Build quality (again?)

[matt]

I have had a quick look through the forum, but I can't see a thread on build quality, so here goes....

Does anyone have an opinion on build quality from RD03 to RD07a? I understand the RD03s were 'hand built' - whatever that means, and they were more Dakar orientated, and that the RD07a is far more road orientated - softer.

I ask, because I have a choice of a 1997 RD07 and a 1992 RD04 with 10k and 20k miles respectively. Is the RD04 better build quality, or did evolution improve the AT over time?

[lootch67]

I've been told it all went downhill after the RD03 I'm afraid. Whether a 92 RD04 is better than an 97 RD07 depends how the bike was treated.

[Slimie]

Abolutely right, Lootch, regarding how it was treated. Mines been slightly ahem not cossetted due to other pressures and it's starting to show.

I need to take a few bits off, like the rad guards for a clean and repaint and the pillion peg mounts for a good clean.

I'm positive that with a little TLC she'll look great once again.

Cheers
-Simon

BTW I changed my tyres this week, and despite my wheels being rebuilt with freshly powdercoated rims by the PO, there is still some corrosion around the valve hole

[Shep]

I am a little biased becuase i have a really mint RD04 but i think the build quality is better than the RD07. But ask Yen he has had both.

[robelst]

I was quite impressed with my RD03 although it was pretty old already when I bought it. In contrast, the RD07's build quality is very disappointing imho (electrics, rims, brakes, frame-paint, suspension), esp if you consider how expensive they were when new. But at least you never get bored when you own one