Dealership/Factory replacement engines, proper.

[quawk]

I have the original owners manual that came with the 1976 RE5 I purchased a few years ago. In the back of the manual is a page titled MEMO on which the original owner appears to have jotted down in ink pen maintenance notes such as oil changes, tire replacement, wheel balancing, anti freeze replacement, etc. At the top of the page was written "engine replacement at 2,000 miles."  My question is were many total engine replacements done by dealerships under the factory warranty? It seems like I remember seeing Suzuki ads of the time that stated they would replace anything, including the engine, that failed within the first year or so many thousand miles. I forget how many thousand miles the warranty lasted. I just read a post by decotriumph that stated an RE5 he purchased new had its' engine replaced under recall(apex seal issues) shortly after he bought it, although he stated he had experience no problems with it. Was wondering if anyone had any idea of just how many engines got replaced.

[wayne]

There are at least two guys on here who worked on RE5's back in the day. Hopefully we may hear. Unfortunately member JESS who really is the oracle with bike's history is away for quite awhile.

My understanding is that failing engines due to seal problems or otherwise was fairly rare. I'm compiling some information on this. In short, there's one owner on here who has two bikes with well over 6 figure miles on original engines.

In Australia when there were still M models being sold, I saw offered a 12 month warranty on the bike, lifetime on the engine (back when some warranties were around 90 days).

[timpa136]

Oct 25, 2021 23:46:23 GMT -5 quawk said:

I have the original owners manual that came with the 1976 RE5 I purchased a few years ago. In the back of the manual is a page titled MEMO on which the original owner appears to have jotted down in ink pen maintenance notes such as oil changes, tire replacement, wheel balancing, anti freeze replacement, etc. At the top of the page was written "engine replacement at 2,000 miles."  My question is were many total engine replacements done by dealerships under the factory warranty? It seems like I remember seeing Suzuki ads of the time that stated they would replace anything, including the engine, that failed within the first year or so many thousand miles. I forget how many thousand miles the warranty lasted. I just read a post by decotriumph that stated an RE5 he purchased new had its' engine replaced under recall(apex seal issues) shortly after he bought it, although he stated he had experience no problems with it. Was wondering if anyone had any idea of just how many engines got replaced. 

I do not know how many engine units were replaced under warranty, probably early units for excessive oil consumption. I felt at the time they probably were not properly set in, I don't like to use "broken in"
New vehicle warranty was 12 months, 12,000 miles. Any replacement required  authorization from A  Rotary Technical Representative as well. Old units must be immediately returned, later units deleted this requirement  and simply added the core charge to the price.

[quawk]

Thanks for the response timpa136. When you stated in your response that later units deleted the requirement for being immediately returned, and added the core charge to the price, my question is who is paying this core charge and "price"? Did the factory not stand the cost of the replacement, or was the dealership having to share this cost? I thought that's what a factory warranty meant is that the factory would absorb the cost of warranty work. Also if the dealership paid a core charge, did the failed or replaced engine stay at the dealership?

[timpa136]

Oct 29, 2021 12:14:37 GMT -5 quawk said:

Thanks for the response timpa136. When you stated in your response that later units deleted the requirement for being immediately returned, and added the core charge to the price, my question is who is paying this core charge and "price"? Did the factory not stand the cost of the replacement, or was the dealership having to share this cost? I thought that's what a factory warranty meant is that the factory would absorb the cost of warranty work. Also if the dealership paid a core charge, did the failed or replaced engine stay at the dealership?

Later units reference referred to many years later after the RE5 program had been shelved.
During warranty or outright purchases, the core charge was billed to the dealer and reimbursed only when the Engine (Proper) was returned, properly drained and lead seal  was still intact. It's remotely possible some dealers might have forfeited the core reimbursement, I do not know. I'm only guessing that the Factory didn't want the responsibility if people put it in an airplane with only single plug ignition. The factory stood behind all the costs during  the warranty period as long as an authorized Dealer did the repair.

[quawk]

Thanks timpa136 for clarifying what you meant by later units. I assumed that you meant the second year A models as opposed to the first year bikes. In another response from Wayne, he made a statement the Suzuki offered a lifetime warranty on the engine. That had to be unheard of, then as now, to offer on any machine. I suppose that was to show Suzuki's confidence in and commitment to the rotary engine.

[decotriumph]

I bought a new RE5 in 1975. I do recall that my entire engine was replaced under warranty shortly thereafter because of a recall. It was an engine number based replacement, not because I was having any issues with my particular bike.

[quawk]

Thanks decotriumph. Do you recall what your new RE5 cost in1975? I'm guessing that info is here on the board somewhere but I haven't happened across it. Did your dealership contact you about the recall or were you notified directly from Suzuki?

[wayne]

QUAWK that "lifetime on the engine" was accompanied in late 1975 with a price tag of either $1299 or $1399 in Australia. However, that was obviously a desperation sale price.

18 months later I had enough money to buy a new bike and the GT750B was either $2099 or $2199. I remembered the low price of the rotary and enquired but was told it was about $100 more than the GT (and of course an A model). From reading, I believe that would be correct as among other things, they were criticised for being more expensive than the current Suzuki flagship, the GT750. That other dealer was desperate to the get the M out the door.

Not US prices but back then, the AU dollar was a fair bit higher than the US.

[quawk]

Desperation sale price is right. I'd like to get in my time machine and go back and buy two or three of 'em for that price. So if I'm getting the exchange rate right, you were paying more in Aussie dollars than we here spending U.S. dollars, correct?

[wayne]

Yes, I wish for the Time Machine too.

Re the $$, no the other way. Back then 1 AU dollar was worth, very ballpark, about $1.30 US. So if it cost 1300 here, that'd translate to around $1700 US. It's the opposite now, one Aussie will only buy roughly 0.70c US.

[decotriumph]

Nov 3, 2021 9:04:31 GMT -5 quawk said:

Thanks decotriumph. Do you recall what your new RE5 cost in1975? I'm guessing that info is here on the board somewhere but I haven't happened across it. Did your dealership contact you about the recall or were you notified directly from Suzuki?

As I recall, my bike was $2500 or thereabouts. My dealer notified me directly. I was motorcycle crazy and went into the shop every week or two anyway, so he just told me when I dropped in.

[quawk]

decotriumph, nothin' wrong with being "motorcycle crazy". A lot of us were. The '70s was the heyday of motorcycling for everybody, not just the bad boy crowd or diehards. Bikes were affordable fun transportation and the negative stigma was for the most part removed/gone. It looks like you're from here in the U.S., as am I. It's been indicated in other posts here on the board that the RE5 was more expensive at the time than the GT750 which was said to be Suzuki's "flagship" model. Do you happen to remember the 750 cost at that time or about how much more the RE5 cost was? The $2500 cost for a 500cc category bike at the time did have to be a little pricey.

[Neville]

Nov 8, 2021 12:50:03 GMT -5 quawk said:

 It's been indicated in other posts here on the board that the RE5 was more expensive at the time than the GT750 which was said to be Suzuki's "flagship" model. Do you happen to remember the 750 cost at that time or about how much more the RE5 cost was? The $2500 cost for a 500cc category bike at the time did have to be a little pricey.

Here's a New Zealand  newspaper ad for a new GT750

[wayne]

After poring through numerous magazines:

USA- 1975

RE5M $2,475

EDIT: GT750M $2,145

Kawasaki Z1B $2,475

With the solid reputation of the Kwaka 900 at the same price, it makes the RE5 look expensive against it and very expensive against a GT.

Australia-

1975 RE5 $2,100. The 1977 B model GT750 was about that price 2 years later and the 1976 GT750A was cheaper than the B. So makes the RE5 a bit higher priced than both.

Also makes that "clearance sale" price of around $1300 that I witnessed dirt cheap.