Author Topic: high mileage (Read 9454 times)

kitcrazy · « **on:** 20 July 2014, 06:45:47 pm »

hi all what do you guys think is high mileage for a gen1?i know the engine is ment to be bullet proof but if your looking to buy then when do think fuk that its had its day.

AyJay · « **Reply #1 on:** 20 July 2014, 07:26:37 pm »

It depends on so much, but I've seen the inside of an ex-despatch FZS1000 that had done 190,000 and it was immaculate. Every bearing was perfect. The guy changed the oil 2000 miles earlier than the scheduled 6000 miles. Then there is Denise.

http://www.okmsta.com/fz1grl/

Mine's done 124k on two engines (the first had the 2001 model dodgy second gear problem and it let go) and it's interesting to see the problems crop up as the miles pile on. I've ridden it through 12 winters, so the wiring is starting to show signs of verdigris now, the engine cases are pretty mankey and there's corrosion everywhere, but some things which I'd have expected to cause problems simply haven't. For example, who would have thought the original discs would still be good at 120k, and I've only just this last week had to replace the rear suspension bushes, and that was my fault as I'd not greased and checked them last year.

My local MOT guy who's now passed the bike 10 times says mine is in better working order than 3 year old bikes at 20k even though it looks like it's been at the bottom of a canal for a year.

In short, if it's been well maintained and not ridden in salt, 200k miles should be quite possible. If it's been ridden by a nutcase on the back wheel through winter and never had the oil changed, it'll be dead by 20,000.

But they are capable of interstellar mileages, no question about that.

stevierst · « **Reply #2 on:** 20 July 2014, 07:49:45 pm »

Just had some guy turn me down on my gen II because he said it was high mileage (31k):

I was giving him a good deal too.

jonesthesteam · « **Reply #3 on:** 20 July 2014, 08:02:20 pm »

Probably not a popular point of view, but I have bought a lot of bikes (and sold them) and I wouldn't look at anything over 30k, to me that is the point mileage starts to become "high", I think this is due mainly to lots of similar bikes having a lot lower mileage, so when shopping around I will see Fazer 600's with 30k or more priced around £1500 and many with less than 20k at about the same price. As long as condition and service history is good then it's a no brainer to buy the one with less miles.

A chap close to me recently had a very nice condition fazer 600 up for £1495, with 39k miles on the clock, after three weeks of no bites he has just dropped down to £1295 and is still struggling to find a buyer, nothing wrong with the bike but the miles are putting people off, if it had 15k miles on it would have sold straightaway

Just my tuppence worth

Jonesy

stevierst · « **Reply #4 on:** 20 July 2014, 09:01:19 pm »

I think it's 'old school' way if thinking. Back 20+ years ago a bike would be needing a rebuild at 30k, and the train of thought has never left the fold.
I've had bikes with 50+ thou, and there's been nothing wrong with them. Cars were in the same boat with 100k was seen as knackered, nowadays they change hands with twice that. Modern machinery is better built nowadays than ever before. Jap machines especially.

stevierst · « **Reply #5 on:** 20 July 2014, 09:01:44 pm »

I think it's 'old school' way if thinking. Back 20+ years ago a bike would be needing a rebuild at 30k, and the train of thought has never left the fold.
I've had bikes with 50+ thou, and there's been nothing wrong with them. Cars were in the same boat with 100k was seen as knackered, nowadays they change hands with twice that. Modern machinery is better built nowadays than ever before. Jap machines especially.

Lez72 · « **Reply #6 on:** 20 July 2014, 09:02:51 pm »

Having some proof of a decent service history and just gauging things from the general condition of the bike should be more important than the mileage really. As others have said above, things can be scrap after 20,000 miles if not looked after properly.

Having said that, I tend to walk away from anything with over 20,000 on it. Its a psychological barrier. I know 20,000 would be nothing on a car so why does that seem high for a bike ?

stevierst · « **Reply #7 on:** 20 July 2014, 09:38:10 pm »

I think it's 'old school' way if thinking. Back 20+ years ago a bike would be needing a rebuild at 30k, and the train of thought has never left the fold.
I've had bikes with 50+ thou, and there's been nothing wrong with them. Cars were in the same boat with 100k was seen as knackered, nowadays they change hands with twice that. Modern machinery is better built nowadays than ever before. Jap machines especially.

richfzs · « **Reply #8 on:** 20 July 2014, 10:23:12 pm »

Didn't quite get that Steve, come again?

AyJay · « **Reply #9 on:** 20 July 2014, 10:24:05 pm »

Sticky webpage Stevie?

It does seem true that bikers won't trust bikes that have mileages over 30/40k unless they're tourers like FJRs, Pan Europeans, BMWs and so on. That kind of bike seems to escape the panic that high mileage brings on. Sportsbike don't seem to get to those mileages. If anyone's in the trade on the forum, please do tell us, but I suspect they end up in breakers yards.

But there's no question, since metallurgy and manufacturing improved in the 1990s and water-cooling became standard, the mileages that bikes can tolerate have gone through the roof. I had an early 89 VFR750 that people rave about for reliability but in the years I had it and the 30k miles I put on it, the only thing that didn't need replacing was the engine. The exhaust rotted through (£1200 to replace back then), the rear bodywork cracked, the discs went, the suspension bushes needed replacing, the shock was done for… it cost a bomb.

These days, as long as they've been serviced and not raced, even sports bikes are probably good for 100,000. Mind, I'm not a dealer, I'm just going on my R1 based bike and 30 years of reading about bikes in magazines and the Internut.

And then there's Kevin Sanders and his round the world R1s. Now that thing took some punishment (up to the axle in sand in the deserts for instance see video) and didn't have a single problem. Meanwhile, the Charlie and Ewan BMWs had all sorts of issues.


Nick Sanders Parallel World Tour - Kenya and the Desert: Pt 2

stevierst · « **Reply #10 on:** 20 July 2014, 10:34:18 pm »

Bloody Tapatalk buggering me around again. Aaaaargh

(

Dave48 · « **Reply #11 on:** 21 July 2014, 07:02:57 am »

Nowadays for bikes& cars its not mileage thats the crucial factor-as already said metallurgy has come a long way since the 70s.
Take two similar bikes. First one has done low annual mileage,spending winters in shed,battery discharging,oil affected by cold & damp-with no protective treatment to surfaces,fasteners.
Second example ridden regularly,cleaned,treated with care.
Then theres the service history---the "paper trail" so to speak--that can tell you a lot.
So each case on its merits or otherwise.
example. Both bikes bought by me last year. Blue FZS 600 33k miles one owner.Had been ridden all year round. Bike clean & roadworthy BUT front of engine/underside never cleaned so corrosion of exhaust studs,nuts,headers,collector box,pipework & rad quite advanced. At 10 years old I spent quite a lot to put things right.
2nd bike 10 year old FZS 600, 3 previous owners,the first two only did summer dry miles & then 3rd owner did 5k miles in 12 months. I bought bike showing 12k & it rode like new.
So look for evidence of care, because its things like condition of fasteners,electrical connectors that tell you a lot,apart from all the obvious signs of drops/crashes.
Dealers use their "bible" of bike prices when doing trade-ins part exs and like cars most vehicle values drop off the scale at 7 years old.
The life span of modern machinery is more likely to depend on the cost of expensive/complex electronics failing which it will do eventually,making repair uneconomic.
In a nutshell I wouldnt be put off by high mileage if there was enough evidence of proper servicing/care. Its as important to assess the owner with some purchases as it is the machine!

PaulSmith · « **Reply #12 on:** 21 July 2014, 04:52:47 pm »

Like most people here, I don't thing that milage on its own tells you much about a bike. If I am looking at an older bike, for myself or someone else, then I don't want anything with much below 4k per year of age. Less then that and you are looking at a bike that has spent its life in storage instead of being ridden, and to me, that means it was owned by someone that didn't love it. I would rather have a 7 year old bike with 50k then a 5 year old one with only 5k on it. At 50k, I know that all the consumables have been replaced at least once, whereas on a very low milage bike, many parts might still be the 5 year old originals.

BMCfaz · « **Reply #13 on:** 22 July 2014, 10:31:00 pm »

I have to agree with those who say it's all about condition. FZS600s and Gen1s are all getting on a bit now, and I'm suspicious of anything with less than 3000 miles/year. WTF have the owners been doing with them?
My Gen1 has just gone over the 40000 mile mark and I regularly get asked if I want to sell it. It's ridden all year, but well looked after, and I see no reason why it can't go on for years more.
The biggest cause of problems with bikes and cars seem to be letting them stand doing nothing and not giving them a decent, regular run. So, if it runs well and everything looks as it should, buy the high-miler, you'll probably get a better deal and it'll run for years if you look after it!

Andy FZS · « **Reply #14 on:** 23 July 2014, 01:03:10 am »

My 2001 has just turned 10000 do you think I should wind the clock forward
Lol

Dave48 · « **Reply #15 on:** 23 July 2014, 07:00:06 am »

Quote from: Andy FZS on 23 July 2014, 01:03:10 am

My 2001 has just turned 10000 do you think I should wind the clock forward
Lol

No ----Just get out more!

Andy FZS · « **Reply #16 on:** 23 July 2014, 07:22:33 am »

Yes good call. Work less play more

stevierst · « **Reply #17 on:** 23 July 2014, 08:54:34 am »

Touche! Right, I'm off to get the bike out. :P

hotmetal · « **Reply #18 on:** 01 August 2014, 07:10:28 pm »

Oh well I'm glad to hear that not everyone thinks 30k+ is the end of the line! My 54-plate gen 1 has got about 32k on it and has never missed a beat. Some engine paint flaking off at the front but otherwise all good. If matey with the 40k bike gets asked if he'll sell maybe I should put mine up for sale!

stevierst · « **Reply #19 on:** 01 August 2014, 11:27:07 pm »

Keep it, ride it, enjoy it

Captain Haddock · « **Reply #20 on:** 03 August 2014, 06:14:13 pm »

Quote

and I'm suspicious of anything with less than 3000 miles/year. WTF have the owners been doing with them?

I bet I struggle to do 1000 miles/year, 500 would surprise me, I live 3 mins walk from work so firing the bike up would rot the internals with condensation, I spend weekends boating and drinking so that rules out biking, it's just an expensive toy realy, years ago I'd be embarrased by such an admission but thats how life turns out.

solorider · « **Reply #21 on:** 04 August 2014, 02:54:22 pm »

My bike has 74k miles and I have no issues with it, I have had a honda cx500 a few years a go with 95k miles which apart from worn valve guides it was rattle free and reliable, I have no issue with high mileage.