Reliability/Durability/Cost: C10 vs C14?

[x01660]

So here's a question that I've been wondering about, and seeing as I'll probably end up with a C14 in addition to Voyager, I wanted to ask the question.

Between the two bikes, which is more "durable"?

What I mean by that is if you're going to be using the bike every day, putting tons of miles, wear and tear, etc on the bike, which will "last" longer and not break the bank?

I've seen some issues related to KIPASS, and in general, ECU and electronics worry me on bikes that are to be ridden hard and in remote places. I don't mind limping out of somewhere, but I don't want to be completely stranded because of some unique part that renders the bike inoperable.

I completely understand if I'm mistaken here, and probably am. But I would love to hear what you all think about this question.

For the home mechanic on a reasonable budget, who plans to ride and ride and ride in all conditions, which bike is "better" for that purpose? And if one isn't better than the other, what are the pros and cons of each?

And please ask any clarifying questions.

Thanks!

-x01660

 

[ron203]

In my opinion, the C-10 is easier to work
on (older tech) but most are getting a lot of miles on them due to age but has better weather protection than the C-14, which is not bad. Kind of your choice to me. I traded up because of more power and better tire selection. My 2000 C-10 had stock wheels.

 

[Konehead34]

The simple answer to the KIPASS is dont lose the fob. That way you'll never have to deal with a dealer who doesn't know/want to program a new fob into the ECU.

I loved my '98 c10, easy to work on. Valve adjusts were so easy to check/do compared to the c14. But also I had fallen in love with the sleek.styling, adjustable screen and 1400 cc of rip roaring GO! My c10 had a throttle lock, but I added a rostra to the c14 and love having true cruise control.

It's getting harder to find bits for the c10, canyon cages, rifle fairing parts, and then there the dreaded HYDROLOCK to be wary of with the c10.

 

[2andblue]

@x01660 they have both been very reliable machines in their time with a couple callouts each.

Having owned both I would choose the C14, hands down. I do regret selling my C-10 when I drive the C-14 off the showroom floor but not for a second regret buying the C-14.

For me fuel injection provides ideal reliability and reduced possible maintenance:

• Consistent year-round worry free A/F performance
• Less (not none) concerns with fuel related gum-ups if machine periodically sits for a while
• Less maintenance - no carbs to replace needles, set floats, and as noted above clean jets
• No choke

The Junction box of the C-10 is a known problem area. My machine just randomly started quitting; pulled the J-Box flowed all solder joints and never an issue again. If not fixed it’s a ticking, inevitable dead bike.

Probably the biggest durability concern is the age of the C-10. Low mile machines (how was it stored, what’s dried out, corroded, broke down). Consistent annual mileage machines are probably accumulating >100K miles and natural wear and tear starts to creep into my mind.

For the C-14 there is some risk of failure inherent to the different fueling and upgraded technology. A lot more vehicle sensors monitoring speed, fuel, vacuum. C-14 has a fuel pump, some have had issues there.

I think overall the C-14 is an upgrade and more worry-free than the C-10, once again aging of the C-10 only aggravates the possibility of maintenance from ‘natural causes’…

Wayne, Carol & Blue

 

[lrbuck]

Many riders go less than 3,000 miles a year. A C-10 used for 20 years @3K/year = 60,000 miles. Diehard C-10 owners would say 60K is just getting broken in. Mine was 2.5x that, and ran like new.

No argument on the advantages on EFI, but TCW-3 will keep the ethanol blues at bay. The thought of the cost of a shim-under-bucket valve service, and time to remove the tupperware, is painful. But at 3K miles/year, valve service would be 10 years. Many owners will have sold the bike at that age..

Between the two, the C-14 is a no brainer and a rocket. If you like to tinker, you'll love a decent C-10 and there are lots of good ones if you look hard enough. My friend, Steve at Shouldabeen says most new owners will spend nearly $2,000 getting the bike fixed up. Do the math.

Larry

 

[x01660]

Many riders go less than 3,000 miles a year. A C-10 used for 20 years @3K/year = 60,000 miles. Diehard C-10 owners would say 60K is just getting broken in. Mine was 2.5x that, and ran like new.

No argument on the advantages on EFI, but TCW-3 will keep the ethanol blues at bay. The thought of the cost of a shim-under-bucket valve service, and time to remove the tupperware, is painful. But at 3K miles/year, valve service would be 10 years. Many owners will have sold the bike at that age..

Between the two, the C-14 is a no brainer and a rocket. If you like to tinker, you'll love a decent C-10 and there are lots of good ones if you look hard enough. My friend, Steve at Shouldabeen says most new owners will spend nearly $2,000 getting the bike fixed up. Do the math.

Larry

I'm doing 1000-1200 miles a month; does that change the calculus?

-x01660

 

[lrbuck]

-x01660

Ride it!

Larry

 

[x01660]

-x01660

Ride it!

Larry

Oh, I am. I got my bike about 3-4 months ago and I'm already at almost 6,000 miles. The reason I'm asking is because I not only ride for pleasure, but also for work. So I'm trying to do a cost/benefit analysis of what's gonna be better over the long term.

There's nothing wrong with Voyager (my C10). Hands down the best bike I've ever had.

That said, I'm gonna be doing upwards of 15,000 miles a year for at least the next 5-6 years, and I'm the kind of guy who likes to keep a bike until I run it into the ground. So I'm trying to figure out if I should just spend the money and get a C14, or go about purchasing 1-3 cheap C10s as parts bikes.

But yes. Ride or die!!!

-x01660