|
erseyside Police has taken some of its motorcycles off the road
after one of its officers was killed in a crash.
Monday, 21 November 2005, 16:35 GMT
- Pc
David Shreeve, 38, was on a motorcycle training course when his bike collided
with a lorry on the M58 in Skelmersdale, Lancashire. The Honda ST1300 motorcycle
has been temporarily withdrawn while the crash investigation is carried out.
Acting Assistant Chief Constable Simon Byrne said the withdrawal was a
"precaution". He added: "The safety of our officers is paramount
and this decision has been made while a full investigation is carried out by
Lancashire Police into the events leading up to the tragic death of Constable
Shreeve. "The position will be reviewed once we have further information from
the investigation." In the meantime, members of the public should be reassured
that we have sufficient vehicles to provide a full operational service." Pc
Shreeve, who joined Merseyside Police in 1987, leaves a wife, a two-year-old son
and a daughter, five. He lived in Wirral and was posted to the traffic division
in March 1994 where he trained as a family liaison officer three years ago. He
regularly supported victims of serious and fatal road traffic collisions. ....
Wed-July-19 2006, PC Allan Shaw (33)
from the GMP was also killed in an accident involving a ST1300P. He also was
married with a young family.
Before we go any further,
thank you Allan and David for your service to your community. My thoughts and
prayers are with your surviving family and friends.....
Several European
Police departments have grounded the Honda ST1300P due to
instability and crashes with injuries at high speeds. Holland (the Federal
Police) had a bad experience on an early version where the Dutch motors officer
crashed the bike at 100+ mph when an uncontrollable front end wobble. I have
also read that some departments in England have grounded the motor due to the
same problem. That would explain the electronic governed speed on the US
version. According to articles written on the subject, "Riders of the
2002 model reported a severe wobble at speeds above 160 km/h (100 mph), a
problem which Honda considered serious enough to halt production of 2003s. The
problem was eventually solved, the 2002s were recalled for a replacement of some
chassis parts and the fix was applied to early 2003s. Other than the wobble and
some complaints about the amount of heat reaching the rider at high
temperatures, owners with 80,000 km (about 50,000 miles) on their ST1300s have
reported the bike to be solid and reliable." But is it solved or not? I do not
know out what production year of ST1300 the latest crashed have occurred on. One
assumes that the training given to a motors officer is extraordinary, compared
to the average civilian rider's experiences.
So if LEOs are
crashing ST1300s, are the rest of us riding around on a time bomb? It
would be nice to have an definitive answer on this one wouldn't it? Well I am not sure I
have one so what I will do is post information regarding this as I find it. This
information will be taken form whatever sources I can find, so you will need to
make a determination as to it's usefulness in your situation. Honda claims the
issue was addressed and resolved before the 2003 ST1300 rolled to dealers.
However with the above accident being 12 NOV 2005, is the danger still out
there? I
think there are several things at play here and I hope to shed light on this
subject.
As you
read down through this page there are numerous references to suspensions
setup. Most people suggest that you crank up the preload on the rear shock to
accomplish similar results with weight distribution. But the question is can
you resolve the issue if you are experiencing it? It may be as simple as a
compromise between how the bike handles at low speed.
When you
talk about the rear shock being to soft, I take it you are talking about the
rear spring. When you adjust the preload (spring preload ) you are also
adjusting the height of the bike at the rear. The more preload you add, the
higher the rear, the lesser fork angle and the reverse if you soften the
preload. The spring carries the weight of the bike and rider, the shock ( shock
absorber - damper ) dampens or reduces spring oscillations. I have found that
when you lessen the fork angle, (trail -caster etc), you end up with a twitchy
bike so when you "throttle off", the front of the bike drops and wobbles start
to set in. If you can find the thread which was entered about bike setup to find
an equilibrium read it. It makes total sense. I setup my bike using his formula,
it took me a bit of time but I ended up with an excellent setup on my bike. It
is know stable at speed, does not buffet with oncoming trucks or side winds,
neutral handling and rides straight with no hands on the bike. I have only had
it up to 180KM/H so far and no sign of any problems.
....So we
see the obvious need to set the suspension up and to meet the riders needs and
to compensate for the riders weight and height.
ST1100
rider ...
I messed
around with the triple tree/fork heights on my ST1100 and found that if I raised
the fork tubes up within the triple tree, I got a high-speed wobble above 110
mph on the ST1100. I immediately went back and adjusted it back to lower the
fork tubes and the wobble disappeared.
I never got a chance to try that with the ST1300, but, I'm
not surprised by your findings.
... front
fork tube length should be verified....
Since I
discovered that reducing the rear spring preload improved my handling problems
and stopped poor tire wear. the bike still had a different feel between left and
right hand turns. Placing the bike on the center stand, pressing on the rear,
causing the front tire to lightly tap the ground, the front wheel walked
steadily to the left. This said the forks were not compressing at the same rate.
I then removed the fork caps and inspected the level of oil in the forks, which
I expected to be out of balance. But, I found the levels to be so close to the
same, it was difficult to see any difference. So, I just put the caps back on
and to my surprise, the unbalance problem was gone. This told me the static air
volume was different between the forks.
But then
handling was even better, more neutral. So, I started playing with the extended
height the Triple Tree was clamped at. Mine was slightly below the top of the
fork tube and the extended length, measured from the top Triple Tree clamp to
the bottom of the black plastic fork shield was very close to 15 -7/8 inches or
40.5 cm. Raising the Triple Tree clamp/lowering the fork tube so they are flush
with the top of the fork tube has raised the extended length to the plus side of
16-1/8 inches and dead on 41 cm has provided the most neutral steering I have
ever experienced. Now, cranking up the preload so I have little to no sag only
causes a little under-steer when there is no positive power. The smallest
positive throttle makes the steering neutral again. Reducing preload so there is
some small amount of sag provides almost constant neutral steering.
... front
fork tube length should be verified .... reiterated....as well as front shock
oil and air.
A BMW rider writes...
Greetings, I ride a '04 RT as
my own bike and a ST1300P for work. The ST is a nice bike for big roads and
speeds...although it is very noisy and yes there is a wobble at 110+ depending
on where the pre-load is set, how much you weigh and how much kit you have in
the panniers. This wobble won't go away and can be quite alarming. It is due to
a torque problem between the engine and frame. That's from Honda who came down
to speak to us after we complained so much. 'P' spec bikes in the UK have had an
aftermarket fix from Honda to try and minimize this but it still wobbles in the
three figure region. If you have the screen up then the, wobble is worse and if
you have the screen down then you can wave goodbye to hearing the radio.
... rear
preload settings again but combined with rider weight, side bag weight and
reference to the Honda European recall.
UK Police
equipped ST1300s are having stability issues at speed. These bikes are very
heavily loaded, much more so than a 'packed for touring' civil version. This
issue was not present on the older ST1100 police bikes, nor on the less loaded
civil ST1300. The criticism of the UK variety of the police ST1300 should not be
seen as an issue for the civil versions. The wide-spread reporting of
instability of UK ST1300-Ps by their operators lends credence to the allegations
that the fatal accident suffered by an experienced Class-1 police motorcyclist
may have been as a result of such instability. One of the reasons many UK forces
moved away from BMWs was a similar instability issue with those machines......
What did that
say?..........One
of the reasons many UK forces moved away from BMWs was a similar instability
issue..... hummmm interesting.... so then the BMW's were flawed as well? And
yes, officers died on BMWs as well. BMW denied any design issues and passed the
buck back to the local levels. I have heard that even Harley's with a fork
mounted windshield can have a high speed wobble. I know My Kaw Nomad, with a 4"
taller, 2" wider windshield and larger than factory spec lowers, had stability
issues at higher speed and it was an 800lb+ bike.
One would think that Motors training would be where
you learn to find that envelope of 110% performance out of a machine, which to
me, is right up to, just before, the point where the bike fails to perform. Wouldn't this be
learning the limitations of the bike? Don't we all do that in our own way? Is it
that the bike's design capabilities can be exceeded before the point where one's
own mind says, "we have reached the point-of-no-return, slow down?"
What I want to know is
under what conditions these events have occurred. Only while in training? High speed
chases? What were the road conditions? I don't know if we will ever have a
concrete answer from the Police investigations or not as it may never be
released to the general populous but instead hushed up by lawyers and
manufacturers.
Anyway, interesting reading. Lets add on to it...
I personally have a
E52 - MAXIA - MONOKEY® Givi Trunk on the
back and as you could imagine, you will be more susceptible to crosswinds
with this high mount trunk so watch your speed on windy days. In fact, I
notice that with the trunk on, the bike gets really jittery at interstate speeds
and this is amplified around trucks and other less aerodynamic vehicles.
However the bright side is, if you but a T-BAG or some other sort of bag behind
you, (no, this wasn't an attempt at humor, but if it made you laugh, then yes I
planned it that way), to fill the gap between you and the trunk, stability is
suppose to improve. If you take the trunk off the bike, handling improves
dramatically and stability in greatly enhanced in higher speed settings.
I have had
my ST1300 up to a higher speed ,
(need to put that SpeedoHealer on, I read 9% high), with
the trunk on the rear, in a crosswind, not weaving through traffic. At
these speeds I was impressed by the way the turbulence wanted to control the
front end of the bike. This bike wants to lean into the crosswind where my
cruiser would simply move in the opposite direction away from the direction of
the crosswind. That tells me the design of the front end plastic is playing a
key roll in the dynamics of air disbursal. Anyway, I wouldn't dare drive
aggressively and weave through traffic under those conditions. But, LEOs don't really have a
choice on when to ride under emergency conditions. It just happens and boom,
your running emergency.
Others have said
that one reason the
UK is dumping the ST1300P is because of their implementation of emergency
equipment which is more or less a small but reasonably sized electric sign.
Unfortunately this sign began to act like a spoiler on the back of a race car pushing the back end down
and lightening the front wheel. Perhaps a wing on the front is needed? Other people reported issues with the single
beacon
pole on the rear right side of the bike being a wobble inducing
issue. Not good at high speed. Add in the turbulence of high speed driving and weaving
though traffic? Sounds like my trunk doesn't it? What do you think?
So it seems we
have an issue with suspension as well as air management. Did Honda go to sleep
when they were doing the wind tunnel tests on the front end to rear end air
transition management in the design? You can also
add tires into the equation as well since a low back tire will induce wobble. So
will cupping of a tire. .... confused yet?
This source preferred not to be
identified and you can guess the line of work by the following quote regarding
their dealings with the ST1300. If you have further questions regarding the
ST1300P in a duty roll, email me and I will engage my source to answer your
questions.
Due to my position as a traffic enforcement officer, I spend a lot of time
over 100 mph every day. Several times per day, I will observe a vehicle
traveling at 80 mph or more. When I lock in their speed on my LIDAR, they
are often 800-1000 feet from me and increasing that gap. In order to make
up that distance, I end up much higher than their speed. High-speed wobble
would not allow me to do that, especially in the S-curves that I take at
100+ mph.
The only time I have ever experienced any high-speed wobble was when (both
of) my tires were seriously over-inflated. This was due to a faulty air
pressure gauge. Checking my tire pressure with that gauge (prior to
realizing there was a problem with it), I found my pressure was low. I
inflated them both to 42 psi indicated, and went to work. Attempting to
overtake a high-speed vehicle, I began to notice a slight headshake at about
90 mph. Writing it off to rain grooves, I continued to increase my speed to
about 120 mph, but backed off at that point since the headshake only
increased. I tested the bike with more runs up to 110, and the wobble came
on each time. I then checked the air pressure again (among other checks) to
confirm that everything was proper. Using a different gauge, I found that
both tires were at 50.5 psi. I reduced the pressure to 42 psi indicated,
and went back out to the highway. Speeds up to approximately 130+ mph had
no headshake or wobble, including speeds on the same stretch of roadway.
I haven’t solved the overall problem or killed the old perception, but I can
attest to the fact that improper tire pressure will cause high-speed wobble.
It is
interesting to note that the wobble was only observed as a result of the
tire pressure, nothing with regard to equipment add-ons, torque values. You
caught that 100MPH PLUS in the S-curves and 130MPH+ straight line??? Sounds
pretty damn stable to me. I can also tell you that the standard setup of
bike they are using does not have the light head shown in the picture above
nor do they have the beacon pole. The windshields appear to be stock as
well. The front engine guards are loaded with the usual siren on one side
and I am guessing the LIDAR on the other side. I can not show you a picture of
the bikes out of respect to the request.
Honda issued a US recall which dealt with
a re-torque of key
structural bolts after it was discovered that many steering related bolts
and nuts were not torque to factory specifications. How in the heck did that
happen? Was that a factory glitch or a dealer prep glitch? (I do not know
what the dealer prep procedure is out of the crate.....sorry)
Then in 2003 Honda issued recall #2 in Europe, for
European bikes only. This one replaced key rear suspension and engine
mounting bolts and pieces, was Honda trying to save the Police market or
provide a real solution?)
The European recall is only for certain MY2002
bikes. It is also believed Europe got the re-torquing of structural
fasteners that was applied to US MY2003 bikes in-crate (along with the
heat retrofit) as a recall a while ago. This more recently announced
recall is for certain MY2002 bikes only.
Translated
French version of
recall #2 here
Then
people started checking their bikes and guess what?....posts like this
popped up out there.... this is scary stuff.
....If you are looking for a
ST1300 that wobbles, I have one. With the help of forum members, I have
found the following. Most of the engine mount bolts were at about 1/3 the
rated torque. The steering head nut was not even touching the bearing. It
took a full turn then setting to spec. All the triple tree bolts were at
about 1/2 the spec. torque. The swing arm left hand bolt was at twice the
specified torque. I reset it to the specified torque. Lowering the tire
pressures from the specified 42lbs to 36 front and 38 rear has also helped.
All of this has helped the wobbles. I was fighting this bike on my first
ride. What took the
bike out of a wobble is a light application of the front brake.
I did call Honda. The rep said they have never heard of this and take it to
the dealer. The dealer was not interested at riding over 75MPH to test it.
Holy crap!!!
Dealer setup issues as well!?!?!? Well this is why I didn't buy a ST1300 in
2004, because I heard dealers didn't know how to support this bike and that they
were screwing them up. Guess that was a wise decision at that point in time.
So, now
if for some reason, the dealership does not set the bike up correctly, you could
experience the wobble effect and given the fact
that that some dealers really have a habit of not paying attention to
detail or even worse that a mechanic could potentially work on a bike they have
not been trained on..... makes you wonder doesn't it? Some people say they have rid
themselves of the wobble through their own adjustments and others still have it.
But does that just mean the "wobblers" just don't have enough information to
make the adjustments to their bike, or is the problem still real?
Great Scott,
this is getting quite cumbersome......let's review..
Overloading the bike is bad.
Open space between the driver and a rear trunk can lead to skittish high speed driving
during crosswinds and air traffic turbulence.
Air management over the front fairing and windshield is bad with windshield in
higher
positions inducing wobble.
Recall to:
Tighten up loose nuts and bolts.
Replace the engine support mounts on the left and right side thus increasing the
level of rigidity at the engine mount levels.
Modify the mounting method of the engine at the rear.
Modify the pivot point of the left oscillating arm.
....................Apparently
Pc David Shreeve's bike had
had the frame balanced that
was supposed to stop this wobble condition.
Torque on critical bolts still maladjusted according to random rider reports.
Front Shocks setup incorrectly with regards to air volume
Tire pressure as shown in the manual my be to high.
So let's turn the
clock up to 2006, eliminate the recalls and look at the remaining symptoms.
Overloading the bike is bad.
Open space between the driver and a rear trunk can lead to skittish high speed
driving
during crosswinds and air traffic turbulence.
Air management over the front fairing and windshield is bad with windshield in
higher
positions inducing wobble.
Tire pressure as shown in the manual my be to high.
Torque on critical bolts still maladjusted according to random rider reports.
Front Shocks setup incorrectly with regards to air volume
Random reports of
Overloading the
bike is bad
So now we look
at the issue and see that we can control the overloading to a degree, meaning
you may have to travel lighter, but we do not know at what point "overloading"
starts.
Open space
between the driver and a rear trunk can lead to skittish high speed driving
during crosswinds and air traffic turbulence.
Trunks may not
be the wisest choice for this bike with out the space between you and it,
blocked. Have you noticed that most, if not all, of the Honda brand trunks are
an import item? Hummmm. Yamaha does not recommend using a trunk with their
side bags in place....hummmm again.
Air
management over the front fairing and windshield is bad with windshield in
higher positions inducing wobble.
As for the
windshield inducing wobble, this was pulled off a recent forum....
I have been
experiencing the high speed instability that has been discussed on this forum.
In my case it occurred from about 80mph onwards. The handle bars would oscillate
like a tank slapper and the back end would weave from side to side. (sounds like
the original complaint doesn't it)
It never got any worse than that, but it was seriously unsettling, and the only
cure was to lower the screen to its lowest position and live with the windblast.
The bike has the Honda topbox and the side panniers in place.
I thought that I had the suspension adjusted correctly, but after reading a
thread on the forum I went back to the bike and set the preload about 3/4 of the
way in and the rebound damping a quarter turn back from full hard. After doing
this,
I have just road tested the bike and it is rock solid up to an indicated 120mph.
It stays rock solid whatever the position of the screen.
The posts which appeared on
the forum after his post, confirmed his findings. So, What did he do?
Remember this from earlier?
When you
talk about the rear shock being to soft, I take it you are talking about the
rear spring. When you adjust the preload (spring preload ) you are also
adjusting the height of the bike at the rear. The more preload you add, the
higher the rear, the lesser fork angle and the reverse if you soften the
preload. The spring carries the weight of the bike and rider, the shock ( shock
absorber - damper ) dampens or reduces spring oscillations. I have found that
when you lessen the fork angle, (trail -caster etc), you end up with a twitchy
bike so when you "throttle off", the front of the bike drops and wobbles start
to set in. If you can find the thread which was entered about bike setup to find
an equilibrium read it. It makes total sense. I setup my bike using his formula,
it took me a bit of time but I ended up with an excellent setup on my bike. It
is know stable at speed, does not buffet with oncoming trucks or side winds,
neutral handling and rides straight with no hands on the bike. I have only had
it up to 180KM/H so far and no sign of any problems.
Tire
pressure as shown in the manual my be to high.
Then let some out, perhaps
"Lowering the tire pressures from the specified
42lbs to 36 front and 38 rear has also helped. All of this has helped the
wobbles",
and go test ride. Tire pressure is critical to the proper performance of any
bike and it is under scored with the use of a sports bike. Check your air
pressure often. And do not get carried away with dropping more than say a
pound of air at a time, you have to tweak it to set the bike up for you.
Torque on
critical bolts still maladjusted according to random rider reports.
Request that the dealer inspect the bike, If you don't trust them, them buy a
service manual, a torque wrench and do it yourself.
Front
Shocks setup incorrectly with regards to air volume
Request that the dealer inspect the bike, If you don't trust them, them buy a
service manual and do it yourself.
Rear tire has a lot more grip than the front tire, or the front tire not
having enough grip to stabilize the chassis.
Thinner rear tire? Pull the
stock towers 20mm up into the triple tree to send more weight to the front end?
Wow, so does
that mean we rid ourselves of high speed wobble and or instability? I don't
know. I think if all this is applied it would significantly reduce the odds of a
random occurrence. My 2006 doesn't wobble and goes fast enough to scare me, so I
don't think I care about going over 140MPH, but, yes now I have to make
sure it doesn't happen in case I need to elude a missile fired at me????. (BSEG)
Keep in mind a
bad tire can wobble as well as bad roads, road surfaces, griping the handlebars too tight
and inducing wobble from fighting the natural tracking of the bike, to sticking
you head up in the wind at 130MPH, and transmitting the air disturbance though
your shoulders, to the handlebars. Tuck your head in. it in!!! Love your gas tank...LOL.
So,
if you apply this information along with a common sense
driving and a sense of responsibility out on the road, keep speeds real, not
unreal, you should be a heck of a lot better off. Enough soapbox, but you know what I mean.
But, it is a sport bike after
all so have fun with it, but
if you need to drive faster than 130MPH, you might want to consider a
full blown Sport bike......hummmm.... lets see, bags on a CBR1000RR..... maybe a
small trunk...lol.
No wait ,I need an Oklahoma Highway Patrol Suzuki Hayabusa
GSX1300R ...no that won't work... no trunk........DING DING DING.
Well, now
you know what I know, Hope this was useful.
05/02/07
The
results of the Coroners Investigation
-------->
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/6600897.stm
Notice that the article refers to a "high speed weave",
NOT a "speed wobble". Speed weaves result from
the rear tire having a lot more grip than the front tire. Or the front
tire not having enough grip to stabilize the chassis. All two-wheeled vehicles
will speed weave at some highway speed, and, if the rider wants to cruise at
very high speeds, he needs to pay attention to the weight distribution and the
front tire profile, as well as front spring preload and the weight of the fork
oil. Part of the ST1300's problem may be the extra police equipment over the
rear wheel. The weight distribution shifts and the center of gravity rises.
The front tire has even less grip than before, while the rear tire has more
grip. The front tire has to work a lot harder to stabilize the motorcycle and
it fails to do so. A perceptive rider will notice that the handlebars seem to
waggle a bit more and the motorcycle seems to be rocking slightly from side to
side. The solutions to speed weave include mounting a less pointed front tire,
dialing off fork preload, and reducing rebound compression to let the tire
grip the road better. Also, if the forks can be pulled up in the triple
clamps by around 10 or 12 mm, the speed at which speed weave begins will be
raised significantly, at
the expense of heavy steering in parking lots. Once you shift the weight
balance a little to the front by pulling the front forks up through the triple
clamps 20 mm, the speed weave will vanish, but, the motorcycle's steering will
become heavy at low speeds.
The chassis engineer has to compromise between light steering at slow speeds
or high speed stability. I guess they figured most people want that "sporty
responsive" steering feel all the time even at low speed. After all the ST1300
is a Sport Touring Bike. It makes sense if you look at it that way.
Kawasaki's original Z-1 didn't use very much rake or trail, perhaps 3.25
inches. This was in the interest of light steering at low speed. But, when
racers experienced "wobbling" and general foul handling at very high speeds,
and bracing the frame didn't help, Kawasaki and other Japanese manufacturers
responded by building chasses that had as much as 6 inches of trail. Of
course, the professional racers who rode such machines were never going to try
to ride them in a parking lot... Steering dampers prevent "speed wobbles". The
problem with the ST 1300 is rightly understood as a *high speed weave*. "Speed
wobbles" are something else, entirely. Speed wobbles occur when the motorcycle
is in the vertical position. They do not throw the rider off the motorcycle,
but they scare him. In the case cited, the constable was thrown off his
motorcycle and a car ran over him.
Speed wobbles occur when the front tire contact
patch is unweighted while crossing bumps, railroad tracks, etc. The speed
wobble occurs at such high frequency ( 5 ~ 10 cycles per second ) the rider
has no time to react, and the speed wobble is over and done with. When the
front tire regains traction, the energy of the speed wobble is absorbed into
the chassis and the oscillations are quickly damped by inertia. A steering
damper will not prevent a high speed weave, because a high speed weave
involves more than just the oscillation of the forks around the steering
spindle.
High speed weaves tend to occur when the
motorcycle is leaned over in a turn. High speed weaves involve the whole
chassis, so the oscillations around the roll and yaw axis occur at a much
slower frequency (about 1~3 cycles per second). The amplitude of oscillation
in the pitch axis is very small, because the steering head jacking effect of
waggling forks is small. But the amplitude of the oscillations about the roll
and yaw axis is absolutely terrifying. The rider can get out of the speed
weave by leaning forward, rolling off the throttle, and dragging the rear
brake lightly. A rider can also stop a speed weave by dropping his feet
off the footpegs and lowering the center of gravity, but he risks running over
his foot if the roll oscillations are extreme.
The ST1300 police model has a high center of gravity, and the front tire lacks
enough traction to stabilize the chassis. A lower profile, wider, or less
pointy front tire is indicated. Or, a narrower rear tire might be fitted to
stop high speed weave by reducing traction at that end of the machine.
08/13/07 -
Honda admits a little problem exists?
The August issue of Bike magazine
has a two page article that contains excerpts of an interview with a Honda
spokesman by the name of Dave Hancock. He describes how Honda spec'd the ST1300P
to meet the requirement of operating to 120 mph or top speed fully loaded with
29.5 kg of radio and police equipment hard mounted behind the rider along with 9
kg in each saddlebag and how the civilian version differs in equipment and
allowable load specification.
The P's rear shock is replaced with one with a non-progressive spring and a
higher spring rate so the ride height when loaded does not negatively affect
steering geometry. The front springs are replaced with non-progressive springs
with the same spring rate as the civilian version. These changes allow fully
loaded operation to top speed. There is a picture detailing other items that
affect the P like light poles, equipment box, lighting, and extra wiring looms.
The civilian version is placarded in the manual not to exceed 80 mph with 9kg in
the saddlebags so the implication is to say that Honda feels the civilian
version is perfectly safe to operate to 140 mph loaded within the configuration
stated on placards on the bike and in the owner's manual and to 80 mph with
saddlebags full. They also mention the FJR has a similar 80 mph restriction but
the BMW R1200LT does not restrict speed with loading configuration.
|
