Should you buy a new motorcycle or fix up your old ride?

Maybe a shiny new model just released that has you contemplating shelling out serious coin for a new ride. Other times it might be updates to a motorcycle you already have. But is the juice worth the squeeze, as they say? Are new bikes really that much better than a two-year-old bike, a five-year-old bike or even a 10-year-old machine? Can you upgrade an older bike to be just as good as a brand new one?

To a certain point, I think this comes down to the ability of the rider. As far as performance bikes are concerned, I feel that most of us (certainly myself) can’t actually ride a bike to its full potential, so does upgrading make sense if your skills aren’t at their top level?

The kind of machine we're talking about matters, too. The old versus new argument makes more sense in some genres than in others. One of the best cases to be made for keeping your machine and upgrading it instead of replacing it with a new one is the cruiser market. I personally went through this exercise myself and opted not to buy a new Harley-Davidson. In fact, since I currently own three Harley-Davidsons, I don’t know if I’ll ever buy another new one.

I really like the Motor Company's latest powerplant offering, the Milwaukee-Eight. Or, I should say, I like the possibility of what it can be. The M8 motor in stock configuration has roughly the same output as its predecessor, the 103 ci Twin Cam, at a rather paltry 75ish rear wheel horsepower, but the M8 separates itself when you start adding hot rod parts. A simple drop-in cam with corresponding intake, exhaust and tuner will easily push you over 100 horsepower. You'll need a big bore kit to get those numbers from an old Twin Cam. Additionally, the M8, with its four-valve heads, responds very well the farther you take the build. Street engines producing 135 horsepower are fairly commonplace.

Sounds good. So why did I decide not to buy new? I started having a problem when I considered spending $17,000 on a new Softail with a Milwaukee-Eight and immediately dumping $5,000 into the engine. That doesn't include any other upgrades or additions I might want to make.

That brings me to where I currently am, building a 32-year-old Harley. I opted to pass on the new H-D and do a frame-off restoration of my 1989 FXRS-SP I bought for $5,000 a few years back. Without getting into the weeds of the build, I am throwing a 124 ci S&S Twin Cam engine in it, a six-speed transmission, four-piston Performance Machine brakes, new suspension, converting wheel bearings from old Timkens to sealed bearings... you get the idea. In the end I’ll have a bike that outperforms any stock late-model Harley and most modified versions and I'll have less money in it. And the cool factor is much higher than newer bikes. (Spare me any indignation over scoring cool-factor points at the local coffee shop or bike night. At some point all of us riding motorcycles do it at least a little for the cool factor.)

Old versus new, other kinds of bikes

I feel like the same argument can be made in the dirt segment, also. I’m definitely still a bit of a newb here and honestly of all the types of new bikes I’m likely to buy, a dirt bike is at the top of the list. But again, what's to be gained from breaking the bank on a new KTM 500 EXC-F when I probably can't ride to the full potential of my trusty 2008 Kawasaki KLX450R? Yeah, the lighter, more powerful, fuel-injected orange weapon has me reaching for my wallet, but is my riding experience going to be that much better? I could throw a few upgrades at the trusty green tractor and have plenty of cash left to use on more experiential things, like traveling to locations I’ve never ridden before, buying new gear or having some extra “refreshment” money.

Or here's maybe a better idea: pick up a used, clapped-out two-stroke on Facebook Marketplace and do a frame-off build. Again, the money spent would be less, I’d get the fun of the bike build and again with the cool factor. We can all agree there is a two-stroke cool factor, right?

Of course there are exceptions to every rule. I guess if you are a pro motocrosser or a competitive road racer you could make the case that having the latest technological advancements is necessary to keep pace with the rest of the field. Or is it?

Our own duo of Zack and Ari had a very interesting result testing a brand spanking new Ducati Panigale V4 S with all the bells and whistles against a freshened-up 2005 Suzuki GSX-R1000. In their particular case, you would have quite a stack of cash left over after investing in the 15-year-old Suzuki plus upgrades instead of laying out big dollars for the Italian Stallion.

The cool factor, in this case, may actually go to the more expensive, sexy Italian. Can’t win 'em all, I guess.

At the end of the day, beauty is in the eye of the beer holder... er, checkbook holder. If you trade your bike in every year or two for the latest, two-wheeled model with all the farkles, that's great. All I’m suggesting is to give the older bikes a chance.

I’m not saying everyone should be looking to score Panheads and Shovelheads and expect them to work like a modern-day machine. But scoring a 10- or 15-year-old machine or keeping your old trusty workhorse at its best by decking it out with some improved suspension, maybe doing some engine work or freshening the paint will do two things: It will give you the feelings of accomplishment that come from working on your own machine and it will score you all the cool points at your local coffee shop.

And let's face it, we’re all in this to be cool on some level.