This thought occurred to me while I was reading ddavidv's thread, but in the interest of not threadjacking...
I've got an XT225, it has turned out to be VERY cheap to gas,maintain, insure, etc. But, it is simply not stable enough to ride on the highway with comfort. So, it's cheap, but more of a knobby-tired scooter than a real-world all-purpose motorcycle.
Is there a real, highway capable motorbike that is actually cheaper to operate than a 1997 Honda Civic DX?
Something like a Superdream 250 or 400 comes to mind. For proper highway you probably need the 400.
In reply to BoxheadTim:
Interesting, closest thing I found in the US was the Honda Nighthawk 750. But, of course with two extra cylinders and 350 extra cc's I'm sure the MPG's take quite a hit. I guess a related question would be, what weight or displacement is necessary to make a bike comfortable in the interstate? Is a Ninja 250 comfortable on the superslab? What about a TU250X? An XT225 definitely isn't.
I can't really believe they didn't sell Superdreams over here - you might have to go back to the late 80s, though. Another bike that comes to mind that is very good on fuel is the Kawasaki KZ550/GPz550. Again, we're talking 80s here. I used to run one of those on my UK commute (120 mile round trip) as a winter hack and got 55mpg+ (that's UK gallons, though, they're a little bigger) - keep in mind I was doing 70mph (definitely not more, officer) most of the time.
Another option might be the basic 70s CB350 twin variants - for some reason the Honda fours of the same period have a bit of a drinking problem so I'd steer clear of those.
It also depends on what sort of car you compared the bike against - in the right circumstances (like during my commute) even my ZRX1200 will average 50mpg, but that's because I hardly ever get over 50mph. But if you're comparing it against a 1st gen Insight, it still falls short. For the 100mpg+ club you're looking at the bikes that transport half of Asia like the Honda C90 and those definitely aren't highway friendly.
Forgot to add - the more modern the bike, the more expensive and shorter lived the tires tend to be. That can make a big difference to the overall running cost.
The answer is: yes
Every bike ever made will be cheaper to own than a new small car except a few rare exotics or bikes that have to run race rubber.
if I lived in the southwest I might not own anything else.
ShadowSix wrote: Is there a real, highway capable motorbike that is actually cheaper to operate than a 1997 Honda Civic DX?
Over the long term? I'd like to see someone do the math (<-- lazy)
Most mikes are much more maintenance intensive that most cars. Sync carbs, shim valves, chain crap you have to deal with, tires that don't last long, the cost of garaging (or dealing with problems resulting from not doing so), fork rebuilds, motors don't last nearly as long, etc.
FWIW, a my Ninja 250 wasn't great on the highway, but didn't bother me any less than my 600. Got great mileage. Only thing nice about the 600 was if you wanted to GO on the highway, you still could, where the Ninja was more like... a Civic Si.
In reply to Giant Purple Snorklewacker:
Well, I'm too high up in the mountains to ride year round, but in general I agree if you compare new for new, and even then the running cost for a bike when you do significant mileage (like 15k+ miles/year like I used to do) a bike can turn out to be fairly expensive.
A lot of bikes don't get much better than 40-45mpg and you're looking at $300-$400 for a set of tires for any kind of bike that is car replacement comfy. Figure between 6000-8000 mile per set depending on how you ride and what you ride.
I rode year round in the UK and had a long commute, plus I would take the bike around Europe at least once a year. 20k miles/year wasn't that hard to do, but even with the BMW[1] service intervals (6k as opposed to the 4k on most bikes) that's 3 services/year and at least 2 sets of tires. Of course fuel is a lot more expensive in Europe than it is over here, so it made (some) economic sense.
[1] I mostly owned BMW oilheads as I had the right mechanic for them. They're not necessarily fully DIYable without the diagnostic tools.
ProDarwin wrote: Over the long term? I'd like to see someone do the math (<-- lazy)
Well, I've done the math for years and promptly ignored the results...
My experience suggests that:
... a car that gets 40mpg probably would have still been cheaper to run and you would've ended up less wet.
ProDarwin wrote: Most mikes are much more maintenance intensive that most cars. Sync carbs, shim valves, chain crap you have to deal with, tires that don't last long, the cost of garaging (or dealing with problems resulting from not doing so), fork rebuilds, motors don't last nearly as long, etc.
The main problem is that when you expect a car replacement, you're looking at touring bikes simply for comfort issues and long distance viablity. My experience is mostly with BMWs (K-Series and R-Series oildheads) and these will do a lot of miles. Probably not car territory but they'll easily do 100k-150k plus, as will a Goldwing. Harley Road Sofa probably not, although that might have changed.
But as you rightly mention, maintenance is more expensive and often requires more DIY and consumables are comparatively expensive. Heck, even m/c specific oil is more expensive than a similar car oil.
I guess the problem is that you just don't save that much gas riding a 60 MPG bike over a 40 MPG Civic. Definitely not enough to cover rubber and extra maintenance. And, nothing that clears 80-100 MPG's is stable on the highway.
I'm still going to be looking at V-Strom 650's over the winter. 
ShadowSix wrote: I guess the problem is that you just don't save that much gas riding a 60 MPG bike over a 40 MPG Civic.
Pretty much. And 60mpg bikes highway-capable bikes aren't that easy to find.
ShadowSix wrote: I'm still going to be looking at V-Strom 650's over the winter.
I can say from my perspective that there is NOTHING that's cheaper to own and operate than an early-nineties Civic. Had my Civic VX for 8 long years, covered more than 120k miles. I figured out my total investment over those 8 years - including average gas, Mobil 1 oil, repairs, wear items, initial purchase, subtracting for the sale price. It turned out to be just under 9 cents a mile.
My year with the Pacific Coast, which I'd consider the Honda Civic of motorcycles, averaged just about 14 cents a mile. And I encountered nothing beyond tires, oil, and gas in that time period.
The PC800 was a much more fun year, however.
Wow, 9 cents a mile is amazing. The best new-car operating costs are in the 40 cent range.
The VX truly was an amazing car, it kills me that every one that shows up on my local craigslist has a B18 or H22 swap. 
Sold mine, stock and running well, with working AC, on here a little more than a year ago for $1500! I must have been absolutely nuts. Wonder how it's doing now...
Anyway, that figure is as sweet as it is because I bought it at the bottom of its depreciation curve, had to put very little into it, and sold it for a small loss. That's the real GRM way. Even better if you drive it for years and sell it for a profit, as many here have, I'm sure.
You're ignoring the elephant in the room, second or third biggest expense of ownership and operation. Insurance.
Watch a VFR800 beat a Civic over a year.
Civic:
Gas: 14000 miles at 35 M.P.G. is 400 gallons, $1600.
Tires: 1/2 of one set at $400 a set installed, $200.
Maintenance: ~$500
Insurance - Liability/"Comprehensive"/Underinsured/Uninsured for 25-yo male: $1100
Total: $3400, or about a quarter a mile.
VFR800:
Gas: 14000 miles at 50 M.P.G is 280 gallons, $1120.
Tires: 2 sets at $350 installed, $700
Maintenance: ~$700 (much, much more than mine has cost me)
Insurance, same coverage: $270.
Total: $2790. A good helmet, jacket, pants, gloves, and boots cost less than $700 new, and I found all of mine except the helmet secondhand for much less than that.
By comparison, If we sold our 2008 Honda Fit today for $9000, it would yield a total expenditure of about 18 cents per mile. That's surprisingly good for a car bought new.
It seems to me that cost per mile traveled is a function of depreciation first, gas mileage second, and repair costs third. I'd hate to see a cost per mile breakdown on a new Land Rover.
chaparral wrote: You're ignoring the elephant in the room, second or third biggest expense of ownership and operation. Insurance.
I suppose you could be correct, if we are assuming that the Civic is not the primary mode of transportation but rather a second car and so adding an additional full insurance burden that you wouldn't have otherwise. Or assuming the even less likely idea that the VFR is the sole mode of transportation.
Sounds like the answer is an MX6 GT Turbo. 
Gas: 14000 miles at 37 M.P.G. is 378 gallons, $1513
Tires: 1/2 of one set at $400 a set installed, $200.
Maintenance: ~$200
Insurance - Liability/"Comprehensive"/Underinsured/Uninsured for 26-yo male: $313
Total: $2226, or about 16 cents a mile.
AWWWWWWYEAH.jpg
:D That is nuts. My vfr was 11 k new in 95. 126 per year to insure. It went 30K miles on basic maintenance. I sold it for 7k in 01. So... Six years of great riding for 4k plus gas.
:D That is nuts. My vfr was 11 k new in 95. 126 per year to insure. It went 30K miles on basic maintenance. I sold it for 7k in 01. So... Six years of great riding for 4k plus gas.
Almost every bike I've owned cost less to buy than most of my cars. Insurance was always a lot cheaper as well (liability only). Maintenance costs were lower with the bikes almost always. Fuel costs, depends on the bike and car.
Which makes it sound like the bikes were the cheaper route to go. There's an elephant hiding in the room.
Weather.
When there's a blizzard blowing outside, the bike is a distinct disadvantage compared to a car. Less extreme, when it's raining, and we get that a lot. Trying to ride in cold or rain, or worse a cold rain, and you get to spend lots of money on gear, trying to find something that works. From electrically heated clothes to leather to who knows what else.
Live in California, and this isn't much of an issue. Live in Maine, and it's a heck of an issue.
foxtrapper wrote: Almost every bike I've owned cost less to buy than most of my cars. Insurance was always a lot cheaper as well (liability only). Maintenance costs were lower with the bikes almost always. Fuel costs, depends on the bike and car. Which makes it sound like the bikes were the cheaper route to go. There's an elephant hiding in the room. Weather. When there's a blizzard blowing outside, the bike is a distinct disadvantage compared to a car. Less extreme, when it's raining, and we get that a lot. Trying to ride in cold or rain, or worse a cold rain, and you get to spend lots of money on gear, trying to find something that works. From electrically heated clothes to leather to who knows what else. Live in California, and this isn't much of an issue. Live in Maine, and it's a heck of an issue.
When I rode a bike for my daily driver I had a $500 75 Chevy 4x4 for weather. Living in Nashville we have very little snow and there weren't many days the rain was bad enough to keep me off the bike, so it got used very little. I always rode in the cold...I think the lowest I saw was 7 degrees....it was cold but doable with the right gear. I enjoy riding in the cold as long as I have decent gear on.
For me I can't really compare a decent bike to a econo box because I refuse to drive an appliance, so my comparison would be to an MR2 or something like that. A car that is sporty but is still cheap and gets decent mpg.
I don't think there's a VFR800 out there that will reliably do 50mpg on the highway. Mine pulls in low-40's on trips, I don't check in-town.
I think the SV650 would probably be a good all-arounder with mile numbers in the low to mid-50's, I think.
In reply to pres589:
I do actually think the SV650/Wee-Strom are probably some of the better mileage bikes-you'd-actually-want-to-ride-for-a-couple-hours. Fuelly says mid to high 40's for the SV and high 40's/low 50's for the Wee. Not bad.
Some of the mags claim the new CBR250R is highway capable... mileage in the mid to high 60's...
Loved my Wee for long distance. Seat could be a bit more comfortable, but I say that in context to 500+ mile days. Best tank was 57 MPG, worst was 45. Same trip, best was in SW VA coming up I-81, worst was going from GRM HQ to Tampa, stop and go through Orlando.
You'll need to log in to post.
