for all the deise 2 wheeled community this sunday

honeybadger

marlin vs

The forecast is bad,I hope it dosen't put too many people off.

Cabaal

No to always on headlights???......yeah smart.
All motorist traffic incl cars, trucks should have headlights on when moving, it makes them much more visible.

Either this riders right protest is the biggest troll ever on the Waterford forum or you people appear have no common sense,

marlin vs

Cabaal wrote: »

No to always on headlights???......yeah smart.
All motorist traffic incl cars, trucks should have headlights on when moving, it makes them much more visible.

Either this riders right protest is the biggest troll ever on the Waterford forum or you people appear have no common sense,

I drive with my lights on all the time, the issue is they are making law's forcing people to do these things.I guarentee that if you go down and have a look you'll see people doing some of these thing's of their on free will.

200motels

marlin vs wrote: »

I drive with my lights on all the time, the issue is they are making law's forcing people to do these things.I guarentee that if you go down and have a look you'll see people doing some of these thing's of their on free will.

I think your making a silly point, what about seat belts, drink driving etc if they were no laws would everybody wear a seatbelt or drink and drive.

Potential-Monke

I'm with Cabaal on this one, always on headlights should be mandatory for every single driver out there, and not just motorcyclists. Partially agree to the high visibility part too, in fairness most bike accidents are caused by motorists who didn't see the biker, so more visibility would be a good thing... Now if only herself would let me get one!

marlin vs

200motels wrote: »

I think your making a silly point, what about seat belts, drink driving etc if they were no laws would everybody wear a seatbelt or drink and drive.

I alway's wear a seat belt and don't drink and drive,and it's not because it's the law it's just common sence,I can't answer for other people.

seanybiker

Most of new bikes don't have an option to turn the lights off so that law doesn't bother me.

Putting a fecking tachograph on a bike and not leaving me into urban areas etc is the stupid proposals they are voting on. Oh and Retro fitting ABS to me bike. Fook off with that idea lol.

Potential-Monke

seanybiker wrote: »

Most of new bikes don't have an option to turn the lights off so that law doesn't bother me.

Putting a fecking tachograph on a bike and not leaving me into urban areas etc is the stupid proposals they are voting on. Oh and Retro fitting ABS to me bike. Fook off with that idea lol.

Why do they want tacographs on bikes? Granted if it's a delivery bike, but a personal bike? I can't see the sense in that. And if there are classic cars that don't require ABS why are they trying to get bikes to have it done?

chelloveks

seanybiker wrote: »

Most of new bikes don't have an option to turn the lights off so that law doesn't bother me.

Putting a fecking tachograph on a bike and not leaving me into urban areas etc is the stupid proposals they are voting on. Oh and Retro fitting ABS to me bike. Fook off with that idea lol.

George Orwell....1884.....big brother is watching! Put one of them devices on the govt cars and let's see where those elected to serve us are driving their free cars!not a fckn chance!

south

I thought headlights on was coming in for all cars and bikes in a few years anyway.. i could be wrong..

seanybiker

Potential-Monke wrote: »

Why do they want tacographs on bikes? Granted if it's a delivery bike, but a personal bike? I can't see the sense in that. And if there are classic cars that don't require ABS why are they trying to get bikes to have it done?

no idea to be honest.

I can't see these coming in anyways. Well not all of them.

two wheels good

seanybiker wrote: »

Putting a fecking tachograph on a bike.... [edit] Fook off with that idea lol.

I read comments about this but have searched relevant documents and websites and found no such proposal. I only found info on On-Board Diagnostics
There is NO proposal to fit ride history recording devices to motorcycles.

On-Board Diagnostics (OBD)amounts to warning lights to tell the rider a failure of equipment has occurred. e.g. ABS failure, brake light failure

seanybiker wrote: »

Oh and Retro fitting ABS to me bike. Fook off with that idea lol.

There is NO proposal to mandate retro-fitment of ABS.
As I understand the proposal is for ABS to be fitted on all new bikes over 125cc

Of course ABS and ODB is going to push up prices

seanybiker

two wheels good wrote: »

I read comments about this but have searched relevant documents and websites and found no such proposal. I only found info on On-Board Diagnostics
There is NO proposal to fit ride history recording devices to motorcycles.

On-Board Diagnostics (OBD)amounts to warning lights to tell the rider a failure of equipment has occurred. e.g. ABS failure, brake light failure



There is NO proposal to mandate retro-fitment of ABS.
As I understand the proposal is for ABS to be fitted on all new bikes over 125cc

Of course ABS and ODB is going to push up prices

Ah that's all grand so. Any site I'm on they are banging on about so I just went with them lol.

My bike and many others already have onboard diagnostics anyways so that's all good.

What about not being able to modify the bike at all and 7 year old + bikes not being allowed in urban areas? That could be hysteria aswell lol.

two wheels good

Potential-Monke wrote: »

I'm with Cabaal on this one, always on headlights should be mandatory for every single driver out there, and not just motorcyclists.

I disagree. The motorcyclist's headlight can 'get lost' in the flurry of headlights.

There are times when headlight off is safer for the motorcyclist e.g with low sun or other bright headlights behind the rider.

Consider the m\cycle headlight lining up with the truck headlight then the oncoming driver sees a pair of truck headlights, not two vehicles.

I'd like to control my own lights thanks.

two wheels good

seanybiker wrote: »

What about not being able to modify the bike at all and 7 year old + bikes not being allowed in urban areas? That could be hysteria aswell lol.

Type approval , and any ban on modification is an outrageous proposal. That's why I'll be protesting tomorrow.

The ban on 7 (or 8) year old bikes in urban is not an EU proposal. It's a domestic French initiative . Utterly ridiculous.
I find it hard to imagine it could get EU-wide support, but who knows with the eurocrats.

seanybiker

Can't see it getting EU support meself to be honest. Think it's more France and the crap loads of scoots all over the place.

Some of the lads not to happy about the hi-vis jackets. Wouldn't bother me to much. Only ever wore one for me test but sure a jacket isn't gonna harm me.

Keith186

two wheels good wrote: »

Type approval , and any ban on modification is an outrageous proposal. That's why I'll be protesting tomorrow.

The ban on 7 (or 8) year old bikes in urban is not an EU proposal. It's a domestic French initiative . Utterly ridiculous.
I find it hard to imagine it could get EU-wide support, but who knows with the eurocrats.

Could you explain what type approval actually means?

Thanks

marlin vs

Cabaal wrote: »

Either this riders right protest is the biggest troll ever on the Waterford forum or you people appear have no common sense,

Not a troll Cabaal,and a lot of us have more common sence than you seem to have.Typical knocker and know all.And what do you mean by you people,do you look down on biker's?

honeybadger

Cabaal wrote: »

No to always on headlights???......yeah smart.
All motorist traffic incl cars, trucks should have headlights on when moving, it makes them much more visible.

Either this riders right protest is the biggest troll ever on the Waterford forum or you people appear have no common sense,

just to let you know cabaal this a european wide protest tomorrow and not just confined to our lovely little city here,and if you have the spare time tomorrow why not come down and support us and enjoy the sight or support your own up in kk there..this is about freedom of rights after all

seanybiker

Keith186 wrote: »

Could you explain what type approval actually means?

Thanks

I didnt read up all the legislation crap etc etc etc

my guessing is type approval means, you can change certain things but they will be tightly governed. eg: no K@N air filter but a slightly different air filter from the OEM is ok. probably totally wrong but thats just my guess.

two wheels good

Keith186 wrote: »

Could you explain what type approval actually means? Thanks

Type approval/Single vehicle approval:
All spare parts must be approved for use. Time consuming and expensive particularly for any low volume manufacturer.

Regulation for people who build bikes and the number of vehicles they produce
More difficult to import vehicles from outside EU

Anti tampering:
Restrictions on mods to motorcycles especially those that increase power. Possibly requirement to specify power figures on registration document
Possible restriction on the tyres permitted for each vehicle

Inevitably all this will mean more cost for manufacturer and consumer - and more NCT-type testing of vehicles, and I suspect more road-side spot checks

Some of the proposals e.g. light-on , hi viz, may seem sensible and not very onerous to some riders but this is a time for the motorcycle community to show solidarity and to resist ALL this unnecessary meddling.

Much of my info is from http://www.righttoride.eu/?p=7646. UK based but still very informative. (I found this encouraging statement along the way "The UK Government [therefore] opposes new blanket anti tampering measures".)

BTW Here's an interest quote from the same website regarding tampering with Learner motorcycles http://www.righttoride.eu/?p=7709

"Interestingly, when asked by FEMA how TRL (UK's Transport Research Laboratory) knows the occurrence rate of a certain type of tampering, the TRL representative said “occurrence is difficult to know, so we often use guesses”. You read that right: current state-of-the-art research on engine modification is based on guesswork. And there is no indication that TRL’s guess is better than anybody’s.

Cabaal

honeybadger wrote: »

just to let you know cabaal this a european wide protest tomorrow and not just confined to our lovely little city here,and if you have the spare time tomorrow why not come down and support us and enjoy the sight or support your own up in kk there..this is about freedom of rights after all

I'm sorry but I honestly can't support a campaign that puts choice into such things as having lights on when the engine is running, its as foolish as the campaigns years ago to have seatbelts as optional for people.

It is a legitimate change that is proven to improve viability to other road users, the comments here that suggest it allows the light to be lost amongst others is just foolish

Some of the proposals e.g. light-on , hi viz, may seem sensible and not very onerous to some riders but this is a time for the motorcycle community to show solidarity and to resist ALL this unnecessary meddling.

This honestly makes no sense, so whilst you admit that there are perfectly legit and reasonable requests being made you lump them in with others and reject them all.

longshanks

Might take a spin in to town, see if any bikers braved the rain

Potential-Monke

Seems to be a good turnout, can't guess how many but there are at least 20 bikes i can see. And all the riders in under the canopy on the Plaza!

Edit: Just got a text from a friend who is on the motorway on the way towards waterford, before getting to the Mullinavat turnoff, and thereare loads of bikes on the road... Blokcing both lanes and driving at 60kph, with a car at the front driving inbetween both lanes. Way to promote guys, way to promote...

Cabaal

Potential-Monke wrote: »

Edit: Just got a text from a friend who is on the motorway on the way towards waterford, before getting to the Mullinavat turnoff, and thereare loads of bikes on the road... Blokcing both lanes and driving at 60kph, with a car at the front driving inbetween both lanes. Way to promote guys, way to promote...

Insanely stupid thing for anyone to do if this is true, not to mention very much illegal. Not exactly something that will make anyone want to support you either.

brian plank

Cabaal wrote: »

Insanely stupid thing for anyone to do if this is true, not to mention very much illegal. Not exactly something that will make anyone want to support you either.

cococoady

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0925/motorcyles.html.

seanybiker

Cabaal wrote: »

I'm sorry but I honestly can't support a campaign that puts choice into such things as having lights on when the engine is running, its as foolish as the campaigns years ago to have seatbelts as optional for people.

It is a legitimate change that is proven to improve viability to other road users, the comments here that suggest it allows the light to be lost amongst others is just foolish



This honestly makes no sense, so whilst you admit that there are perfectly legit and reasonable requests being made you lump them in with others and reject them all.

There's more to it than just the lights. Most bikes don't have an off switch for the lights anyways. Look at the whole things they want to bring in and not just the lights being on and then you might know what we are giving out about.

Cabaal

seanybiker wrote: »

There's more to it than just the lights. Most bikes don't have an off switch for the lights anyways. Look at the whole things they want to bring in and not just the lights being on and then you might know what we are giving out about.

and you've noted that already alright, my point being if its not about lights and most bikes can't turn off lights anyway then why include it as something not wanted on posters etc?

Why not use poster and campaign space for the stuff that actually matters and you have an actual real issue with such as say roadside diags?

takola

marlin vs wrote: »

Cabaal.need I say anything else.:D

Banned.

Try to keep it civil, guys.