It's an RTL, great price for sure, so 57k isn't a deal breaker?
All else aside, in my mind, 57 k miles is actually
WAAAAYY BETTER than 5,700 or even 15,700 miles or so on a maybe 4+ year old Spyder - the 57 k sorta miles effectively mean that Spyder's
just about been run in properly; the engines on these Spyder's are generally pretty much bullet proof out beyond 3 or 4 times that much; and at least you know that it's been ridden, instead of spending most of its life sitting around unused, basically just growing rust and mould, letting all the rubber & synthetic parts deteriorate thru lack of use, and being eaten by rodents or infested by bugs and 8-legged spiders!!
So if
I was looking at it, I'd treat those miles as a
GOOD indicator! Sure, as always and suggested above, I'd still do all the other 'due diligence' stuff; checking the maintenance records, log book, doing the VIN & ownership/accident checks etc, comparing the price to others of the same basic vintage/milage, querying why if there's any significant difference in the price, and making sure that it's still all running and there's no significant maintenance &/or breakdown issues waiting to jump out the moment the deal is done; then I'd
carefully look at the Spyder, and critically compare it to those others with less milage/similar prices to see if there's any appearance &/or wear issues that might change my mind, all the while
knowing that the 57k Spyder has been in good enough condition to run, what, 15,000 odd miles per year, vs those others that
maybe have been lucky enough to do saaaay, 1500 miles or so per year instead - or worse, did all/most of their miles in one hit, but were never used much otherwise/since!
You need to
satisfy yourself on all that, and then maybe ask yourself if you want a bike that may well have spent all it's life sitting around, possibly in a workshop/waiting for parts, but definitely
NOT BEING USED and slowly letting all the bushes and bearings dry out or the oils & gas go off/start eating away at everything they touch while everything they don't touch starts rusting instead; or do you want a bike that's still in similar condition and at the same price but has clearly been
running well the whole time?!?
Personally, given the choice between an about 4 y/old 57k mile Spyder and one of the same or older vintage with any significantly less miles up for the same price, then if that price is reasonably in line with the going rate for whatever particular vintage Spyder it is, I'd want a pretty hefty
DISCOUNT to take a 4+ year old Spyder with anything much less than 20,000 miles on it because of the potential issues that 'lack of use' implies; but that's just me, YMMV!
