2005 Nomad

[ponch]

http://phoenix.craigslist.org/nph/mcy/3485616333.html

[Jared]

Nice looking bike with almost no miles on it.

[ponch]

Yeah, I thought so too.

[ringadingh]

That will be a real nice bike for someone.

[smbke]

Pretty good price, too. Say what you will about metric resale values, they help people without a lot of money enter the world of motorcycling in a big way.

[trosco]

I'd offer a dissenting opinon on the very very low miles bikes or those that have been "stored" for extended periods.
When you buy (for example) a 8 year old bike with 8,000 miles on it, one of two things is likely to be true.
1) The bike was riden so little (500-1,000 a year) that even if it recieved scheduled maint it went years with old fluids and lubricants in it. And extended periods (weeks at a time) idle and then was used for short trips which causes more rapid fouling of those fluids. At the same time things like swingarms, shock pivots, stearing heads all depend on constant minor movements to prevent pressure causing migration of lubricate from friction points so in those infrequent and short trips wear is exagerated. So often they have dramatically more wear than their miles might indicate.
2) Or the bike was inactive for years in it life cycle. Some event cause the bike to sit for 5,6,7 years. Every point of metal on metal and every area where rubber contacts metal or where corrosive fluids (gas, water) and any fluids like oil, grease, or Antifreeze that will suspend corosive agents and any point were electrallisis occurs is ageing faster sitting than if the bike is being ridden.
And It's always true that deteriation related to age for things like rubber happens regardless of the miles. But the low miles allow the owner to not have to address those problems. The new guy puts the bike in service only to quickly be addressing problems like radiator or vacum or oil leaks associated with the deteriorated hoses and seals.
All this can be prevented but it's my experience that if a person doesn't use a motorcycle often they often don't take care of it either. There are exceptions but I personsally would buy a bike that was ridden 5-10,000 miles a year, if the condition appears excellent and the owner is a long term owner with excellent maint records before I'd buy the ultra low miles bike. I'd probably pay less for it too!!!
But a bike that has been abused (loud pipes, poor appearnce, missmatched parts, evidence of multiple spills, 3 or more owners in short period are all possible indicators) is to be shuned no matter how good the deal seems.

[ringadingh]

Originally Posted by trosco

I'd offer a dissenting opinon on the very very low miles bikes or those that have been "stored" for extended periods.
When you buy (for example) a 8 year old bike with 8,000 miles on it, one of two things is likely to be true.
1) The bike was riden so little (500-1,000 a year) that even if it recieved scheduled maint it went years with old fluids and lubricants in it. And extended periods (weeks at a time) idle and then was used for short trips which causes more rapid fouling of those fluids. At the same time things like swingarms, shock pivots, stearing heads all depend on constant minor movements to prevent pressure causing migration of lubricate from friction points so in those infrequent and short trips wear is exagerated. So often they have dramatically more wear than their miles might indicate.
2) Or the bike was inactive for years in it life cycle. Some event cause the bike to sit for 5,6,7 years. Every point of metal on metal and every area where rubber contacts metal or where corrosive fluids (gas, water) and any fluids like oil, grease, or Antifreeze that will suspend corosive agents and any point were electrallisis occurs is ageing faster sitting than if the bike is being ridden.
And It's always true that deteriation related to age for things like rubber happens regardless of the miles. But the low miles allow the owner to not have to address those problems. The new guy puts the bike in service only to quickly be addressing problems like radiator or vacum or oil leaks associated with the deteriorated hoses and seals.
All this can be prevented but it's my experience that if a person doesn't use a motorcycle often they often don't take care of it either. There are exceptions but I personsally would buy a bike that was ridden 5-10,000 miles a year, if the condition appears excellent and the owner is a long term owner with excellent maint records before I'd buy the ultra low miles bike. I'd probably pay less for it too!!!
But a bike that has been abused (loud pipes, poor appearnce, missmatched parts, evidence of multiple spills, 3 or more owners in short period are all possible indicators) is to be shuned no matter how good the deal seems.

I agree with most of what you say, about buying an older low mileage bike, I think they can be a great deal for someone who spends some time going over it top to bottom. On most of my vehicles, if I'm not sure of the past maintenance, I do it as if it is due for it regardless of the mileage.
On that particular bike Id take the forks apart and clean and change the fluid, grease the triple tree and swingarm and everything else on the bike, change all the fluids, and give it a good thorough clean & wax.
It wouldn't cost a $100 to do all that other than your time and effort, and you would most likely have a good dependable bike.

[danimal2]

Saw this bike. Always check the market to see what they're bringing and this one seems well priced.

Can't say I disagree with Trosco on buying older low mileage bikes, but there is a stipulation. Lived this one buying a 12 year old bike with just over 5,000 miles on it last year. Although I had to go through and replace all the fluids, had a failed outer waterpump seal, had to replace the battery, both tires were gone. I'd do it all again in a heart beat. Didn't even know about the JOG/POG deal before buying it and had to replace that at 20,000 miles, I'd still do it again. Always do my own work so that makes it less costly. Not sure I'd repeat if I had to pay someone else to do it all.

I agree with ring on this one. If you're mechanical and enjoy working on stuff, it can result in a nice deal. I'd do this 2005 for $5500 if I was in the market. This is an especially good price in the Phoenix/Arizona market where bikes really seem to hold their value.

[cactusjack]

Originally Posted by trosco

I'd offer a dissenting opinon on the very very low miles bikes or those that have been "stored" for extended periods.
When you buy (for example) a 8 year old bike with 8,000 miles on it, one of two things is likely to be true.
1) The bike was riden so little (500-1,000 a year) that even if it recieved scheduled maint it went years with old fluids and lubricants in it. And extended periods (weeks at a time) idle and then was used for short trips which causes more rapid fouling of those fluids. At the same time things like swingarms, shock pivots, stearing heads all depend on constant minor movements to prevent pressure causing migration of lubricate from friction points so in those infrequent and short trips wear is exagerated. So often they have dramatically more wear than their miles might indicate.
2) Or the bike was inactive for years in it life cycle. Some event cause the bike to sit for 5,6,7 years. Every point of metal on metal and every area where rubber contacts metal or where corrosive fluids (gas, water) and any fluids like oil, grease, or Antifreeze that will suspend corosive agents and any point were electrallisis occurs is ageing faster sitting than if the bike is being ridden.
And It's always true that deteriation related to age for things like rubber happens regardless of the miles. But the low miles allow the owner to not have to address those problems. The new guy puts the bike in service only to quickly be addressing problems like radiator or vacum or oil leaks associated with the deteriorated hoses and seals.
All this can be prevented but it's my experience that if a person doesn't use a motorcycle often they often don't take care of it either. There are exceptions but I personsally would buy a bike that was ridden 5-10,000 miles a year, if the condition appears excellent and the owner is a long term owner with excellent maint records before I'd buy the ultra low miles bike. I'd probably pay less for it too!!!
But a bike that has been abused (loud pipes, poor appearnce, missmatched parts, evidence of multiple spills, 3 or more owners in short period are all possible indicators) is to be shuned no matter how good the deal seems.

If it's been sitting in a garage in Phoenix for all those years, then heat and lack of humidity takes a toll as well. Seals and gaskets dry out and crack, tires crack, hoses get brittle and crack. But there won't be any rust on it!

[Top Cat]

Soooo, when I get ready to sell my 2007 with 87,000 miles on it I should ask top dollar because it sure as hell hasn't been sitting in a garage it's whole life.

[VulcanE]

Tim, where's you bike right now?

[ponch]

I saw this today: http://phoenix.craigslist.org/evl/mcy/3458477255.html

[Top Cat]

Originally Posted by VulcanE

Tim, where's you bike right now?

Well Cliff, it is on life support in the ,ummm, garage.
But it does not spend much time in there in the spring, summer and fall.
If some one bought it today the tires would not be dry rot that's for sure

[Top Cat]

Originally Posted by ponch

I saw this today: http://phoenix.craigslist.org/evl/mcy/3458477255.html

This is what I saw when I clicked on what you saw

This posting has been flagged for removal. [?]

(The title on the listings page will be removed in just a few minutes.)

[ponch]

It's not what I see.