

**Racey Rider** · 11th January 2004, 07:27

Get real Wkid! There IS No Moon!!
It's just a optical illusion, Set up by the Americans,,, so they could then fake a landing on it!!
The cost to the earth of having a real moon would be far to great!