Subframe update

[OB_NumbNuts]

Would that not be classed as altering the frame.....and the sticker says,....I don't know. I can understand exactly what you're saying, dont give it a chance to propogate, or even start, but it shouldn't have to be this way.

I've been trying to keep outta this one, so please excuse me again!!

nuts

 

[OB_BarryW.]

Nuts,
You're correct, it would certainly be an alteration. How a dealer would react to it in the event of a failure if you told them it was done to prevent the failure, I don't know. JohnnyCheese probably would need to be consulted on that one.

 

[OB_Johnnycheese]

I am with Maui on this.
Let's look back so far people on this board want to SUE for;
fuel pump
fuel lines
side stands
cam chain tensioner
rear frames
rear hubs
chains
clutchs
anyone care to add to the list?

And you wonder why prices keep going up.

 

[OB_JokerJ]

Jumping on the Maui bandwagon. I've put 3000 miles on my bike half of which my wife was on the back. She's not Rosanne Barr but she's no Vanna White either.

I've posted before that these boards are an assett as well as a tool to invoke unneccessary fear in people.

Yeah, I've had my share of bikes in the past. This is the first one that I participated in online message boards about. So any of these problems could have occurred on them, I would never know. And I had no major problems with them.

Until Suzuki sends me a letter stating I have a problem, it's business as usual.

 

[OB_Johnnycheese]

I would not polish the frame it will make it weaker.
As for reporting anything to the lovely Goverment.
They are going to ask to see Suzuki's records
and If everyone puts in manual tensioners and never reports it to a dealer there is no problem.
And just because you say to the Gov. you think you have a problem you have nothing to back it up.
I have said this for a while I am sticking with my auto tensioner and if it goes Suzuki pays.
Price out what it cost if you have a manual one in and it goes(it won't) but you now voided part of your warranty.
I say if you think you have a problem you have to start at a dealership and prove it then the ball can roll.
Calling Suzuki will do nothing.PERIOD!

 

[Guest]

First my legal department is there to protect me and my company.Secound I am not looking to sue anybody but I am looking for acceptance of product liability and a possible failure that could injure/kill my passenger or myself. If my company put out a defective device we would get our asses sued to no extent. But if nobody told us the part was defective the lawyers would get it thrown out of court. (that is what they are paid for)however if the person with the defective part could prove previouse knowlege on the company (which would be my complaint) and the company failed to do anything about it the defect(no recall or action taken) The company large or small would be responsible for the resulting damages. Yes this is a fast bike and there is some high risk riding any motorcycle but a frame failure should not be one of the dangers. And remeber Suzuki has a much larger legal department than I have so I don't think my one complaint (and that is what it is a complaint NOT a lawsuit)would close them down.

 

[OB_JohnnyB]

I'm also with Maui on this issue.
If we weren't looking at this board we wouldn't even know about this and other problems. Just ride on like you did 10 years ago. when there's a recall have the work done.

Oh yeah, and stop whining!!!

 

[OB_CanuckBusa]

Johnnycheese is right. Calling Suzuki will do nothing. Calling the dealership also does nothing, because when I called the dealership and asked them to call Suzuki they did. But Suzuki never called the dealership back. I don't think the dealer looked at the frame either, like I asked, because they haven't heard of any problems, and if they haven't heard of any problems then why look?

Oh yeah, I dropped off the manual tensioner today and said 'put her in'. I got a funny look from the mechanic, but whatever, it sounds like a good solution that works. *** No, I don't have extended warranty, so when I do the math the risk and cost of leaving the auto tensioner in doesn't work in my favor. ***

Anyways, I am just chalking all of this up to experience, and information for my next purchasing decision.

I am going to order some safety wire. Install it as a backup plan. (More for riding two up than me by myself.) And then ride the bike till I sell it - which probably won't be too long down the road.

Will I buy a GSXR1000 next? Unlikely. Unless I get sucked into the hype. I'll probably buy something that has had the bugs worked out.

 

[OB_CanuckBusa]

5 reported cases of subframe failures that I am aware of maui, not 1. I have never heard of this problem with any other bike, so though the number is small the fact that I have never heard of this with another bike makes me wonder. I can see where you might say the numbers are too small to consider. As long as you aren't one of the 5.

Are all the other beefs/complaints about the Busa invalid? Maybe most, but surely not all. Is everyone confident of the current design of the cam chain tensioner? I would like to be, but I think not and wishing so cannot make it so. I have heard of far too many guys with this problem. If half of the reported cases are true, then this is in fact still a weak link of the bike.

How many recalls have you heard regarding a Honda Blackbird? How many frames on that bike have broken? I suspect that bike has had less problems.

I'll tell you what: If you accept poor quality from manufacturers (I am not saying the Busa is poor quality) then that is what they will give you.

 

[OB_DaveD]

JohnnyB:

That's the beauty of these boards, we DO get to hear about problems before they rear up and bite us.

If we then choose to close our eyes so we don't see things we don't like, then that's up to us.

I just want some action from Suzuki.

If they tell us it was a casting defect affecting a certain batch of subframes, for example, then fair enough. But I want them to say SOMETHING!

[This message has been edited by DaveD (edited 02 August 2000).]

[This message has been edited by DaveD (edited 02 August 2000).]

 

[OB_Hayawoody]

LISTEN EVERYONE!!! ALL THIS TALK ABOUT SUBFRAME FAILURE..AND...TENSIONERS..ETC.ITS ALL AND MOSTLY HEARSAY..NONE OF US KNOWS EXACTLY WHAT HAS BEEN REPORTED TO SUZUKI OF CANADA,OR USA,OR UK,OR ANYWHERE,SO IT MIGHT ALL BE BULLSHIT AND/OR EXAGERATED STORIES,I KNOW THAT NONE OF US KNOWS ANYTHING CONCRETE 100% FOR SURE.ANY OF YOU WORKING IN SUZUKI OFFICES ANYWHERE ON THIS PLANET? DIDN;T THINK SO!...SO WHAT IS IT YOU EXPECT OR WANT SUZUKI TO DO? CONFIRM ALL THAT CRAP YOUR HEARING. DO YOU KNOW THE CIRCUMSTANCES AND DETAILS OF ANY REPORTED FAILURE 100% ACCURATE. NO YOU DON'T! DIDN'T THAT ONE GUY WHO POSTED PICS SAY HE HIT A TREE OR A POLE? WHAT THE F*UCK DID HE THINK WAS GOING TO HAPPEN, AND NOW HE'S SPREAD THIS SUBFRAME THING LIKE WILDFIRE.DON'T BELIEVE EVERY LITTLE THING YOU READ OR HEAR! IF THERE IS A PROBLEM REPORT IT TO YOUR DEALER SO HE CAN SUBMIT IT TO SUZUKI TO TRACK IT,OTHERWISE EVERYBODY GETS F*UCKED!IN THE LONG RUN. JUST MY 02.CENTS

 

[OB_jcchen]

Maui et al.,

It's not about suing Suzuki or getting some type of bonus. It's about receiving a product that is fit for a particular purpose - in this case, high speed riding. Subframe failure is NOT an inherent risk of high speed riding. If Suzuki is producing a defective product, they should be held accountable - i.e., provide a fix. They don't have to pay out zillions to everyone who has bought a Hayabusa, but they should ensure that the products they sell are free of safety-related defects.

Under the Motor Vehicle Safety Act, 42 U.S.C. 30101 et seq., if Suzuki wants to sell road-worthy bikes to the public, it is responsible for producing a motorcycle that is free from safety related defects and is in full compliance with all Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. Sub-frame collapse sure sounds like a safety-related defect to me. So what that there's "only a handful" of incidents - do you want to be the one on the bike at 100mph when the subframe cracks? The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has ordered recalls when as little as ONE report out of hundreds of thousands of CARS involves a serious safety related defect (e.g., fires in engine compartments). As a manufacturer, Suzuki has an obligation under the law to ensure it sells a product free from safety-related defects. There is no excuse for lack of response.

Any one on this list that has experienced subframe failure or knows of someone who has should file a report with NHTSA or encourage the filing of such a report. NHTSA will not put Suzuki out of business, NHTSA will not sue Suzuki for a zillion penalty dollars - the Agency will just ensure that Suzuki does the right thing under the law.

 

[OB_Rocket Man]

Suzuki's are the only bikes I have ever owned. Never have I had a bit of trouble with any of them.

Everyone is human here and everyone makes a mistake or screws up from time to time. I think that they made a good product, but have screwed up with a couple of the parts. Suzuki should acknowlage that and come up with a remedy. If they just admit(cam chain tensioner) that they made a mistake and are trying to fix the problem, that alone would make a lot of people happy.

 

[OB_DaveD]

Perfectly put, jcchen

[This message has been edited by DaveD (edited 02 August 2000).]

 

[DaveO]

Maui has a point. It's seems that the good old USofA has become SUE happy. Where else can you spill hot coffee on yourself and make a million $$'s. In this day/age if a lawyer thinks the is ANY chance for out of court settlement, they go for it.

Couple years back helmet prices went crazy...why? I heard that 40% of every Bell sold went to their legal defense budget. Isn't that great...They sell a product to save our *SS, and we sue them for it!?!?

Back to the Busa frames. The bottom line is how many have failed, under what circumstances? You think Suzi is going to admit to a potential problem so you can SUE them...I'll have to see a failure before I get too worried about it.

There may be a problem, but lets not all overeact to it....

Dave

 

[OB_SlowHand]

When I decided to buy the world's fastest production bike in its first year, I knew that there would inevitably be glitches. I just hoped that they would not be major. So far, at least for me, that has been the case.

I think some people may have bought the wrong bike. The last thing in the world I would do with the Hayabusa is destroy its relatively light weight, good balance and aerodynamics by bolting a set of hard bags onto an aluminum subframe and making a pack animal out of a race horse.

There is a reason that the Hayabusa is 175lb. lighter than a Honda ST1100, and that reason is primarily that it was designed more as a sport bike than as a tourer. If you need more carrying capacity than soft luggage gives you, maybe the ST1100 is a better choice.

For those of you who mentioned the Blackbird, if that bike works for you, then get one. They are durable, reasonably fast, and might hold up better to hard bags. Probably a better sport tourer, but not even close as a sport bike. Not to mention the extremely limited ground clearance and the linked brakes which are an abomination in any conditions other than straight up and down on a dry road.

The only case I've seen documented on sub frames breaking involved a dealer welding a crack, then the frame breaking at the weld. I saw the pics on that one.

I pop my rear seat or hump off before every ride and take a quick look at the sub frame welds. If a crack ever starts to develop, I'll spot it easily, but I doubt that I'll have a problem.

One guy posting on here claimed to have had 3 drive chain failures in 1600 miles. My chain has 18000 very fast miles on it and is like new. I use a lot of full power, but with smooth inputs. Some guys use a Busa for nothing more than non-stop wheelies, stoppies and general thrashing. I don't really care, but there is a price to be paid in maintenance and breakage, and I don't want to hear their sniveling.

My problems so far have involved getting rid of the most miserable clutch I've ever experienced on a bike by installing the Brock mod; cleaning the fuel filters once and using Redline injector cleaner for the last 10000 miles, and installing a manual camchain tensioner yesterday as a preventive measure.
I don't consider those things to be important enough to dampen my enthusiasm for the best bike I've ever owned.(I've owned over 50 bikes )

 

[Guest]

Personally I'm am not gonna go out and spend my money on parts that will end up voiding my warranty, this is up to Suzuki to replace...

All these people doing all these engine mods, I guess you have your reasons and I respect them. But perhaps in the long run, they may cause more harm than good. Who's knows because they also have not been tested throughly.

I have heard some people say that the mechanics will never know the tensioner has been changed... Bullshit, do you really think they are that stupid? Mine is not!
What do you think is gonna happen if they do find out, no warranty pal! None! Zippo! Then everything is out of your own pocket.... (Blow your motor off warranty $4000) The bike cost enough!

I will wait, if something happens, such as subframe failure or tensioner, then I will act.....

Until then I just want to ride!

 

[OB_LeeMI]

How about this...change your stock exhaust and put lighter cans on. That way, there will be less weight to fulcrum on the subframe where the fractures have been occurring. It's not much but with the stresses of riding on the road, bumps, etc. it may mean the difference between a crack or not.
Lee

 

[OB_maui]

no problem jcchen, It's good to know that there is recourse. I'm just getting tired of the whole lawsuit thing. Adds so much cost to every thing you buy now days.

I'm gonna put a lumber rack on my bike tonight, I need to pick up 40 sheets of 3/4 CDX plywood tomorrow.

 

[OB_JokerJ]

Slowhand - the reference to people doing stoppies makes me wonder. Not to say that all or even any of the reported sub-frame problems were caused by them. But I can only image that stoppies, especially two-up, would place stress on the sub-frame that the bike was not built to sustain.