I consider myself to be a careful consumer and hardly ever purchase anything without reading reviews or testing the product, if possible.
I was about to purchase a WR300, but I am not sure about this choice anymore.
Reading about the modifications to the 2012 WR model range, I can't help but wonder why Husqvarna had to reinforce the frame near the steering head on most models. Would they really do this if it weren't necessary? Did frames show signs of metal fatigue in previous years?
Apart from that, there was a recent newspaper article that made me wonder if there is not a general build problem with the Italian Huskies.
Sima, the French motorcycle importing company, accounting for the largest sales volume of Husqvarna bikes worldwide, has decided to stop importing Huskies. When interviewed, the CEO answered (litterally translated from French): I am very disappointed about the build quality of Husqvarna in the recent couple of years. I was expecting the Germans (from BMW) to show more discipline and offer solutions to correct the problems. As there are no solutions, I cannot put my company and my dealer network in jeopardy.
The original interview (in French) can be read here: http://www.moto-station.com/article...eric-fourgeaud-sima-je-ne-veux-pas-subir.html
This is a clear statement and I think I have no choice but to consider purchasing a different brand now. This is sad in a sense, because the WR250/300 are the only bikes left that are suitable (without aftermarket parts) for large riders. I have had one Husky before (a 1975 MIkkola Replica CR360, I was 16 years old back then). Even though the crankcase broke (an issue known to the Swedish Husqvarna engineers), I liked the roughness of that bike. I'd love to have another Husky, but I do expect to receive a quality bike when I pay 7000 Euros.
Not trying to spread negative publicity, but am looking for your comments, please.
I was about to purchase a WR300, but I am not sure about this choice anymore.
Reading about the modifications to the 2012 WR model range, I can't help but wonder why Husqvarna had to reinforce the frame near the steering head on most models. Would they really do this if it weren't necessary? Did frames show signs of metal fatigue in previous years?
Apart from that, there was a recent newspaper article that made me wonder if there is not a general build problem with the Italian Huskies.
Sima, the French motorcycle importing company, accounting for the largest sales volume of Husqvarna bikes worldwide, has decided to stop importing Huskies. When interviewed, the CEO answered (litterally translated from French): I am very disappointed about the build quality of Husqvarna in the recent couple of years. I was expecting the Germans (from BMW) to show more discipline and offer solutions to correct the problems. As there are no solutions, I cannot put my company and my dealer network in jeopardy.
The original interview (in French) can be read here: http://www.moto-station.com/article...eric-fourgeaud-sima-je-ne-veux-pas-subir.html
This is a clear statement and I think I have no choice but to consider purchasing a different brand now. This is sad in a sense, because the WR250/300 are the only bikes left that are suitable (without aftermarket parts) for large riders. I have had one Husky before (a 1975 MIkkola Replica CR360, I was 16 years old back then). Even though the crankcase broke (an issue known to the Swedish Husqvarna engineers), I liked the roughness of that bike. I'd love to have another Husky, but I do expect to receive a quality bike when I pay 7000 Euros.
Not trying to spread negative publicity, but am looking for your comments, please.