[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 43 (Wednesday, March 5, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10574-10575]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-5137]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration


Denial of Motor Vehicle Defect Petition, DP02-010

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 
Transportation.

ACTION: Denial of petition for a defect recall.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the reasons for the denial of a 
petition submitted to NHTSA under 49 U.S.C. 30162, requesting that the 
agency initiate an investigation of model year (MY) 2000 and 2001 
Suzuki GSX-R750 motorcycles to address an alleged safety-related 
defect. The petition is identified as DP02-010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Leo Yon, Office of Defects 
Investigation (ODI), NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 
20590. Telephone: (202) 366-7028.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Mr. Scott M. Shannon of Clearwater, Florida, 
submitted a petition to NHTSA dated October 8, 2002, requesting that 
NHTSA open a defect investigation on MY 2000 and 2001 Suzuki GSX-R750 
motorcycles (the subject R models). The petition alleges that the 
motorcycles' 6-speed manual transmission contains a safety-related 
defect, which causes the vehicle to slip or shudder while under load in 
second gear.
    The four cylinder 750cc Suzuki GS series motorcycles, for the years 
in question, were sold as two designated models: GSX-750 and GSX-R750. 
Approximately three times as many subject R models were sold in the 
U.S. as compared to the base model. Prior to MY 2000, the two models 
shared the same transmission components. For MY 2000, the R model 
received several design changes to enhance the motorcycle's 
performance. These changes include, but are not limited to, a revised 
overall final drive ratio through the use of a new transmission gear 
set. Other transmission modifications were also introduced in an effort 
to improve the motorcycle's perceived shift quality and feel.
    To evaluate the petition, an information request was sent to the 
manufacturer, American Suzuki Motor Corporation (Suzuki), in November 
2002. In its response, Suzuki submitted data for both models for MYs 
1999 through 2001. The total population of the subject R models is 
11,551 motorcycles. Following the introduction of the MY 2000 R model, 
Suzuki received a significant increase in the number of consumer 
complaints relating to the motorcycle's transmission. Suzuki reported 
that it received 248 consumer complaints about the subject R models 
where the key words ``second gear'' or ``shifting'' were found in the 
description field. This compares to 7 similarly-derived consumer 
complaints for both MY 1999 models. A corresponding increase occurred 
in warranty-related claims. Suzuki reported that, according to claims 
submitted by dealers on transmission parts, there were 439 claims 
attributed to the subject R models. This compares to 7 for both MY 1999 
models. Field reports and calls by dealers to Suzuki's technical 
hotline for advice on this topic accounted for 492 contacts for the 
subject R models, compared to 10 for both MY 1999 models.
    Suzuki reported only one claim of an injury that may have been 
caused by this condition in the subject R models. Five Suzuki technical 
hotline reports allege a crash that may, or may not, relate to the 
alleged defect. Suzuki stated that there is insufficient information 
concerning these alleged incidents to allow it to assess these reported 
incidents. Suzuki has no lawsuits or subrogation claims pertaining to 
the alleged defect regarding the MY 2000-2001 R model motorcycles.
    NHTSA has received 30 ``transmission'' complaints involving

[[Page 10575]]

the MY 2000 R models, with one injury allegation and one crash 
allegation.
    To address consumer complaints about this condition, Suzuki 
redesigned the second driven gear for the R model. In November 2000, a 
newly-developed second driven gear was introduced as a running change 
to the MY 2001 R model and released as the recommended service part for 
all subject motorcycles. A technical training video was released to 
Suzuki dealers to help their mechanics diagnose the symptoms before 
disassembling the transmission. A copy of this tape was supplied with 
Suzuki's reply to ODI's information request.
    Suzuki's Quality Assurance group examined several warranty return 
parts for mechanical integrity, noting that several displayed signs of 
abuse consistent with ``incomplete or abusive shifting practices.'' 
Suzuki alleged that these practices will produce high impact shock 
loads between the gears' engagement surfaces, leading to localized 
deformation. Eventually, the deformation helps to create a force 
between the two gears, in this case second and sixth, pushing them 
apart. If the magnitude of the separating force between the gears 
exceeds the force generated by the shifting mechanism to hold them 
together, the two momentarily disconnect, and then are forced back 
together by the shifting mechanism. This momentary disconnect-reconnect 
as the motorcycle is accelerated gives the operator a slipping or 
popping sensation as the transmission delivers torque to the rear 
wheel. Under rapid acceleration, the operator can experience a quick, 
hesitation-like feeling when second gear momentarily disengages, 
accompanied by a change in the pitch of the sound generated by the 
engine. Left unattended, the slippage can increase in frequency and 
duration.
    To reproduce and demonstrate the failure consequences to ODI, 
Suzuki prepared one subject motorcycle with parts intended to represent 
worst-case conditions on the engagement surfaces of the second gear. 
Additional instrumentation was installed on the shifting mechanism to 
record the resultant forces and the momentary disconnect of the second 
gear. Normal operation of the motorcycle, accelerating through a series 
of turns and straight roadways, was digitally taped (video) to allow 
analysis of the condition and its consequences, both from an observer's 
perspective and that of the operator. Review of the video clips did not 
identify an increased risk to safety or a loss of vehicle control.
    Based on this analysis, it is unlikely that NHTSA would issue an 
order for the notification and remedy of a safety-related defect in the 
subject vehicles at the conclusion of the investigation requested in 
the petition. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize 
NHTSA's limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety 
mission, your petition is denied.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30162(d); delegations of authority at CFR 
1.50 and 501.8

    Issued on: February 26, 2003.
Kenneth N. Weinstein,
Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 03-5137 Filed 3-4-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P