Help me choose a GS

[tslugmo]

Recent grad of the MSF course, first-time rider.  Been looking at GS's for a while, forcing myself to start on one instead of an SV.  I've found several and am having a hard time choosing.  Would like your opinion of which of the following is the best choice:

1999 with literally 200 miles.  Been in storage and doesn't start.  I'm sure it needs a new battery, but if the oil hasn't been changed and the gas hasn't been used in years, might we be looking at some expensive repairs?  $1900

2001 with 4,000 miles, some rust at weld points and on some bolts, 2 inch bare metal circle on gas tank where I think a dent was pulled out, couple small dents on other side of gas tank and scrapes on side of crankcase and some fairings, front fender broken into 3 pieces but mechanically starts right up and runs very well. Needs new tires, unknown service history $2300

1999 with 20k miles, never down, rebuilt carb w/ jet kit, new battery, full service history $2300

Wondering how much more desireable '01 is due to better carbs.  Is a '99 with a jet kit basically the same or better?  How much should rust worry me?  Is it better to have an older bike with less miles or a newer bike with more miles?

Thanks for your input for this newbie!

[rfairbanks]

man the best thing for you is a used 04+ f model awsome bike. 07's are $5199 new. well worth every pennie.

[jordan172005]

If your not mechanically inclined then I'd go with the 1999 that runs. Why buy the '01 for the same as a nice 99 when the 01 is beat to hell? The 1999 with 200 miles might just need new battery, fuel, oil and possibly some gaskets or seals. other than that it should be like brand new. I'm new to motorcycles myself so this is just my 2cents.

[Jarrett]

Go with the 99 for 19.  You'll learn how to wrench and you'll get a decent deal.

[ducati_nolan]

Stay away from the 99 with 200 miles. Bikes with low miles that are put into storage for long periods of time are very likley to have rust and corrosion on the internal engine parts. Even if you get it running well, there is probally more dammage and wear in it than if you got a well maintained and regularly ridden bike with quite a few miles on it.

[NiceGuysFinishLast]

Talk the guy with the '01 down to $2K or less, and take it.

I bought my '02 with 4K for $2200, and it looked like it was off the factory floor. Pampered, washed every weekend, oil every 3K, all initial services, etc... So get the '01 for $1900, spend $80 on some decent spray paint (from colorrite.com), learn a good bit about wrenching, get all the modern goodies (better carbs, better seat (IMHO), better stock tires (although you'll replace em soon enough), better looking plastics), and still have a pretty decent deal.

Just my $.02 (don't listen to me though, I'm an idiot. Just ask anyone here. )

[debtman7]

I've vote for the 99 with 20,000 miles. I think I'd rather have a bike with a known service history that's been well care for than one which has sat, probably improperly, for 8 years. I say this having bought a 96 with 3,600 miles which has obviously sat around a lot, so take it with a grain of salt

I think the price on that one is too high though. NADA book value on that bike is $1,730 (average retail price). Well maintained counts for a lot, but I don't think I'd pay over $2,000 for it. But, it depends on your market, I've watched things around here in the spring and it seems there are plenty of newbies desperate for a bike willing to overpay, so you'll have to decide what you're comfortable with.

For the 99 with 200 miles, the guy is smoking crack. I'm sure he'll find someone to convince that only 200 miles make that bike more valuable, but if it hasn't been stored properly I wouldn't touch it. $1900 for a bike that doesn't even run and for all you know is rusted into a solid block? No thanks. If you can put it in gear and manually turn the wheel, I might offer him $500 At least then you'd know the engine isn't rusted solid.

The 2001 might not be a bad buy, unknown service record though and it's going to need several hundred put into it. Rust is a sign that it hasn't been stored properly and hasn't been cared for, which makes me nervous. If you're convinced it's otherwise mechanically solid, you might offer $1800 for it.

[tslugmo]

 

So far each bike has received a vote.  LOL.  Guess this is a hard decision.  I agree, the 200 mile bike was probably improperly stored, since it doesn't start.  Was going to bring a battery or try to jump it, but wondering if that's a bad idea, might do damage if the engine/gas tank actually needs to be cleaned first.  Of course, I wouldn't buy it if starting it made it explode... 

I think I'm leaning towards the '01 cuz of low mileage & it being newer.  Seems the problems are cosmetic, & in theory it should last longer & have better resale value if cosmetic stuff taken care of.  You guys don't seem afraid of a '99 though...

You can manually turn the wheel when in gear?  Thought that was pretty hard to do.  The prices are high, but GS's seem to come along infrequently in my neck of the woods, at least this time of year.

Thanks for your input, keep it coming!

-tslugmo

[scottpA_GS]

Stay away from the 99 with 200 miles. Bikes with low miles that are put into storage for long periods of time are very likley to have rust and corrosion on the internal engine parts. Even if you get it running well, there is probally more dammage and wear in it than if you got a well maintained and regularly ridden bike with quite a few miles on it.

I strongly dissagree. I bought my 95 GSE 2 years ago with only 180 Miles on it. It was the same deal.. it was in storage for over 10 years! parked in a nice garage but never touched for 10 years. I brought it home, cleaned out the tank, ( ewe!! you should have seen it) kreamed it, changed the plugs, oil, filter etc.. cleaned the carbs and it fired right up.  A few weeks later I took it in for a checkup and they said everything was good  I bet you could get him down to $1500 and with only $100 more in new oil, filter, fuel filter, plugs, battery and some kream you will have one cheap and sweet GS. Be sure if you do go and try to start that bike, put it in a high gear and try and spin the rear wheel or take the side cover off and crank it by hand to be sure everything is free 

[Egaeus]

The low mileage bike is a huge gamble.  It might be as good as new, and it might be completely rusted inside.  It depends on whether you like gambling.

GS's are prone to rust.  Get used to it.  Unless you have a garage, you're going to get rust.

I think your other two options are too high. 

[tslugmo]

Thanks again for all the responses.  Definitely a tough choice.

To make things more complicated, I found two more options that are pretty good.

-2002 with only 750 miles.  This one starts, but again, I am worried about such low miles.  I was able to talk him down to $2800, but he wont go any lower.  Physically the bike looks BRAND new, with no signs of external rust.  The owner says he always stores it in a garage under a blanket.  Everything is original, so the carbs will likely have to be cleaned, and the tires may be a little dried out.  But the owner says he starts it from time to time, and it starts without any problems.  He is convinced that it is in perfect condition, but he doesnt seem to know that much about bikes.  He is the second owner, and only put 100 miles on it.

-1999 with 28K miles.  This one is on ebay, so there is no exact price, but I think it will go between $1500-2000.  Pictures look good.  Owner says she's always kept great care of it and that physically it is in near new shape, with the exceptions of some slight scratches from her zipper. She's owned it since new.  She just had the carbs cleaned, and battery replaced.  She said the chain has never been replaced as she oils it and adjusts it regularly, and always keeps it in a garage.  She says there is no rust in the tank.  Tires are fairly new with a few thousand miles on them.

Any thouhts on these?  Both are a good drive away, but thats not that big of a deal.  I'm considering renting a truck with a buddy and getting the 2002 tomorrow, so let me know ASAP what you think. 

As always, thanks!

[scottpA_GS]

The low mileage bike is a huge gamble.  It might be as good as new, and it might be completely rusted inside.  It depends on whether you like gambling.

GS's are prone to rust.  Get used to it.  Unless you have a garage, you're going to get rust.

I think your other two options are too high. 

As I said from experience. I have a GS that sat for 10 years! It had 180 miles on it  I have had it almost 3 years now and there are NO PROBLEMS related to it sitting. there is no internal rust The only bad thing would be the tank but after a good cleaning a new lining and an inline fuel filter you wont have any problems 

As far as being prone to rust I am sure that if you dont take care of it you will have problems, but... I park my bike outsde under a cover everynight durring the riding season (6months here) and there is not one speck of rust on it  and it is is 12 years old 

I say go for the 02' but the price still seems a little high  I got my 95 w/ 180 miles on it for $1000

[Egaeus]

Yes, but one case does not a trend make.  Anecdotal evidence is a great story, but bad science. 

But if you want another anecdote, my stepfather had a 6-wheeler that sat for about a year.  We got it back from the shadetree mechanic that was supposed to fix something on it in his spare time.  We started it and it ran for a couple of hours.  Then it broke a rod, and upon disassembly, we found a handful of rust in the combustion chamber of that piston.

[tslugmo]

The low mileage bike is a huge gamble.  It might be as good as new, and it might be completely rusted inside.  It depends on whether you like gambling.

GS's are prone to rust.  Get used to it.  Unless you have a garage, you're going to get rust.

I think your other two options are too high. 

So if there is no sign of rust anywhere on the outside (or in tank), and if the bike was always garaged, is it still a big gamble?

[scottpA_GS]

Well... I seem to have some tough oposition but I dont think that you will have any trouble at all 

[The Buddha]

Sitting can be bad. Yes chamber rust is an issue likely, as is possibly gummed up and stuck rings. I usually look in the chamber as much as I can (through the exhuast and intake and sparkplug hole with a flashlight) before starting it up. I have mostly had them work OK, but that 900 eli was f&*ked up and I ended up having to do the whole top end on it. I also chase the chamber with oil etc ... Put oil in it and crank it first with the rear wheel, then with the starter. I also do carbs, valves etc ... before startup on anything.
Cool.
Srinath.