Are Kawasaki motorcycles more expensive as far as maintenance when compared to Suzuki?

I'm looking for a good "beginner" bike. I have heard that Kawasaki is a harder and more expensive bike to work on than a Suzuki. Is this true?|||not true. the person that told you that was just a Suzuki fanatic. No one brand is worse than others, other than if you are in the US and want a Euro bike like BMW or Guzzi. they cost more and require more maintainance.|||it really should be the same


the cheapest is scooters


get 150cc or bigger





a used ninja or seca is what you should be looking at|||The answer to your question would depend upon which "model" you have in mind. It would also depend upon the model's complexity and the total number which have been sold. It would also depend upon how far the service station is from your residence.





Any multi cylinder model with fuel injection would automatically be more expensive to fix than a comparable single cylinder air cooled machine. The simpler it is made, the easier and cheaper to fix and vice versa. This would apply to almost any make. Got it ?||| I have worked on many brands and a Suzuki is one that I will not work on anymore. |||love my ZRX1100, no fuel injection, just 4 big carbs, simple to work on.|||Kawasaki and Suzuki collaborate on many models, actually the same bike with different bodywork. The flagship range of each remain separate so far, but many learner bikes are so similar that there should be no difference in maintenance costs.





http://www.motorcyclenews.com/MCN/News/n鈥?/a>





http://www.drive.com.au/Editorial/Articl鈥?/a>


|||Kawasaki and Suzuki make bikes for each other. Any bike made by any company in any country will probably have similar maintenance costs. It's the unforeseen reapirs that will cost you.