Featured Is it all bad ?

Back in the late 80's early 90's I bought and owned a k100rt it was a few years old when I bought it. Great bike never really cleaned it like the 2 I have now. Well, one day I was parking up and prepared for the big heave to get her onto the centre stand, heaved and up she went only to carry on going backwards! The centre stand had fallen apart the bike crashed to the floor busting a pannier smashing 2 panels of the fairing and a mirror. I got it to a BMW dealer to get a quote for fixing it and they mentioned there had been a recall on my model, for collapsing centre stands, which hadn't been done. 1 letter to customer services backed up with a report of the damage and they replaced all the damage no fuss.

 

Will it make any difference?

 

Had a few bikes now, and sorry, but you have to clean them every ride, if your out in a British winter. In this country we use salt on the roads, you leave this on any metal surface and it's going to corrode.

My first big bike was a brand new SV650, passed my test in September and rode it through the winter, just cos biking was brilliant. I washed it every time and dried it off, best I could. Come spring time when I took the fairing off for a good clean up, I was devastated at the corrosion in there. You could see where bits of rock salt had been thrown up and sat on the engine and caused rusting to start. I learned an important lesson, you gotta wash, dry and spray with ACF50 or similar to protect these very vulnerable pieces of metal.

Nobody buys a bike to spend time washing and polishing it (except some Harley owners), I wish I could buy a magic bike that didn't rust, but as yet nobody is making a stainless steel motorbike (be ugly and heavy, so you wouldn't ride it any way).

So, washing it every ride and applying ACF50 regularly, is a necessary evil, if you don't want corrosion on your motorbike !And if you don't, don't complain about it cos as sure as the pope shits in the forest, bikes are going to corrode; be they Triumphs, Honda or B*W's. Triumph's ain't any worse or better than any other brand,except older Honda's, they were over engineered, but if neglected, they all corrode.

Go on a Suzuki forum and they complain as well, that Suzuki use the thinnest paint, poor cheap metal, etc, but I had a 20k K7 GSXR and it rode through all weathers and looked brand new when I sold it at 8 years old. But I enjoy cleaning bikes and take pride in my bikes appearance. Bit OCD, if I'm honest, cotton buds are great for getting into calliper's and engine fins, etc

 

I had a Suzuki Intruder C1800R cruiser for 4 years rode all year round whilst I owned it. Lots of chrome and shiny bits and it never had any corrosion when I sold it. I never used ACF50 or FS363, so I am a little concerned that my T'bird is showing some issues after just 8 months, particularly as I have treated it on regular basis. I do agree that if you ride in the winter that you do need to clean and treat your bike after each ride; I do?
As previously mentioned I will monitor this over the coming months and see what my dealer has to say when I get its next service.
Wessa

 

So corrosion after less than six months from new, and less than 2000 mostly fair weather miles on non salty roads is to be expected? Sorry, couldn't agree less.

 

Is this on a painted, anodised or bare metal part?

Any piece of unprotected metal is going to corrode, unfortunately. Can't really know what road conditions you've been out on, or what time of year, but if it was over the last six months, I would have been blathering my bike in acf50 regularly and cleaning it every ride to keep it fresh at this time of year.

Go look under the bonnet of your car, or underneath at the suspension or brakes, I know most cars are horrible there, but they have painted bodywork to hide it. I waxoyl my cars underneath and regularly valet under bonnet and spray with GT85 to keep them clean and serviceable.

I just suppose its up to the owners how nice they want to keep them, or how much they can be arsed. None of this applies to the KTM, it is presently sat covered in mud, but I know it has a film of ACF50 under that.

If it was painted and rusted, then yes that is a poor show, but still cleaning after every ride is advisable on british roads. Unless it's a totally dry day from April till August, I maybe wouldn't bother, but any damp or muck and I clean it before it goes away, or next day if that wasn't possible.

 

Agree completely with Pasher!

Chrome plating is there for a reason and sure if it's subjected to abuse and neglect it will deteriorate. The whole point that many don't seem to get is that this corrosion is happening when all reasonable care has been taken. I've covered my wheels with ACF50 to keep the corrosion at bay. This is way beyond reasonable care and maintenance for corrosion resistant plating on mostly dry weather, salt free riding.
I don't see Triumph broadcasting that their bikes and more specifically their wheels should be splattered with what is effectively grease. Grease that can find it's way on to tyres and brakes.
Some of you guys really are playing along with the Triumph bullshit. Put the responsibility onto the customers. Blame it on bad washing, poor maintenance, but never ever defective manufacture.

 

Got the bike mid August 2016 and garaged it for winter mid December, prior to any roads being salted. That's when I noticed the corrosion on the chromed spokes, their nipples, and on the chromed rear shock bodies. The only time I recall getting wet was on a ride from Nottingham to Leeds, when the heavens opened on the way back. The bike was cleaned and dried the day after (as it has been every week or two whilst being used). So, no bare metal corrosion. I still maintain that this is unacceptable.

 

Agree not acceptable, but by mid December roads are pretty shitty, I give up by end of October 'ish as I think it's too wet and crappy and some roads are gritted by then. Will not have spoked wheels again, they are horrible to look after, unless they are stainless,. Too easy for crap and moisture to attack the surface.

But rust on rear shock is not acceptable, unless been put away wet. Really doesn't take long for any rust to take hold.

Did you put any 'protection' on it before riding? I know first job I do is ACF50 a new bike before it gets wet (which happens a lot in Scotland).

Rub the offending part down with a ball of scrunched tinfoil and coke (or pepsi), then give a good a good soak of protection, should be OK then. Found that works well, did on the bit of rust found on my America (sissy bar, mainly), which by the looks of it had been put away wet by the previous owner.

 

I can only assume you mean me, and I'm not offended . I have got a downer on Triumph for a reason, the reason being they sold me something that's defective. If you've had loads of Triumphs without a problem that's great and I have to be honest I bought the T120 based partly on what I'd read about "new Triumph" in terms of quality and reliability. The bike itself is in my view a thing of beauty and that was also a major factor. That coupled with a teenage lust for an original T120 made the bike a must have thing - I sold my Fireblade FFS and have no regrets. That's how much I wanted the bike and still do. Read my first few posts, I doubt if I could have praised the bike any more.

It may not be popular, or you may not agree but the fact is some parts of some T120's, including mine, are suffering from problems. I've got mates that it would possibly be fair comment to suggest that corrosion or whatever is down to their neglect. I spend a lot of time looking after my bikes. I don't see it as a chore, I enjoy doing it. I don't even trust tyre changing to anyone. It is a bit galling to have it implied (not by yourself) that because I didn't splatter the bike in anti-corrosion treatment I am somehow responsible. Whether you or others accept it, corrosion on chrome plated items after a short time is down to defective manufacture - nothing else. I've had my 1977 Suzuki for a few years - when I bought it, it had been lying against a shed under a tarpaulin for who knows how long? The brakes were seized solid, as was the chain. The whole thing looked like shit but after a good wash the chrome rims and zinc plated spokes showed zero corrosion. Yet, me and the other people who have had corrosion on split new 10 grand bikes are just downers on Triumph?

Why don't you try your clocks - mine easily had 1.5mm completely free movement on their mountings. Not the give in the rubber mounting, but "rattle about" play.

Try your seat - how well does it fit?

Maybe I'm now looking for faults? Maybe if there hadn't been the corrosion issue I wouldn't even have noticed the other relatively minor things. Coming from an engineering/manufacturing background I find it fairly incomprehensible that these relatively minor faults made it into production. It would have cost no more to do it better.



I wonder if my T120 will look this good in 2056?

 

Pasher, what was your dealers comment when you took the bike back for them to asses?

 

Nowt wrong with a good moan if you are genuinely aggrieved.
I must admit I can never remember having to protect my bikes from the weather like I have to do with this Triumph. (30 year break from biking)
Without a doubt the chrome and zinc plating is not as good a quality as bikes 30+ years ago, but I still love the bike and know I have to clean and protect it regularly.
Your Suzuki 500 is top dollar, and yes you are right, if that is the original chrome and aluminium finish I cannot see the Triumph being like that in the same number of years.
What I do remember though with the Jap bikes was the crankcase lacquers used to deteriorate and look shite and the monkey metal Philips drive screws used to round off.

 

The back wheel with the rusty spokes has been replaced under warranty (front wheel spokes are ok so am hoping it was just a bad batch from the platers and the new will be ok). Have emailed them about the rust on the shocks saying I'll be taking it further when I'm back on the road and can ride there to show them. They acknowledged the email with an 'OK'.

 

Over the years Ive had 4 x K100RS's. My current one is a '90 16v with 'fixed' instrument pod (a Goretex breather), and yes, that still mists up to buggery. I have to say though BMW certainly engineered this to last. 27 years old and used in all weathers, with minimal pampering and it's still pretty damn good. Cant see many modern bikes holding out this well.

 

Hey Bonzo

That is a cool looking K100RS just love the black

 

Cheers Gary,

Well, it used to be white (or as BMW called it - silver), but some numpty reversed into it in Sainsbury's carpark and so paid for repairs. As my previous K's were all black, that's the way I went.

...Anyway, strayed off topic again

 

You'll probably find this is all down to the fact that they let accountants run manufacturing now, as opposed to engineers. They supply is down to who can give an acceptable product at the lowest price. Not who is going to supply the best quality and longest lasting item.

Triumph will , like most bike manufacturers, buy in items such as shocks and wheels, these are supplied Just In Time (go look it up) to the factories ready for assembly, they don't spend time inspecting these items, but are just supplied and the producers relied upon to ensure the quality is at the correct level. Quality control inspections won't happen to every item bolted onto the bike. The suppliers are run by accountants, they want to make the item for the lowest price, so they get the contract and therefore make the most money. If you leave the shockbody in the chroming vat for 4 minutes instead of 5 minutes, they save production costs and therefore increase their profits.

Back in the time of your old bikes being produced, engineers were in charge and a lot of production was done in house, so therefore manufacturers had greater control, but this was costly to do. Remember Triumph went out of business, BMW motorbikes were a whisper away from being closed.

This system of manufacture was pushed by the Japanese, and to compete, the European manufacturers had to follow. So yes, your Triumph's are not as well made as they used to be. But that is the only way that Triumph can compete in the world market.

R Orr (Hons) BEng Mme

 

I read what you're saying Mr O and agree but if we just accept it then they'll sell us any old crap.

Not all modern bikes are badly made. My Yamaha FJR1300 is a superb example of how to build quality into a motorcycle. 50,000 miles and other than servicing and an insatiable appetite for tyres the only thing to fail is a headlight bulb. The only corrosion is where the centre stand grounds.

The Fireblade I sold to buy the T120 was IMO an engineering masterpiece and oozed quality.

It's not all doom and gloom, there are some bikes from some manufacturers that are still well put together and can stand the test of time.

 

Sounds like you're delving into Lean manufacturing there Mr O.
False economy to make crap in any country or factory. It closes businesses!
True lean manufacturing keeps costs down through the application and discipline of a continuous improvement philosophy, and should never be run by accountants.
One part of lean is inventory management which if applied correctly will always keep the accountants happy (well as happy as an accountant can be) and out of your hair.

 

My 2017 T120 has corrosion on the sprocket cover and both wheel rims, despite frequent care with washing and PTFE spray. I was told by Triumph to rub the corrosion off with chrome polish, but this has ruined the brushed aluminium finish on the sprocket cover. Although I'm a fair-weather summer only rider surely a modern m/cycle should be able to be ridden as a daily commuter through the winter without corroding? Assuming a 9 to 5 job it's impossible to wash your bike everyday especially as such a commuter would only be at home during the dark hours. As I said, I don't ride in bad weather and look after my T120 and it's still corroding after less than a year. Triumph won't put this right under warranty. This isn't good enough! Car manufacturers wouldn't get away with it, why do we let the bike companies escape their responsibilities?