Okay price for a xj650?

Wasn't sure where to post this. But I was looking at this 82' XJ650 Seca and its $1,700. There is 24,xxx miles on it. Nothing needs to be done to it though. Is it a decent price?

 

ha ha!

http://www.xjbikes.com/forums/index.php?threads/contemplating-purchase-1982-xj650rj-seca.48518/

FU

 

T - you came to the right place.
Check out the link 'noob posted and you will know everything you need to know.

Short answer, there are things to be done, and no it is not a decent price.

 

Yeah I saw the post after I posted it. My friend works there and I've meet the owner so I thought it might have been good to go. I need to read the post a bit more about it. Looks like there is some work I would need to do.

 

It is a smart looking bike, but in regards to it being reliable in the long run. . . . well it's a 30 year old bike and bikes of that vintage require specific maintenance items to be completed. Some of those items are not completed on that bike, and there will be an investment on the new owners part of at least $600 plus time, plenty of time ($$$) to insure a safe and reliable ride.

That last part gets preached a lot here - safety and reliability. Yamaha made a great bike with the XJ's but they are old and old things need to be refurbished/ rebuilt.

 

No, it's not a good price, and it looks goofy too.

Read the thread that was shown to you very thoroughly.

 

paid 1200 for mine with 3400 miles like new. I do need to replace the tires originals and front brake hydraulics they work fine just want to be safe. In the process of doing alt the maintenance now. Runs just like its brand new. Oh it is almost. Len stopped by and commented on how clean it was. It is all in how much you like it and what its worth to you.

 

I wish everybody would stop bashing that poor bike... I feel kinda sorry for it. Plus, its in WAAAAAAY better shape than mine!
(Mine only cost me two cups of Tim Horton's coffee, so I don't feel too bad about it)

 

The derision on the board is amusing, although the cautious approach is wise. I think the bike looks pretty sweeeeeeeeet, IMO

 

'Cept nobody is bashing it---- just being realistic about it. I'm sure not gonna tell anyone that its an incredible example of a perfect restoration that doesn't need any work, and that it's worth all that and more, etc... Blah blah blah

 

I know its not perfect, but I don't think it looks "goofy". That's a bit of a burn. It may have mechanical issues, but the looks are there... I think that any bike you get for less than two grand is gonna need work. Let's just agree to disagree about the looks. You know way more about these bikes than I ever will, so I'll never argue with you on that!

 

I have no problem disagreeing on the looks, I don't think "it looks goofy" is any more of a burn than " the looks are there" is. I don't like the non-original fairing, the seat ( it looks a lot like the European seat, iirc), the butchered rear fender, the drilled seat cowl with the oval lights, the mismatched covers, knee pads, tank stickers, or the blacked out exhaust pipes. To ME, those seem like a bunch of random things and to ME it looks goofy.. Probably has knobby tires but I just can see the tread-- lol

 

I just took another look at the bike from the pictures in the other thread... You're right about a few of the looks things. The seat looks like a hunch-back (that's definitely a burn!), and the black headers and shiny metal exhaust don't match, I'm not a big enough fan of Fredrick the Great to go for a Maltese cross, etc. BTW the tires are not knobby, they're street tires. I guess I was just sticking up for the poor beast because of all the negative comments and it's in so much better shape than mine! But again, I only paid four bucks for mine!