Re: st-digest V1999 #241

["Larry Rau" <fastbike@xxxxxxxx>]

Ken T wrote:
> Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 00:33:36 EDT
> From: KenTmpsnmc@xxxxxxx
> Subject: Batt problem consensus
>
> I'm having a difficult time swallowing this line of thinking, please help
me
> with the logic here.  In my many years of riding and many motorcycles I've
> never experienced a 2,100 miles (approx.) battery failure with normal
Yuasa
> batteries.  I've never had a problem getting 2 or 3 years out of a
battery.
> But I'm hearing that I should expect this life out of the sealed unit on
my
> 99 Sprint St.  I'm at about 3,000 miles since receiving the bike in April
or
> 6 months.  Frankly if this is what I can expect I'll go back to a
non-sealed
> unit.  Or... are we saying that all T-5's discharge batteries at an
alarming
> rate while off.  Should we just leave them on the battery tender while
off?
>
> Ken T. from Ca.
>
Ken,

My ST first refused to start after sitting for two weeks while I was on
vacation. The dealer's first response was that the clock and computer would
drain the battery over this period (lots of grounds, etc). I'm not an
electrical engineer, but it was clear that the service manager wasn't
either. I had some trouble buying this argument since the ST isn't the first
bike I've had with fuel injection and a clock, but I dutifully plugged in my
battery tender every few nights. However, the problem continued to appear,
even though the battery would read charged. After one instance where the
bike wouldn't start after being on the charger overnight, the dealer gave me
a new battery. So, I'm with you. The discharge argument is BS, the clock and
engine management computer won't draw enough current to drain a battery
after a week or two of sitting.

Larry


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

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