NSW MCC Meeting September noise ----- Well.. the noise saga continues. No news yet ont he ZX10 owner who got booked on his brand new bike for having a pipe whose stationary noise test info showed it passed the latest ADR but was louder than the NSW regs allow. Still winding through the courts I believe. But... A gentleman bought a bike from a large dealership two years ago. THis bike was sold with an aftermarket pipe. He was recently booked for no label and excessive noise via our old friend Clause 19. He successfully[1] sued the shop that sold it to him, and was awarded the price of the bike plus legal costs. As they sold him a bike not fit for the purpose. He had kept the original photo ad, and so was able to show it wore the same pipe as it had when he bought it, which was also mentioned by brand in the ad. I expect this may motivate dealers somewhat! We know that Frasers have been getting HD buyers to sign papers saying they know the bike is not road legal, I would expect other dealers to now do the same. It's up to the buyer to sign or not... Politics --------- An ALP Federal member Gibson (didn't record his firstname) who is the chairman of the Staysafe committee that overseas federal and state roadsafety has been talking with the MCC and AMC and has invited the motorcycling bodies to address the committee. And possibly get involved. This means rider representation at the highest level of road safety legisliation in the country. You may have noticed there's a federal election coming up! There are pollies all over the place, desperate to talk to you. So talk to them! THings you can ask: - what is your party's motorcycle road safety policy? IF you don't have one, why not? Will you be putting one together? When? - what is your party's policy on sustainable transport? Are bikes in there? If so, what does it say? If not, why not? - What is your party's policy on wire rope barriers? Do you know there's been no testing at all done on the effect on motorcycles? What do you think will happen when a bike hits one? - what is your party doing to make rural roads safe for bikes? It's likely your average hopeful will have No Clue (so what's new?) But they are all hungry as hell for your vote in this close election. So make them realise that you are serious about bikes, and encourage them to contact you with that information. It will get back to HQ for sure. Low BAC for riders ------------------ A recent conference on safety resolved that a low BAC for riders was a Good Thing, despite clear evidence that if you remove unlicenced riders and unregsitered bikes from the stats the drunk rider percentages drop to way below the level for cars. Whereas cars show no change. So if anyone should have a low blood alcohol level, it's cage pilots! The MCC has been protesting this, the RTA are playing dumb. It's getting up to poilitician level. Stay tuned. Ride to work day --------------- Ride to work day is Wed 20th October. The MCC will be trying to set up gathering points on major commuting runs so that people can travel togetehr and make a bit of a splash. I'm not sure how this will be determined, if you know of a few people who will be riding to work on that day, then make your ride together! If you have suggestions as to gathering points that will be useful for many commuters, please make them. Pillion haulers wanted ----------------------- We are teeing up a "day on a bike" for journos from several mainstream mags. The idea is to get pillion friendly bikes with pillion experienced riders and take the journos for a ride to see what bike riding's like. And maybe to show them how useful bikes are in traffic. I don't know if this will be a weekday or weekend thing, or any more about it than what I've written here. I expect it will be Sydney city based though. If you fit the bill, with a good pillion bike and you knwo how to make a first time pillion feel safe and comfortable, email me with name, bike type, contact details, and if you are available on weekdays with notice. That's about it - see separate posts for request about LAM experiences, and motorcycle awareness week FREE FOOD! Zebee [1] The MCC is not aware - or was not at the meeting - if this was a judgement or a settlement.
In aus.motorcycles on Thu, 9 Sep 2004 20:47:53 +1000 Clause 19 is not about being registered. It is about operating them on the road. It is very important to keep that distinction in mind. A vehicle can be refused registration if it is "excessively noisy". No mention of ADRs or noise level, it's up to the individual's ears. But it cannot be operated on the road without being properly labelled, and if it is post (I think) 1988, complying with ADR 39 (I think that's the one). That is, a stationary noise test of 94dB. A bike that complies with the new ADR, 86, with a stationary noise test greater than 94dB but a rideby test that passes the ADR, can be registered, but as the regulations stand, not ridden on the road in NSW. Bloody ridiculous? Yes. Current attitude from the relevant Minister, Debus I think, is "talk to the EPA, I don't wanna know". "Minister, here's a box of documents, recording how we've talked to the EPA". "Talk to the EPA, I don't wanna know". Your tax dollars at work. Zebee
mmmmmm, revenue raising at its finest here, we will take your money, get you a nice sticker to say your bike is registered, but no, you cant ride it on the road because it is illegal have I got it right??!!!!? mh
ADR 86 supersedes ADR 39 but ADR 39 still exist? Does it exist in Federal govt regulations or is it incorporated into the NSW act? If it exists in Fed. govt regs why not lobby the federal authorities to have the ADR removed (ie so that NSW regulation points to a blank ADR) or if the wording of ADR 39 is incorporated into NSW legislation why not lobby an independent MP to introduce a private members bill to have the offending wording removed? Surely there must be one MP who is sympathetic to motorcyclist's POV. Nev.. '03 ZX12R
In aus.motorcycles on Thu, 9 Sep 2004 22:00:23 +1000 It's not quite revenue raising. It's more like left hand and right hand. Registration is RTA. Clause 19 is EPA. Two different bodies. EPA were under the impression that years ago RTA had made the labels mandatory for registration. Which they were for about 6 weeks. Zebee
In aus.motorcycles on Fri, 10 Sep 2004 00:09:10 +1000 The MCC isn't standing still on all this you know. ONe of the things we've been telling variou spollies is that the MCC is a road safety lobby group but has been spending most of its time on this bullshit, which is a total waste. Yes, political work is being done to get this fixed. There is a very low political will to cross the EPA. Zebee
In aus.motorcycles on 9 Sep 2004 23:03:04 +1000 It's the Salvation Army doing the providing.... Zebee
Zebee, do I have this correct (additional question). What is your view of Federal ADR regulations being overridden at the state (NSW) level leaving a purchaser buying a bike that is legal per ADR but not allowed to be ridden in NSW? Stan
In aus.motorcycles on Fri, 10 Sep 2004 09:14:12 +1000 Well.. ADRs are about what's to be imported, each state is free to make their own regs as to what is allowed on their roads. State's rights and all that. So the ADR isn't being overridden, just not being incorporated into state regulations. So leave the overridden bit out, and just that it's ADR compliant but not NSW compliant. Zebee
