RE: The Last Triumph?

[Philippe Deraeve <pd.dtv@xxxxxxxxx>]

Eric,

How many people are on the mailing list? If every one of them sends an 
e-mail to Triumph showing we disapprove their attitude on this matter they 
might reconsider their position. Something like a petition: a standerd 
e-mail that you could on the list and that everybodu then forwartds to 
Triumph.


On lundi 9 aout 1999 9:31, Jonathan Schulster [SMTP:Schulster@xxxxxxxxxxx] 
wrote:
> Finally got the response from Triumph UK on my claim for the valve 
clearance check and re-shim for the T509 from March this year.  The wording 
goes something like "although we are well aware of the rumours and stories 
relating to valve clearance problems our thorough investigation shows no 
such fault exists, and therefore no warranty claim will be met."
>
> This suggests that the valve clearances should only be checked at 
20,000km (12,000mi), and if they have closed up and burned out a valve at 
that time, well tough.  Presumably Triumph will reject that warranty claim 
also.  If we choose to pay for a valve clearance check at 10,000km that is 
our own problem and even if this prevented major engine damage in the 
following 10,000km because a valve was out of spec, well that's nothing to 
do with Triumph.
>
> There seems to be some inconsistency in Triumph's response; riders buy a 
sports tourer to be a reliable, long-lived bike that can be ridden for 
10,000km without problem, and has an engine that should last 200,000km or 
more.  When the owner takes the time and trouble to ask the dealer to make 
extra checks, which then finds a problem that would have meant a much 
larger eventual claim for new valves/head/pistons etc our small claim for 
reimbursement under warranty is treated with contempt (on a bike that is 4 
months old!!!!).  All I asked for was DM 400,- to cover the extra labour 
and shims cost. Even a contribution towards this would have satisfied me.
>
> I saw the results of the burned out valves on my 509 and did not want 
that to happen on the ST. I did intend to keep and ride this bike for a 
very long time indeed, so reliability was worth paying for.  Triumph's 
attitude convinces me that;
>
> a) they have not built this bike to last.
> b) they don't give a knats widget whether careful owners make the effort 
to keep and maintain the bike with care;
> c) THEY HAVE NO RESPECT FOR THEIR LOYAL CUSTOMERS:
>
> Where do they think most of their sales come from? - from us recommending 
our bike to friends, colleagues and other riders.
> I have 3 friends who bought ST's because they tried mine or I rang the 
dealer and arranged a test ride for them. I cannot count the number of 
times I have been stopped to ask what I thought of the bike and recommended 
it unreservedly.  I know what I will say next time.
>
> "THE BIKE IS GREAT, BUT TOO BAD ITS MADE BY TRIUMPH!"
>
> Why dont Triumph do the decent thing (they are British after all!):
> 1. Tell the dealer to check the valves at 10,000km
> 2. Reimburse those who chose to have it done, if any/all valves needed 
reshimming - this proves that there was a manufacturing fault.
> 3. SORT OUT THEIR CUSTOMER SERVICE!!!!
>
> If you get this far, and you are considering whether to buy a Honda VFR 
or a Triumph ST or even a BMW R1100S, think carefully about how much the 
manufacturer values your custom......
>
> Sorry for the length of the post, but this really pissed me off (no 
kidding!)
> Jonathan
>
>
>
>  *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   * 
  *
>  The ST Mailing list is sponsored by the Unofficial ST Website
>    http://www.TriumphNet.com/st for ST and Mailing List info
> 


 *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
 The ST Mailing list is sponsored by the Unofficial ST Website
   http://www.TriumphNet.com/st for ST and Mailing List info

=-=-=-= Next Message =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=