FJR Unsuitable for Passenger with Top Box Fitted?

[ieduffield]

I am pretty ticked at Yamaha right now. My rear sub-frame cracked in the same place several others have experienced. When my dealer contacted Yamaha they said that due to age (4 years old) they would not cover replacing or repairing the sub-frame.

This seems like nonsense to me.

I know that there is a limit in the weight you should put in the top box - 13lbs. However, having a passenger ride on the bike, leaning against the top box must also creates a torque which I can only guess would be many times greater than the 13lb weight limit for the box (even from my lightweight passenger). This torque on the sub-frame below, appears to be the root cause of the cracks in my sub-frame.

Someone help me understand how this is not a design flaw that warrants a recall. Is Yamaha saying that you should not have your passenger lean back, as it will crack the sub-frame?

Anyone have a different experience with Yamaha on this topic.

Ian

2008 FJR - only 16,000 miles on the bike

 

[Queensland Ken]

A few guys on the Aussie Forum have had dealings with Mr Yamaha re top boxes.

My sub frame cracked using the Hepco & Becker top box and mount (same as Yamaha's)

I know I never overloaded it nor ridden with a passenger.

10:1 on it was the constant movement of the box that weakened the frame.

 

[Ignacio]

Someone help me understand how this is not a design flaw that warrants a recall. Is Yamaha saying that you should not have your passenger lean back, as it will crack the sub-frame?

I believe recalls are safety based (at least in the U.S.) When have you heard of somebody being seriously injured or killed because of this? I'll answer that....never.

Or what's the probable risk? Having had a subframe failure I'm pretty familiar with what specific part of the subframe is breaking and it isn't the part under the pillion. I cannot imagine a pillion falling off a bike because of this or an accident occurring because of a subframe cracking. It's the bit on the end of the tail and at VERY worst case you might....potentially......have a top case go skittering down the road. As that's also never ever happened before in my memory....I doubt a "recall" is going to happen.

I'd suggest you pull the subframe, have it welded and beefed up, and continue to be ticked about this one small shortcoming of the FJR while being elated with the 99 other cool things.

 

[BobbyBlue]

I just had my bike, an 05, in to the local large dealer for a fluids flush and they wanted to order a part for this " covered recall " for the rear sub-frame...warranty, but i didnt want to wait a week for parts to do this and declined at this time. I have a Garauds rack and frequently strap a 20 lb les paul on back and haul ass...no problems so far....maybe i should let em do it as prevention?....my luck, the welder will kill my ECU or my blinkers will want equality with me stop lights....dogs fuking cats...this could turn ugly man....i dunno...

 

[Fred W]

Someone help me understand how this is not a design flaw that warrants a recall. Is Yamaha saying that you should not have your passenger lean back, as it will crack the sub-frame?

Or what's the probable risk? Having had a subframe failure I'm pretty familiar with what specific part of the subframe is breaking and it isn't the part under the pillion. I cannot imagine a pillion falling off a bike because of this or an accident occurring because of a subframe cracking. It's the bit on the end of the tail and at VERY worst case you might....potentially......have a top case go skittering down the road.

I don't think that you are looking at the issue the same way. I think the OP is saying that he believes that the subframe is cracking due to the extra weight of his pillion leaning backward against his top-box, which is overloading the rearmost subframe. I've actually heard this claim before.

It may be a bit callous on my part, but I think maybe the OP's pillion should learn to lean forward just a bit and use her (his?) abdominal muscles to help support the weight and not lay back against the top-box as a backrest. It's not a fricken' LaZ-Boy, after-all. It's a motorcycle.

She (or he) will probably thank you at the end of a long day, as I find I am in much better shape leaning forward slightly, than sitting straight up or worse, leaning back and taking all the road shocks up the tailbone into the spine.

As usual, YMMV.

 

[SacramentoMike]

Wait a minute. Your GUITAR weighs 20 POUNDS?

 

[rfulcher]

This problem has been reported enough over the years that I was reluctant to use the stock rack with a top box. I avoided the issue by mounting my top box on a Givi rear rack. The Givi rack is kind of ugly but I think it distributes the stress more effectively.

 

[Ignacio]

I think the OP is saying that he believes that the subframe is cracking due to the extra weight of his pillion leaning backward against his top-box, which is overloading the rearmost subframe. I've actually heard this claim before.

Even if....it's still the appendage part the top case is over. That part of the subframe is made from the cast pot metal or inferior aluminum alloy compared to the beefier aluminum square tube construction under the butt of a pillion.

 

[wfooshee]

But if the pillion leans back hard on the box, it applies weight out over the back of the bike, just like an overloaded box.

I just can't imagine anyone leaning that hard on a top box and actually being comfortably seated...... I think their back would be just as broken as the subframe.

I do know that one time my (ex)wife was climbing onto the bike and put her right hand down on the box lid to push up. I gave her very firm speech about hand on my shoulders to climb on, and nowhere else. If the pillion uses the box as a handle or handrest during mount/dismount then you'll have a major problem.

 

[SoCalFJR1300]

So there shouldn't be an issue with riding 2 up and being concerned with the sub-frame cracking?

I'd like to take the Wife for a ride sometime and between the 2 of us were close to the weight limit for the bike I think.

 

[Fred W]

Look around at any FJR gathering. I'd say that you would be in good company with that statement.

I go 220 lbs outta the shower. My co-pilot, TMJ is only 4'12" and 100 lbs soaking wet (which gets me lots of snide comments by other FJR riders with bigger pillions), but by the time you pack the side bags with a weeks worth of necessities and the top case with the daily odds and ends, anyone will be over the maximum weight rating.

Maximum load ratings

49 states CA

Early 1st Gens ( -'03) 445 lbs 443 lbs

Later 1st Gens w/o ABS ('04-'05) 443 lbs 441 lbs

1st Gens w/ ABS ('04-'05) 428 lbs 425 lbs

2nd Gen A 467 lbs 465 lbs

2nd Gen AE 459 lbs 456 lbs

3rd Gen A 474 lbs 472 lbs

Hmmm... This brings up a related question: What did they do to a 2nd gen that would allow 39 more lbs of cargo to be carried than an ABS 1st gen? I sure can't think of anything.

 

[Pepperell]

Difference between 2003 and 2004 maybe? Suspension changed between those 2 years.

 

[Fred W]

Difference between 2003 and 2004 maybe? Suspension changed between those 2 years.

Good catch. That was the '03 1st gen spec. I'll go back and edit the post with the load capacities for the '04's and '05's.

edit - The '04's and '05's are actually even less.

 

[mferriter]

I think its about time someone figures out how to rig up a rear rack that's mounted to the main-frame and not the rear subframe. Maybe some sort of tubular (like the Canyon-Cage) exoskeleton system the runs from the main frame to the rear of the bike.

Like this:

OK, so it's an FJ, not an FJR. Pretty close, though.

 

[Fred W]

As far as I know, nobody has ever overloaded or cracked the main part of rear sub-frame, i.e. the tubular part identified in the below diagram as shaded green, which supports the rider, passenger and sidebags.

The only part that has cracked (on both first and second gen bikes) is the rearmost cast alloy part of the sub-frame assembly highlighted red below. It appears that part was deigned just to hold up the rear cowling, fender and tail light assembly. Putting the weight of a trunk on that piece is what kills it. Supporting that weak metal casting with a frame of steel seems like a good idea. But I see no reason to tie it back to the main frame. Just tying it into the tubular steel subframe (the way a Givi trunk mount does) looks to be good enough

BTW - it's worth noting that the riders foot-pegs are suspended off the main frame, but the passenger's are hung off the green part of the sub-frame assembly.

 

[Auburn]

As far as I know, nobody has ever overloaded or cracked the main part of rear sub-frame, i.e. the tubular part identified in the below diagram as shaded green, which supports the rider, passenger and sidebags.

The only part that has cracked (on both first and second gen bikes) is the rearmost cast alloy part of the sub-frame highlighted red below. It appears that part was deigned just to hold up the rear cowling, fender and tail light assembly. Putting the weight of a trunk on that piece is what kills it. Supporting that weak metal casting with a frame of steel seems like a good idea. But I see no reason to tie it back to the maion frame. Just tying it into the tubular subframe (the way a Givi mount does) looks to be good enough

Good point about the Givi Fred. I am seriously considering the Givi frame set up and switching top boxes because of the cracking that some are encountering. I ride 95% two up and my wife treats it like it is a back rest because it is more comfortable for her. Why else would Yamaha sell a factory back rest pad for it if it was not intended for the passenger to lean against it?

On my bike the grb bars have separated from the piece that goes under the seat on both sides. It has me concerned.

 

[Fred W]

On my bike the grb bars have separated from the piece that goes under the seat on both sides. It has me concerned.

I would be very concerned by that. That means that the only thing supporting the trunk is the red part of the SF. And if one of those grab handles broke off your lady may be pavement surfing.

 

[Enn]

I also have Hepco & Becker Journey TC52 top case. Anybody knows if the Givi frame fits for this?

 

[Fred W]

I assume that you have one of these mounts now?

You could use the Givi frame under this, but it will not be simple. You'd have to remove the big plastic Givi trunk plate and then make or buy a flat adapter plate that would mount on the Givi frame and the HB mount would fasten to. That would have the advantage of being able to adjust forward and backward position of the HB mount and trunk position to get the best backrest position for your passengers.