2017 Can-Am Spyder RT Problems
Owner-reported complaints filed with NHTSA, grouped by component
Data refreshed
What this page shows
Everything below is an owner-reported complaint submitted to NHTSA about the 2017 Can-Am Spyder RT, grouped by the component NHTSA recorded on the report. These are not confirmed defects, and they are not recalls. NHTSA does not verify most reports before publishing them, and a category with more reports in it is not evidence that a part is defective.
Complaints are reports submitted by owners and drivers to NHTSA. They are not verified and do not establish that a defect exists.
Reports by component
Ranked by how many owner reports name each component category
- Powertrain (other)457.1%
- Brakes228.6%
- Engine114.3%
Percentages are of component mentions. A single complaint can name more than one component, so these do not sum to the total complaint count.
Each component in detail
What the reports in each category say, in the owners' own words
Powertrain (other)
Powertrain reports that are not specifically the engine or transmission — driveshafts, axles, transfer cases and differentials.
From owner reports, verbatim
The contact owns a 2017 Can-Am Spyder RT. The contact had received notification of NHTSA Campaign Number: 24V728000 (Power Train). The contact called the dealer and was informed that the recall remedy would be performed based on the mileage. The contact was informed that at the current mileage (31,709), the vehicle no longer qualified for the recall repair. The contact stated that the recall repair was unfair and that the vehicle might still be susceptible to failure regardless of the mileage. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was made aware of the issue but offered no additional assistance. The contact was referred to the NHTSA Hotline to report the failure. The contact had not experienced a failure. Parts distribution disconnect.
The contact owns a 2017 Can-Am Spyder RT. The contact received notification of NHTSA Campaign Number: 22V352000 (Power Train) however, the part to do the recall repair was not yet available. The contact stated that the manufacturer had exceeded a reasonable amount of time for the recall repair. The dealer was made aware of the issue. The manufacturer was made aware of the issue. The contact had not experienced a failure. Parts distribution disconnect.
Too few reports in this category for a page of its own — they appear in the full complaint list.
Brakes
Reports naming service brakes, the antilock braking system, brake hoses, master cylinders or the parking brake.
From owner reports, verbatim
The contact owns a 2017 Can-Am Spyder RT. The contact stated that while driving with a passenger at highway speeds, the brake pedal was depressed; however, the vehicle failed to stop as intended. The contact stated that the brake pedal was depressed to the floor. The contact was able to slow down and stop the vehicle. The contact stated that the failure had occurred while avoiding a nearby crash. The contact stated that the failure almost caused a deadly crash. The vehicle was driven to the residence. The dealer was made aware of the failure and agreed to have the vehicle towed to the dealer. The vehicle was towed to the dealer, where it was diagnosed with a failed control module. The contact was informed that the control module needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. In addition, the contact stated that the dealer had previously performed an unknown recall repair a month prior to the failure. The dealer where the vehicle was purchased was contacted, and the contact was informed that the braking system was serviced two months prior to the sale of the vehicle. The dealer contacted the manufacturer, and the manufacturer was made aware of the failure but provided no assistance. The dealer was informed that the technical investigators confirmed that the failure was a known defect that occurred during manufacturing. The contact was informed that the repair was not covered under warranty. The failure mileage was approximately 16,531.
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2017 CAN-AM SPYDER RT LIMITED. WHILE DRIVING 2 MPH, THE BRAKES ENGAGED INDEPENDENTLY. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER, BUT THE FAILURE WAS UNABLE TO BE DIAGNOSED OR DUPLICATED. WHILE ATTEMPTING TO LEAVE THE DEALER, THE BRAKES SEIZED. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS INOPERABLE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED FIVE TIMES; HOWEVER, THE FAILURE RECURRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 2,800.
Too few reports in this category for a page of its own — they appear in the full complaint list.
Engine
Reports naming the engine itself — including stalling, misfires, oil consumption, cooling and internal engine components.
From owner reports, verbatim
Dealership can not do recall until December 2025. Was told service department is only doing 1 recall per month per management. I'm [XXX] and bought this motorcycle from this dealership. I find this totally unacceptable to be only doing 1 recall a month. I was told it was ok to ride bike and PROBABLY doing would happen, which does not make me feel safe at all to ride. Dealership is MotoMember Purcellville VA 20132 INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
Too few reports in this category for a page of its own — they appear in the full complaint list.
Higher-selling and older vehicles accumulate more reports. Counts are not failure rates and are not directly comparable between vehicles that sold in very different numbers.
Elsewhere on this vehicle
Data sources
- NHTSA Office of Defects Investigation — owner-reported complaints and the components recorded on them
Data on this page last refreshed .