SHAD SH50 Install

[ScottyUSN]

The Givi mount has you remove and replace the grab rail and tail mount and replace it with the metal mount. mounting to the frame under the rear seat as well as at the tail. Here

What you have (and I had previously) places the top box out on the tail without re-enforcing that subframe. The additional weight out on the tail gets to bouncing like a diving board which can cause those stress fractures.

Edit to add: I think your 100% correct this would never be an issue for most, but a worthwhile part of the purchasing process. Especially if you know you will be packing heavy and touring.

 

[nervous]

The Givi mount has you remove and replace the grab rail and tail mount and replace it with the metal mount. mounting to the frame under the rear seat as well as at the tail. Here

What you have (and I had previously) places the top box out on the tail without re-enforcing that subframe. The additional weight out on the tail gets to bouncing like a diving board which can cause those stress fractures.

Not to sidetrack my original thread any further but I think this needs clarification. The conventional wisdom is that the Givi mount (i.e. the SR357)adds some extra support that the stock rack does not. Not in overall individual strength (steel vs. aluminum) but rather in it's connection with something other than the subframe which is the vulnerable piece the Givi rack is claimed to save. But it doesn't as far as I can tell. And the issues have been with broken subframes and not broken OEM racks.

Here again is the Givi with it's two front attachment points highlighted to note their location on the subframe:



And here is the stock rack highlighting the same two points that IT uses in attaching to the subframe:



They both use the same three rear points so if both use the same five mounting points to the subframe how is the Givi superior?

From what I have been reading the claim is that it moves the weighted stresses away from the subframe but it's clearly attached to the subframe (exactly like the stock unit) so what am I missing? I don't mean to be thick-headed here but I not seeing it yet. :blink:

And, one other small point to an earlier poster that expressed concerns to the Shad mount I'll restate the point that any rack that mounts to either the Givi or stock rack will introduce the same stresses, not unique to any Shad product.

 

[PanAmerican]

According to the Shad website the maximum load, independent of the mounting system is only 8 kg (17.6 lbs). On my Givi E55 is't about the same (10 kg max load and a 120 km/h to speed). I can't see how using a different bracketing system would make the case able to carry more. Structurally each case has a limit for a reason.

 

[nervous]

According to the Shad website the maximum load, independent of the mounting system is only 8 kg (17.6 lbs). On my Givi E55 is't about the same (10 kg max load and a 120 km/h to speed). I can't see how using a different bracketing system would make the case able to carry more. Structurally each case has a limit for a reason.

Agreed. But my question is if the Givi actually offers a higher level of subframe breakage protection as touted than the stock which mounts exactly the same way. And, if so, how.

 

[PanAmerican]

According to the Shad website the maximum load, independent of the mounting system is only 8 kg (17.6 lbs). On my Givi E55 is't about the same (10 kg max load and a 120 km/h to speed). I can't see how using a different bracketing system would make the case able to carry more. Structurally each case has a limit for a reason.

Agreed. But my question is if the Givi actually offers a higher level of subframe breakage protection as touted than the stock which mounts exactly the same way. And, if so, how.

Note: The force acting on the bolts in the red circles would be in tension, not compression. They are trying to be pulled out, not pushed down.

At least that's what a simple statics free-body diagram would indicate.

 

[nervous]

According to the Shad website the maximum load, independent of the mounting system is only 8 kg (17.6 lbs). On my Givi E55 is't about the same (10 kg max load and a 120 km/h to speed). I can't see how using a different bracketing system would make the case able to carry more. Structurally each case has a limit for a reason.

Agreed. But my question is if the Givi actually offers a higher level of subframe breakage protection as touted than the stock which mounts exactly the same way. And, if so, how.

Note: The force acting on the bolts in the red circles would be in tension, not compression. They are trying to be pulled out, not pushed down.

At least that's what a simple statics free-body diagram would indicate.

Correct, as they would on both mounts, equally.

 

[gixxerjasen]

According to the Shad website the maximum load, independent of the mounting system is only 8 kg (17.6 lbs). On my Givi E55 is't about the same (10 kg max load and a 120 km/h to speed). I can't see how using a different bracketing system would make the case able to carry more. Structurally each case has a limit for a reason.

Agreed. But my question is if the Givi actually offers a higher level of subframe breakage protection as touted than the stock which mounts exactly the same way. And, if so, how.

Note: The force acting on the bolts in the red circles would be in tension, not compression. They are trying to be pulled out, not pushed down.

At least that's what a simple statics free-body diagram would indicate.

That's what I was thinking looking at those pictures. I'd only had to go on what I've read in the past. I'll be interested to see more info as it comes along.

 

[nervous]

Here is an interesting bit of info I pulled from one of the many failure threads that is quite telling:

You've asked for updates on two different threads, so obviously this is a concern for you.

Keep in mind that nobody's cracked the subframe unless they removed the grab rails, unless I missed one somewhere. The grab rails are part of the structure of the rear rack, whether it's the stock rack or the Givi steel replacement. They are in tension to carry the load hanging out behind the bike. Also keep in mind that the entire load of a top case is behind the rear subframe's bulkhead, and without the bracing of the grab rails the rear bulkhead has no chance of carrying the load.

The corollary is apparently true, too. Those that have removed the grab rails have all suffered cracks or breaks in the rear subframe.

Not a design defect, but a result of modifying the structure without realizing that the modification is structural, if you see what I mean.

Why remove the grab rails? Well, if you remove the rear seat and the grab rails, you've got a lot of space for something, like an aux fuel cell, or whatever luggage you may want to put there. The rails narrow that space down a bit. Also, apparently that Garauld rack they're referring to required the grab rails be removed as it replaced the stock rack completely.

The cure for the subframe failures is to not remove part of the rear subframe, even if it doesn't look like it's part of the rear subframe.

Maybe therein lies the answer...

 

[ndivita]

I have used one of these on my 05 FJR since 2010. I'd say I have over 5,000 miles on my bike now with the SHAD50 case. The case is fantastic. It's mounted using the dedicated SHAD topmaster mounting assembly and plate. No problems so far. I admit I try to pack the case with the lighter, bulkier stuff just to be on the safe side, but I would likely do that anyway. Heavier stuff always goes as close to the COG of the bike, in the side cases or in the seat bag. See attached.

 

[allrider]

So has anyone mounted an SH50 on an SR357 yet? If so pls post some pics. I'm just waiting for the SH50 to arrive and already have the SR357 in place. I'm interested in seeing how easily the Shad base plate that comes with the box will bolt up to the 357 and/or if I'll have to modify.

After looking at some old posts it looks like the base plate for the 50ltr may have evolved since it first came out a few years ago.

 

[nervous]

So has anyone mounted an SH50 on an SR357 yet? If so pls post some pics. I'm just waiting for the SH50 to arrive and already have the SR357 in place. I'm interested in seeing how easily the Shad base plate that comes with the box will bolt up to the 357 and/or if I'll have to modify.

After looking at some old posts it looks like the base plate for the 50ltr may have evolved since it first came out a few years ago.

Check out the pics in post #10:

Shad mount on a Givi 357 rack

 

[FJRMGM]

looks good.

 

[allrider]

Check out the pics in post #10:

Shad mount on a Givi 357 rack

I think this mounting plate is the older version. The newer one has a metal plate under the plastic one, which makes it more stout. At first glance the metal plate seems to have plenty of choices for mounting positions. I'll see soon enough when mine comes in.

 

[nervous]

Check out the pics in post #10:

Shad mount on a Givi 357 rack

I think this mounting plate is the older version. The newer one has a metal plate under the plastic one, which makes it more stout. At first glance the metal plate seems to have plenty of choices for mounting positions. I'll see soon enough when mine comes in.

This is it and it does:



If that's still not enought you can always drill some more. Lighter AND faster!

 

[allrider]

Check out the pics in post #10:

Shad mount on a Givi 357 rack

I think this mounting plate is the older version. The newer one has a metal plate under the plastic one, which makes it more stout. At first glance the metal plate seems to have plenty of choices for mounting positions. I'll see soon enough when mine comes in.

This is it and it does:



If that's still not enough you can always drill some more. Lighter AND faster!

And Faster... :bike:

Thanks for the pic, that's the ticket. I wonder if the rubber mounts from the SR357 will be an advantage or if it will make it shakey? We'll see.

 

[not2shabby]

According to the Shad website the maximum load, independent of the mounting system is only 8 kg (17.6 lbs). On my Givi E55 is't about the same (10 kg max load and a 120 km/h to speed). I can't see how using a different bracketing system would make the case able to carry more. Structurally each case has a limit for a reason.

Agreed. But my question is if the Givi actually offers a higher level of subframe breakage protection as touted than the stock which mounts exactly the same way. And, if so, how.

Note: The force acting on the bolts in the red circles would be in tension, not compression. They are trying to be pulled out, not pushed down.

At least that's what a simple statics free-body diagram would indicate.

Correct, as they would on both mounts, equally.

Not so, the Shad bracket is ONLY stressing the 3 bolts on the very rear on the tail section, it doesn't touch the grabrails or use them for support in any way. The Givi rack does spread the load to the 2 forward bolts under the rear seat. Having said that, I've had no problems at all with my SH45 in 2 years now. I doubt if I've ever had more than 10-12 lbs of stuff in it either. Carry the dead hookers in the side bags and you shouldn't have a problem!

 

[nervous]

On a lighter note just a fun addition to make it all a bit more factory fresh

 

[user 28803]

Cool :thumbsup:

 

[ScottyUSN]

Looks great.. The Yamaha logo is a nice touch.

 

[mvette]

The Givi mount has you remove and replace the grab rail and tail mount and replace it with the metal mount. mounting to the frame under the rear seat as well as at the tail. Here

What you have (and I had previously) places the top box out on the tail without re-enforcing that subframe. The additional weight out on the tail gets to bouncing like a diving board which can cause those stress fractures.

Not to sidetrack my original thread any further but I think this needs clarification. The conventional wisdom is that the Givi mount (i.e. the SR357)adds some extra support that the stock rack does not. Not in overall individual strength (steel vs. aluminum) but rather in it's connection with something other than the subframe which is the vulnerable piece the Givi rack is claimed to save. But it doesn't as far as I can tell. And the issues have been with broken subframes and not broken OEM racks.

Here again is the Givi with it's two front attachment points highlighted to note their location on the subframe:



And here is the stock rack highlighting the same two points that IT uses in attaching to the subframe:



They both use the same three rear points so if both use the same five mounting points to the subframe how is the Givi superior?

From what I have been reading the claim is that it moves the weighted stresses away from the subframe but it's clearly attached to the subframe (exactly like the stock unit) so what am I missing? I don't mean to be thick-headed here but I not seeing it yet. :blink:

And, one other small point to an earlier poster that expressed concerns to the Shad mount I'll restate the point that any rack that mounts to either the Givi or stock rack will introduce the same stresses, not unique to any Shad product.

The difference is that the Givi 357 rack is made of heavy steel. The factory grab rail is not aluminum, it is PLASTIC. After awhile of use the factory grab rail will break at the points just outside of the two mounting bolts circled in red where the rail goes under the seat edge. At that point the rear subframe is no longer tied to the grab rail. The break is hard to notice. I know, my grab rail broke and I noticed it before damage was done to my sub frame. I now have the 357 as ugly as it is.