Page 1 of 2
If you could only have 1 (low-cost) bike, what would it be?
Posted: Thu Jun 11, 2009 6:13 pm
by Rocket
Just for fun, putting the 1200R to one side for the moment, if you could have just 1 bike and you had a very limited budget (max $2000-$3000 / £2000 ), what bike would you choose and why?
Somebody start....... I'm still tying to make my selection
Re: If you could only have 1 (low-cost) bike, what would it be?
Posted: Thu Jun 11, 2009 6:30 pm
by Bheckel169
Have it. the 07 Kawasaki Versys.
Bruce
Re: If you could only have 1 (low-cost) bike, what would it be?
Posted: Thu Jun 11, 2009 6:46 pm
by TAG-Caver
Suzuki DR650. Reliable as a stone hammer, easy to maintain, and a ton of fun. I think mine costs about $50.00/year to insure. It's my favorite commuter bike and I even play in the dirt once in a while. For low cost fun or even if money is no object, a thumper is tough to beat.
Kevin
Re: If you could only have 1 (low-cost) bike, what would it be?
Posted: Thu Jun 11, 2009 7:11 pm
by lewellen
Rocket wrote:Just for fun, putting the 1200R to one side for the moment, if you could have just 1 bike and you had a very limited budget (max $2000-$3000 / £2000 ), what bike would you choose and why?
Somebody start....... I'm still tying to make my selection
KLR650 or other 600-700cc range thumper - but I prefer the KLRs. Reasonably reliable, cheap to operate (good gas mileage, low insurance costs), very nimble in the twisties and nice and narrow for a commuter ... and with the typical KLR color scheme, little chance someone would steal it. :-) Of the thumpers, I find the KLR fits me best, and I think it also has the biggest gas tank, making it a surprisingly functional touring machine with a few fairly cheap upgrades.
Or, if I found one in good shape, an '85-ish CB650SC or CB700S Nighthawk. About the only maintenance required is change the oil every 3k miles and change all the fluids once per year. Shaft drive, hydraulic valve lash adjustment, automatic cam chain tensioner, handles quite well for its age, and a fairly bulletproof engine IF the oil has been changed regularly (with the possible exception of the cam chain tensioner - it's a wear item and you do occasionally need to change it). The only downside I saw on these bikes was the 3 gallon peanut tank, and consequent 100-mile-ish range.
Good roads,
- John L.
Re: If you could only have 1 (low-cost) bike, what would it be?
Posted: Thu Jun 11, 2009 8:33 pm
by motoracer8
Suzuki SV650
Ken G.
Re: If you could only have 1 (low-cost) bike, what would it be?
Posted: Thu Jun 11, 2009 11:46 pm
by sweatmark
Depending on intended use: each option purchase used (carefully)
Classic touring - BMW airhead /5
Adventure - Suzuki Vstrom 650
Thrashing & trackdays - Buell XB9S
Re: If you could only have 1 (low-cost) bike, what would it be?
Posted: Fri Jun 12, 2009 1:55 am
by CRazyCam
Dunno how your prices go, compared to ours in Oz, but, I got an R850R, 1998 model, about a year ago for $5.000.
I needed a "shopping" and carrying wife bike, had short-listed various, found the BM, and, after a fairly short time riding it, consider that, if I could only have one bike, that's the one I'd keep.
regards,CrazyCam
Re: If you could only have 1 (low-cost) bike, what would it be?
Posted: Fri Jun 12, 2009 4:37 am
by thepeacebullgrunt
I use to own a Black Suzuki GSX-1100G-1992 bought at 11K for $1100.
Its an heavy bike but didn't have any major issue on it until 97K when I sold it for $600.
You can get one for $900 to $2200
They tend to spend too much gas while getting old but this is just some needles to change in the carb...cheap and easy procedure for mechanic experienced guys.
Re: If you could only have 1 (low-cost) bike, what would it be?
Posted: Fri Jun 12, 2009 10:13 am
by Motorcycle_Girl
Well the one low cost bike that I just sold was my 1985 Honda Nighthawk. Great bike!! For me any mid 80's Japanese standard would do...
Re: If you could only have 1 (low-cost) bike, what would it be?
Posted: Fri Jun 12, 2009 10:17 am
by Bill Stevenson
I have two bikes that are used constantly: The R1200R, which you know about, and a Vespa GT. If I could only have one bike it would be a Vespa. Easy to use, lightweight, versatile - I have carried 13 bags of groceries on it. The most fun you can have with your clothes on. Absolutely a hoot. These things will go 75 mph and get upwards of 65-70 mpg. Many people have toured all over the globe with them. Mine has never broken down, something I can't say about the R1200R. Fun! Did I say Vespas are fun? Big fun.
Now with that said, I love my Beemer too, and am very grateful to be able to own both. The Beemer is far more competent at speed on the open road. The Vespa is much more user friendly, though, especially in city traffic. Both bikes are modern renditions of classic machines.
Bill
Re: If you could only have 1 (low-cost) bike, what would it be?
Posted: Fri Jun 12, 2009 11:22 am
by Dan-A
lewellen wrote:Rocket wrote:Just for fun, putting the 1200R to one side for the moment, if you could have just 1 bike and you had a very limited budget (max $2000-$3000 / £2000 ), what bike would you choose and why?
Somebody start....... I'm still tying to make my selection
KLR650 or other 600-700cc range thumper - but I prefer the KLRs.
Good roads,
- John L.
Damn, and I just sold my KLR 650.
Re: If you could only have 1 (low-cost) bike, what would it be?
Posted: Fri Jun 12, 2009 1:02 pm
by Rocket
For me it would be a DRZ400.
Great dual purpose bike - can use summer or winter, on road or off-road.
100 mph performance and loads of torque so very comfortable cruising in normal traffic.
Low maintenance , reasonably economical and great fun.
Re: If you could only have 1 (low-cost) bike, what would it be?
Posted: Sat Jun 13, 2009 6:16 am
by BigEasy
TAG-Caver wrote:Suzuki DR650. Reliable as a stone hammer, easy to maintain, and a ton of fun. I think mine costs about $50.00/year to insure. It's my favorite commuter bike and I even play in the dirt once in a while. For low cost fun or even if money is no object, a thumper is tough to beat.
Kevin
What he said. The stock seat is kind of crappy for any more than 50 miles at a stretch, but that is easily remidied, as is the fuel range from a smallish tank. Having said that I think if I could find a DRZ 400, and didn't already have the DR650, I'd give it some serious thought.
Re: If you could only have 1 (low-cost) bike, what would it be?
Posted: Sat Jun 13, 2009 7:29 am
by Phillo
Yamaha XT 660 R no question in my mind !
Re: If you could only have 1 (low-cost) bike, what would it be?
Posted: Sat Jun 13, 2009 12:13 pm
by BigEasy
Phillo wrote:Yamaha XT 660 R no question in my mind !
Not sure where our friend Rocket is from but we can't get cool Yami's like that on this side of the pond, or I'd probably have one of those instead of the DR. I really like Yamaha's
Re: If you could only have 1 (low-cost) bike, what would it be?
Posted: Mon Jun 15, 2009 1:03 am
by Rocket
I 'm in Derby, UK.
Anybody know how the Suzuki DR650 compares with the Yamaha XT660?
Re: If you could only have 1 (low-cost) bike, what would it be?
Posted: Mon Jun 15, 2009 7:15 pm
by mogu83
I think that all depends on what you consider 'low cost'
I have a little over $400 in this CB125S Honda:
Slightly less than $1,000 in this CB550 Honda:
Both bikes were purchased cheaply with good engines but in rough shape. Lots of elbow grease E-Bay parts and a paint job done in the garden shed.
Re: If you could only have 1 (low-cost) bike, what would it be?
Posted: Mon Jun 15, 2009 8:19 pm
by Caroanbill
I thought I had a low cost city bike - $7500AUD ~ 3,000Sterling ~ $6200USD
... trouble is, it has been appreciating and is now worth more like $10,000AUD . Not that I'm unhappy!
The F650CS is one of BMW's most underrated bikes - very nimble around town yet quite strong enough to tour with large bikes. ABS a major plus. Luggage was an issue (solved with custom-fabricated pannier frames) and the standard lights are pathetic (small alternator means a fix is problematic), but I've done 4,500km (2,800mi) in a week, fully laden, with no problems at all ...
.. and yes, as much as I love the R1200R, if I had to have just one bike in Sydney, the F650CS would be it
It's a worth successor to my old (and much adored) 1984 R65LS .. also a true all-round bike, and (with OEM panniers) a passable light tourer (though the F650CS is better ... )
Re: If you could only have 1 (low-cost) bike, what would it be?
Posted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 5:17 pm
by famousperson
Since getting my R two years ago I haven't done much looking around, but the last low cost bike I had was the Suzuki Savage, a 650 single, now called the LS40. I think I paid ~$2000 for it new in 1986 (new LSs go for $4300). For what it was, and what it cost, I had a hell of a good time with it. I used it primarily as a commuter but, tricked out with saddle bags and a windshield did a couple of Chicago-Pittsburgh runs with it. Not the most comfortable ride on the slab nor the quickest in the twisties but it fit my student budget just fine.
And there's just something about a big, ol' single... (thump, thump, thump)
Re: If you could only have 1 (low-cost) bike, what would it be?
Posted: Sun Jul 05, 2009 7:20 pm
by crewzzn88
My choice would be Kawasaki's biggest secret.......drum roll........ZR7s! Good cheap bike. Large gas tank (5.8 gal) Just the enough after market parts to make a great ride (tourer/everyday ride). Used regular gas, easy to maintain, very affordable insurance, full coverage of course! Just enough power (750cc) Not very popular with thieves. I love mines!