I don't know if this has been put up before, my memory ain't what it used to be. Anyway, I was kicking back, trolling through the Saturday Papers, and I was looking through the Cars Guide, not that I'm up for a car at the moment, (bought one in December last year)
Anyway, wot got my thinking, as I had just finished reading a bike mag road test, with the standard "at this price, its a bargain..." I always think, "for someone with a lot more money than I have", For the price of wot a new 600 would be, I can pop down to street and get a nice shiny 4 cylinder car, ABS, Alloys, Cruise, CD/MP3, Air, Airbags, EBC, Electric Tinted Windows, 5 year warrantee and so on, they would even throw in on road costs, to boot.
I used to feel that the price for bikes was justified to an extent, but these days, so many more people world wide are getting into bikes, the "limited market" thing just don't work anymore. Don't get me wrong, I'd happily pay wot ever to keep my bum on my bike. Years ago (say 30) You could see how some of the costs where justified, Kurt & Helga/ Mario & Tina, putting the bikes together by hand and maybe the local town having a party when a bike finally rolled out of production (cause everyone in town works there). These days their massed produced, like everything else.the old brands, bought out years ago by some conglomerate, or some self made Billionaire, who's poor working class father used to ride one. (don't get me started on why the cost of europeans bikes is justifiable)
Even the R & D costs are absorbed, cos many, many models have a very long life, with a few cosmetic and mechanical changes for next years model, plus there are heaps of part bin specials (Hornet/Fazer)
How many bike makers out there? You would not be close, take into account European manufacturers as well. Competition is supposed to make things cheaper, it does with cars, why not bikes? I reckon bike owners are getting shafted. Anyway had my Saturday vent, feel better now

 

with all the newbs wanting the best thing on the road, the prices won't come down. i wouldn't buy a new bike, ever again. my next bike will be used...hopefully off some squid who didn't know what to do with it other than try and look pretty. i'll let him take the hit from depreciation.

you're absolutely right...bikes aren't 'worth' that much...but then again, 'worth' is subjective.

 

I flip flop on this one. When you compare bikes to cars it seems very expensive - but when
you look at the performance level you are getting it seems better value. Most of the bikes, on
this forum especially, are not far from being racing demons, and they sure keep us entertained.

When I compare the price of my bike, to the price of my mountain bike (ie: no engine) then I
generally feel a lot better about it.

If it cost $7k to get a bike that is close to the best in the world, that works, has a warranty and will
last for years, then I am OK with it. Perhaps the bike companies know that we'd rather spend our money on toys
than on the burdens of life, so they just keep pushing the envelope. For the larger companies like Honda,
I am sure they know the relationship between performance, price and the number of potential buyers they will have
at each price range.

At the end of the day, they make great bikes and we love to ride them, so I don't mind if they are making profit doing so !

 

Yeah, but what kind of car do you see on the road that can be sold for nearly 70% of it's original value some 5-6 years after it was made?

My old car, 2002 Mitsubishi Galant GTZ, fully loaded, was $25K new. When I sold itlast year, I got almost $9K out of it. And it was super clean, immaculate interior, with only a super small ding in the rear quarter panel (didn't even phase the buyer).

This is not a Mitsubishi thing, so let's not go there.

 

if i was out of school with a sick job i would buy something new, buy buying say a cbr1000 for 11k, a year later you might get 8500, next bike im just gonna wait for some dumbass like tahoe said

 

It's not really fair to compare a damn-near race replica bike to a low cost hoopdie. A car equivalent of a 600RR would be an exotic, costing maybe 10x what the CBR goes for. The right comparison to an everyday, decent 4-cylinder car might be something like a Rebel or Nighthawk, that costs maybe $3500 at the dealership.

I'd rather compare the cost of buying and operating a bike to what other fancy toys, like a boat, would cost you.

 

In theroy competiton should make products cheaper. But tariffs especialy the protective ones here in America allow the gov't to charge the better imported products more money so in turnthe foreign comapnyraise the prices on imported products. IMO this gives domestic companys no incentive to make 1) a better product 2) inexpensive product, just cheap enough to cost less than its competion.American companies (I.E. Harley Davidson, GM) charge more money for an outdated inferior product that can be sold for less than it's superior counterpart. Just think how much your imported bikes and cars would cost if there were no protective tariffs.
Exactly everyone wants to make money and I don't mind giving them mine eitherjust give me the product I want. American car and bike companies don't do that.
[sm=rant.gif]

 

prices are what the market will bear. look at Harley's stock price appreciation, granted a Harley is not really what we are talking about, but it is a pure Bike play, up 40% in 5 years, not bad, but not great. Honda isn't much different than that bike/car. Toyota is just slightly worse, all car.

My guess is that we aren't paying that much for what these machines cost to make. They probably are similar to the automotive model as far as costs and whatnot.

I feel pretty happy with my $8000 purchase, much better than $15 for a DVD or $3 for a beer or $20 for a lap dance, plus I have fun with this thing, not like some cars I have owned.

But yeah, my next bike will be used, and at least I'll save some on the first year depreciation.

 

+1

 

A couple of intersting points, but bike depreciation (here at least) is same as for cars, 20% a soon as it hits the street. The other point I was trying to make, and I agree that performance wise you getting a better deal, but there is still the same technology and heaps more metal in my car, than my bike, just because there is a big difference in the power to weight ratio (my car, in line four, DOHC, & fuel injection) should not govern what you pay. I remember when BMW made a real song & dance when the released the "K" series bikes. the fuel injection & black box where Bosch and where the same fitted to a lot of Fords, they made heaps more money flogging their "Recommended Spark plugs", which where Bosch plugs in a BMW box. I think that I've mentioned in a previous post with regard to the parts on bikes, for instance, on Yamaha they use Toyota brake lines. A lot of the Turbo developement that went into some bikes in the 80's (CX500 &CX650 fer instance) ended up in their affilated car companies (so much for R &D costs being a factor)
My own theory for what its worth, as bike riders, we would do & pay just about anything to be on the road, thats pretty much reflected in what the state government makes us pay for compulsory 3rd party insurance & rego, rather than say "Stick it", we pay it cos we want to keep riding. I'll continue to ride for as long as I'm able, and part with bucks when I eventually get another bike.
but I still reckon where getting buzzed by the companies.