[CZroe]

Originally Posted by choneofakind

*By 'bad petcock' I mean one that has a physical flaw that causes it to fail prematurely. This does not include cases where the rubber parts degrade because of long term exposure to gasoline. Not all cases of leaky petcocks are due to flawed design; they do fail on their own over time.*

We actually have yet to have a single confirmation that a leaky newgen petcock was caused by normal degradation of rubber parts and most were discovered before the bikes were two years old. Replacing a petcock ever two years is not normal.

Originally Posted by choneofakind

Lets take a step back and look at this without the sarcasm or capital letters.

Sarcasm? Sorry if I sounded like I had an attitude. I was not being sarcastic and did not mean to give that impression. If I weren't lazy I would have italicized "MINE" instead of using caps, but I was adding to the poster above and not directly responding to you there.

Originally Posted by choneofakind

Say that you somehow discover that every leaky petcock that we know of is due to a flawed design or a bad manufacturing process that leaves imperfections inside the petcock that cause it to malfunction.

Now compare the number of bad petcocks you find to the number of bikes on the road. Let's say you find 100 that are leaky because of a flaw inside the petcock. How many millions of Kawasaki Ninja 250R's are there on the road? I bet that small percentage of allegedly flawed petcocks falls right into Kawasaki's tolerances for faulty parts.

I already explained that the vast majority of those with leaky petcocks don't even know it. Also, remember Microsoft hiding behind similar logic with the XBOX 360 fiasco? The failure rates were FAR higher than industry norms, but they only counted the customers who actually went through the entire warranty process even though numerous people were sitting on the sidelines waiting for a final resolution instead of sending their consoles in over and over and over. Some bought new consoles. Some got them working just long enough to trade in at shops (infamous "towel trick"). Some claimed purchase protection warranties. Many saw that journalists were on their fourth or fifth replaced console and decided to buy a second console and sit on the first while waiting for a final resolution. Some were outside of warranty and attempted repairs long before the warranty program was expanded to include them, thoroughly voiding their warranties. So many ruined their consoles that they couldn't and didn't claim warranty even when it was expanded to include them. Microsoft hiding behind those numbers to claim that their failure rate was "within industry norms" for as long as they did was willfully ignorant and, thus, was reprehensible and wrong.

Similarly, we can't ignore the realities of leaky petcocks. Most owners will have no idea because most owners don't ever try to drain a carb.

Originally Posted by choneofakind

I guess I'm just not sure what you're trying to accomplish by proving that Kawasaki has a part with a possibility of leaking. Petcocks (on all bikes) are known to leak sometimes. It's not realistic to expect every single part on a vehicle to be perfect for the lifetime of the vehicle.

I thought I was pretty clear. I'm trying to save people engines from catastrophic damage. Regardless of the cause of the bad petcock, I want to make sure people know that if you smell gas in the oil, check the petcock! Now I want people to also look and see if it's defective so that we can know and not keep replacing defective with defective like the defective CDIs.

Originally Posted by choneofakind

Are you trying to get a recall from Kawasaki? Are you trying to sue Kawasaki for selling flawed parts to the public? What is the point of trying to prove that there's a flaw? I'm not sure what you're going for with this whole thing. That's why I told you to stop beating a dead horse.

I'm trying to save other people the serious engine trouble I and many others experienced as a direct result. I also want them to know while their bikes are still under warranty. I would have appreciated knowing while my bike was still in warranty. Even outside of warranty, I would have changed my oil more often at the very least. People can only act on the information they have. If it's something I would have liked to know, I assume it's something they might like to know and I don't think I'd be doing anyone any good not to share it.

Even if I felt the same way you do, I'd ask the OP to take his apart and show us instead of prematurely calling the horse "dead." How can it be dead if only one member ever looked inside and so many had leaky petcocks in barely over a year (IOW, barely outside of warranty)?

@Navigon: Will you take yours apart after replacing it and tell us if you find something similar to Andrew?