Re: 1st Bike. New or S/H. Which is better
 

You see I consider anything new to be a money pit - depreciation (and initial high outlay unless 0% APR)

Re: 1st Bike. New or S/H. Which is better
 

Agreed apart from the fact that a new rider is less likely to know what they want in terms of type of bike or even biking at all. So more likely to be seeling within a year I would suggest?

Re: 1st Bike. New or S/H. Which is better
 

I didnt!

I did buy an old but sound heap just in case I did though - made sense at the time ;)

Luckily for me though my ol man , eats, sleeps and lives bikes, can fix anything, has renovated more bikes than Ive had hot dinners ;) so buying a lemon wouldnt enter the equation. :cool:

Re: 1st Bike. New or S/H. Which is better
 

My money pits have been worse than depreciation most of the time :pale: with depreciation you know its coming and roughly what the hit will be.......a ?500 bill one month and ?250 the next is very unwanted and can be a real pain in the bum.

True, there is that......but once you've tried biking you dont go back.

Re: 1st Bike. New or S/H. Which is better
 

If you can afford it and are planning to keep the new bike for a few years then I would say buy new. I have had great experiences on both new and second hand bikes. My SV was 18mths old from a mate so I knew it was well looked after and he wasn?t blagging me over anything. As I knew where he lived.

New is far better, that new bike smell and you know it?s been looked after because you have cared for it yourself. As for the running in yeah you are supposed to do it properly, but TBH I did for the first 300 miles got bored and rode it normally, its been fine (other than the lose connector which has nothing to do with running in) . How do you think I felt on the Kwak 4K limit as per book is 45MPH FFS!!!!!!

I am not bothered about depreciation, yes if I sold in the first two years then I would lose a lot keep it an extra year and its lost all the heavy depreciation and I will still get over 3K for it easy. More than for an equivalent SV that?s for sure.

I think when deciding whether to buy new decide upon how long you are going to keep it for and the type of bike and its depreciation.

Re: 1st Bike. New or S/H. Which is better
 

I didn't. That is a risk but not a certainty. I actually think I am more at risk now as I start to conciously push my limits.

I thought about this and bought new because...

:cool: I was paranoid about the history

:cool: I could afford it at the time and I got an extra ?200 knocked off the retail price

:cool: I wasn't too worried about the depreciation because I had no plans to chop and change

:cool: The run in period allowed me to appreciate the change from the ER5 I learned on (for about 12 hours)


If I could afford to do it again, I may be tempted to buy new. Having said that, a good second hand machine is always going to be financially better.

Re: 1st Bike. New or S/H. Which is better
 

If it's like the one I had for a while it didn't even have any counter from 0 to 3k rpm - just a small gap then the rev counter started proper at 3k :o

Superb machines though when they're spun up but running in must be hellish.

Re: 1st Bike. New or S/H. Which is better
 

I kept my SV for 13 months, did 4600miles and lost ?1100 in that year (23p a mile), but in my eyes it was still worth it and dont regret it.

Thats ?100 a month which isnt all that much, i bought mine outright for cash but cant imagine monthly fianance payment being much less than that.

Re: 1st Bike. New or S/H. Which is better
 

I think your history means that for you, it's a sensible option to buy new. However, this is probably not true for most other people - financially. A new bike is often a heart decision, not a head one.

Re: 1st Bike. New or S/H. Which is better
 

I might buy new if I had Loadsa money - or no money at all (0% finance is pretty attractive)

Actual policy used to be shop around for the cosmetically challenged... the SV put an end to that....was spotless - although the oil was a bit manky.