Q Why has my Hornet lost its sting?
A £500 fork makeover will deliver a plush ride on your GSX-R1000
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’