Post by: Niko on July 08, 2017, 02:43:26 PM
Anyone fitted a lighter return spring. After ten minutes my wrist aches...(lol).
I'm sure the one that's on there could close my garage door.
Any lighter ones that you guys might recommend please
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Post by: Niko on July 08, 2017, 02:44:31 PM
Hi(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170708/fbad399d5c568e0a89017f047d41d038.jpg)
Anyone fitted a lighter return spring. After ten minutes my wrist aches...(lol).
I'm sure the one that's on there could close my garage door.
Any lighter ones that you guys might recommend please
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Non std as you can see with lots of non original bits
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Post by: mike the bike on July 08, 2017, 02:58:40 PM
Post by: Niko on July 08, 2017, 04:06:46 PM
It's there, not ro return the throttle, but to strengthen your wrist.
It's working then
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Post by: petermigreen on July 08, 2017, 05:51:37 PM
It's there, not ro return the throttle, but to strengthen your wrist.I don't need a spring for that.......
Post by: JamesH on July 08, 2017, 06:58:32 PM
Post by: K2-K6 on July 08, 2017, 08:01:32 PM
So, avoiding that with a neat side step, and as James pointed out, the cable is important. Specifically if it's the Honda one with right angle bend coming out of the twistgrip, originally they had a plastic sleeve in this section which when older the cable cuts through. If this is the case, the cable is harder to pull and makes it feel a whole lot heavier.
Are you using a quicker action twistgrip as that will have a part to play as well.
I find that with a fatter throttle grip they are harder as your hand is more open and you used more effort to actually grip it rather than turn it.
Also if the surface is in any way shiny you just end up with cramping trying to hold it open on longer journeys.
See, nothing remotely available for double entendre use there at all ;) no sniggering at the back there.
Post by: hairygit on July 08, 2017, 08:09:42 PM
Post by: Niko on July 09, 2017, 09:40:38 AM
Enlarging the picture, it does look like a quick action throttle, had one on a 400/4 around 30 years ago, bloody heavy action, resulting in some very dodgy behaviour on wet roads. That is almost certainly the cause of your problem, only real solution is to get shot of it!(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170709/1953f126e82c24606230e29e579ee5e9.jpg)
It's not a quick action....and no real friction at all until the spring is hooked up. It's just a massive spring.
When the carbs were off I couldn't budge the cam / cable guide at all.
I think a lighter spring is needed ....just wanted to know if anyone had done it.
I will double check what is being said though...cheers
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Post by: Wenman on July 09, 2017, 09:53:57 AM
Post by: hairygit on July 09, 2017, 10:16:50 AM
Sent from my X6pro using Tapatalk
Post by: Ashdowner on July 09, 2017, 10:51:27 PM
Post by: Bryanj on July 10, 2017, 07:21:00 AM
Post by: Niko on July 10, 2017, 10:26:11 AM
Where's your pod filters????Fitted now
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Post by: Niko on July 10, 2017, 10:27:48 PM
Cheers
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Post by: z1100r on July 25, 2017, 02:59:34 PM
Post by: matthewmosse on July 25, 2017, 03:17:38 PM
Post by: mike the bike on July 25, 2017, 05:00:36 PM
As m m said, there's always the kill switch.
Post by: hairygit on July 25, 2017, 05:41:08 PM
Let's be honest here. it's the pull cable that does all the work. The push cable doesn't do much, there's no strain on it so it's unlikely that it will ever break. Were Honda ahead of the times with Health and Safety or summat?But, in the event of an accident, insurers may wash their hands of the incident, regardless of blame, if the bike was fitted with 2 cables by Honda and you choose to remove a "manufacturers safety device" Insurers will try anything to wriggle out of a claim!
As m m said, there's always the kill switch.
Sent from my X6pro using Tapatalk
Post by: mike the bike on July 25, 2017, 07:45:05 PM
Post by: K2-K6 on July 29, 2017, 12:11:35 PM
The spring is operational and not a backup, there is only one of them so in the event of failure the secondary cable is absolutely required. Other systems that have duplicated springs and can use one cable are designed in that way to avoid a failure, unlike the Honda one fitted to these bikes.
Whichever person investigating a serious accident of a vehicle has no real choice of what to include or exclude, if it's a fundamental part of the safe operation of that vehicle of course it will have an impact or a legal outcome. It's pretty niave to think otherwise.
If you take off the spring of a system fitted with no return cable and try to ride it, you'd not get far.
Post by: deltarider on July 29, 2017, 03:00:11 PM
Quote
Whichever person investigating a serious accident of a vehicle has no real choice of what to include or excludeOver the years I had two insurance agents having a look at my bike after an incidence (somebody else his fault). None even noticed the cable missing.
Quote
if it's a fundamental part of the safe operation of that vehicle
fundamental?! Are you kidding us?
Quote
of course it will have an impact or a legal outcome.of course?! I haven't heard of one case yet.
Post by: MCTID on July 29, 2017, 07:33:29 PM
If you were carrying a pillion who suffered injury, they would have to sue you for any personal damages; if you hit another vehicle or pedestrian, they would have to sue you for any damages - primarily because your Insurers will deny ANY liability because you removed a piece of 'safety related' kit which the manufacturer installed when they designed the vehicle and sold it as 'fit for purpose'.
Just because an Insurance Assessor hasn't picked up on similar things in the past isn't anything to go on for the future.There are 'good' Assessors and there are 'bad' Assessors.....in a case potentially involving big bucks.......which type of Assessor do you think your Insurers will send out ? Similarly, an Insurer will frustrate a case coming to court for as long as they like....leaving you (and those suing you) in limbo without any compensation or payout - possibly for a few years.
Don't take my word for it....I may be right....I may be wrong......but what's the point of paying out for Insurance then giving your Insurer a 'watertight case' for not having to pay out should you have a serious claim involving serious money ?
Post by: Clunker on July 29, 2017, 08:08:14 PM
I'll have to jump in and say that if you remove the return cable and spring....and something untoward happens to your bike and you have an accident, then an Insurer WILL use that against you. It may have had little to do with the reasons for the accident occurring, or the eventual outcome, but they WILL use it against you and it will be up to you to prove in a court of law that it had nothing to do with the accident. You will need tens of thousands ££££ to fight any case against your Insurer, and if you lose, you can wave goodbye to your house - if you own one - or your future lifetime earnings if you don't. Insurers don't mess about and they will fight you in court - because they have little to lose - unlike you do.
If you were carrying a pillion who suffered injury, they would have to sue you for any personal damages; if you hit another vehicle or pedestrian, they would have to sue you for any damages - primarily because your Insurers will deny ANY liability because you removed a piece of 'safety related' kit which the manufacturer installed when they designed the vehicle and sold it as 'fit for purpose'.
Just because an Insurance Assessor hasn't picked up on similar things in the past isn't anything to go on for the future.There are 'good' Assessors and there are 'bad' Assessors.....in a case potentially involving big bucks.......which type of Assessor do you think your Insurers will send out ? Similarly, an Insurer will frustrate a case coming to court for as long as they like....leaving you (and those suing you) in limbo without any compensation or payout - possibly for a few years.
Don't take my word for it....I may be right....I may be wrong......but what's the point of paying out for Insurance then giving your Insurer a 'watertight case' for not having to pay out should you have a serious claim involving serious money ?
^What he said^ Your Insurance "Will" do you over if they can! It's how they make money, by blaming anyone else!
Post by: Moorey on July 29, 2017, 08:46:55 PM
I'll have to jump in and say that if you remove the return cable and spring....and something untoward happens to your bike and you have an accident, then an Insurer WILL use that against you. It may have had little to do with the reasons for the accident occurring, or the eventual outcome, but they WILL use it against you and it will be up to you to prove in a court of law that it had nothing to do with the accident. You will need tens of thousands ££££ to fight any case against your Insurer, and if you lose, you can wave goodbye to your house - if you own one - or your future lifetime earnings if you don't. Insurers don't mess about and they will fight you in court - because they have little to lose - unlike you do.
If you were carrying a pillion who suffered injury, they would have to sue you for any personal damages; if you hit another vehicle or pedestrian, they would have to sue you for any damages - primarily because your Insurers will deny ANY liability because you removed a piece of 'safety related' kit which the manufacturer installed when they designed the vehicle and sold it as 'fit for purpose'.
Just because an Insurance Assessor hasn't picked up on similar things in the past isn't anything to go on for the future.There are 'good' Assessors and there are 'bad' Assessors.....in a case potentially involving big bucks.......which type of Assessor do you think your Insurers will send out ? Similarly, an Insurer will frustrate a case coming to court for as long as they like....leaving you (and those suing you) in limbo without any compensation or payout - possibly for a few years.
Don't take my word for it....I may be right....I may be wrong......but what's the point of paying out for Insurance then giving your Insurer a 'watertight case' for not having to pay out should you have a serious claim involving serious money ?
^What he said^ Your Insurance "Will" do you over if they can! It's how they make money, by blaming anyone else!
If someone removes the close cable and spring which are safety features the insurance comp are not doing you over by not paying out. If you stick to terms and conditions they can't do you over. People choose not to notify of modifications which is against the policy terms because they don't want the possibility of a premium increase. How can they give a genuine quote if they do not know of any mods made. Insurance isn't just about ticking a box. its for when it all goes tits up. Tell them any mods done, most of the time they say its ok. They are not in business to give money to those who don't disclose all relevant facts. Would you.?
Post by: Seabeowner on July 29, 2017, 10:26:29 PM
Post by: Moorey on July 29, 2017, 10:39:57 PM
Who mentioned removing the close cable AND spring? Sounds like an interesting ride!
My mistake on that one.
Post by: mike the bike on July 29, 2017, 11:59:01 PM
Post by: matthewmosse on July 30, 2017, 12:42:55 AM
Post by: deltarider on July 30, 2017, 07:43:33 AM
Quote
I don't remember my GS1000 or my GS850 having two throttle cables and my K75 hasn't got one. Is it just a Honda feature?I don't rule out it was one of these US 'safety' requirements as useful as written messages (objects appearing in this mirror... etc) in rear view mirrors. Maybe someone sued a motorcycle manufacturer over it, who knows? I take it someone must have succesfully sued a carmaker over its wideangle rearview mirror that didn't warn the driver.
BTW, I haven't heard of one incident yet, where a missing second throttle cable played a role.
Post by: K2-K6 on July 30, 2017, 03:54:22 PM
The design of this setup is that the pull cable opens the throttles and the spring closes them, not the second cable. The second cable just "floats " and remains as a contingency in the event of a spring failure, or enough friction that the spring could not overcome that friction to close the throttle.
Other systems commonly use more than one spring within their design, which gives those systems a contingency to close the throttles in the even of one spring failing. This does not exist in the Honda system, the second cable IS the only safeguard. It may appear over engineered or in excess of what seems to be needed but it is their solution as originally designed.
Like any good contingency measure, it can sit there for years with no impact until it may be used. It causes not real problems to have it there and IF you needed it, you'd most likely welcome it's correct working.
Sure it may or may not be spotted ( if not fitted) by a insurance assessor, that's neither here nor there in just a general insurance claim. But if your bike was involved in an accident in which you could not stop it because the throttle was open, then that would by its nature involve more scrutiny of the relevant systems and the maintenance of them.
Post by: mike the bike on July 30, 2017, 04:46:57 PM
Post by: K2-K6 on July 30, 2017, 06:02:29 PM
Post by: Seabeowner on July 30, 2017, 06:28:46 PM
Also this is from the 500 owners manual:
Post by: matthewmosse on July 30, 2017, 11:20:40 PM
Post by: Bryanj on July 31, 2017, 05:06:05 PM
Post by: K2-K6 on August 01, 2017, 10:22:29 AM
Every bike and car I've worked on has some secondary method of closing the throttle in a potential failure situation ( or in the case of a slide carb, a captive compression spring), this is just Honda's way of doing it and adding a competent engineering solution to avoid the throttle running out of control.
The notifying insurance angle is interesting but not tested unless an accident or claim is considered. It goes further than that though, construction and use laws are absolute and not subject to your own decisions. They examine your actions against wording like "failure to maintain a vehicle and it's accessories " under which you'd be able to persuasively argue that your removal of a manufacturer fitted safety design was reasonable, I assume.
Also, you have no contract with a third parties insurers whether you damaged them or they've damaged you. And then you get to the claims solicitor "specialists" that may be brought in by another party.
Really, it's easier just to run with it, and it works.
Post by: AshimotoK0 on August 01, 2017, 10:37:17 AM
What do you (I) do about the CB500K0 early gearbox? .. there was a Class Action Lawsuit against Honda in the States in relation to it.
My 2p on the throttle cable .. listen to Rex Harrison and fit the 'Push-me-pull-you' arrangement ... You know it makes sense !