MZ/MuZ Riders

by **nice2day** » Sun Oct 11, 2020 3:42 pm

Just spotted this Ebay ad for an MZ supposedly with JUST 167 Miles from NEW!!! :shock:

Seems strange that it has different tyres than the originals though ( unless these types WERE fitted as standard??) Does anyone know?

It does look nice though in that colour.

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/124349099197 ... noapp=true

by **DAVID THOMPSON** » Sun Oct 11, 2020 5:39 pm

it is a dealer selling so may have changed dry rotted old tires
my rotax powered mz set on the show room floor 1995 to 2001
the 1st owner indicated those on it were new when i got it

but they were wrong sizes and caused handling problems
at 15 years out the set i put on it are out of date and need replaced
dave

by **Blurredman** » Mon Oct 12, 2020 2:24 am

According to MOT history (there are only two though)

24th December 2015: 127 miles

25th May 2017: 151 miles.

Only those who would be willing to take apart the engine etc would know whether it is genuine or not I suppose..
Not to say that it simply has been stored 'badly' (?).... It does have 10 digit telephone number on the number plate..
But it does have a fuel filter.. That's not standard.

It must be said though that a lot of dealers did change the tires from the originals as a selling point... Just as they do now....

by **nice2day** » Mon Oct 12, 2020 3:16 am

I also thought it was possible that they had been changed just for this new sale but looking very carefully especially the photos of the front tyre, left and right, you can see the tyres are not brand new. Furthermore, anyone finding a "barn-find" bike never changes the tyres as they will never get back the extra money spent from the sale price. Someone will either buy the bike or not irrespective of tyre freshness especially when the spokes are very rusty and might need to be changed anyway.
It is very possible though that the original owner decided to change them straight away out of safety concerns with the originals. The proof will be the date code on the side of the tyres. The bike does look very original though.

Thanks to Blurredman for the DVLA dates....It does make sense now as it would be likely the tyres were changed in 2017. So yes, that makes perfect sense now.
Whether it is worth £2750 is difficult to decide. It would be nice to have an MZ and still need to "run it in" but to really make the bike as FRESH as a new bike with just 167 miles on it will take a lot of new paint and new spokes and chrome...All quite costly.

Looking at this 251 model reminds me that at the time I bought my Saxon Tour 301 new in 1994, I was pondering whether I should buy the ETZ 301 instead. Looking at the "sickly" styled Saxon I still have, I think I made a mistake and it would have been cheaper too. Just a small point....I think the last ETZ 301's had red forks? I thought that suited the bike quite well.
Les

by **Blurredman** » Mon Oct 12, 2020 3:53 am

It does actually look the same as a machine that was on e-bay not long ago, that had been in a front end crash. I couldn't see the miles on that one, but it 'looked' pretty much brand new as does the one in this thread.. I think that went for £1,500 ish. I can't find it on the 'completed' listing on e-Bay so cannot get it up, but it could be someone turning the bike around.. But.. You might ask yourself... Patina or no patina.. To get a brand new bike - if it really has original clocks - it is still a lot cheaper than a new brand new bike...

by **Puffs** » Mon Oct 12, 2020 4:52 am

Following a biased and flawed moderator choice (someone posting aggressive personal attacks is rewarded, while my technical posts are removed - behind my back & without any justification!), I have withdrawn from this forum.

by **nice2day** » Mon Oct 12, 2020 5:28 am

I think my Tour 301 was around £1850 ish and they were more expensive than the old ETZ 251...but that was 26 years ago.

Thinking about the MOT mileages they just don't really make sense. The first MOT would have been required in 1996 but not recorded on the DVLA electronic database which wasn't set up till later. Then in 2015, 22 years from new, it was tested with just 127 miles on it and in another 2 years had done just another 24 miles...seems ludicrous to me.
Looking at the condition and tiny wear points I would guess it had done around 4-5K miles at least, surely the master cylinder would still have some paint on if it had never had fluid spilled on it? It has obviously been left in the sun quite some time as the rev and speedo needles are bleached white (originally red). Even so 4-5K miles is very little but you are still left with a bike that needs lots of restoration and has only a normal value of around £2.2K tops?
Les

by **Puffs** » Mon Oct 12, 2020 5:44 am

Yes, the £ has dropped significantly wrt the €, when the € came there were 1.5€ in the £. So €2.5 was about £1.7, so £1600-1700 for a 251 sounds about right.

But now, again, it's not the miles that drive the value, but the condition. And the market, obviously.

by **Blurredman** » Mon Oct 12, 2020 5:44 am

Just for clarity, I was talking about a new bike 'Now'.

And yes, I also saw spark plug cap, and all the other wear and missing paint and/or rusty items that was pointed out. It's all very suspicious, and as I say.. It looks used - It's a piece of pie to change a speedo clock on ANYTHING.

A friend of mine had put 35k miles on a brand new bike in less than 3 years. When the 'First' MOT came (as per usual for when a machine reaches 3 years old here), he had put a clock with 11k miles on... Anyone with any background however would have seen the condition of the bike, and the various noises and rattles betrayed the stated mileage.

Potentially the seller is purely looking at just the mileage, and the fact that a half decent MZ of any description will sell for £1,500 on e-Bay these days...

by **nice2day** » Mon Oct 12, 2020 6:34 am

Hi Blurredman, yes you have to compare it to a new bike at todays prices but taking into account the actual value in 1993 the cost would be only £3,400 today (Bank of England figures) and that was brand spanking new, zero miles and PERFECT condition so at £2750 it seems too expensive as you are going to need to spend around £500 at least on it and it wouldn't be new and had no previous owners and no question marks hovering over it.
Having made that point, I know classic bikes with exceptionally low mileage (a few hundred genuine miles) have sold for over double the normal current price. A few years ago a Velocette Venom, virtually untouched, apart from superficial corrosion, had an asking price of £17,000 when a normal used, but well restored one, sells at £7-£10K so there are those people around who do want something with extremely low use and unrestored. Which reminds me that I paid £650 for my '91 MZ ETZ 250 which had one owner and only 7,000 miles of use and last on the road in 1997. Having stripped it down to the last nut and bolt I am convinced this mileage is accurate. I would think that splashing out an extra £2,100 for a bike with just a few miles less and slightly less rust I would have paid far too much for it.

Les
By the way: The spark plug lead was indeed blue originally but the plug cap is different:

Les

by **Puffs** » Mon Oct 12, 2020 7:23 am

Following a biased and flawed moderator choice (someone posting aggressive personal attacks is rewarded, while my technical posts are removed - behind my back & without any justification!), I have withdrawn from this forum.