Mileage musings

[hindle8907]

suppose im in luck lol i got my bike with 1054 miles on the clock its a K5 06 Reg a month ago now it has 2100 on the clock

[dirtydog]

Originally Posted by Alpinestarhero

DD- each to their own. But it does kinda raise the issue that a bike's value is dependant on its milage (obviously) and the acceptable milage is determined by the average milage of everyone, not the individual.

Personally, I don't care how often people ride their bikes...just so long as they are a good, courtious rider when they do. What grinds my gears is the people who go out not-very-often but when they do, treat the world like their personal racetrack (well, this is also true for some people who ride every day aswell). My dad and his mates don't ride too often, but when they do they are good ROAD riders. Thats all that matters

Like you say obviously value is partly dependant on mileage but it's not the be all and end all to the bikes value. I would happily pay the same for a higher mileage bike that's been cared for than a low mileage that has been ragged with little or no mechanical sympathy. What it comes down to is people always want low mileage bikes as they perceive them as being better than a high mileage bike which we all know isn't always the case and the dealers push this as well. Also depends on the type of bike as well.

Take my RS for example registered in Feb 04 so on a 53 plate so it's 4 1/2 years old and has covered just 14500 miles which gives an average of 3222 miles a year. but it's well serviced and always spotlessly clean
Where as my first SV was registered in 2000 and when it died in 2004 it had covered about 40k, over 30k of that was mine done by me in about 3 years with little servicing and rarely got washed.

I've not had any complaints about my riding on the rare occasions I do get out

Originally Posted by dirtydog

Like you say obviously value is partly dependant on mileage but it's not the be all and end all to the bikes value. I would happily pay the same for a higher mileage bike that's been cared for than a low mileage that has been ragged with little or no mechanical sympathy. What it comes down to is people always want low mileage bikes as they perceive them as being better than a high mileage bike which we all know isn't always the case and the dealers push this as well. Also depends on the type of bike as well.

Take my RS for example registered in Feb 04 so on a 53 plate so it's 4 1/2 years old and has covered just 14500 miles which gives an average of 3222 miles a year. but it's well serviced and always spotlessly clean
Where as my first SV was registered in 2000 and when it died in 2004 it had covered about 40k, over 30k of that was mine done by me in about 3 years with little servicing and rarely got washed.

I've not had any complaints about my riding on the rare occasions I do get out

this is true, I'd rather take a 20,000 mile bike thats well looked after than a 4,000 mile bike of the same age that has questionable service history

I like to think that if i come to sell my SV, one of the major selling points will be that I've looked after it and kept it serviced, even if it has over 50,000 miles

I must admit, I was slightly suprised at the assessors comments about my GSXR for pretty much the same reason - they were only expecting it to do 4000 miles a year, while I'd already put that on it by the end of May (6 months total).

Triumph are probably more suprised about my current steed - 1700 miles in a fortnight, although a lot of that was down to having the deadline of the GM looming.

[Essex of Essex]

The comment made by my local Triumph dealer was that they didn't expect the bikes to be ridden much, but to be polished a lot
I average about 10k a year and the dealers say that's a high mileage I do another 20k in the car so if I sold the car and just used the bike I think they would faint at the mileage. They are meant to be ridden not just looked at and polished!

Guy at work just got his bike MOT'd. Mileage between the two MOT's was 500 miles. He rides (or doesn't) a GSXR600. Not only that, but after the MOT he parked his bike outside the garage and it consequently slid off the side stand fell over onto another bike which in turn fell over onto another. Expensive MOT.

[Lissa]

Our 2001 Duke had done 12,500 miles in 7 years. It hadn't done any for the last year and a half. Now on 30,000, and probably almost worthless if we ever wanted to sell it. Which we don't!

Just about hitting 20K on my three year old SV.

But whether or not people "actually use their bikes" is irrelevant. What's relevant is what's actually on the market.

Go on autotrader and try to find a 5 year old low mileage sportsbike, there will be loads of them that have done less than 1000 miles per year. Now try to find a 5 year old low mileage BMW GS, R or K series, much less choice.

The value of a bike is determined by the other bikes it is competing against. So if there are loads of 4000 mile gixxers and yours has 6000, the only way you will sell it is by dropping the price. Condition whilst important when people view a bike, doesn't actually matter in the small ads, 'cos you could have the best looked after bike in the world, but if the price is too high for the age and mileage, nobody will come and look at it.

For bikes in general, how many miles per year it has done doesn't matter, it's for each particular bike, how it compares to all of the other bikes of the same make, model and age on the market at the time.

If you want to do high mileage AND retain value, buy a BMW or suchlike.

[TEC]

Originally Posted by Ed

I was shocked at this, so I'm supposed to limit mileage to 3,500 a year to maintain the bike's value.

I have no idea where that figure has come from but would guess its something that insurance companies magic'd up as another way of not paying out, you've done a greater mileage than you declared you would when you took out the insurance

Mileage won't affect the value of my bike, its worth feck all anyway.