Team-BHP (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/)

-   Motorbikes (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/motorbikes/)

-   -   Himalayan 450 Chassis Frame Breaking, multiple instances! After-market crash guards to blame? (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/motorbikes/281225-himalayan-450-chassis-frame-breaking-multiple-instances-after-market-crash-guards-blame-7.html)

If you can't find a mechanic with a torque wrench or don't want to spend on buying one just for this job, here's an unsolicited tip: you can do it yourself with one of those portable weighing scales with hook used to weigh luggage (and a regular wrench).

Torque is angular force at a distance - T = r x F x sin(angle). So, you can apply a certain force. with the wrench at a distance 'r', perpendicularly to not worry about the sine component (sin(90)=1), to apply a certain torque. That force would just be the torque divided by the distance.

For instance, if you want to apply 20Nm of torque and let's say you're pulling the tool at a distance of 20cm from the nut, convert these to kgf-m and m, which in our instance are 2.04kgf-m & 0.2m. Then, divide the kgf-m by the m; 10.2kgf in our instance. This means, pulling the wrench, at 20cm from the nut, till you see 10.2kg in the weighing scale, should be the same as applying 20Nm of torque with a torque wrench.

BullettuPaandi awesome explanation but it was a total bouncer, too complicated to try to do for a person like me. Guess that’s why God made mechanics with torque wrenches :)

Cheers

This is another case, where the rider was unaware on his long ride that one of the bolts fitted on his crash guard had fallen off.

https://youtu.be/h1Q7u45sbfk?si=C7vCp4B07K6SQUG6

Perhaps I wasn't articulate enough, or was incomprehensible. I assure you that it is easy. Here's a visual aid:



...from Ryan, in this YouTube video of FortNine:

http://youtu.be/JKZVc4JRY4A?t=477

I like this method because the tool used - the weighing scale - is rather versatile & the guilt of already having tools just sitting on a shelf after being barely used, prevents me from buying an actual torque wrench. Also, as already discussed, most mechanics don't use torque wrench. They just 'tighten' by "feel", which I think has a better chance of correlating with how hungry or full they are, than a torque spec.

It looks like my skepticism about the rumor that the bike was ridden without the bolts installed, was valid. Found this comment from the video shared above. It seems like the black bike had a crash protector installed but he took it off after the crash due to warranty concerns.

While it seems great theoretically, the actual work will be horrible as most hooks will slip with spanners and allen keys. It may still work well for lower torque settings as slip can be reduced by something like a teflon tape , as seen in screenshot.

Team Zana - posted new video explaining their side folks

https://youtu.be/wEC9YCoy_Gw?si=MaT4mq79UvHqgTZT

From Royal Enfield, they said it's because aftermarket crashgaurd messed up with the engine bolt nut but it seems they never touched.

Let me know your thoughts folks.

Also, I'm using Himalayan 450 with mototorque crashgaurd and I'm in dilemma now, whether should I buy the rally OEM crash gaurd and waste/throw away 5k spent on mototorque crashgaurd or should I still run this aftermarket mototorque crashgaurd.

Can the experts through some light on whether the issue was really with crash guard, after watching the video posted by zana. If what zana says is true then it looks like a complete design failure by RE. There are no two excuses for such a critical failure, especially repeating the same mistake they did in RE 411.

Few things :

0. To begin with, this crash guard looks like one in the first instance (refer post #1) & not the second instance (refer post #30). Quoting @IamAsHter here,
I'm stating the obvious just to be clear that this discussion doesn't apply to the second instance.

1. Now to the actual thoughts: I feel when they were evidently showing how their product doesn't mess with the engine mounting bolt from the factory & that they had thought about this issue while designing their product (props for both!), they could've gone ahead and explained how mounting the crash guard where they do DOESN'T cause any issue. Ultimately, their guard shares mounting point with an other component of the bike - albeit, a less critical tank guard. It's still arguable that this is part of problem; so, they could've explained why they think, say, their mounting bolts won't come loose over time.

2. RE themselves have not used that mounting point for their crash guard; they've used only for the tank guard; raises the question whether this in fact is an effective mounting point for a crash guard. Let's suppose it is for the sake of argument. Now why would RE ignore this mounting point mere inches away & choose to mount their crash guard with the engine mount, which complicates the problem and demands 'specialised' hardware to solve it? I don't know; only RE does. I also don't know if the same nuances of the engine mount bolt also apply to the bolt they've used just above that - again, only RE does & perhaps the owner of the bike in the first instance if they had inspected those bolts; if anyone reading this do, kindly clear the air on this.

3. They could've also gotten into why they think a bike with their crash guard on broke. I'm slightly sceptic of the fact that they didn't even hypothesise anything; would've been so easy to blame RE again for anything - it's not as if they haven't given enough reasons with their proverbial QC issues.

From where I stand, this raises more questions than it answers. If someone is just looking at this thread, here's the bottom line: The Himalayan 450 broke -> we blamed RE -> RE blamed after-market crash guards -> one of those crash-guard makers show that particular blame doesn't apply to them -> end customers remain just as confused.


There's really no best advice, but this is what it seems to me, as things stand now: as counter-intuitive as it sounds, you are better-off without a crash guard than with any! Yes, the OEM ones haven't broken the chassis yet, but No, you can't bet on it. I would, but that's only because I haven't spent the 3L on the bike in the first place. Besides, of what good is a crash guard that doesn't inspire confidence?

If you/your friends/relatives happen to know someone from RE, who is both knowledgeable and isn't incentivised to up-sell a crash-guard to you, ask for their advice.

I'm just wondering out aloud here.

After all this noise on social media about aftermarket crash guards, suppose a rider has fitted an aftermarket crash guard, and suppose his bike breaks, and suppose he hurriedly removes the crash guard before taking the customary photos and videos and posting them on social media, and presenting his case and warranty claim to RE, how would we or RE ever know that an aftermarket crash guard had been fitted earlier and then taken off?

Point to ponder ...

Cheers, Doc

The rider voided their warranty the moment he installed the after-market crash guard. I do think the crash guard was on when the chassis broke & the rider removed the crash guard before taking pictures. Quoting myself from earlier:

But my scepticism aside, it doesn't help his case having posed with the after-market crash guard on the bike (refer post #30). Even if the rider had gotten the crash guard removed by RE themselves afterwards, RE could still argue that 'having the after-market crash guard on, weakened the chassis & it was too late by the time the rider got it removed'. So, the fact that the after-market crash guard was on the bike at some point, is enough grounds for RE to not honour the warranty.

I bet they'd still call it 'honouring warranty' or perhaps them 'acting on a good faith basis', despite not being legally obligated to do either. But realistically, they're attempting to attenuate the noise; part of their damage control expenses, I'd say.

Crash guard should be fixed to a sturdy bolt on the chassis. Maybe RE can give a extender on the same point so that the bolt on the chassis need not be removed to fix the guards.

It should be easier to verify if the bolt was removed to install crash guard even if someone removes them after an incident to photograph.

But really disappointing for a company with such long history to not being able to design a better motorcycle :Frustrati They have been explaining engine being a stressed member like they invented the design.

How? Something like a seal?

Cheers, Doc

I think a thin protective film also should do.

Why cant manufacturers include a decent crash guard/engine guard as part of standard equipment. A bike, specifically an "adventure bike" is likely to fall multiple times due to intended nature of use. Crash guards protect the side panels, tank, engine casing etc.

Why cant ARAI make it mandatory for all manufacturers to include a crash guard, just like how they have with a sari guard. I wonder why a sari guard is required on an adventure bike, but thats discussion for another day. There are bikes like KTM 390 adventure which comes fitted with a standard engine guard. There are bikes like Xpulse which comes with a standard engine guard. It would not cost an arm or a leg to include a guard in the standard configuration if the manufacturers wanted to. But all they want is business and create added accessories line to be purchased separately. Enfield genuine accessory engine guard costing upwards of 10K is not cheap by any means. Cost of metal tube is around 70rs a kg only.