Buying adv bike sight unseen?

[bart]

I had a DR350 and it was a good bike. Now I have a DRZ400, which is a GREAT bike (if not doing huge distance).

If the km's on that one on trade me are correct, it would be hard to beat. A one legged man must have owned it though, as there is bugger all wear around the frame/engine cover beside back brake lever.

[NordieBoy]

If the km's on that one on trade me are correct, it would be hard to beat. A one legged man must have owned it though, as there is bugger all wear around the frame/engine cover beside back brake lever.

Not everyone is as hard on bikes when there's a camera around as you.

[SlowHand]

I had a DR350 and it was a good bike. Now I have a DRZ400, which is a GREAT bike (if not doing huge distance).

If the km's on that one on trade me are correct, it would be hard to beat. A one legged man must have owned it though, as there is bugger all wear around the frame/engine cover beside back brake lever.

Yeah I did note lack of wear on both sides, but I read the brake lever is the first thing to puncture the engine cover so maybe it's been down and replaced? Nothing a few Q's and viewing wouldnt clarify

[XF650]

I would be reluctant to buy used bikes sight unseen, without getting someone independant to check them out. There's much that can't be seen in a pic, plus there are often different expectations of what meets a certain standard. Newer / low km bikes might be an exception but remember that most adv bikes have been off road and through water, plus many have been dropped.
Enjoy the excuse to test ride as many different bikes as you can.

[bart]

I would never buy anything of value unseen (unless new). But I'm a tight bugger. It takes far too long to earn the stuff, to go throwing it away.

A mate of mine bought a bike off TM a couple of years ago. We both went and checked it over one night. Met the guy at a pub half way. Had a real good look over it. Took it for a quick thrash (well, it was a CR500). Handed over the $$$$. Loaded up and took it home.

Next morning, on closer inspection, we found it was a real shitter. Metal putty everywhere. Lesson = TAKE A TORCH.

On the up side, for the amount he paid, he still got a bargain.

[merv]

Which one has the better spread of gears... the DR350?

Yep the DR350. I use as a measure of spread the ratio between first and top gear because if you are looking to do all things with the one bike you want nice low gears for the hard out bits and a tall top gear for highway cruising.

On my scale a DR350 has a ratio of 3.026 on that measure whereas the DRZ400 is only 2.647. As a comparo the DR/DRZ 250 is 2.925 whereas the Honda XR250s are 3.402. This is why I grizzled about the close ratios on the Suzuki 250 when I had that because I was used to the Honda type ratios and have gone back to them now and can't complain any more.

[bart]

Yep the DR350. I use as a measure of spread the ratio between first and top gear because if you are looking to do all things with the one bike you want nice low gears for the hard out bits and a tall top gear for highway cruising.

On my scale a DR350 has a ratio of 3.026 on that measure whereas the DRZ400 is only 2.647. As a comparo the DR/DRZ 250 is 2.925 whereas the Honda XR250s are 3.402. This is why I grizzled about the close ratios on the Suzuki 250 when I had that because I was used to the Honda type ratios and have gone back to them now and can't complain any more.

You're missing one point though. Torque. With more torque you can use more of the rev range in each gear, so can get away with narrower ratios.

[bart]

Not everyone is as hard on bikes when there's a camera around as you.

Yeah I know. Best to stay behind the camera, not in front of it.

[warewolf]

With more torque you can use more of the rev range in each gear, so can get away with narrower ratios.

Yebbut that just means in a narrow gearbox you get heaps of overlap between the gears, for the same low/high speed overall.

Much smarter to spread the gears out and utilitise the torque to create a greater difference between achievable low and high speeds.

[warewolf]

On my scale a DR350 has a ratio of 3.026 on that measure whereas the DRZ400 is only 2.647. As a comparo the DR/DRZ 250 is 2.925 whereas the Honda XR250s are 3.402.

The DR650 is 2.93 and the 640A 3.06.

3.4 would be nicerer.

Be interesting to see the numbers on the BMW 1150GS with/without the overdrive 6th. Tall enough that it isn't effective for overtaking near the speed limit... as it should be.

[CRM]

If you're looking at mostly road I'd say the DR350 would be better than the DRZ400 - lower seat height and just better manners. I would check out the Pampera 400 though as they would have the performance of the DRZ but be better on the road (lower seat height).

I had a DRZ400 and found it unpleasant on the road. I had a 250 Pampera (2-stroke) which was totally different to the 400 Pampera being a 4 stroke. I've had a sit on a 400 Pampera and liked it a lot. Then I rode an XR600 and fell in love with the power and decent road manners. pretty good off road too as long as you think ahead (ie if possible stay out of places where the weight and lack of e-start will be a problem). I've learned not to be put off so much by the age of bikes either - the old DR's and XR's were killer machines and simpler than the modern ones.

I've also bought a couple of bikes sight-unseen and had no problems. I think you can suss out a person by talking on the phone and by what they say in emails and if you have suspicions move on.

[merv]

Yebbut that just means in a narrow gearbox you get heaps of overlap between the gears, for the same low/high speed overall.

Much smarter to spread the gears out and utilitise the torque to create a greater difference between achievable low and high speeds.

Eggsackery, the more torque an engine has the wider the ratios can be without a problem. That's why I haven't understood the change to closer ratios on a lot of these dirt bikes with fairly large engines.

To make my Suzuki 250 even vaguely capable in the dirt I had to put a 12t front sprocket on it in place of the 14t and then I had to go up and down the gears too much and it seems pointless that a 400 has a closer ratio box than that had.

[bart]

Yebbut that just means in a narrow gearbox you get heaps of overlap between the gears, for the same low/high speed overall.

Much smarter to spread the gears out and utilitise the torque to create a greater difference between achievable low and high speeds.

I'm the first to admit the DRZ400 has a too closer ratio box, (I was actualy meaning more along the lines of the DR650), but............with more torque, you can gear it high for the road, but still have enough grunt to lug along in a high first. Technical tracks through trees and hill climbs are a different story, but all adventure riding is a compromise, and that is really dirt bike terrain.

[SlowHand]

Right, now I'm even more confused. Haha. Comes with learning more so thanks guys.

Seems they're all good in there own way. I'll sort something out with those bikes then report back. Spose the cheapest non-lemon bike will be most ideal until I decide what riding I really enjoy.

[warewolf]

but............with more torque, you can gear it high for the road, but still have enough grunt to lug along in a high first. Technical tracks through trees and hill climbs are a different story, but all adventure riding is a compromise, and that is really dirt bike terrain.

It'd be much less of a compromise if the gearbox had a better spread to suit the broad torque range (and dare I say it, dual uses) of most dual-purpose bikes. There's way too many adventure riders want more gear spread, even if they aren't doing single track through the trees. Part of the problem is simply not wanting to rev hard at highway cruise - even if you have the torque spread, you just don't want to be spinning the engine that hard.

The best compromise for longer trips is to swap out front sprockets, but that's not so good when you are in & out of rugged stuff en route.