Which would you buy? '86 or '93 VFR750?

Man that '86 is nice; I would buy it - a RWB 750 and they are solid bikes. You can't go wrong with either but the older bikes in that condition are getting rare.

 

Here is the thing, all of theses guys are right; Reg71 for sure, niether of these bikes are worth the asking price, so why bother?

Secondly: the '86 is a classic no doubt; but would you buy a classic Ferrari and use it as an every day commuter? A classic can be a great thing, but usually not for everyday appeal. I wouldn't want to commute on a mechanically needy bike that has parts availability issues. After all, the '77 328 that Magnum P.I. made so famous is now appreciating from a collectors standpoint, but you don't see collectors of that car driving and commuting everyday in a car that they can't find parts for. That's not say that the '92 is that much better off, but is better off.

Thirdly: the '92 will soon be a classic in it's own right, maybe not with same charisma as the '86, but a classic nonetheless.

Finally: Niether bike is worth the asking price, so my advice would also be; take your $4,000 and buy a 5th gen. It has better performance by far, well over any of the machines that are currently on the table. Parts are readily available, and it too will become a classic.

 

The '92 was/is going for $2000 and the '86 is $2400. Here are some more pictures.
thanks again for all the info.
ben

 

Man, like a lot of folks said. 86 for the classic ride that stills has a lot of cool factor ridiability plus ain't all that bad for a get a rounder. Now on the 92, yes better bike in some areas just because it is newer. if one was getting one to do a lot of commuting riding, just not the week end warrior type, then yes the 92, as far as which one is better depends again on your riding experience. I can work magic with an 86. can also do it on a 92 set up correctly. IMO the 86 in the twist's can have the 92s lunch, but that is not as easy as it was a decade ago. ask how I know. On the other hand the 92 set up right can be a pretty formidable weapon in it's own rights, one thing for sure the 92 has more legs. tough call here, sort of like comparing a 4th gen to a 6th they both have their points. You really can't go to wrong with either one. Just for the cool factor and how rare and clean this 86 750 is getting, I might go that way. you won't lose a dime on the 86 if you take care of it. But if it's just for having a great bike and just plan on running here and there noting wrong with the 92. :biggrin: I like the idea of just getting both.

 

it would be a good race!

 

Based on the pics you just posted I would not give $2400 for the 86. Looks like a $2000 bike at best. If the 92 is cometically near perfect and all it needs is a tire (s) along with taking care of a few minor leaks I'd be all over it. Remember, cash talks!

 

I must say that my gen 3 struck me as a dog compared to my gen 2.

 

I was told that the cam problem was fixed in 86

 

I test rode a 93 and felt the same way. At that time I thought, man my 86 would kill this thing. And it(93) had a full Yosh pipe on it.

 

The '92 wasn't as good as I was hoped it would be. Small dent in tank, cracked fairing, bent brake pedal. It 'fell' down at one point.

 

The gen 2 was the closest thing to bullet proof as you can get.

 

Being the 2nd gen are only a little bit dated is the only thing that keeps em from being a real hot ticket item. when new they were the shits to have. I think Honda needs to bring this model back big time..

 

That's any easy fix and parts are still available. If you don't want to go that route keep looking cause niether of the bikes you're looking at are perfect. Perhaps the 86 just needs some TLC . You'll be able to find a tail eventually or get that one fixed. The tank on the other hand is more of an issue but might be fixed cheaper than finding a replacement. Otherwise it's time to move on.

 

I personally would go for the 86 but then again i,m biased as i have 2 .The newer tech advantage of the 92 i' isn't really a point to me.If you want new tech get new. Performance wise at anything close to legal limits the advantage goes to the rider on these 2 bikes. If you are going to commute with it then get the 1 that is the best fit to you. or the 1 that moves the sol. Is there really a bad vfr.

 

don't know if anyone answered Jake's question about the cam issue... so, Jake: The '86 was given an upgrade to a Desmodromic gear driven cam system, very similar to that of the Ducati. That move eliminated all issues regarding the abnormal wear on the cams.

 

What the hell are you smokin??:crazy: A Desmodromic system has NO VALVE SPRINGS and uses a belt to drive the cams. WTF?

 

'86 750s are quick and fast bikes; the cam issues were with the gen 1 bikes were fixed on the second generation VFRs with better top end oiling; the cams are gear driven and use one rocker arm per cam lode which fixed uneven wear that the forked rockers on the prior model caused.

 

not true, a desmo uses the cam to both open and close the values via a positive action


they come in belts (most modern ducatis) - aka rubber band heads


but older ducatis used bevel drives - aka bevelheads

 

Thanks for the quick defend, Beterace. I guess I should have clarified that I was comparing to the older Ducati's but I figured since we were talking about an '86 model VFR.... Sorry for the confusion there RC.