Warranty Requirement to Wash Motorcycle After Every Ride

Trebor16

david29dpo wrote: »

Another reason the British motor and bike industry went down the pan. I am surprised anyone bought one with that clause!

The Triumph warranty department have gained a reputation for rejecting claims for spurious reasons.

neilmcl

An item corroding due not being maintained properly isn't a fault so SOGA wouldn't apply.

Trebor16

neilmcl wrote: »

An item corroding due not being maintained properly isn't a fault so SOGA wouldn't apply.

Indeed, but if it corroded due to poor quality finish by the manufacturer that is a different matter. And how would SOGA apply in relation to a requirement to wash a motorcycle after every ride? Is it a reasonable requirement to make or is it an admission that their components are poor quality and need washing so frequently?

neilmcl

All they're stating is they have some components that are liable to corrode if not kept clean, doesn't make them poor quality.

Trebor16

neilmcl wrote: »

All they're stating is they have some components that are liable to corrode if not kept clean, doesn't make them poor quality.

A component corroding after a mere 500 miles doesn't exactly suggest good quality.

fivetide

Strange some bikes (old ST1100 Pan and my Blackbird) can be made without falling apart.


The 'Bird is on 50,000 miles now, I ride all year and as per the reviews the only thing 'wrong' is the fork legs are a bit tatty. Not bad considering it is 8 years old too!

The Kawasaki Ninja I had before though had real issues with paint, especially on the wheels, there just wasn't enough of it. It all comes down to a product built for the lowest possible price.

5t.

oldagetraveller

How do they know it hasn't been washed after every journey? What a stupid and poorly though out "requirement". An excuse for a cheaply made product possibly!
No doubt if rust appears and a warranty claim is made they'll try to "get out" by saying their washing requirement hasn't been adhered to?
Car brake discs show rust if not used after a wash so surely certain parts of the bike will do the same too?

Trebor16

oldagetraveller wrote: »

How do they know it hasn't been washed after every journey? What a stupid and poorly though out "requirement". An excuse for a cheaply made product possibly!
No doubt if rust appears and a warranty claim is made they'll try to "get out" by saying their washing requirement hasn't been adhered to?
Car brake discs show rust if not used after a wash so surely certain parts of the bike will do the same too?

They wouldn't know. Even if an owner did wash the bike as per the handbook instructions and the part corroded, how would the owner be able to prove that he/she had complied?

I agree with you Oldagetraveller that the requirement is an excuse to make components cheaply. Having owned two brand new Triumphs, one purchased in 1999 and a replacement (same model) in 2004 it was quickly apparant that build quality had worsened and the newer bike looked more tatty after a year and 6000 miles than the old did at 5 years old and with 35000 miles on the clock.

The old one lived on the street for the first two years of its life too. The new one was kept in a garage from new.

zappahey

CvPiper wrote: »

The Triumph bikes are the best selling bikes in UK - outselling all the European and Japanese competition.

It is mainly put in in relation to winter riding, I.e. salt. If you leave it on any alloy or chrome finishes it will deteriorate them.

Fair play to even considering corrosion related warranty - no other manufacturer will do.

Nonsense, I've had the corroded fork legs on an SV650 replaced under warranty.

Trebor16

fivetide wrote: »

The Kawasaki Ninja I had before though had real issues with paint, especially on the wheels, there just wasn't enough of it. It all comes down to a product built for the lowest possible price.

5t.

And it looks like Triumph, by inserting the clause in the handbook, are covering themselves by putting the onus on the owner to wash the bike after every ride to cover up for the fact that their quality of components is not what it was because of cost cutting. At the same time they still present their products as being at the top of the tree comparing them with Honda and BMW.