1996 or 2001?

Ok, here's my situation. I currently own a 2006 Ducati Multistrada 620 that i am selling to move to something more sporty. I've been looking at some of the pure sportbikes, mainly the Honda CBR900rr, but i would also like something that is more pilion friendly for my girlfriend when she comes along and something that i can happily ride for hours at a time. The VFRs seem to be a nice compromise for my needs. My budget doesn't allow for a newer model so i've been looking at the older ones. I would prefer a non-vtec since they seem to be the preferred models. I found a 2001 and a 1996 for sale nearby that meet my criteria. Both bikes have around 50,000kms(30k miles). The 2001 seems to be in slightly bettter shape.
The '96 has a small crack on rear fairing behind the seat cowl, and a pretty large scratch on the front fender. It also comes with a corbin seat with passenger rest(along with stock) and a D&D exhaust, new Bridgestone Battleax B023 tires(with nibs still on them). Owner tells me it requires a new chain and sprocket and battery to be ready to ride. Asking $2300. Keep in mind i am in Canada, where prices are slightly higher.
The '01 looks to have no body damage at all. It is pretty much a stock bike, ready to ride. Service history is provided and seems to be very well taken care of. Owner is asking $4600.
So which do i choose? Do i get the '96 and spend a couple extra G's$$$ to "make it my own" or do i get the '01 to begin with? My budget is about $6000, considering that is what i expect to get for my Duc. I am not sure what $2000 gets me as far as "parts/service" on the '96 but i assume it should get me a nice running bike. Truth be told, i'd like a bike that can keep up with a modern 600 sportbike and yet provide the comfort and "grown up" appeal of the VFR. Perhaps i'm asking too much from the performance capabilities of the VFR?
So which route would you go?

 

Personally I would go for the '01, in fact I am toying with the idea of getting one and making it my play/track bike while I use the '09 as it's original intention, a commuter and long distance bike. See of you can talk the seller down a few $. IMO, I think the '01 would be a better option.

 

Here are some photos of the bikes in question. Should be obvious the grey is the '96 and the red the '01. You can see the damage to the '96 in a couple of the photos.

 

+1 for what OOTVS said.

Another thing to consider is that fairing parts for the 96 (4th gen VFR) are far more difficult to find than for the 2001 (5th Gen). The tail section pieces for the 4th gen bikes in particular seem to be very hard to come by. The 5th gen bikes (1998-2001) are also fuel injected whereas the previous gen's are carburated (some people prefer one or the other) and both have gear driven cams. As for the price, it certainly seems to be in the ball park for the Canadian economy. I picked up my 2000 VFR 3 years ago now and the owner was asking $4900 to start but it looked pretty rough and I got him to decrease the price accordingly.

Whereabouts in Canada are you located? Reason I ask is there is a guy near me (Penticton, BC) that has a 99 VFR800 (yellow - the fastest color if you ask certain board members) and he is asking $3900 (bike has 16,000 km's) Here is a link to for the bike I am mentioning. If you are close enough to consider this one great, but if you are on the eastern side of the country, I apologize for getting your hopes up. LOL

HONDA VFR800Fi 1999 - Castanet Classifieds

 

Another thing to consider, the '96 has carburetors and the '01 has fuel injection. The '01 is more likely to have more mod options too, if that's on your radar. You're also taking about 12 yrs old for the '01 vs. 17 yrs old for the '96. I'm sure both would outlast most other bikes but just something to consider.

 

i'd go for the '96 since it has the nice saddle which you will appreciate if you plan on long rides. The new tires is good too. The chain and sprockets cost me US$ 212 from sprocketcenter.com last year when I changed mine. Plus not being red is a plus

 

Thanks for your input. I am in Toronto. I saw the yellow one you're talking about. It seems to have extensive damage to the front fairing.

 

I am not concerned with age, rather the condition of mechanicals. I am definitely interested in "mods" btw. As i mentioned, i am looking for an alternative to a pure sportbike like the CBR900rr. I don't expect that kind of performance from the VFR but i would like to keep up with the kids on their Gixxer600s if that is possible. Just what is possible with these bikes as far as performance if i were to throw in a couple G's worth? I heard something about swapping out the front end with one from a CBR900 to improve handling, ohlins shock, etc......

 

If you are going to keep the bike for a while and not worry about resale value, you will end up with a better ride by getting the 1996 and spending the price difference between it and a 5th gen on upgrades or farkles( heated grips, luggage, gps, penske or ohlins shock, USD forks, radial brakes etc etc) the possibilities are long. You can refresh the old bike by replacing all rubber parts(hoses, carb boots, etc) , get the plastics fixed and repainted to your liking and still stay under your budget.

But if you have a preference to FI over carbs then that is something to consider. Personally I have had no issues on the vfr carbs and couldn't tell the difference riding a FI vfr or Carbed one.
I would choose FI over carbs if the prices were colser. But with that price difference you have over there Carbs would be a non-issue if it were me.

 

As far as ownership, if i like the bike i will keep it for a while. I owned the Ducati Multistrada for all of 6 months before i decided to put it up for sale. It just wasn't the bike for me or my riding style. Well to be honest, i have only owned fuel injected, so i don't really know the difference between carburated and injected. There seem to be mixed opinions on this. Many prefer carbs and just as many fuel injected. I am not mechanically inclined, i just like to ride! So what are the pros and cons of each?

 

In a nutshell the biggest difference in carbs and FI in this case is that FI probbaly never needs any maintenance and the carbs may need to be cleaned at some point. That being said I have 55k miles on my 1994 and 27k miles on my 1996 and carbs has never been off the bikes and never had problems. But both bikes have been ridden regularly throughout their life. In my experience as long as you don't let the vfr sit for a while(Or winterize properly) without riding the carbs will never need to be cleaned. I cannot say the same for some other bikes I have had(eg: ninja 250 i have had to pull the carbs for letting it sit for just 2 weeks).
The VFR carbs are well sorted that you can ride away almost immediately with a little bit of choke and turn off the choke in less than a minute of riding.

I do not have experience in extreme cold though. The coldest we get here is 30 deg F in the coldest mornings.

Other advantages of FI are easy tune-ability: much easier to upload a map than pulling carbs and replacing jets etc.
Most FI systems automatically compensate for altitude(barometric pressure)
Usually better fuel economy and power with FI. ( I don't think there is a significant difference in the VFRs though).

 

ok, so sounds like not really any pros to having carbs and a slight advantage to fi. Not enough to sway me in either direction though. I would like to make some performance improvements actually so i guess the fi is better for this though.

 

If you are thinking about performance upgrades you will get hardly any with the the VFR. You will be better of getting something like the FZ1, Blackbird, ZZR, FJR(heavier but lots of power) or newer Sprint ST etc. If you want cheap power get a Bandit 1200/1250. The bandits are a few notches lower in the handling and build quality to the VFR. But its relatively cheap to get more power out of it. I think in the stock form the bandit 1200 engine is really restricted.
To get more power with VFR the cost/benefit is pretty high I think. Some folks here have supercharged the VFR. Maybe that's an option
I would recommend you test ride the VFR first and see if you need more power and if you need more power IMO get something else that has more power or is a better platform to modify.

I know a guy who bought the VFR as a more comfortable replacement to his CBR 954 and was very disappointed in the power and sold the VFR.
If you are looking for handling performance, the VFR will handle really good with a well sorted suspension, but is still going to be heavier than modern SS bikes.

If you are looking for a slightly more comfortable bike than the 900rr have you considered the VTR1000/ Firestorm/ Superhawk. That is a great bike but has some quirks. MPG can be really bad. I used to get anywhere from 28mpg to 40 mpg when I had mine depending on how it was ridden. The tank size is small. So 100miles -150 miles is the range with stock tank. other cons are they only come with carbs, They have a well documented issue with CCT( easily solved by installing manual CCT though). At least here in the US they are relatively cheap for what you get. A buddy of mine is selling his for $3k (some guy is buying it this monday: 1998 Honda VTR1000 Superhawk) with lots of expensive aftermarket goodies. If I had room I 'd buy it right away. The VFR is much better for long rides. I had no Problems with 300 mil days on my vtr with a corbin seat. The vfr with stock seat I have done multiple consecutive 500mile days and was OK(I will get a corbin seat soon though) . I am 6' (with relatively longer limbs) , 24years old, 200lbs (fat overweight) with low back pain(disc degeneration and nerve compression).

 

my first advice is don't try to compete the kids.the viffer is asport touring not a sport bike.you can get into troubles.if you read the mechanic forums you will see that the newer bikes have a lot of troubles with the sensors.but i rode 100000 miles on my bike 1998 before the troubles begun.no such problems on 4th generation.i wish you happy rides