Under federal law, no modifications void the entire warranty. The law does allow manufacturers to refuse warranty coverage when they can show the mods likely caused whatever potential warranty issue is at hand. Even then, the rest of the warranty remains in effect.
It's pretty rare for consumers to have to lawyer up simply to get warranty coverage. It does happen, but it's pretty rare because manufacturers know they will only win if they have a strong case that the mods contributed to whatever failure is being denied coverage.
I certainly am skeptical of it. I had an issue with Harley Davidson concerning a warranty repair. I had a car tire on the bike and a part in the power train, compensator pack had failed. This is a part known to fail on any model. The service manager told me the warranty claim would be denied because of the car tire. I produced to much of a strain on the drive train of the bike. I argued that they used the same drive train part on their trikes that were delivered with car tires. I consulted an attorney and he said it would be an extreme long shot to win despite the Federal Act.
Putting a heavier car tire on would certainly stress the compensator, considering that it's designed to absorb the engines power pulses between the sprocket and the wheel. You had zero chance of winning that one unless the "decider" didn't understand basic physics (which is, unfortunately, surprisingly common).
Actually, car tires weigh less than motorcycle tires. I've been using CTs since 1978 and have been through all the arguments about the topic. As for the supposed stress on the drive train, I wrote a letter to the engineer division of Harley Davidson asking them that same question. The Division secretary called me a few weeks later to tell me they had passed my letter around the engineers and none of them had any idea how that notion came about. Also, Harley Davidson never put out any message of any sort saying such a thing. I asked her why then would service managers tell me that. She told me she didn't know but they wished the SMs wouldn't do that stuff. Right now in Virginia, my delegate representative is introducing an issue for consideration concerning a State Trooper in the safety Division who issued an addendum to the state vehicle inspectors telling them to reject any motorcycle that was presented for annual inspection with a car tire. I spoke to the Trooper myself after tracking him down as the author. His original evidence was data from two national traffic safety studies. I got ahold of both of them and read them cover to cover and nowhere did it even mention car tires let alone being the cause of incidents. He then changed his reasoning to, "It seems dangerous". He didn't have time after that to explain anything further on the topic. That's when I decided to talk to my delegate and she agreed, first that he just introduced that requirement without legislative authority and second, his lack of any data proving the use of CTs were dangerous. As long as I've known of it, I haven't heard of any incident caused by a CT on a motorcycle. Yeah, there's the stories that people heard of, but no detail, i.e. name, place, date, bike, etc. In actuality though, CTs provide much better traction than MTs, for cornering, stopping and weight bearing. Additional benefits are longer wear by at least 2X and about half the price. There are forums dedicated to use of CTs called darkside. 100s of thousands of riders without any incidents caused by the CT. Yeah, there may be incidents of motorcycles with CTs but not because of the CT. I think I could be considered an expert on the topic having the decades of experience and awareness of it.
Car tires provide much better traction than motorcycle tires for cornering, stopping and weight bearing? Ignoring the non-sensical claim of better traction for "weight bearing", the claim that they are lighter and provide "better" cornering and stopping traction, I'm surprised MotoGP riders haven't adopted them yet. They should be running Hoosiers I guess.
If ya haven't actually done it, ya don't have much to say about it except what ya "think" might happen. I've weighed the tires, I've done stop gaming, I've tracked the miles and expense. They're great for the bagger crowd because the lean angle is limited. As for completion riding, dirt racers use a completely different tire than a street course bike. Which one is wrong? CTs on a bagger or chopper works.Car tires provide much better traction than motorcycle tires for cornering, stopping and weight bearing? Ignoring the non-sensical claim of better traction for "weight bearing", the claim that they are lighter and provide "better" cornering and stopping traction, I'm surprised MotoGP riders haven't adopted them yet. They should be running Hoosiers I guess.
Just remember, if it looks like BS, and it smells like BS, it's BS.
OK, you're probably right, the only reason Valentino Rossi never discovered how much better the cornering traction (and all the weight savings) would be was because he was too closed-minded to try a car tire. He's probably still trying to figure out how he could have used all that extra corner traction at limited lean angles!
I don't even have to think about turning outlets on and off. There is a setting in the outlets page for turning on the outlets when you get in the car. They turn off when you leave. They don't work if you are plugged in of course since the inverter is in use for charging.
And also, I suspect that the 48V system would also be powered/charged from some sort of inverter. There might not be much difference between 120V and 48V systems when vampire loss is considered.
I would wager the 48V conversion is considerably more efficient than the 120V conversion, simply because it's a DC to DC conversion (instead of to AC).
That probably depends on what you feel is "considerable".
