Q Why has my Hor­net lost its sting?

A £500 fork makeover will de­liver a plush ride on your GSX-R1000

Motorcycle News (UK) - - Garage -

My Honda Hor­net 600 is run­ning re­ally rough. I have had the carbs apart as I thought it was fu­elling, but all the emul­sion tubes, jets and pas­sage­ways are clear and there was no crud in the float bowls ei­ther. Where do I go next? Dar­ren Bates, email

AAn­swered by Chris Dabbs, MCN If you are sure the fu­elling isn’t the cause, then the next place to look is the spark. This method works across most mod­els with the same fairly stan­dard set-up as the Hor­net: two coils deal­ing with a pair of cylin­ders each; one and four, two and three re­spec­tively. You can check their ef­fi­ciency quickly by pulling the leads off one pair (one and four on the out­side are eas­i­est to start with), but keep­ing them ly­ing on the cylin­der head where they can make a good enough con­nec­tion to the plugs to keep the en­gine run­ning. Get it fired up, maybe us­ing choke to keep the mix­ture rich while the spark is poor, then use some elec­tri­cal pli­ers to lift the lead away from the plug. If it makes lit­tle dif­fer­ence to the en­gine’s run­ning you are mak­ing progress. Put a spare plug in the sus­pect lead and earth it with the threaded sec­tion on a cam cover bolt be­fore spin­ning the starter mo­tor over. The coil should be send­ing a healthy, fat spark that’s bright white with a blueish tinge. If it’s dull, pink­ish-pur­ply in colour you have found the cul­prit and the coil will need chang­ing with new plug leads for good mea­sure.

I was stopped for speed­ing by a po­lice­man us­ing a speed cam­era. I was given a road­side re­port that stated an in­cor­rect reg. It was cor­rect in the court sum­mons. Am I able to get it thrown out as they got the de­tails wrong?

Mo­hammed Ra­man, email

The de­fence you would seek to rely on is a tech­ni­cal de­fence. That is, the de­tails of the charge against you were in­cor­rect and con­se­quently you can­not de­fend the al­le­ga­tions as they do not re­late to you. This sounds good in prin­ci­ple but it is not easy to rely on in prac­tice.

For a tech­ni­cal de­fence the er­ror has to be so fun­da­men­tal that you are un­able to make out the al­le­ga­tions. Here you were stopped for speed­ing at a spe­cific lo­ca­tion. Thus, you know what the charge is against you, even though ini­tially the lo­ca­tion and reg­is­tra­tion num­ber were in­cor­rectly quoted. This in it­self may be enough to es­tab­lish a tech­ni­cal de­fence as it could be ar­gued that the reg does not re­late to you or that you had not vis­ited that lo­ca­tion.

The po­lice could, how­ever, rely on the ‘slip rule’ mean­ing they have no­ticed their er­ror and have rec­ti­fied it. They should usu­ally do this within 14 days of the er­ror, how­ever this can be done at a later date and even at court. They can only rely on the ‘slip rule’ as long as the rec­ti­fi­ca­tion of the er­ror does not lead to a com­pletely new charge. In your sce­nario the charge re­mained the same and the po­lice have rec­ti­fied their er­ror for the reg­is­tra­tion mark and lo­ca­tion.

‘For a tech­ni­cal de­fence the er­ror has to be fun­da­men­tal’

Find the dodgy coil and your Hor­net will have you buzzing

Spada Air Pro 2 Dainese Drake Su­per Air Alpines­tars A10 Air Flo Rukka Orivesi

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from UK

© PressReader. All rights reserved.