|
clutchpuck posted:You're high xbs look rad. Well poo poo, you're right. Guess that explains why they kept selling out so fast that no dealers could keep them in stock.
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 06:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 22:29 |
|
|
clutchpuck posted:You're high xbs look rad. You're pretty fast at rebuilds to get three in in six hours
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 06:55
|
|
|
HotCanadianChick posted:Well poo poo, you're right. Guess that explains why they kept selling out so fast that no dealers could keep them in stock. But now you can get one for half the price of one of those XRs, and it will actually behave like a proper motorcycle. That's what we were talking about.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 16:15
|
|
|
I still feel the XB9/12s is the best looking motorcycle ever; well maybe the SS looks slightly better.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 19:08
|
|
|
Really clean and sorted 2000 sv650. 21k miles, new tires exhaust some other aftermarket do dads. Lots of recent maintenance. What would you pay assuming it's turn key as advertised? Nada says 1300 bux but that seems pretty low.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
PaintVagrant posted:Really clean and sorted 2000 sv650. 21k miles, new tires exhaust some other aftermarket do dads. Lots of recent maintenance. What would you pay assuming it's turn key as advertised? Nada says 1300 bux but that seems pretty low. I just bought a 2001 SV650 with 33k miles for $500*, so lowball away.  *was crashed by the PO and had an undamaged frame and forks, running engine, and the clutch lever still intact, so ymmv
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 20:13
|
|
|
That's a 16 year old bike. Up to $2k maybe if I were shopping SVs. That's considering their inexplicable desirability and the local spring market.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 20:14
|
|
|
Yeah dude is asking 2500, I feel like 2k is the highest I would go if its pristine. Still feels high but sv650s seem inflated around here.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 20:23
|
|
|
If you think an SV650 seems inflated, you should see a Hayabusa!
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 20:27
|
|
|
PaintVagrant posted:Really clean and sorted 2000 sv650. 21k miles, new tires exhaust some other aftermarket do dads. Lots of recent maintenance. What would you pay assuming it's turn key as advertised? Nada says 1300 bux but that seems pretty low. Maybe 1800ish.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 20:30
|
|
|
PaintVagrant posted:Yeah dude is asking 2500, I feel like 2k is the highest I would go if its pristine. Still feels high but sv650s seem inflated around here. Beginner-friendly bikes they stopped making tend to demand a premium. The bright spot on the horizon is that Suzuki, in their never-ending quest to maintain a more boring lineup than Honda, is releasing the SV650... again. So the used prices for older ones should take a hit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 20:31
|
|
|
clutchpuck posted:Beginner-friendly bikes they stopped making tend to demand a premium. The bright spot on the horizon is that Suzuki, in their never-ending quest to maintain a more boring lineup than Honda, is releasing the SV650... again. So the used prices for older ones should take a hit. gently caress off if you think a nuSV is in any way shape or form more boring than the parallame twin line-up. Like they could release literally the same bike (and I'm pretty sure only the frame and electrical bits are different) and it'd still be better than honda's twins.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 21:57
|
|
|
I mean I guess it's less boring than the BNG updates they've been bringing to everything else.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 22:02
|
|
|
Somebody's got to be buying new Suzukis, right? Otherwise, where would this great cache of old DR-Zs, SVs, B-Kings, Hayabusas, Bandits, and V-Stroms on CL come from?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 22:04
|
|
|
They are the best selling motorbike brand here and have been for several years in a row. Nuke NZ and suzuki's shares will crater.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 22:09
|
|
|
captainOrbital posted:Somebody's got to be buying new Suzukis, right? Otherwise, where would this great cache of old DR-Zs, SVs, B-Kings, Hayabusas, Bandits, and V-Stroms on CL come from? We're counting deeply-discounted new old stock, right?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
For a p-twin, the Ninja 650 is fairly fun. It's a bit tractor-ish at low revs, but keep it over 4k and it's decently snappy. Also when people ask what kind of bike you have you can honestly tell them you have a Ninja. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 23:20
|
|
|
clutchpuck posted:Beginner-friendly bikes they stopped making tend to demand a premium. The bright spot on the horizon is that Suzuki, in their never-ending quest to maintain a more boring lineup than Honda, is releasing the SV650... again. So the used prices for older ones should take a hit. Don't be salty just because Suzuki cornered the "do it all sporty v-twin" market better than Buell was able to.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 01:21
|
|
|
Jim Silly-Balls posted:Don't be salty just because Suzuki cornered the "do it all sporty v-twin" market better than Buell was able to. Your post has a delectable irony to it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 01:35
|
|
|
I'd like them better if they came with suspension and weren't so overvalued. I assume the sv1000 fixes that though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 01:47
|
|
|
clutchpuck posted:Suzuki, in their never-ending quest to maintain a more boring lineup than Honda True, they seem to keep the same model/types for a very long time, but boring? SV650, Bandit, DRZ400SM, DR650, VSTROM, hayabusa, b-king, GSXR... Suzuki knows how to make a bike that people want. Not just now, but for a long time after they were created. I'd almost say I don't know who would buy a NEW suzuki, but a friend bought a gladius new, so there you go. I feel like I need a caveat that I have no ill will towards you, clutchpuck. I enjoy your contributions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 01:50
|
|
|
clutchpuck posted:I'd like them better if they came with suspension and weren't so overvalued. I assume the sv1000 fixes that though. The 1000 takes the forks from godawful to more than acceptable, ditto with the brakes. Rear shock is pretty obviously uprated but still nothing to write home about, though they never are on naked bikes. They also depreciate like rocks so it fixes the last thing too Suzuki's strategy is to just keep building their four good models and it's working pretty well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 02:08
|
|
|
clutchpuck posted:I'd like them better if they came with suspension and weren't so overvalued. This is the reason my friend uses when I beat him in the twists with my ninjette.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 13:36
|
|
|
Beat him at what?
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 14:12
|
|
|
astrollinthepork posted:Beat him at what? Twisties. You know, roads that twist, you go fast down them and hope there's not a bear or a car around the corner to slam into. 
Shadowlz fucked around with this message at 15:59 on Apr 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 15:56
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:The 1000 takes the forks from godawful to more than acceptable, ditto with the brakes. Rear shock is pretty obviously uprated but still nothing to write home about, though they never are on naked bikes. They also depreciate like rocks so it fixes the last thing too The point is those new SVs should depress the price of old ones in a few months/years. How much are they gonna be? Price on Suzuki's USA site says TBA, it can't be more than the Gladius, can it?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 16:42
|
|
|
They'll probably push down the price of the 2nd gen ones a bit once it becomes known how much better they actually are, vs the power increases and whatnot that are listed on paper. Just like the fuel injected ones killed the carbureted versions prices. After this new one comes out, carbed SV's are going to be like the single biggest bang for the buck used bike out there
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 16:45
|
|
|
This one is stupidly overpriced, but I really like the looks of K bikes - http://chicago.craigslist.org/nch/mcy/5536138410.html. I had a naked GL 1100 for awhile, and outside the weight it was probably my favorite bike to ride. I think my ideal bike would be a naked standard with the riding position and comfort of the GL for 2-up, closer to 500 lb's max, ABS, and less than 10 years old. Does such a thing even exist? Maybe the R1150R or R1200R?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 20:50
|
|
|
Jim Silly-Balls posted:They'll probably push down the price of the 2nd gen ones a bit once it becomes known how much better they actually are, vs the power increases and whatnot that are listed on paper. Are carbed ones any good though? I've never ridden one but the on-paper horsepower is substantially less than the 2ng gen.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
Dutymode posted:This one is stupidly overpriced, but I really like the looks of K bikes - http://chicago.craigslist.org/nch/mcy/5536138410.html. My wife really likes her 1150R. She uses it for cross-country trips mostly, put 40,000+ miles on it since 2010, and it sits most of the year.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 00:03
|
|
|
Dutymode posted:This one is stupidly overpriced, but I really like the looks of K bikes - http://chicago.craigslist.org/nch/mcy/5536138410.html. lollin at that price. What an rear end in a top hat.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 00:30
|
|
|
Dutymode posted:This one is stupidly overpriced, but I really like the looks of K bikes - http://chicago.craigslist.org/nch/mcy/5536138410.html. Wow. That's the first BMW I've ever really wanted. That engine looks luverly.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 00:35
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:Are carbed ones any good though? I've never ridden one but the on-paper horsepower is substantially less than the 2ng gen. I would think 4.5 HP is not 'substantially less'  
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 01:18
|
|
|
HotCanadianChick posted:I would think 4.5 HP is not 'substantially less' Looks like I remembered wrong. Carry on!
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 02:09
|
|
|
Chichevache posted:Wow. That's the first BMW I've ever really wanted. That engine looks luverly. Hahaha nice one.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 03:10
|
|
|
So I check CL every day looking for sweet bike deals. Who doesnt, right? I found a 2009 ninja 250 VERY close (like, walk the bike home in neutral close). A small used car lot apparently took it as a trade, and had sat on it since. It needs maybe the carbs cleaned, some front brake pads, etc. 12k miles, scuffs and damage but nothing crazy. Good starter bike. $1500. I call the dude and he says hes got other interest, but I am close so I swing by first. I am super pumped, I am going to scoop up one of those legendary CL deals that everyone pretends are commonplace. I get there, the bike is as described. He rides it up and down a back alley and shifts through the gears/etc. Looks good. Idles after this fairly spirited ride. I have cash on me, lets do it. Sit down in the weird 1970s storefront and he hands me the green Michigan title. I start counting cash, and ask "hey, is this your name?" No, the title is in the previous owners name who traded it in. Oh. I look at the seller fields, and one is filled out...for the title holders name?! Like, he sold it to himself? I say, hey, I don't think I can buy it with this title like this. They immediately are like "oh ok, no problem". No resistance, barely any explanation, nothing. Just scoop my money back up and hand it to me. I assume I dodged a bullet here?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 20:40
|
|
|
PaintVagrant posted:Title Stuff Previous owner = Bob Biek shope = Biek Shop, Inc. You = You So the title was in the name of Bob. In the title transfer portion of the title doc it had Bob listed as the seller and no one listed as the buyer? Biek Shop, Inc. was not listed on the title at all? Is that what you're saying? When I bought my motorcycle through a dealership the title was in the PO's name (and it was a Wisconsin title). But on the title transfer form the dealership basically filled themselves in as buyer and then again as seller in the part of the form set up title transfers. Then I signed as the 2nd buyer. That, along with the bill of sale, allowed me to register the bike in MN.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 20:55
|
|
|
Fishvilla posted:Previous owner = Bob Correct, the purchaser field was filled out with the original owners name, mentioning nothing of the shop or any of the people in the shop. It was a little weird looking, so I got skittish and they demured so fast I assume that something was fishy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 20:59
|
|
|
You sure that wasn't the release-of-interest line the PO signed?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 21:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 22:29 |
|
|
clutchpuck posted:You sure that wasn't the release-of-interest line the PO signed? In rertospect, maybe. I probably hosed myself out of my one unicorn deal I am entitled to as an AI/CA poster for the rest of my life. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 21:03
|
|