Deactivating HM Quickshifter?

[Zebrs]

Hi all,

Bought a new bike a couple months ago and been waiting for insurance time to get it on the road. A while ago I was getting fairly high quotes, now it seems to be even more with no change in circumstances. A bit of fiddling with online comparison sites highlights one of the reasons being the quickshifter fitted.

So I'm considering de-activating the thing for the sake of road riding and several hundred sheets saving. Problem is I'm not sure how to do it, particularly as I'd like to have it re-activated further down the line, so don't want to strip it all out; I'd like to keep the mechanicals in place and remove the electronics if possible, effectively turning it into a fancy push rod only. Is this fairly easy to do?


TIA for any input.

Cheers,

Z

[MrGman]

I know what I’d do.

I think if you don’t want to declare it you’d have to totally remove it from the bike and fit the standard shift rod.

You can ‘deactivate’ it though, all you need to do is get to the spark plugs and disconnect the hm loom, will be 8 plugs if your bike is a 4 cylinder and is very self explanatory.

[moanthebairns]

A way I've found around this whilst using the comparison sites online is to obtain the quote based on a standard bike (many seem to opt out when you add exhaust etc).

Give the one you fancy a call and declare it over the phone (this normally results in no price change).

[Biker 1]

I thought many bikes now come with quick-shifters as standard, or included in limited edition models. How come this is a big deal for insurers??

[dern]

Biker 1 said:

I thought many bikes now come with quick-shifters as standard, or included in limited edition models. How come this is a big deal for insurers??

They'd have to pay to replace them in the case of a total loss and they're not cheap.

[fergus]

dern said:

Biker 1 said:

I thought many bikes now come with quick-shifters as standard, or included in limited edition models. How come this is a big deal for insurers??

They'd have to pay to replace them in the case of a total loss and they're not cheap.

I would have thought that their reasoning may be that the only reason to fit a QS is to "go faster" and anyone who fits one therefore may have an increased risk profile and more chance of a having a 1st party claim (i.e. no other vehicles involved to claim from)? The cost of the QS vs the cost of a written off bike is substantial.

[Zebrs]

moanthebairns said:

A way I've found around this whilst using the comparison sites online is to obtain the quote based on a standard bike (many seem to opt out when you add exhaust etc).

Give the one you fancy a call and declare it over the phone (this normally results in no price change).

Top man! Thanks for the advice, I did just this and the company weren’t bothered by it, I even managed to include commuting on the policy for the modified bike for not too much more than it would have been stock on the online comparison sites. Saves me now needing to mess around with deactivation.

Thanks for all the input chaps.

[moanthebairns]

Zebrs said:

moanthebairns said:

A way I've found around this whilst using the comparison sites online is to obtain the quote based on a standard bike (many seem to opt out when you add exhaust etc).

Give the one you fancy a call and declare it over the phone (this normally results in no price change).

Top man! Thanks for the advice, I did just this and the company weren’t bothered by it, I even managed to include commuting on the policy for the modified bike for not too much more than it would have been stock on the online comparison sites. Saves me now needing to mess around with deactivation.

Thanks for all the input chaps.

See I'm a good when it comes to saving money.....