Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Maintenance cost 600 vs 1000

Discussion in 'Bling and Appearance' started by da_matrix, Jun 8, 2007.

  1. Yes another 600 vs 100 thread...

    I read up on other threads 600 vs 1000

    but havent really got an answer on how much more would it cost maintenance wise to own a 600 vs 1000
    -minus insurance (currently 20 and still on my P's :roll: )
    -minus regio (since anything above 600 is the same, right...?)

    i have currently owna cbr250rr, so it would be nice to see how much more it would cost to own the 600 or 1000. i dont want to start another debate on the other aspects of owning a 600 or 1000, just the cost... cuz im cheap like that :LOL:

    If maintenace wise they cost the same, i would just get the 1000.
  2. Depends how hard you ride it. If you rode them both hard.
    The thou would chew through tyres, and chains and sprockets quicker than a 600.
    Other than that, theres not really any difference.
  3. As ZXR mentioned, it depends how you ride 'em.

    My ZX/9R - not a litre bike, but close - would shred a $275 rear tyre in 3500 hard ridden kms. Ouch. Yet I could never restrain myself enough to ride it any easier, so it cost me heaps in tyres. And of course, I rode longer than I should have on shagged tyres as a result.

    Also much harder on chains and sprockets.

    I had to trade down (temporarily) to a ZZR600. Bloody great little bike. Not a ZX/9R by a long shot, but still delivers big grins, sees off much more powerful bikes, and costs me nowhere near as much in tyres, chains, sprockets. I probably ride it harder than the ZX/9R trying to compensate, but 90 odd horsepower is not 130, so wear and tear on rubber is still far less.

    Air and oil filters, other general maintenance and consumables are pretty much the same, just as long as you're comparing apples to apples - I.E, 4's to 4's, V-twins to V-twins etc.

    I love litre bikes, and I'll have another one, but they are bloody expensive beasts on tyres alone.

  4. Yep , tyres mainly. If you look after your chain properly it will last almost as long as a 600's will , unless you like clutching it up for wheelies :wink:

    After having owned a 6 for many years and now a thou , consumables don't really matter , we all have to fork out for them. If you're on a baby blade at the moment and are serious about your riding then I'd advise on riding a 600 for a while , or maybe one of those GSXR750's , those things are awesome and very unintimidating.
  5. speak for yourself!!!!
  6. did i miss something??

    or does this post not have anything to do with anything.
  7. im mostly commute, what do you mean by riding it hard? twisities or full acceleration?

    i rather a 1000, mite as well go all the way at once, seems like most people aim at getting to 1000 anyhows.

    But i can see why 1000 is a bit excessive, red line in first gear would mean you would be way over the speed limit... and i would like to red line any bike once :eek:
  8. Thats an interesting point. Personally I feel if you can't reddline even in 1st, seems like it takes away from part of the excitement. Maybe thats just me though.
  9. it does seem to be quite rare, actually. I'm a big fan of smaller bikes, since you actually can nail them to the redline without doing stupid speeds. My XT (and the SRX before) with a 600cc single get to the redline and 1st and 2nd getting up to 60kmh. Sure, not as fast as a 600 or thou inline 4, but it feels just as fast.

    Less powerful bikes are a great way to improve your riding, too. You *need* to maintain corner speeds, as you can't just straighten up and nail it to catch up to others. It is a good feeling when you leave the supersports (which cost 4x as much, and have 4x the power) behind in the twisties.

  10. On the other side of the coin, generally larger engines don't work as hard and therefore don't wear as fast. So there may be some argument for long term ownership of the 1000.

    I write generally, because so many other things come into play that it's difficult to judge. e.g brand x 1000 may be just a bored 750 and thus the engine components are much more stressed, whereas brand why may be designed as a 1000.

    You've got to own a big bore once in you life just to tick the box, but my next bike will probably be a smaller bike.