AL8 35kW restrictor?

[timwilky]

To add to what has also been stated. It is also virtually impossible to measure the power should there be a dispute.

It should be at the crank, so no gear train etc. As we no longer have separate gear boxes there is no reasonable method to attach to a dyno. So the only real world testing would have to be on chassis dyno with assumptions made for transmission losses. These assumption then could put you before the magistrate!

[embee]

Originally Posted by timwilky

To add to what has also been stated. It is also virtually impossible to measure the power should there be a dispute.

It should be at the crank, so no gear train etc. As we no longer have separate gear boxes there is no reasonable method to attach to a dyno. So the only real world testing would have to be on chassis dyno with assumptions made for transmission losses. These assumption then could put you before the magistrate!

A fundamental issue is that under the relevant directive, engine power must be measured at steady state and maintained within a specified tolerance for a minimum period of time (can't remember what it is now, 30sec or something). Nearly all workshop type dynos are inertia rollers which use the principle of accelerating a known inertia and measuring the speed/time, and working backwards to calculate the applied torque and so with speed it can give a power value. Absorption dynos need substantial capital equipment.
I would argue that power determined on an inertia dyno certainly shouldn't be satisfactory as evidence for conviction, it would be like being done for speeding based on a copper pacing out a distance and using a stopwatch. It will give an indicative figure but isn't up to evidential standards.

[guitar-adam]

Update: Spoke to the dealer today and finally got their answer. They can provide an ECU, but want me to travel up to them (4-6 hour, 200 mile round trip) and pay £100 towards the cost of the unit. I also spoke directly to Suzuki and they can sell me one directly through any dealer, for £500.


On the one hand, an 80% discount is appealing - but on the other hand, paying £100 to get the bike how it was advertised feels instinctively wrong. I also value my time, and taking half a day to solve the problem is just plain irritating.

Any advice on what I ought to do?

[Bibio]

tell them it was not advertised as restricted so its up to them to rectify. get them to send the ECU in the post and do it yourself then sell the restricted one.


swapping the ecu over is a POP.. it will take all of 10min and all you will need is an alan key to get the side covers and seat off (i assume that the ecu is under the seat next to the battery).

[SV650rules]

Agree with Bibio, they did not advise you of a very important fact when you bought the bike. Are you a member of AA or RAC or similar ? If so approach them with your problem and see what they say. Dealer may want a deposit before they send the ECU to you ( offer them one anyway as sign of your goodwill ), but if they do it for £100 and then refuse to refund deposit you are still quids in both time and fuel wise, and also 200 miles less on your bike oddometer.

[Ruffy]

Originally Posted by guitar-adam

Update: Spoke to the dealer today and finally got their answer. They can provide an ECU, but want me to travel up to them (4-6 hour, 200 mile round trip) and pay £100 towards the cost of the unit. I also spoke directly to Suzuki and they can sell me one directly through any dealer, for £500.

On the one hand, an 80% discount is appealing - but on the other hand, paying £100 to get the bike how it was advertised feels instinctively wrong. I also value my time, and taking half a day to solve the problem is just plain irritating.

Any advice on what I ought to do?

You're negotiating, bartering on price now. They've effectively agreed to provide the ECU, so that's a good thing, and you're now needing to thrash out how to make it happen. This is now more a test of nerve rather than right/wrong.

As you instinctively feel and as others have said, I also agree that you should hold out for what you want - resolution at no cost to you by them providing you a new full power ECU. It's not unreasonable and so why should you make any concession? (Ask yourself if you are capable/willing to fit it yourself and bear in mind any warranty terms they may be committed to. You also need to be clear with yourself if you're willing to travel to have them fit it if they offer it for free, or accept the liability if you do it yourself. Prepare the detail of what you're willing to accept.)

It's not an 80% discount on the ECU, it's an extra £100 over the sale price for the bike that you thought you'd agreed (Remember, you will only end up with the same as what you expected to have in the first place.)

You have leverage because you have the threat that you will reject the sale and land the bike back with them for a refund (which is a problem for them - no profit + extra cost).

Don't be afraid to let them know about the inconvenience to you and suggest to them that they need to find a better solution, e.g. a day off work plus travel cost (fuel etc.) plus the £100 contribution they want is getting close to the cost of a new unit so how can you possibly agree, it's uneconomic for you because it leaves you inconvenienced and out of pocket? I was always taught that no deal is better than a bad deal. (And that's nowt to do with Brexit.)

I would suggest being prepared to send back the restricted ECU (but only after you have a full power one from them and fitted) but don't offer it unprompted, wait for them to remember to ask.

[SV650rules]

I think for a good outcome there needs to be give and take on both sides, maybe dealer really did not realise bike was restricted, and I guess dealer profits on bikes may not be huge with so much competition around these days.

[Ruffy]

Originally Posted by SV650rules

I think for a good outcome there needs to be give and take on both sides, maybe dealer really did not realise bike was restricted, and I guess dealer profits on bikes may not be huge with so much competition around these days.

I suspect I'm not as charitable when it comes to business. Is it a "good outcome" for the OP if he has to unexpectedly contribute more to get what he thought he had in the first place?

I'm not accusing the dealer of being underhand and I wouldn't try to be cruel or vindictive, but there's no need to subsidise a business entity when they make mistakes, however innocent.

I just think there's a difference between consequence and punishment. In this case, I think the consequences (i.e. replace the ECU) need to lie pretty much fully with the dealer, as a result of their misrepresentation. Is that really too harsh?