Do bikes tend to depreciate slower than cars?

[croyde]

I paid £5800 for my Street Triple in 2009. By 2015 it was back at the dealers having £400 worth of damage sorted thanks to yet another failed theft attempt.

I'd had it back a day when a car ran into it whilst it was parked and knocked it over.

It was back at the dealers as not only damaged but would not start.

Bill was £500 so I just said buy it off me, I've had enough.

They gave me £2500 which I thought fair on a 6 year old bike but they then had it in their showroom for £3800.

This has me thinking that I should buy new but then the insurance companies here in London don't like it if your bike is worth more than £6000, let alone the £15k+ for a sports bike and even the new T-Max is £11k

Funnily I can't get anyone to quote on that, even MCE.

[trickywoo]

Used bike prices don’t make much sense to me. If you don’t know what you are looking at or get unlucky you can very easily spend what is equal to depreciation on a new bike on consumables on a used one.

If you have the capital it makes more sense to buy new / very lightly used imo.

[matthias73]

I bought a Harley Davidson street 750. Pick it up on Friday.

A 2015 model without ABS that cost 5750 new was in the showroom for 5250.

I just went for a new one instead. So very excited.

[yellowstreak]

I'm about to pay more for a Super Duke GT with 1500 miles on it than similar bikes were offered new before Christmas.

Over the last few years bikes have got a whole lot more expensive and that's also hardening second hand values. Not to mention the whole retro, cafe racer thing that's been going on.

Also there are a lot of bikes which sold or sell in very small volumes but end up being highly sought after - witness the glacial depreciation of the KTM 690 SMT.