11 ms·
Motorcycle is an under-considered car alternative. Fuel is peanuts and total annual costs only a few hundred; a small fraction of car ownership. Only a few gr
by rubashov 16y ago
Motorcycle is an under-considered car alternative. Fuel is peanuts and total annual costs only a few hundred; a small fraction of car ownership. Only a few grand of capital is tied up in the bike.
It's great if you only need to drive a couple times a week and can resort to other means if necessary.
- mitjak 16y agoI'd love to explore this option at one point (Vespa drooling time). In the meantime there is the ebike and ordinary bike options too. Until you need to grocery shop for a week or two ahead that is.
- rubashov 16y agoI don't know what the heck the point of these scooters and vespas are. They're the same price as 250cc proper motorcycles. Seems like a tax on hipsterdom.
- lsc 16y ago> Seems like a tax on hipsterdom. you say that like it's a bad thing. The objective issue is that scooters have automatic transmissions, which make them quite a lot easier for many people to handle. Subjectively, they are in general much less intimidating, which seems to be a positive for the scooter crowd and a negative for the motorcycle crowd. But I think the automatic transmission is the big thing. Honda tried to sell auto transmission motorcycles a while back, but nobody wanted them.
- gamache 16y agoHonda's selling new CVT-based automatics now, the spacey DN-01 and overkill-redesigned VFR1200. Very expensive and aimed at no discernable market (unlike the old Hondamatics you mentioned). I haven't seen a single one on the road yet.
- philwelch 16y agoAt least on a car, a stick shift is a lot more fun than an automatic. Since people ride motorcycles largely for fun, I'm not surprised they're uninterested in automatic transmissions.
- lsc 16y agoeh, you can get pretty big bags for a motorcycle. with a topcase and two sidecases, you could carry a weeks worth of food, at least a weeks worth for one person, on a small motorcycle.
- gmac 16y agoI love the idea of motorbikes, but find the risk of death off-putting. E.g. http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/risks_of_travel.htm http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/risks_of_travel.htm
- confuzatron 16y agoI wouldn't ride a motorbike for just this reason. I wonder what the corresponding stats are for mopeds. It's a truism that some [young] reckless motorcyclists ride machines that are too powerful for them to control. Mopeds, not so much I'd guess. This is the best source I could find with comparative accident rates for motorbikes/mopeds: http://www.motorcycle-accidents.com/pages/stats.html http://www.motorcycle-accidents.com/pages/stats.html
- mike-cardwell 16y agoIs this because riding a motorcycle is more dangerous or because people who like driving fast and taking risks are more likely to have a motorcycle than people who aren't? Ie, if you ride a motorcycle sensibly, is it really that much more dangerous than driving a car sensibly? I suspect it is always going to be higher because you've got less protection when you do crash, but still, it can't be that much higher...
- confuzatron 16y agoI am guessing it's because motorcycles are capable of going faster, accelerating quicker, so people go faster on them and tend to drive more aggressively. I'd say, at the same speeds, a motorcyclist is much more likely to be injured than a driver. In one case, the car is the crumple zone, in the other the motorcyclist's body is the crumple zone.
- qjz 16y agoA sage once told me, "On a motorcycle, you are the bumper."
- philwelch 16y ago
- jbarham 16y agoIn my experience owning a motorcycle in Canada or the US is more expensive than owning a small car. Even medium sized sport or sport touring motorcycles (e.g., Honda VFR) aren't cheap to run. The engines are tuned for performance not fuel efficiency and usually need premium fuel, so small cars are about as cheap to re-fuel per mile. Also the maintenance cost that killed me was tires: You have to pay around $500 dollars for (two) good tires on a motorcycle every 10k miles (if you're lucky) whereas I spent only $200 at Costco for (four) tires for my car that should last more than 50k miles. Also consider than motorcycles depreciate faster than cars and the resale market is less liquid so you lose more money when you sell. Summary: Buy motorcycles because they're fun, not because they're cheap! Granted a 50cc scooter would certainly be cheaper to run than a car but then you're restricted to city streets (i.e., no highways).
- rubashov 16y agoI have no idea what arithmetic you're using. I get over 50 mpg. Annual insurance is about $100. Averaged out I spend maybe $200 on maintenance, taxes, and registration. Motorcycles are very much cheaper than cars. Japanese motorcycles are totally liquid and don't depreciate quickly. You can sell a Ninja in a day.
- sliverstorm 16y agoIndeed. I get about 50mpg, and could re-tune to get 60mpg if it was worth it to me (bike becomes an anemic heap though). Insurance is cheap, bike cost $1,500, oil is cheap (6,000 factory change interval, and truck oil which works well in my bike costs $13/gallon) Your parent is right, tires can be expensive. It depends on the bike you ride and the tires you buy. I can get ~10,000 miles out of $80 of tire, and I install them myself. I'd say it really comes down to the bike you have. Some bikes are way more expensive to own than a commuter car, but that doesn't mean all bikes are.
- darrylb42 16y agoIt will depend on the bike. In Vancouver BC my Ducati Monster 696 costs more to insure ~$1800 then my Infiniti G35 Coupe ~$1600. That is with a 42% discount safe driver discount. If you are concerned just about cost you will need to get a small displacement city only bike.
- pkulak 16y agoI had a motorcycle. I drove my car for any kind of a long trip, and my bicycle for everything else. Needless to say, I sold my motorcycle.