Worst Bike to buy?

We always praise the VFR as being one of the best bikes to buy for many reasons. I would like to know which bikes are the worst ones to stay away from as being probmatic for whatever reasons. Bad transmissions, handling, bad engines, etc. I have only oned Honda's and I have no exposure to other brands of bikes. I've drivin a Buel once and hated it. :smile:

 

According to some experts right here on ths very forum the Honda VFR1200 is a piece of crap. Please notice that none of them have done much more than seen one at a motorcycle show and maybe even sat on one. But, they are experts and we must remember that.

The one's that are being sold in Canada are worse than the ones being sold elsewhere.

 

Well depends upon what you consider 'worst bike'.

Some would say the AMF made Hardleys, but some HD owners prefer the AMF bikes because they enjoy wrenching on their machines.

In addition, I've found with speaking with other bike owners each model seems to have a unique problem or issue (i.e. the VFR and it's RR problems).

Many of us kind of come into riding at one of the best times. The only real maintanance we have to do is change oil, lube and tighten chains and change some fluids every couple years.

I would say a set of bikes I would NOT own personally are the early Honda VF and VFR's. Parts are scarce, I lack alot of mechanical know how and the mechanic support is also pretty low for those bike in my area. Only time I would reconsider is if I found a decent example and lived close to Jamie Daugherty. Then I would probably be more apt to be interested in one.

BZ

 

Of the bikes I have purchased and repaired, the early Ninja 750 was the worst. The transmission's were terribly fragile. Never got more than 1800 miles out of one.

 

Badbilly, What makes the ones in Canada worse? You would think they would be sold under the same standards as USA or Europe?

Toe Cutter, yes, I have heard many riders complaining about weak trannys in the Ninja's. As well as poor shifting spots, maybe related

 

Early Honda VF's were crap and had magically chocolate cams.

The early DOHC CB Hondas weren't that great either.

 

Dare I say Ducati. While they are great bikes in many respects they also have a mechanical dark side. Which is to say high frequency, high cost maintenence. I know that most Ducati owners will say that it is part of their charachter and cache, which may be true from a certain perspective. For me, no amount of cache is worth the longterm cost of ownership and comparitively low reliabilty. Sure they do some things that your everyday Japanese sportbike won't do, and the high MSRP reflects that, but are they attributes that even a seasoned rider can take advantage of? Rarely, if at all, would be my guess. Even riders at the pro level are having their issues with Ducati. I suppose the point I'm trying to make is that when compared to dollars spent (overall value) I personaly don't find Ducati to be a very good bike.

Harleys too.

 

Gill,

Just putting you on a little. I have one on order. There were some dudes on here that were crying like little girls because Honda didn't listen to how they thought this bike should be engineered. I was thinking of maybe doing like some folks do with Harley stuff and making up some Kleenix with a Honda logo so these dudes could sob without making thier keyboards all sticky.

Some of the pre AMF HD's were not all that great and it does take a hefty bankroll to keep a desmo Duc happy. The bottom line here is that if you posed the same question and the responses were the same as are on this particular thread on another BB dealing exclusively with HD's or Ducatis. Those would be fighting words. Another factor is how a question is posed.

As an example using any HD BB you can find. Go on and say you read on a Honda BB that Harley's were shit. Then duck..

 

I am happy to see that you have finally seen the light after all those crying jags we had to read when you were worried about running out of of gas on a bike you had never even seen. The question now is what was it exactly that caused this epiphany?

I take it you are not buying one. Thats kind of too bad since, your input is so valuable.

Any advice about a bad bike since changing your mind about the 1200?

 

BMW- fella at work here has had his in and out of shop several time for a mutitude of issues including the transmission and oil leaks. And you thought only HD's and Old Brit bikes did that. So fare my 77 Yamaha XS 500D; 1977,1981/83/88/99/02 Gold Wings have been great. Had an '03 Glide but got over it!; the 05 Silver Wing was fun and no issues; the '08 Triumph Scrambler and the VFR are the newest and so far NO ISSUES.

 

Well the worst is kinda relative. A person may say a crusier sucks because they like sportbikes. There are also some nice bikes I like, but I do not fit on them very well so they suck to me - but not really. I have a Yamaha 600R which is a nice solid dependable bike with low maintenance - a lot of sportbike riders do not like the 600R because it is slow and is carburated - so they think it sucks. Some of my MC members are dirtbike riders and aggressive sportbike riders. They think the VFR sucks because it is big and bulky to them and not as fast or manuverable. I have shown them what a VFR can do but they still like what they like. The Kawi ZX12 is another bike some people seem to really like or really dislike. I love my VFR and I am having fun with the recently acquired 03 Yamaha R1 so I am gonna concentrate on bikes I like. Other bikes I like are the ole 01-02 Honda F4i and the 2001 Honda Valkyrie. Also, the 03 - 04 1000cc Suzuki GSXR is not a bad road bike and I also kinda like the Suzuki M90. I am not a Harley rider, but I will say it has been documented that AMF did Harley dirty by producing bikes with major issues - largely due to a lack of quality control and greed.

 

The worst bike to buy is my bike. Because that means its not mine anymore.

 

Great analogy tinkerinWstuff, made me laugh about the comparison! And I guess your right, there really is no "perfect bike", but what I was interested in was other riders opinions with regards to other bikes out there other than the Honda line. I never owned a HD and probably never will. It's not my style, however HD must have something more about them that appeals to riders other than being American. Is it true that Americans buy HD just because they are made in the US or because they really are a fun bike to ride? Not to mention really freaking noisy! There are probably lots of bikes out there that are alot of fun and compare to the VFR mechaniclly, but if I cant get past what they look like (first impression) then i move on to something else. I remember having the oportunity to have a free older goldwing when I was 20, but I couldnt get myself to ride it with my friends. That would have been wrong, Maybe if I was 50 :O)

 

Like previous posters have said, you'll have at least one thing to "beware of" with any brand/model of motorcycle. Each has their own "weak points" in the design. Some are more particular (like the RR on the VFR) while others are more general (like an AMF era Harley Davidson).

For example, I also own a Honda VTX 1300. They are known for being mostly bulletproof, but for whatever reason the steering bearings and rear wheel bearings seem to give a good handful of people problems. I haven't had these problems :knock on wood: so I wouldn't consider it a "worst" bike, but for someone who HAS had the problem I could see where they could be justified in saying it's a terrible machine.

I'd say pretty much any "mainstream" machine made these days (90s+) is more or less fine. The market has gotten so competitive that in my opinion QA/QC has improved, by necessity, to the point where you can't really go wrong.

 

as a Ducati owner, I would agree with you somewhat. I had a very limited edition (1/150) 998 that was nothing but trouble from day 1 (in the shop 7 times in the first 18months) until I arranged for it to go to heaven and trade for a new 999. The 999 has been as reliable as any Honda I have ever owned with nary an issue. The cost of maintenance is an issue (majors every 6K miles $900) due to the complicated valve actuation system. That being said, the true cost of my 999 is less than it's japanese equivalents due to much lower insurance.

When I got the 998, I actually bought an R1 and while waiting for prep/delivery went home and called my insurance co(geico) and was quoted $2,300 a year (42 years old, clean record for 5 years). I asked about a GSXR750, CBR954 and all were the same. I asked about the Ducati and it was $425/year! so I did the math and the difference in insurance alone over 5 years was $9,325. The R1 was OTD at $10K and the 998 (MSRP $23,995) was $17,250. A no brainer.

Evidently ducati owners (up until the recent 1098/1198/848 price drop to appeal to the masses) take care of their bikes and lock them up etc. My insurance is still $425/year (full cover, fire, theft, collision) and I pay an additional $110 for the VFR as my second bike.

newer ducs have a 7,500 valve adjustment interval

 

If I suddenly found myself without one, I'd take virtually any bike someone was willing to give me. (What this has to do with the original question is beyond me, but for some reason I had to say it. I think it must be a Tourette syndrome variation.)

 

Being an owner of a Ducrappy, I can offer my opinion. Character and cache? That's fine, if you're able to pay for the hassles? The parts are Ducati only, no aftermarket ($$$$$$). Would I buy another one? Hell no. Do I intend to keep this one? Yes, it was the bike I wanted 10 years ago but couldnt afford then. Will I always have a primary bike? Yes, a reliable Japanese one, b/c the Duc will never be such. Ducati made progress with the Testastretta engines (mine is a desmoquattro), and over the years have extended the valve service interval. The new Multi-S gets almost ~ 16k miles before valve servicing b/c of new valve seat design / material, regardless, I still would not buy one again. I will give it to Ducati, they know how to build a race bike, things are easy to disengage or dis-assemble and vice-versa. The time saving aspect. An example is the SSSA. But they didnt make a user-friendly bike with a user-friendly cost of owning.

It was a great bike when it ran, and it will be great again, someday. Even in pieces, it's still a sexy bike.