91 Bandit (GSF400) or 84 GS400S (for a beginner bike)?

[ripcurl]

I'm looking for a beginner bike and I'm currently looking at a 1991 Suzuki Bandit GSF400 with 53000km on it for $1750 and a 1984 Suzuki GS400S with 49000km on it for $900. Insurance on both bikes come out to be $1500/year

I plan to keep the bike for 2 seasons and do most of the maintanence myself (the easy stuff). My question is which one is the better buy? I'm worried about the mileage on both the bikes, and thus want to spend the minimum amount possible.

What are the potential issues with both bikes? I'll update when I have pics of the bikes and more info.

If this is in the wrong section, can a mod pls move it to the right one? Thanks

[Red01]

The Bandit is the sportier of the two, but the GS is famous for reliability - not that the Bandit is bad... both are old and probably aren't perfect, despite their low kilometerage for their age.  The GS is also very closely related to the GS500 that is still in production, so if you ever did need parts, there's 30+ years worth of GS's.

$1500 for insurance on either one?     Is that full-coverage?  Given the low prices on the bikes, I would only insure for liability.

Bottom line though, buy the one that moves your soul the most.

[Vidrazor]

I have a '93 Bandit 400 with 67592 kilometers on it, and it runs just fine. I'm at a loss as to why numbers like this for bikes are considered bad. If you were buying a '91 Toyota with 53000 kilometers on it, would you think that's a lot?

I agree about the insurance numbers. What are you insuring? I don't think you can get collision and theft after a certain year, if I'm not mistaken. I don't know where you are, but I'd look around a bit more or get a modified plan.

[PitterB4]

I don't know where you are,

KMs and $ sounds like Canuckland to me.

Yeah, the reason you don't see nearly as many higher mileage bikes as you do cars is because they are more often crashed and less often worth repairing.  A lot get bashed up and then parted out rather than repaired long before they rack up serious miles.  Also, most places they're not year-round transportation.  They're often also recreation rather than a primary mode of transportation.  Its not that they aren't meant to be high mileage machines.

Anyway, I can't speak to the GS but I learned on my B4 and am still here typing to you.

Good luck!

[skibum]

I've owned both bikes.  I still have my 93 B4 and absolutely love it.  Far more serious motorcycle than a GS400.  In fact, while you can certainly learn to ride on a B4, you likely won't outgrow it, and feel the need for something more advanced, like you probably will with the GS400.  That said, the GS400 has the reliability of an anvil.  You simply can't break the damned thing.  And should you manage to pull off the impossible, parts are available and cheap.  Also, working on the GS is far more straightforward than on the Bandit.  I could pull, clean and reinstall the carbs on the GS in about a quarter of the time the same task takes on the Bandit.  Valve adjustments are far simpler also.  So, if you really plan to ride it to learn and move on to something else, I'd buy the GS.  If you think that long term, you could be satisfied with 400cc and don't mind working on something a little more complex, then buy the Bandit.

[LowRyter]

why would you pay $1500 for annual insurance on a $1700 bike?  I'd find another agent and probably would go with liability-only.

I think the B4 is the best deal.  That little Bandit is a keeper and potential collector's item.  It's a serious sporty bike.  Great trellis frame, café racer. 

The deal breaker is condition.  All things equal, you'll get a little classic with the B4.

[mademiriam]

why would you pay $1500 for annual insurance on a $1700 bike? 

because depending on where you live...this could be the liability only quote.

[interfuse]

Yes another reason why Canada sucks.

[wizzobeer]

250 a year liability on my B12- see Canada's not all bad

[interfuse]

Ontario is bad.