D-Fuzz

That is an impossible question to answer. You are asking people on here to decide which bike you would be most happy with: and only you can answer that.

Put it this way: A bike with 5K on the clock but owned by an apathetic numpty would be a worse buy than a 25K bike owned by a judiscious and caring owner....

I would say, though, that lower the mileage the better (on two bikes of similar condition and ownership...), but judge any bike you see on its own merits.

Go and test ride them. See which model you are most tempted by and then keep your eyes open. If you find a bike that looks tidy, regardless of the mileage and seems to have been well looked after and the price suits you, then go for it.

I, personally, would not worry over a bike with 25K on the clock, especially any of the models you mentioned.

If you get a good feeling about a bike and the price suits the condition/age/mileage...Buy it. If you have a mate who knows engines, bring him along for a bit of peace of mind.

If picking a bike is a concern for you, go to a dealer. You'll get less for your money, but you should be able to negotiate some sort of warranty period.

Test riding any used bike outside of the cruiser &/or crotch rocket category in my neck of the woods is tough. There just aren't many (read: any) around. The Suzuki dealer is town has new V-stroms and I can test those when the snow finally melts. However, any other bike is likely a 6-8 hour drive away, so it kind of limits my options for test rides. I am not trying to get anyone to tell me which bike I am going to like, I am just hoping to tap into other people's experience to help me narrow down my list of options. Thus far, my short list of bikes is:

1) 1999 BMW F650 (Funduro) - 5K miles

2) 1998 BMW F650 Funduro - 20K miles

3) 2003 KLR 650 - 20K miles

4) 1997 Triumph Tiger - 20K miles

5) 2001 Triumph Tiger - 25K miles

Basically, all these bikes are a weekend commitment to drive, test ride, load and bring home, hence the reason I would like to trim the list down a bit.

The only reason I have included the KLR in the list is it is the closest (2.5hr away) and is a couple thousand dollars cheaper than the other examples. I have a friend with a KLR and he really likes it. I'm sure he would let me test ride his, but my concern is loading the bike up with kit to go to Alaska, and finding it too underpowered on the highway. I am sure once you get to the rough stuff up north, the KLR would be great, but up to that point is what I am not so sure about.

The 1998 BMW is a little further away (about 3.5hrs), while the 1999 BMW is about 6hrs away, in the opposite direction of course. My concern with these bikes again comes back to the single, will the have enough comfortably haul me and my kit down the highway? Are they significantly different from the KLR (more refined, quieter, less buzzing)? The prices of the bikes seems a little high given the year, but are they more expensive for a good reason or strictly because they are Bimmers?

The Tigers are the furthest away and it may likely be more economical for them to be shipped than for me to go get them. The 1997 Tiger is cheaper than the 2001, but is the 2001 a better bike overall? I am not concerned about the power of the bikes and their ability to haul me and my stuff around. As far as handling, given my limited riding experience, how much am I going to realize during a short test ride? If the bike was a total pig, there would be plenty of people on the forums telling about it. If I don't like the way it rides, I can always sell it and try again.

This is a pretty long post with lots of questions, but hopefully it will clarify a bit as to what I am looking for.

Thanks.

OK. two things. Firsty, I didn't intend to criticise you for asking advice, its just that this will end up being someone else's view based on their likes, dislikes and priorities... They may not be the same as yours.
To illustrate this there is a good thread in this forum, here that shows that regardless how much you research sometimes you might end up on a completely different bike and be thrilled for ever more!!

The second point is wanting to be able to spot a dog yourself is a useful skill, such as checking wheel and steering bearings, checking chains, tyres, discs, and pads for wear and even recognising unhealthy engine sounds or symptoms.

On this second note have a look here (don't just look at this page, but all the basics to give you an idea: very easy to read and follow): a great resource. Make notes and use them as a checklist if you go to view a bike....

Unfortunately, I have no poersonal experience of any of the bikes you mention. I'm sure others do and will answer soon. However, based purely on what I have read: ie anecdotal evidence, I believe they are all capable bikes. My guess is that the KLR will be best off road, the F650 will be better on the highway, and of course the tiger will be smoothest and most powerful of all 3. I expect the singles to do best on fuel and component wear due to the lower power and cc.

HTH

I wouldn't dismiss the KLR ,try your friend's bike and see if it is what you want .
I live close to the Alaska Highway and the KLR is one of the most popular bikes that I see .So yes you can load them up to the gills and head north
without a problem ,you won't have the speed of the Tiger but you knew that already .
If you are looking at bikes as diverse as 40 hp singles and near 100 hp multicylinders ,you really haven't decided what kind of riding you want to do .
Maybe it would be best to get that sorted out before you buy.
If you have a Suzuki dealer in town, it might be better to buy locally ,it'll be a whole lot easier getting parts .

That certainly is a consideration. In our fair city of 200,000 people, we have a Suzuki/Honda shop, a Kawasaki/Yamaha shop, a Ducati shop and a Harley shop. The nearest BMW and Triumph dealers are 3.5 hrs away. I am comfortable enough doing most of the work myself, but parts availability is certainly something to consider, although the internet makes getting parts for most things pretty easy.

Well, I think I have made a decision. I have found a used KLR and a used DR650 fairly local (within a few hours drive). The prices on them is considerably lower than finding a used Tiger or V-Strom. I have decided to go that route, ride the bike for awhile to see how it suits my needs and go from there. I haven't ridden in several years, so the biggest thing is to get out and do some riding. The trip we are planning is over a year away, so if I find the single doesn't do what I want, I will look for something else next spring.

I don`t know if you have these in the States, but I bought an XTZ660 Yamaha a few months back and have been riding it every day (including today!) and I really enjoy it. It is great for the potholed back roads around here and I have done a few trips of 200 miles or so and found it very comfortable. It will sit at 80 on motorways, but I feel happier at 70 on it. It has slowed me down and I am enjoying the view more! I reckon it would make an excellent bike to do a trip on as long as there is no really serious off road stuff.

Canada is not "the States" and the XTZ is not available .

I think the biggest dual-purpose bike available from Yamaha in Canada is 250cc.

[quote=Dodger;235478]
If you are looking at bikes as diverse as 40 hp singles and near 100 hp multicylinders ,you really haven't decided what kind of riding you want to do .
[quote]

Of all the very good advice in this thread, I think this point really needs to be addressed before a decision is reached.

If it possible to be even more confused, well I am. I went to have a look at a '01 KLR the other day and all it did really was muddy the water for me. It was easy enough to ride, I liked how light it felt, but a 15 minute ride around town didn't tell me much.

It has been mentioned that I need to figure out what kind of riding I want to do. Well, this is what I want to do:

- commute to work
- do daytrip rides around home that would likely include a couple hours on the highway in order to get to gravel and dirt roads. I live in a place where the majority of roads are gravel &/or dirt but you have to ride some highway to get there.
- ultimately I am wanting to do a trip to Alaska next summer which will include several solid days of riding on highway during the trip.

When I began looking for a motorcycle, I was hoping to spend $5000 or less. It seemed that a thumper of some kind was about the only thing in that price bracket. There are very few "adventure" type bikes for sale in this area and the ones that are seem to be quite high priced. (a 2006 Wee-strom with 20,000km = $7500CDN??) Unfortunately for me, I have to rely on the experience of others to help me in my search. I have spoken to some friends who ride a lot and their advice is to stay away from the thumps unless I plan to trailer the bike on the highway and ride it on the gravel roads.

I know it is important to get something and get some riding in as I don't think it is practical to buy something next spring and expect to ride to Alaska. I was hoping to be able to buy something sooner than later with the "fun money" I have socked away. (Wives can put a damper on spending too much on these things.) Am I better off waiting a bit until I can squirrel away some more money or would I be better served buying something like a KLR, getting some riding in over the summer, and the selling it if necessary to buy something bigger in the fall or next spring? If I did that, I would basically have 2 months next spring on riding before doing the Alaska thing (May-June).

D-Fuzz.

I have owned a few singles: some trailie types and others not. Its perfectly possible to ride highways on a single: its just not fast and a bit more vibby. If you can live with that then you have nothing to worry about.

Based on what you are saying the highways are a means to an end, rather than the trip themselves, so I say buy a bike that will make the parts you are heading for the most fun possible.

You want to ride dirt tracks; so get a thumper, and live with a slightly slower drive too the dirt tracks. Regardless how capable the DL and Tiger are in the dirt, if that is the terrain you are aiming for a single will beat them hands down.... It's that simple.

Same with commuting: thumpers, typically, are a lot cheaper to run on tyres and fuel, and they are nimble in town. Do you need 70-100 bhp to commute? My best commuters were between 25-40 bhp, but small, nimble and cheap to run!

Finally for the big trip, same logic as above: dozens of members here have done BIG trips on singles and not suffered for it. Cheaper to do the whole trip and as Grant and many other seasoned travellers can tell you: the slower you go the more you see and the more you do.

In a nutshell, if Highways are the only thing stopping you I say don't let them. Buy the bike you enjoyed, pocket the money you didn't spend and keep it for the trip next year and go nuts on some dirt tracks in the mean time with a bike built for the job!!

My 2p.

Couldn't agree more Warthog.

The type of usage you are stating D-Fuzz means that really the only difference the extra bhp a twin or triple will give you is the speed you travel at on the open road, but in town you could be on a Honda C90. I am now on my third thumper, an MZ Skorpion, MZ Baghira and Royal Enfield 500 Bullet and love them all. The MZ's will keep up with motorway traffic and the Bullet is now residing in Kazakhstan after an aborted attempt to get to Mongolia.
Riding that bike fully loaded up made me realise that it isn't always the destination that matters but the journey getting to where ever you end up. 50 / 60 mph gives you so much time to see your surroundings slowly change. Comfort is probably the most important factor on any long haul, and don't forget handlebars can always be changed, unless you find that you also need to cover the miles as quickly as possible.

Sometimes it really comes down to what your heart says when you see a bike. Short comings can always be overcome or overlooked if you really like the machine.

If you live anywhere near Vancouver ,I saw a Transalp on Craigs List today .
It might be what you are looking for .

I live in Saskatchewan, smack dab in the middle of nowhere.

I saw that Transalp. There are also a couple in Toronto. I think that would be an excellent bike, not too big, not too expensive. The problem for me is getting a bike from Vancouver or Toronto to Saskatchewan. It is too cold and to early in the year to make a big ride, and shipping seems to be a problem for everyone when you ask. Any ideas?