Ninja Pricing

Message

Apollofrost · Sat Dec 09, 2006 9:31 am

So, I've been looking up Ninja 250s on cycletrader and craigslist and they all seem to want 2500-3000+ for a year 2000 - 2005 ninja thats been dropped or needs work when the kawasaki website puts the price for a new one at 2,900. Whats weird is the ninja 500s sell for 2500-3500 on those sites minus the dropping (and with really low miles on some... wonder why

). So why the almost lack of difference in price?

And what would be a good price for say a 2005 ninja 250 with no damage or that has been dropped once?

Damian · #2 Unread post by **Damian** » Sat Dec 09, 2006 10:12 am

The best way to find what price a bike should be costing is to use KBB's Motorcycle Guide (use the retail guide) and the NADA Guide. You'll find prices on CycleTrader and Craig's List that are so far away from the blue book value as to make you cry, but I'm convinced that it's either dealers who are trolling for people who don't know how to haggle or owners who have that "there's no way this bike is only worth $xxxxx" mentality.

I'd suggest that when you find a bike you'd like, look up the value and give the person a call. Tell them what blue book is and ask if they's be willing to start the negotians a there (remember blue book value is for a bike in "excellent" condition). They'll either agree to start there or try to convince you why it's too low. That might include a list of aftermarket performance parts or something, then it's up to you to decide if it really is worth the increase in price. If they tell you "no", leave your phone number and tell them you have the cash and will be buying a bike; if they want to come down on the price to give you a call. You'll be surprised how many people realize their insanity a few days later and decide to give you a call.

At any rate, never pay what the person is asking for, even if it's fair, try to get at least $100 off the price. All this advice is from my experience buying used cars, I'm pretty new to bikes, but I'm sure the procedure is at least similar.

Puyopop · #3 Unread post by **Puyopop** » Sat Dec 09, 2006 6:50 pm

i've also been looking a lot at both the ninja 500 and 250 and from what i've seen i think youd probably be better off going with a 500 thats the decision ive come to. There were two main reasons i decided a 500 was just the logical thing, one was i didnt want to get bored with the bike i thought that might happen with the 250, and second the price difference as you mentioned can be very minor in certain situations. From what iv seen you may end up dishing out an extra 200-300 dollars for a 500 as opposed to the 250 small price to pay imo.

Also if your slightly used definition includes the zzr250 the price seems even more rediculous to me as they go for at least 4k or more. They must have better features or something i havent really looked into it but i ruled that bike out to. Also does anyone know if the features that are included in the zzr250 and if they are even worth the price jump?

Apollofrost · Sun Dec 10, 2006 9:11 am

I'm torn on the issue of a 250 or a 500.

Some additional info: Besides the daily commute to work and school I'm going to want to ride the bike from Santa Rosa, CA to San Francisco maybe once a month and take a 350 mile trip to visit my grandparents in the Siskiyous about twice a year. I won't be doing either till I feel I'm ready, of course. The 350 mile trip brings up some issues though, what would a change of elevation from 167 feet to 2600+ feet do to the bike's performance/tires? Would either bike be able to keep up with the rest of traffic when going up a steep grade? I'm 140lbs and 6' if that helps.

Hmm... the more I think about it the more I think it would be best if I rode with someone the first time I make that trip.

#5 Unread post by **Koss** » Sun Dec 10, 2006 2:20 pm

apollofrost wrote:I'm torn on the issue of a 250 or a 500.

Some additional info: Besides the daily commute to work and school I'm going to want to ride the bike from Santa Rosa, CA to San Francisco maybe once a month and take a 350 mile trip to visit my grandparents in the Siskiyous about twice a year. I won't be doing either till I feel I'm ready, of course. The 350 mile trip brings up some issues though, what would a change of elevation from 167 feet to 2600+ feet do to the bike's performance/tires? Would either bike be able to keep up with the rest of traffic when going up a steep grade? I'm 140lbs and 6' if that helps.

Hmm... the more I think about it the more I think it would be best if I rode with someone the first time I make that trip.

I think a quick, simple answer would be that everything you would demand from the bike will come easier to a 500. Although the 250 has been used for commuting and iron butt rallies, long distance touring, and the like. So you wont hear me saying that it will never be up to the task.

qwerty · #6 Unread post by **qwerty** » Sun Dec 10, 2006 7:19 pm

140 pounds is nothing to a Ninja 250. It will do all you need. You'll just be into the gearbox more often than a 500. I'm also 6 feet, and I found the 250 a little cramped. The 500 felt more comfortable to me. I suggest doing a 30 minute sit test on each before you make up your mind.

flynrider · #7 Unread post by **flynrider** » Mon Dec 11, 2006 1:24 pm

apollofrost wrote:I'm torn on the issue of a 250 or a 500.

Some additional info: Besides the daily commute to work and school I'm going to want to ride the bike from Santa Rosa, CA to San Francisco maybe once a month and take a 350 mile trip to visit my grandparents in the Siskiyous about twice a year. I won't be doing either till I feel I'm ready, of course. The 350 mile trip brings up some issues though, what would a change of elevation from 167 feet to 2600+ feet do to the bike's performance/tires? Would either bike be able to keep up with the rest of traffic when going up a steep grade? I'm 140lbs and 6' if that helps.

So, are you in Southern Mexico or in California?

If you're going to be riding on long highway trips, the 250 will be doable, but the 500 will be better suited for such a trip. The altitudes you mentioned won't have much bearing on performance, but the 500 will have more reserve power to handle steep grades at highway speeds than the 250. (Q: If you're topping out at 2,600 ft., how steep can they be?).

Apollofrost · Mon Dec 11, 2006 3:19 pm

Ok, let me clear something up. I'm currently living in southern Mexico, down by Cancun and have lived there for a little over two years. In six months I will come back to the US to start college and after a few months back in the US I will probably get a bike.

The mountains coming into the Siskiyous are pretty steep because it goes up from around 200ft to 2500ft pretty fast then dips up and down a lot. Once you're in "The Valley" it flattens out again. I sent an email to my uncle who rides and has made the trip before and I'll see what he thinks. How does a 500 stack up against a 250 as far as manuverability and ease of use for a new rider?

#9 Unread post by **Koss** » Mon Dec 11, 2006 4:05 pm

The 500 is highly manuverable, and is known for both its newbie friendly nature, and the ability to pass less skilled riders on the cutting edge 600, 750, or 1000cc sportbikes in the canyons or racetrack. From what I hear, its easier to flick aroundfor corners, but of course has less cornering clearane and much less horsepower, and a lower power-to-weight ratio than any modern sportbike from the 1990's to current.

In regards to the 250, I don't know if it is as easy handling, but it can't be to far off. Im sure its closer in flickability to a 250 than a 600. And it only has a very modest horsepower increase.

At 5,000-5,200 rpm depending on road incline and/or winds, the bike cruises at 60mph in 6th gear, with plenty of power avaliable to quickly pass any car ive come around so far without downshifting to 5th gear. The redline on the bike is at 10,500 rpm, and the engine will bounce off the rev limiter at 11,500 rpm. I also found no problems going up any hill, valley, canyon, or mountain road. I live in mountainous terrain, and my neighborhood is pretty much on the side of the mountain. Plenty of fun and usable power to be had with the 500.

The 500 is less fuel efficient than the 250. I usually average about 56 miles per gallon. I have heard the 250 is above 70 mpg, but can be less depending on how it is used.

When looking for insurace rates, I compaired the 500 and 250, and got mostly the same prices. One place ended up being 9 dollars more expensive for the 500.

Apollofrost · Mon Dec 11, 2006 5:04 pm

Insurance... progressive gives me the same rate for both and geico costs over $130 more than progressive but its the same cost for both of the bikes. I suppose it all boils down to which bike feels right for me, gut feeling ya know? Hey, where would I be able to try out both bikes(test ride) to see how they would feel?