Normally I would agree with you, but the issue here is one of mileage. The more miles, the more chance of failure. The problem is well documented. There is a plug fitted at the factory to close up an unused oil gallery, probably used on a previous incarnation of this engine. The plug doesn't secure very well, probably due to difference between the metal of the plug and the crank case, and also glues not being as good 20 years ago. This gallery plug starts to unwind slowly rubbing and wearing away against the big ends. Eventually it drops out. You may get lucky and have it drop harmlessly to the bottom of the sump, or it may jam things up. There will certainly be some swarf from the wearing process. Also, when the plug come out there will be an immediate drop in oil pressure which is probably not a good thing. I took my engine out initially just to clean it. Then the plan changed to painting it. Rich suggested painting it complete and just masking parts off, to reduce labour. I then decided that I wanted to do it properly and pull the heads and barrels off. Rich advised me not to as he was fairly certain what we would find. And we did. Rich had a wonderful analogy. He likened it to cancer. He said that if you have cancer and don't know it then you just carry on with your life, enjoying it as you go. Once you have been diagnosed with it though then your life changes. I said that's fine, but I want to know if I've got cancer so I can deal with it before it kills me. So we pulled the vertical barrel off and found the problem. Rich reckoned that the majority - that's over 50% - of the old 900 engines that he pulls apart have this issue. In my view its a timebomb. You either address the issue before it kicks off, or carry on oblivious to the problem and wait for it to go pop, maybe major, hopefully not too serious.
Dead right. Before I bought mine I did some research, including popping down the road to Baines racing. There was a 900 monster in there for an (apparently un necessary) engine rebuild, purely because it had reached 100,000 miles. Aside from a slight puff of smoke on start up it was running strongly.
Well it just sold again on eBay. This time for £2013! I notice in his latest listing he removed the photo from the ad of the lhs of the bike so you couldn't notice the mismatched panels. I think we'll see this up for sale again soon.
Quite often a high mileage can mean that the problems have been resolved and all is well. Treat a very low mileage example with caution because it can indicate the the previous owner(s) didn't like it.. Why?
+1 For regularly used engines (generally!) lasting well. I've got 34k on my 900ss and 31k (nearly all by me) on my 600 Monster without any major issues and would agree that regularly serviced and ridden bikes have far fewer problems. Though I did have an ST4 as my daily ride, that needed new main bearings at 11k! Rich at Louigi Moto found it was down to the crank being over-shimmed at the factory - it had never been apart! Most of what you hear is based on magazine road testers that don't know their spanners from their elbows and on historical stories from the days of the bevels, when Italian electrics really were crap. Yeah, Italian bikes do require a bit more 'owner involvement' than a Jap equivalent, but you'll never get any 'character' with a Honda and they really aren't that unreliable. I know, I tried living with an 1100 Pan for nearly two years - a brilliant bike which did exactly what it said on the tin, but ultimately sooooooooooooo boring :Yawn:. Ultimately sold it to get another Ducati, an ST4 which I really miss.
