[exavid]

imported post

I'll concede the 1800 is a superior bike to the 1500 but the 1500 gives more bang for the buck, ie, much cheaper. I really like my 1500 and after riding an 1800 didn't think it was worth $10,000 more than my 1500. I could pay cash for a couple of them if I really wanted an 1800 but the 1500 is such a good fit for me, it's been so reliable, and has more baggage space that I don't see a reason to move up. I'd rather buy a second bike if I wanted something sporty to pay with but would still keep the 1500 for my road trips. Add to that the 1500 is a lot easier to work on, less electronics and a good bit simpler. Since I do all the work on my bikes that's a big consideration.

 

[knute]

imported post

Exavid, not to doubt you, but, you say the 1800 issuperior to the 1500, do you mean truley superior, or, just better? the reason I ask is that I have read many posts that claim mild favores one way or the other, you seem to be a good authority on these bikes, I was just wondering your thoughts?

 

[Matt G]

imported post

It is real easy, I paid 3500 for my 88 GL1500, and have put over 70,000 miles on it and replaced a fuel pump, beyond normal maint and upgrades.

I paid 10,200 for my 01 GL1800, put 35,000 on it and it was on it's 2nd set of O2 sensors at $300 a set,

so for cost of getting the bike and the up keep, The GL1500 wins hands down,

I sold the 1800 and kept the 1500
The 2 things the 1800 had that I wished the 1500 did was the hand radio controls, and the headlights.

 

[exavid]

imported post

knute wrote:

Exavid, not to doubt you, but, you say the 1800 issuperior to the 1500, do you mean truley superior, or, just better?

Faster, more powerful, better gas mileage, electronic fuel injection, ABS, lighter, faster in the curves, in other words a superior Goldwing. I still prefer my 1500 because I don't need the better performance as much as I need the luggage space and comfort my bike gives me. It's similar to my preference in cars. I don't need a Lexus or Corvette even those are superior in many ways to the mid sized Mercury I do have.

 

[fenry]

imported post

exavid wrote:

knute wrote:

Exavid, not to doubt you, but, you say the 1800 issuperior to the 1500, do you mean truley superior, or, just better?

faster in the curves...

There's a set of back to back 90 degree "S" curves on the country road that I use to commute to work. Last week I was lost in dreamland and the Beach Boys as I banked out of the last curve I looked down and saw the speedometersneaking up through 75. Just how much speed do you need in a curve on a touring bike? It put my beloved 1100 Spirit to shame and does it without the vibration. The Spirit reliably pulled 45mpg; my 1500 reliably pulls 42mpg (unless I sink the spurs to it ).



The 1500 is very easy on my long legs and bad knees.



As to styling, I like my angled tupperware over the rounded off look (but then I love square, boxy cars and trucks too; makes me feel like I'm getting something for my $$.) Aerodynamic styling always leaves me with the impression the manufacturer is trying to cut corners on material while upping the price...:shock:. However, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.



And finally (INCOMING!!!) the service folk Ihave spokenwith confide that the 1520 is the most reliable Wing engine built to date...:clapper:

 

[knute]

imported post

exavid wrote:

knute wrote:

Exavid, not to doubt you, but, you say the 1800 issuperior to the 1500, do you mean truley superior, or, just better?

I don't need a Lexus or Corvette even those are superior in many ways to the mid sized Mercury I do have.

I agree, I have had many cars in my life, and a93' mercury sable I bought for $4600 with 88,000 miles was the nicest riding car I have ever owned, lot's of snort from the 3.8, 30mpg, awesome heater&air conditioner, and it was a good looking car(at least I thought it was).