G oog le Buell 1125R Forum | Login/out | Topics | Search | Custodians | Register | Edit Profile


Buell Forum » 1125R Superbike Board » Archives 001 » Archive through May 29, 2009 » Clutch weep is getting ridiculous » Archive through May 19, 2009 « Previous Next »

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jmr1283
Posted on Wednesday, April 29, 2009 - 09:39 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

ive wondered for awhile about this. and i guess buell might be trying to get a solution, but its actually rotax's engine. so its on them. hopefully with them and buell working on it itll be coming out sooner.
i havent have weeping but ive had a eye on it im mid 2k and nothin yet.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Brapbrapbrap
Posted on Wednesday, April 29, 2009 - 10:54 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Success has many fathers, while failure is an orphan

Funny when it wins a race or it's American content is discussed its ALL Buell's engine.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sportshaft
Posted on Thursday, April 30, 2009 - 02:39 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

well as i am new to the buell 1125R i didn't know shit about it and the guy who sold me the bike conveniently neglected to tell me about the "weep" and so far that is the only issue i have,it is alot of fun,i'm gonna stick it out to the end and get it sorted and if the dealership can't do it i'll get a wacky scientist to.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Geforce
Posted on Thursday, April 30, 2009 - 07:15 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

It may be entirely possible that he didn't know about the weep. It's not really common knowledge until you notice it...freak out, then get on here and start searching... happened to me.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Hogs
Posted on Thursday, April 30, 2009 - 07:57 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

This Stuff works on just about any thing... And no setup time like Silcone etc..Been using it on cars 100 percent results will it work here???

http://www.permatex.com/products/motorcycle/motorc ycle_gasketing/motorcycle_gasket_makers/motorcycle _Permatex_the_Right_Stuff_Gasket_Maker.htm
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Court
Posted on Thursday, April 30, 2009 - 08:13 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)


quote:

but they were able to indicate that I should expect one soon,




That's accurate information.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Spectrum
Posted on Thursday, April 30, 2009 - 08:42 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Hogs - I'd classify that in the shade tree mechanic category. Not that that's all bad. Make shift quick fixes have gotten a number of vehicles back on the road and delivered the pilot and passengers to their destination.

This isn't one of those situations that warrants a make shift solution. These bikes are usually quite functional with a leaky clutch.

I'll wait for the properly designed solution.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Marcodesade
Posted on Thursday, April 30, 2009 - 09:49 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

I've gotten a lot of good information from this thread (I started it). But I haven't yet heard from anyone who has had a catastrophic failure --- like the one that sent my bike to the shop the first time (it just went in for the third time in less than a month). I suppose that's a good thing, but has anyone else had that happen?

Also, is anyone actually checking fluid levels? I am hearing a chorus of "No," but I'm starting to get a case of PTSD here. I did, after all, lose all hydraulic pressure on the road.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Crowley
Posted on Thursday, April 30, 2009 - 01:14 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

As Court says, Rotax have completed endurance tests on the new set up. Things will be sorted soon.

Well done Buell for identifying the problem and being so pro active

We're still waiting for the brake line recall though!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Clarkjw
Posted on Thursday, April 30, 2009 - 01:16 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Stop being cry babies. The bike is perfect.
You don't need a clutch!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Marcodesade
Posted on Saturday, May 02, 2009 - 12:03 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

So I've asked the question a few times, with no affirmative answers that I can recall, so at this point I'm willing to believe that I am the only one here who has actually had the clutch FAIL.

My bike is back in the shop --- the third time in a month, a solid week each time so far. To be sure, my dealer has provided me with a string of wonderful rides (courtesy of my extended warranty): a Sportster, a Heritage Softail, and now a very cool (if somewhat gutless) Crossbones. Still, I bought my bike because I wanted a Buell 1125R.

I am heartened to hear Court and others report that a fix is on the way. In my case, the bandaids my bike has received have leaked significantly worse than the original problem.

I love my bike, but I'm beginning to wonder whether the California "lemon law" applies.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Court
Posted on Saturday, May 02, 2009 - 12:28 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

You are the only one I am aware of who has had a clutch fail. I do not know if your failure was related to the cause of the reported cover weeping.

The CA Lemon Law may be a bit dicey as it was modified in January of 2001 to wit:


quote:

As of January 1, 2001, under California Lemon Law, a vehicle is considered a Lemon if it fails two attempts at repairing life-threatening defects.




It may be tough to build a case that the clutch is a "life threatening" defect. It could be done but if you enjoy the bike I'd not make pursuit of the Lemon Law your first step. Buell has an excellent (cars AND motorcycles) reputation for coming through on these sorts of things.



quote:

California Lemon Law 1793.22.
(a) This section shall be known and may be cited as the Tanner Consumer Protection Act.

(b) It shall be presumed that a reasonable number of attempts have been made to conform a new motor vehicle to the applicable express warranties if, within 18 months from delivery to the buyer or 18,000 miles on the odometer of the vehicle, whichever occurs first, either

(1) the same nonconformity has been subject to repair four or more times by the manufacturer or its agents and the buyer has at least once directly notified the manufacturer of the need for the repair of the nonconformity or

(2) the vehicle is out of service by reason of repair of nonconformities by the manufacturer or its agents for a cumulative total of more than 30 calendar days since delivery of the vehicle to the buyer. The 30-day limit shall be extended only if repairs cannot be performed due to conditions beyond the control of the manufacturer or its agents. The buyer shall be required to directly notify the manufacturer pursuant to paragraph (1) only if the manufacturer has clearly and conspicuously disclosed to the buyer, with the warranty or the owner's manual, the provisions of this section and that of subdivision (d) of Section 1793.2, including the requirement that the buyer must notify the manufacturer directly pursuant to paragraph (1). This presumption shall be a reputable presumption affecting the burden of proof, and it may be asserted by the buyer in any civil action, including an action in small claims court, or other formal or informal proceeding.

(c) If a qualified third-party dispute resolution process exists, and the buyer receives timely notification in writing of the availability of that qualified third-party dispute resolution process with a description of its operation and effect, the presumption in subdivision (b) may not be asserted by the buyer until after the buyer has initially resorted to the qualified third-party dispute resolution process as required in subdivision (d). Notification of the availability of the qualified third-party dispute resolution process is not timely if the buyer suffers any prejudice resulting from any delay in giving the notification. If a qualified third-party dispute resolution process does not exist, or if the buyer is dissatisfied with that third-party decision, or if the manufacturer or its agent neglects to promptly fulfill the terms of the qualified third-party dispute resolution process decision after the decision is accepted by the buyer, the buyer may assert the presumption provided in subdivision (b) in an action to enforce the buyer's rights under subdivision (d) of Section 1793.2. The findings and decision of a qualified third-party dispute resolution process shall be admissible in evidence in the action without further foundation. Any period of limitation of actions under any federal or California laws with respect to any person shall be extended for a period equal to the number of days between the date a complaint is filed with a third-party dispute resolution process and the date of its decision or the date before which the manufacturer or its agent is required by the decision to fulfill its terms if the decision is accepted by the buyer, whichever occurs later.

(d) A qualified third-party dispute resolution process shall be one that does all of the following:

(1) Complies with the minimum requirements of the Federal Trade Commission for informal dispute settlement procedures as set forth in Part 703 of Title 16 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as those regulations read on January 1, 1987.

(2) Renders decisions which are binding on the manufacturer if the buyer elects to accept the decision.

(3) Prescribes a reasonable time, not to exceed 30 days after the decision is accepted by the buyer, within which the manufacturer or its agent must fulfill the terms of its decisions.

(4) Provides arbitrators who are assigned to decide disputes with copies of, and instruction in, the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission's regulations in Part 703 of Title 16 of the Code of Federal Regulations as those regulations read on January 1, 1987, Division 2 (commencing with Section 2101) of the Commercial Code, and this chapter.

(5) Requires the manufacturer, when the process orders, under the terms of this chapter, either that the nonconforming motor vehicle be replaced if the buyer consents to this remedy or that restitution be made to the buyer, to replace the motor vehicle or make restitution in accordance with paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 1793.2.

(6) Provides, at the request of the arbitrator or a majority of the arbitration panel, for an inspection and written report on the condition of a nonconforming motor vehicle, at no cost to the buyer, by an automobile expert who is independent of the manufacturer.

(7) Takes into account, in rendering decisions, all legal and equitable factors, including, but not limited to, the written warranty, the rights and remedies conferred in regulations of the Federal Trade Commission contained in Part 703 of Title 16 of the Code of Federal Regulations as those regulations read on January 1, 1987, Division 2 (commencing with Section 2101) of the Commercial Code, this chapter, and any other equitable considerations appropriate in the circumstances. Nothing in this chapter requires that, to be certified as a qualified third-party dispute resolution process pursuant to this section, decisions of the process must consider or provide remedies in the form of awards of punitive damages or multiple damages, under subdivision (c) of Section 1794, or of attorneys' fees under subdivision (d) of Section 1794, or of consequential damages other than as provided in subdivisions (a) and (b) of Section 1794, including, but not limited to, reasonable repair, towing, and rental car costs actually incurred by the buyer.

(8) Requires that no arbitrator deciding a dispute may be a party to the dispute and that no other person, including an employee, agent, or dealer for the manufacturer, may be allowed to participate substantively in the merits of any dispute with the arbitrator unless the buyer is allowed to participate also. Nothing in this subdivision prohibits any member of an arbitration board from deciding a dispute.

(9) Obtains and maintains certification by the Department of Consumer Affairs pursuant to Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 472) of Division 1 of the Business and Professions Code.

(e) For the purposes of subdivision (d) of Section 1793.2 and this section, the following terms have the following meanings:

(1) "Nonconformity" means a nonconformity which substantially impairs the use, value, or safety of the new motor vehicle to the buyer or lessee.

(2) "New motor vehicle" means a new motor vehicle that is used or bought for use primarily for personal, family, or household purposes.

"New motor vehicle" also means a new motor vehicle that is bought or used for business and personal, family, or household purposes by a person, including a partnership, limited liability company, corporation, association, or any other legal entity, to which not more than five motor vehicles are registered in this state. "New motor vehicle" includes the chassis, chassis cab, and that portion of a motor home devoted to its propulsion, but does not include any portion designed, used, or maintained primarily for human habitation, a dealer-owned vehicle and a "demonstrator" or other motor vehicle sold with a manufacturer's new car warranty but does not include a motorcycle or a motor vehicle which is not registered under the Vehicle Code because it is to be operated or used exclusively off the highways. A demonstrator is a vehicle assigned by a dealer for the purpose of demonstrating qualities and characteristics common to vehicles of the same or similar model and type.

(3) "Motor home" means a vehicular unit built on, or permanently attached to, a self-propelled motor vehicle chassis, chassis cab, or van, which becomes an integral part of the completed vehicle, designed for human habitation for recreational or emergency occupancy.

(f)

(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), no person shall sell, either at wholesale or retail, lease, or transfer a motor vehicle transferred by a buyer or lessee to a manufacturer pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 1793.2 or a similar statute of any other state, unless the nature of the nonconformity experienced by the original buyer or lessee is clearly and conspicuously disclosed to the prospective buyer, lessee, or transferee, the nonconformity is corrected, and the manufacturer warrants to the new buyer, lessee, or transferee in writing for a period of one year that the motor vehicle is free of that nonconformity.

(2) Except for the requirement that the nature of the nonconformity be disclosed to the transferee, paragraph (1) does not apply to the transfer of a motor vehicle to an educational institution if the purpose of the transfer is to make the motor vehicle available for use in automotive repair courses.

California Lemon Law 1793.23.
(a) The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:

(1) That the expansion of state warranty laws covering new and used cars has given important and valuable protection to consumers.

(2) That, in states without this valuable warranty protection, used and irrepairable motor vehicles are being resold in the marketplace without notice to the subsequent purchaser.

(3) That other states have addressed this problem by requiring notices on the title of these vehicles or other notice procedures to warn consumers that the motor vehicles were repurchased by a dealer or manufacturer because the vehicle could not be repaired in a reasonable length of time or a reasonable number of repair attempts or the dealer or manufacturer was not willing to repair the vehicle.

(4) That these notices serve the interests of consumers who have a right to information relevant to their buying decisions.

(5) That the disappearance of these notices upon the transfer of title from another state to this state encourages the transport of "lemons" to this state for sale to the drivers of this state.

(b) This section and Section 1793.24 shall be known, and may be cited as, the Automotive Consumer Notification Act.

(c) Any manufacturer who reacquires or assists a dealer or lien holder to reacquire a motor vehicle registered in this state, any other state, or a federally administered district shall, prior to any sale, lease, or transfer of the vehicle in this state, or prior to exporting the vehicle to another state for sale, lease, or transfer if the vehicle was registered in this state and reacquired pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 1793.2, cause the vehicle to be re-titled in the name of the manufacturer, request the Department of Motor Vehicles to inscribe the ownership certificate with the notation "Lemon Law Buyback," and affix a decal to the vehicle in accordance with Section 11713.12 of the Vehicle Code if the manufacturer knew or should have known that the vehicle is required by law to be replaced, accepted for restitution due to the failure of the manufacturer to conform the vehicle to applicable warranties pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 1793.2, or accepted for restitution by the manufacturer due to the failure of the manufacturer to conform the vehicle to warranties required by any other applicable law of the state, any other state, or federal law.

(d) Any manufacturer who reacquires or assists a dealer or lien holder to reacquire a motor vehicle in response to a request by the buyer or lessee that the vehicle be either replaced or accepted for restitution because the vehicle did not conform to express warranties shall, prior to the sale, lease, or other transfer of the vehicle, execute and deliver to the subsequent transferee a notice and obtain the transferee's written acknowledgment of a notice, as prescribed by Section 1793.24.

(e) Any person, including any dealer, who acquires a motor vehicle for resale and knows or should have known that the vehicle was reacquired by the vehicle's manufacturer in response to a request by the last retail owner or lessee of the vehicle that it be replaced or accepted for restitution because the vehicle did not conform to express warranties shall, prior to the sale, lease, or other transfer, execute and deliver to the subsequent transferee a notice and obtain the transferee's written acknowledgment of a notice, as prescribed by Section 1793.24.

(f) Any person, including any manufacturer or dealer, who sells, leases, or transfers ownership of a motor vehicle when the vehicle's ownership certificate is inscribed with the notation "Lemon Law Buyback" shall, prior to the sale, lease, or ownership transfer of the vehicle, provide the transferee with a disclosure statement signed by the transferee that states:

"THIS VEHICLE WAS REPURCHASED BY ITS MANUFACTURER DUE TO A DEFECT IN THE VEHICLE PURSUANT TO CONSUMER WARRANTY LAWS. THE TITLE TO THIS VEHICLE HAS BEEN PERMANENTLY BRANDED WITH THE NOTATION "LEMON LAW BUYBACK"."

(g) The disclosure requirements in subdivisions (d), (e), and (f) are cumulative with all other consumer notice requirements and do not relieve any person, including any dealer or manufacturer, from complying with any other applicable law, including any requirement of subdivision (f) of Section 1793.22.

(h) For purposes of this section, "dealer" means any person engaged in the business of selling, offering for sale, or negotiating the retail sale of, a used motor vehicle or selling motor vehicles as a broker or agent for another, including the officers, agents, and employees of the person and any combination or association of dealers.

California Lemon Law 1793.24.
(a) The notice required in subdivisions (d) and (e) of Section 1793.23 shall be prepared by the manufacturer of the reacquired vehicle and shall disclose all of the following:

(1) Year, make, model, and vehicle identification number of the vehicle.

(2) Whether the title to the vehicle has been inscribed with the notation "Lemon Law Buyback."

(3) The nature of each nonconformity reported by the original buyer or lessee of the vehicle.

(4) Repairs, if any, made to the vehicle in an attempt to correct each nonconformity reported by the original buyer or lessee.

(b) The notice shall be on a form 8 1/2 x 11 inches in size and printed in no smaller than 10-point black type on a white background.

The form shall only contain the following information prior to it being filled out by the manufacturer:

WARRANTY BUYBACK NOTICE

(Check One)

/__/ This vehicle was repurchased by the vehicle's manufacturer after the last retail owner or lessee requested its repurchase due to the problem(s) listed below.

/__/ THIS VEHICLE WAS REPURCHASED BY ITS MANUFACTURER DUE TO A DEFECT IN THE VEHICLE PURSUANT TO CONSUMER WARRANTY LAWS. THE TITLE TO THIS VEHICLE HAS BEEN PERMANENTLY BRANDED WITH THE NOTATION "LEMON LAW BUYBACK." Under California law, the manufacturer must warrant to you, for a one year period, that the vehicle is free of the problem(s) listed below.

__________________________________________________ _________
|V.I.N. |Year | Make | Model |
|___________________________|________|__________|_ __________|
__________________________________________________ _________
| Problem(s) Reported by | Repairs Made, if any, to |
| Original Owner | Correct Reported Problem(s) |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
|___________________________|_____________________ __________|


Signature of Manufacturer Date

_______________________________________________ ____________


Signature of Dealer(s) Date

_______________________________________________ ____________

_______________________________________________ ____________

_______________________________________________ ____________


Signature of Retail Buyer or Lessee Date

_______________________________________________ ____________

_______________________________________________ ____________

(c) The manufacturer shall provide an executed copy of the notice to the manufacturer's transferee. Each transferee, including a dealer, to whom the motor vehicle is transferred prior to its sale to a retail buyer or lessee shall be provided an executed copy of the notice by the previous transferor.

California Lemon Law 1793.25.
(a) Notwithstanding Part 1 (commencing with Section 6001) of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, the State Board of Equalization shall reimburse the manufacturer of a new motor vehicle for an amount equal to the sales tax which the manufacturer pays to or for the buyer when providing a replacement vehicle pursuant to subparagraph (A) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 1793.2 or includes in making restitution to the buyer pursuant to subparagraph (B) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 1793.2, when satisfactory proof is provided that the retailer of the motor vehicle for which the manufacturer is making restitution has reported and paid the sales tax on the gross receipts from the sale of that motor vehicle and the manufacturer provides satisfactory proof that it has complied with subdivision (c) of Section 1793.23. The State Board of Equalization may adopt rules and regulations to carry out, facilitate compliance with, or prevent circumvention or evasion of, this section.

(b) Nothing in this section shall in any way change the application of the sales and use tax to the gross receipts and the sales price from the sale, and the storage, use, or other consumption, in this state or tangible personal property pursuant to Part 1 (commencing with Section 6001) of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.

(c) The manufacturer's claim for reimbursement and the board's approval or denial of the claim shall be subject to the provisions of Article 1 (commencing with Section 6901) of Chapter 7 of Part 1 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, except Sections 6902.1, 6903, 6907, and 6908 thereof, insofar as those provisions are not inconsistent with this section.

California Lemon Law 1793.26.
(a) Any automobile manufacturer, importer, or distributor who reacquires, or who assists a dealer or lien holder in reacquiring, a motor vehicle, whether by judgment, decree, arbitration award, settlement agreement, or voluntary agreement, is prohibited from doing either of the following:

(1) Requiring, as a condition of the reacquisition of the motor vehicle, that a buyer or lessee who is a resident of this state agree not to disclose the problems with the vehicle experienced by the buyer or lessee or the non-financial terms of the reacquisition.

(2) Including, in any release or other agreement, whether prepared by the manufacturer, importer, distributor, dealer, or lien holder, for signature by the buyer or lessee, a confidentiality clause, gag clause, or similar clause prohibiting the buyer or lessee from disclosing information to anyone about the problems with the vehicle, or the non-financial terms of the reacquisition of the vehicle by the manufacturer, importer, distributor, dealer, or lien holder.

(b) Any confidentiality clause, gag clause, or similar clause in such a release or other agreement in violation of this section shall be null and void as against the public policy of this state.

(c) Nothing in this section is intended to prevent any confidentiality clause, gag clause, or similar clause regarding the financial terms of the reacquisition of the vehicle.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Court
Posted on Saturday, May 02, 2009 - 12:33 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Actually . .. I may be mistaken.

In California what you are really referring to is the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act (beginning with Civil Code section 1790).

Song-Beverly applies to ""new motor vehicle" and specifically excludes (as do several other states) motorcycles.

If you decide to go that way there are better options.


quote:



The law discussed above applies to "new motor vehicles." (Certain limited protection may apply to used vehicles as described in Section 2.) The term "new motor vehicle" includes not only new motor vehicles but also demonstrators; the chassis, chassis cab, and propulsion system of a new motor home; and any other motor vehicle sold with a manufacturer's new car warranty. For example, a two-year old used car sold with the remaining one year portion of a manufacturer's three-year new car warranty would be treated as a new motor vehicle. The term "new motor vehicle," however, does not include motorcycles or exclusively off-road vehicles.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Marcodesade
Posted on Saturday, May 02, 2009 - 01:13 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Court, thanks so much. I hadn't seen the actual text of the law, although I was aware of the exception for motorcycles as not having the same protection as "new vehicles" (there are other protections).

I do hope that a real fix is made available soon. As you suggested, pursuing a legal remedy is not my first choice. I really just want my bike back, running the way it was intended.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Chameleon
Posted on Wednesday, May 06, 2009 - 08:18 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

I did have my clutch completely fail.

I had just got it out of the shop after an oil leak was repaired requiring the replacement of a gasket on the right side of the motor (throttle / clutch side).

I rode less than 100 miles from home and on the way back home the clutch was gradually losing effectiveness until I was forced to shift clutchlessly. On the last stretch toward home, it died 3 times at lights due to the clutch not completely disengaging with the lever fully pulled in.

When home, I checked the fluid reservoir and it was virtually empty I put more in and it would not build pressure and seemed to have an internal leak as there was no apparently external leak.

I had to have it towed back to the shop and they wound up replacing the entire clutch actuator assembly including seal. They claimed that there were tool marks on the piston seal which would have been from the dealer I bought the bike from replacing the clutch cover a long time ago due to... you guessed it: weeping. Unfortunately the shop I bought it from does not have any Buell-factory-trained 1125R technicians on staff and that is why I no longer go through them for service on my 1125R. In fact, I am their only 1125R customer.


2.5 months and a bit over 4,000 miles later and the clutch cover is weeping again.
I, too, am really hoping for an effective resolution soon.

I have a feeling that I had better purchase the extended warranty before my factory warranty runs out.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Marcodesade
Posted on Wednesday, May 06, 2009 - 09:08 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

+1 Chameleon.

The one bright spot in this for me is the long line of awesome bikes I've been riding while the one I want to ride is in the shop.

So far I've had a Screaming Eagle Nightster, a Heritage Softtail, another 1125R, and now a sweet (if somewhat slow) Crossbones. The extended warranty has more than paid for itself.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Brapbrapbrap
Posted on Wednesday, May 06, 2009 - 10:11 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Maybe the 1125 is a Harley Davidson ploy to make you fall in love with chrome covered bikes through the 1125 loaner program?

Walk away from the light!!!!!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Xbswede
Posted on Wednesday, May 06, 2009 - 10:18 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Funny I wasn't offered a Chrome Harley. Instead I had to choose between a TT and 12R. Oh well.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Chameleon
Posted on Thursday, May 07, 2009 - 01:36 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

The extended warranty has more than paid for itself.

So the loaner bike is an extended warranty benefit or just a benefit of having a great dealer?

Seriously I've had my bike serviced at 3 different dealers and none have offered a service loaner and they refuse me one when I ask... Even the shop I bought 3 bikes from in 6 months wouldn't lend me a bike while they were charging me over $700 for service. That's F'd up.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Court
Posted on Thursday, May 07, 2009 - 06:18 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Chameleon:

That does not sound related to the leak. Please make certain you contact your dealer and Buell Customer Service.

Also, those of you with the weeping clutches . . . I'm hoping you've advised your dealer or Buell Customer Service.

I can't imagine that it will require an extended warranty to get it fixed.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dartanjang
Posted on Thursday, May 07, 2009 - 07:00 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Would it be possible to perhaps pin a date for when this fix will be available? My clutch just had its first drain and if there is a fix available soon and I can manage meanwhile by refilling the reservoir there is no point in going to the shop to get the old rebuild.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Xbswede
Posted on Thursday, May 07, 2009 - 08:58 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

I am getting mine fixed currently as far as my dealer knows what they are doing is the fix and has not heard of anything else available yet. So far they have not had any returns with their rebuilds.

I will get a list of the parts that are being replaced in mine to see if its the same others have done.

Chameleon-
I have serviced mine at two places here where I live and Latus is the only one that has done this for me. Its pretty much dealer/sales persons. Latus has made it a point to be best in customer service. But then you pay a little more upfront on their bikes because they are not your bargain shop. Sometimes you get what you pay for. I didn't mind paying Latus more for my bike then if I would have driven to another city because I know they stand behind their customers 100%
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Marcodesade
Posted on Thursday, May 07, 2009 - 04:44 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Chameleon:

It's the extended warranty. It's also a feature of the prepaid maintenance package. I believe that, between the two (and including the optional tire and wheel protection) I may have paid about $1500.

A week's rental of the bike of your choice runs about $600 if memory serves. I've had 3 weeks worth or more.

Still, I do hope it's fixed properly this time.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Zac4mac
Posted on Monday, May 18, 2009 - 04:39 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

In the RevA cover, the weep hole is in the cover.
RevB has the hole in the puck - I rotated mine ~45 degrees, has Peg's wings parallel to the ground.
Did this a couple of weeks ago and today pulled the puck.
No dribbles at all but when I pulled the puck, a bunch came out.

I just heated the puck in some boiling water and used my thumbnail to lift the Peg sticker.
Flipped it over, now the weep hole is at the top; should be good for the Summer.
The O-ring on the RevB seals very well.

Zack
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bigblock
Posted on Tuesday, May 19, 2009 - 01:28 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Mine has been fixed once, and started weeping again after about 3,000 miles. It still is, and I just had to top off my reservoir, my dealer doesn't seem to be too interested in repairing it again.

Last time I was in, they "took a note" about the clutch, and said they would get back to me if Buell came up with a better fix.

I am hoping I don't have to go through customer service, but ...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Zac4mac
Posted on Tuesday, May 19, 2009 - 02:53 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Here's a pic of my "fix" for the dribble.






Z
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Fresnobuell
Posted on Tuesday, May 19, 2009 - 03:43 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

So Zac, I am confused here. The o-ring of RevB seals well, but you still have weeping?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Xbswede
Posted on Tuesday, May 19, 2009 - 08:27 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

So what all is being replaced when you guys have your cover replaced? From what I understand is that the hydraulic piston slides into the O-ring causing it to scar and leak. just replacing the O-ring and cover would not fix that issue.

This is what i had replaced recently. Don't know if its any different or not.
Parts replaced in the Clutch kit:
CF0007.1AMA - O-rings
CE0006.1AM - Retaining Ring
X0087.1AM - Sleeve
X1086.1AM - Piston
CF0001.1AM - O-ring
CF0023.1AM - O-ring
H0412.01A0 - Crush Washer
M0741.1AM - Clutch Cover
R1029A.1AM - Diaphragm Ring Assy w Plug&G

(Message edited by xbswede on May 19, 2009)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Zac4mac
Posted on Tuesday, May 19, 2009 - 09:11 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Harlan - the inner seals still leak.
When the hole is at the bottom, fluid dribbles out after a few days.
The puck is held on by a thick O-ring that seals well, so the leak is contained.

By moving the hole to the top, the leak is contained for a longer period.

Z
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Palmer
Posted on Tuesday, May 19, 2009 - 09:58 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Mine is still not weeping after fittng it, it's 2000km since then.

Zac,

mine was weeping not from the little hole, but from the inside, maybe my O-ring wasn't well sealed. Do you have sealed it better?
and you removed the pegasus logo for doing this i think.
« Previous Next »

Topics | Last Day | Tree View | Search | User List | Help/Instructions | Rules | Program Credits Administration