Truimph Thunderbird (1997) - known fault/valuation request

I'm looking to replace the Bandit 6 (fucked, due to a bike/van
interface situation), probably with a triumph Thunderbird 900 - P reg
(97).

I have seen a model that looks very good and is a reasonable price,
however the rev counter is not working. Chappy selling it says it is
a known fault affecting most second hand tbirds of that vintage. Is
this bollocks? Should I be looking at a large discount from the
asking price? It already looks a bit steep (best part of £3k -
http://tinyurl.com/mple9z) - Parkers have that bike valued at a dealer
price at £1950. A very similar one is on for just over 2k (http://
tinyurl.com/m3knzn) - not immediately obvious why the differential,
save for one is trade.

Any thoughts or does anybody have a better idea for the valuation?

 

http://www.upmystreet.com/local/crime-in-l15-4lg.html suggests that
whatever you buy, you won't keep it long

 

Nice bikes. Really, really nice bikes. The best of the 885cc triples,
IMHO. Soft and woofly and just fun. Characterful

I think so.

It's stupid money for a bike with a fault like that. I'd go for a T'bird
Sport, privately, for maybe £400-500 less. Even better bike, better
brakes, lovely styling.

 

Thought the same - not many about though. There is quite a good
looking red one on autotrader (1100 miles for a 12yr old bike?) as
well as a higher mileage one that has gone.

 

As a followup to this, what is the best approach with dealers that
seem to have a bike on for ridiculous amounts? I have seen a nice
looking TBird Sport on ebay (2302623234) but is about £700 higher than
other dealer bikes listed on autotrader (more like £1500 higher than
the private sales).

Is the right approach to move on to the next sensibly priced one? How
easy is it to negotiate a price like that down to a reasonable level?
Seller is at the opposite end of the country to me, so a speculative
drive by with haggling is not on the cards.

Any thoughts appreciated.

 

I'd point out the difference, and if I really wanted the bike, suggest
that they made up the £700 (or whatever) difference with some extras
and/or clothing.

As the margins are quite decent on accessories, helmets, etc, the
difference to them wouldn't be so severe and they ought to play ball.

 

Cheers sounds like a good idea. Out of interest, do you think I am
miles out on that one (ebay 2302623234 - Cannot really see it being
worth much more than £2700 or so.)

Ta.

 

"Your search returned no items"

 

Boggle. Haven't a fucking clue how that happened - the ebay item is
150363845172.

 

:

or you could just post a working URL
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=150363845172

seems way over the top to me, but low sales when new & demand do funny
things to prices.
Factor in it will be on the original, ten year old tyres. I'd want to
change those.

 

Tough call. It's ten years old but as near as-new as makes no
difference. I think it's over three grand all day long, about £3250, at
least from a dealer.

You have to look at it this way: what would a newer bike, in that sort
of nick, cost? Looking at those pix, and assuming it's as good as it
looks, I'd forget asking for £700 worth of kit and hold out for a
leather jacket and maybe a helmet. Or a rack and some basic luggage.

 

****.

I might well contact him tomorrow. Still a bit concerned about the
disparity between some of the autotrader prices (£2k to £3k) and this
bike (£3.7k). I am particularly shite at getting a good bargain
though.

Then again, the last bike I bought (bandit 6) I thought was a good
bargain and it was a fucking shed (I have posted on here before about
it as was thinking of selling about 6 months ago (someone offered a
few hundred quid for the bike in an OK-ish (and honestly described
state), about what it is now worth (and offered) since I drove into
the back of a van).

 

Yebbut the crock-o-shit path is so much more *fun*.

Allegedly.

 

Thanks for that - much appreciated.

I will take a look at it. Not that sure what I am looking for as I
have only owned two bikes so far and my mechanical aptitude is a
little on the low side. Any pointers on what to look for on a bike
this age?

 

Verify the provenance. Does the documentary evidence support the claims?
Does it really look like it has done just 2600 miles? I mentioned the tyres
previously, but do they have 1999 date codes on them?

If the provenance is sound then there shouldn't be anything wrong with it,
apart from perhaps a perished rubber component such as a hose or fork seal.

 

If it's been properly stored and re-commissioned, nothing.

In contrast to Wessie, I really don't think the tyres will have gone off
in a mere 10 years. Rubber components don't perish in that time either,
although fork seals can dry out and start leaking.

 

<Contemplates garage contents>

Yeah. Right.

 

There was an FJ1200 on ebay a while back going for £2K, again, a dry
stored, original with less than 10k on it.

Still can't see it being worth 2K ...

Paul.

 

Not quite the same thing. I saw that, too, and worthy though it was,
an FJ12 is now an old, old dated bike. And an early-1990s bike and 10k
miles is a long way different from a 1999 model and 2600 miles. I'd be
really surprised if the FJ was in anything like the same nick.

 

Just spoken to the seller. Its had two owners, been off the road for
5 years, in storage.

Seller has had fuel tank flushed, new tank of petrol, oil and filter
changed and fork seals replaced.

Mileage looks sound too - First MOT in 02, at 1985 miles. Second in
03 at 2349 and third was at 2483. Since then a few hundred.

Won't budge on the price over the phone (says there has been loads of
interest) but will pop down and take a look tomorrow - see if it is
any good.

Ta all for all the advice.