Learner legal HondaShadow?

roberto_98

Well guys. Just bought a VT600c shadow '94. Being told it is and it isn't learner legal. Can anyone clear this up? I did the math with the power:weight and its not lookin good. Thankya much:D

Lucifer31

Hey there. I bought a recently imported '03 VT600C last year. It meets the power/weight restriction criteria alright. I am insured with Quinn Direct. Took a while for them to understand that I did NOT need to get the bike restricted, but they've come round after I sent in some documentation to show this.
I recently passed my test on the same bike too. The tester ALSO incorrectly thought that my bike needed to be restricted, but I put him right on that too.

cantdecide

@185 kg and 43 hp, which are the stats that I've found online, it would result in a power to weight ratio of over .17 kw/ kg. What hp is the '03?

cantdecide

Btw, my brother has a '98 Shadow 1100 and he restricted it. You'd barely notice a difference between before and after.

Lucifer31

The spec for the '03:
Claimed Horsepower: 39 hp (29.1 kW) @ 6500 rpm
Dry Weight (without fluids): 199 kg (438.7 pounds)

That gives a power/weight ratio of 0.146Kw/kg, which is under the 0.16Kw/kg restriction.

My insurer is happy with this information, so restriction is not necessary in my case anyways.

roberto_98

thanks for the info. what kind of documentation did u send to them?? i found some stats with a weight of 207kg and 41 claimed horsepower for my own bike and its in the region of .15. so surely this means it's ok...

thewatch

Not learner legal. has to meet both criteria.

roberto_98

how do you mean?

thewatch

It needs restricting. The Power to weight may be ok but originally the horsepower was greater than 25kW. Has to be both unfortunately.

Quinn will insure you on anything but when it comes to the crunch they could say you are not licensed for the bike therefore insurance is invalid

cantdecide

thewatch wrote: »

...Has to be both unfortunately...

This again?

CharlieCroker

Thought it was one or the other?? I.e. You could have a bike with 40bhp once it was over a certain weight?

Certainly open to correction though

thewatch

Been done to death on biker forums. both.

Lucifer31

Roberto 98: Once again, your bike is learner legal. I have gotten verbal and written confirmation from the RSA that once the bike meets EITHER criteria, it is road legal. I have had Quinn Direct state that indeed there is no issue with my policy (Unrestricted VT600C). Nor should there be.

martydunf

Why is there so much confusion over this?
So its either or then, yeah?

Wouldnt make much sense for it to have to meet both criteria TBH.

thewatch

can you post up a copy of the RSA statement please?

This why I always thought it was both

http://www.biker.ie/forum/showthread.php?t=13202

Has the confusion been sorted so or what?

mathepac

From the RSA website - http://www.rsa.ie/en/RSA/Learner-Drivers/Motorcyclists/The-Motorcycle-Test/

"A person applying for a first-time motorcycle learner permit in category A is restricted to driving motorcycles with an engine power output not exceeding 25kW or with a power/weight ratio not exceeding 0.16kW/kg.

This restriction continues to apply for the duration of all learner permits and for the first 2 years after taking out a full driving licence in category A.

A motorcycle can have a restrictor kit fitted to it to meet this requirement; the kit should only be fitted by a registered motorcycle dealer and you should keep the documentation relating to the kit while it is on your bike. Manufacturers and suppliers will advise on the power outputs of individual motorcycles."

(bolding and italics above are mine)

thewatch

mathepac wrote: »

From the RSA website - http://www.rsa.ie/en/RSA/Learner-Drivers/Motorcyclists/The-Motorcycle-Test/

"A person applying for a first-time motorcycle learner permit in category A is restricted to driving motorcycles with an engine power output not exceeding 25kW or with a power/weight ratio not exceeding 0.16kW/kg.

This restriction continues to apply for the duration of all learner permits and for the first 2 years after taking out a full driving licence in category A.

A motorcycle can have a restrictor kit fitted to it to meet this requirement; the kit should only be fitted by a registered motorcycle dealer and you should keep the documentation relating to the kit while it is on your bike. Manufacturers and suppliers will advise on the power outputs of individual motorcycles."

(bolding and italics above are mine)

read this http://www.biker.ie/forum/showthread.php?t=13202

martydunf

thewatch wrote: »

read this http://www.biker.ie/forum/showthread.php?t=13202

That thread is nearly 4 years old. Theres been a few changes since then.

If the RSA say its either/or, then thats good enough for me.

thewatch

I've seen nothing from the RSA to say either/or

mathepac

It says OR --- once more with feeling, from the RSA website - http://www.rsa.ie/en/RSA/Learner-Dri...torcycle-Test/

thewatch

mathepac wrote: »

It says OR --- once more with feeling, from the RSA website - http://www.rsa.ie/en/RSA/Learner-Dri...torcycle-Test/

That's the legislation that the RSA has just copied. Nothing new to say the shadow is ok based on power/weight.

What it says in the legislation is NOT A or B

A being 25kW

B is 0.16kw/kg

Or at least thats the interpretation I take from it and the guys in the thread I linked.

And round we go

I don't care anymore

KamiKazi

thewatch wrote: »

It needs restricting. The Power to weight may be ok but originally the horsepower was greater than 25kW. Has to be both unfortunately.

Wrong.

thewatch wrote: »

Quinn will insure you on anything but when it comes to the crunch they could say you are not licensed for the bike therefore insurance is invalid

Wrong.

Quinn are now looking for proof of restriction for every rider with a full licence less than two years.

Check out the new paper on the new EU directives that were published a few weeks ago, they clearly state XX BHP and 0.XX KW per KG. The current system is XX BHP OR 0.XX KW per KG.

roberto_98

my head hurts

MrAbc

Seems the legislation is phrased along the lines...

"given that bikes can be high- or low-powered, and can be fast- or slow-off-the-line ... you have permission to choose only a bike which is low-powered or slow-off-the-line"


I take that to mean I can have any low-powered bike(even if it's fast-off-the-line) or any slow-off-the-line bike (even if its high-powered).


Like Santa could be restricted to bringing you only a laptop that will be too small or will be too slow :-(

Flyin Irishman

Its ridiculous that the RSA would word the restriction in a way that may lead to confusion, but I would take the restriction to mean:

"A person applying for a first-time motorcycle learner permit in category A is restricted to driving motorcycles with an engine power output not exceeding 25kW nor with a power/weight ratio exceeding 0.16kW/kg."

As in it cannot be either: more than 25kW, or more than 0.16kW/kg. Exceeding either limit is breaking the restriction....





......I think

KamiKazi

Flyin Irishman wrote: »

Its ridiculous that the RSA would word the restriction in a way that may lead to confusion, but I would take the restriction to mean:

"A person applying for a first-time motorcycle learner permit in category A is restricted to driving motorcycles with an engine power output not exceeding 25kW nor with a power/weight ratio exceeding 0.16kW/kg."

As in it cannot be either: more than 25kW, or more than 0.16kW/kg. Exceeding either limit is breaking the restriction....





......I think

People have already used the power to weight ratio as a valid restriction to take driving tests...

MrAbc

Flyin Irishman wrote: »

Its ridiculous that the RSA would word the restriction in a way that may lead to confusion, but I would take the restriction to mean:

"A person applying for a first-time motorcycle learner permit in category A is restricted to driving motorcycles with an engine power output not exceeding 25kW nor with a power/weight ratio exceeding 0.16kW/kg."

As in it cannot be either: more than 25kW, or more than 0.16kW/kg. Exceeding either limit is breaking the restriction....
...I think

But that's just it, if they wanted it in law to mean 'nor', it would have to be 'nor' !!!

Flyin Irishman

MrAbc wrote: »

But that's just it, if they wanted it in law to mean 'nor', it would have to be 'nor' !!!

I agree, and i bet a team of highly paid people were probably employed to word and review the law. It's discraceful that it would be ratified into law, still worded in a way that causes confusion

EGOSHEA

But loads of people pre-test or post-but-within-two-years own and are insured on (and in a way that pays out if/when they have an accident) bikes which are over 25kw but are in line with the power/weight ratio. So it must presently mean 'X AND/OR Y'. Couldn't they just have said 'and/or' - that would have cleared it up, no?