Restricted Use Motorcycles (RUM)

[VIMike]

imported post

imported post

Fartypants I appreciate your knowledge and wisdom in this matter. I can also appreciate that my next point could be a bit costly to inform the public, but why can't we see a phase-in? It seems like the law maker's hammer just drops sometimes without any grace period.

I haven't read anything in the papers or heard anything on the news aboutit.Another thoughtis thatthe government has contacts with the various interest groups that will be impacted socouldn't they be contacted so the word can get out before it becomes law?

Just some typical pondering on my part.

VIMike

 

[cactusreid]

imported post

imported post

kaos wrote:

FARTYPANTS,i'm wondering if you could enlighten us on this angle. lets say i take a frame with no serial # and assemble a motorcycle that has all the pieces to make it road legal and plate-able in b.c. Reguardless what it looks like or resembles ie: a streetbike,a chopper, a 2stroke cafe racer or a dualsport style motorcycle, am i correct that i could get a serial # issued,and legally buy insurance and a plate and ride my "ubilt motorcycle" in this province? or is there a clause that say's if it "looks" like a rum bike UPON COMPLETION-it must be a rum bike? Or does a ubilt motorcycle have to be gobbed together with chicken sh%^t welds on the frame and walmart fasteners on the bodywork in order to be street legal in this province?also i would think that i should be able to get a list of all the required parts and components that would be looked at and approved at the time of inspection. example being if a steel fuel tank is required,i'm sure not going to show up for an inspection with a plastic tank on my ubilt MOTORCYCLE. you seem to be the man in the know here, and thanks for the help so far in getting our heads around this topic. cactusreid

its all in the wording,you don't modify a ''rum'' bike ,you assemble parts. the used frame would likely have no 'rum '' sticker and as a you build, it given a serial #,so the sticker is not an issue after the fact.

 

[Brimstone]

imported post

imported post

So the issue essentially then is that while a bike "could" be modified to be compliant, the government has taken the easier approach to just completely remove that option. In essence forcing consumers to purchase bikes from manufacturers which have produced compliant bikes. Whom I'm sure didn't lobby for this legislation...

The government (ICBC) is taking the easy way out by simply not giving owners the option to bring an existing bike up to compliance. That is what I have a problem with.

The fact that it may be easy or not to modify an existing bike as opposed to having the knowledge and ability to ubuild a bike should not be an issue. I'm not entirely convinced that the guys building any custom bikes are completely qualified anyway. What makes someone qualified to manufacture a bike? Engineering degree? Good with tools? Great metal fabricator? Even Fartypants, who arguably sounds like he knows exactly what it would take to modify an existing bike isn't allowed under the current rules.

I guess it was inevitable that the government would start to clamp down. Now it's our responsibility to pressure manufactures to build the kind of road legal dirtbikes we all want...

Lee J
Kelowna, BC

 

[cactusreid]

imported post

imported post

Brimstone wrote:

I guess it was inevitable that the government would start to clamp down. Now it's our responsibility to pressure manufactures to build the kind of road legal dirtbikes we all want...

Lee J
Kelowna, BC

I think it's time to pressure the government to back off! NEXT TO THE HST BEING GOOD FOR US,this is the biggest waste of taxpayers money i've heard about all summer!

 

[zokalr13]

imported post

imported post

fartypants wrote:

zokalr13 wrote:

i dont think this new guideline is for legalities about if your bike is "proper' -its put in place to limit access to sensitive watersheds that are high up in the mtns .if you get in an accident ICBC will try and blame both partie$$ so it doesnt matter really if you have all the good parts- they will be smashed up anyway....

What??

How does stopping rum's from being registered on the street stop me from riding any dirt bike high into a watershed??

Ya lost me there.:?

simple-a guy with a dirtbike on a truck will not drive 25km up a logging road to the watersheds to unload his bike ,he will stay down low and unload his bike and ride around keeping close to his truck...its a subtle way the GOV tries to limit access to FSRs -

 

[old trials guy]

imported post

imported post

zokalr13 wrote:

fartypants wrote:

zokalr13 wrote:

i dont think this new guideline is for legalities about if your bike is "proper' -its put in place to limit access to sensitive watersheds that are high up in the mtns .if you get in an accident ICBC will try and blame both partie$$ so it doesnt matter really if you have all the good parts- they will be smashed up anyway....

What??

How does stopping rum's from being registered on the street stop me from riding any dirt bike high into a watershed??

Ya lost me there.:?

simple-a guy with a dirtbike on a truck will not drive 25km up a logging road to the watersheds to unload his bike ,he will stay down low and unload his bike and ride around keeping close to his truck...its a subtle way the GOV tries to limit access to FSRs -

I am not so sure zokarl13 is totally off base. There has been a tremendous number of FSR's seemingly arbitrarily closed to the public across our province. Even some that are currently active for logging are being gated. When askedthe usual response is the ministry has decided the road is no longer safe for vehicle traffic or thereis a concern about the watershed. Decommissioning is radical in many instances creating ridiculous cross ditches or removing vital bridges. If they ever had to fight a fire, how the heck would they access it?

I know it reeks of paranoia but I think there is a long term plan to erradicate off road vehicles of all descriptions in anywhere butapproved riding areas (which coincidentlyare almost impossible to find or create due to the stringent environmental requirements). It is fine to clearcut sections of Blue Mountain in Maple Ridge but the local club has to jump through hoops to get access to a few single track trails.

Sorry for getting off topic but I am concerned this is just part of a greater agenda to restrict public access to our forests.

otg

 

[icanpopawheeli]

imported post

imported post

"things get created for one purpose and used for another all the time(viagra)."

Is this something that can work for my bike Al?

 

[Sweet]

imported post

imported post

What makes a factory street legal dirt bike any safer than a RUM bike that has been converted with a dualsport kit and DOT tires? The sticker!? What a joke! Yet another case of Government B.S.

 

[franhoser]

imported post

imported post

icanpopawheeli wrote:

"things get created for one purpose and used for another all the time(viagra)."

Is this something that can work for my bike Al?

yes, three tablets in the gas tankand you get a Husky for about 20 miles.

 

[icanpopawheeli]

imported post

imported post

Wicked! I'm off to the pharmacist right now!

 

[sueandal]

imported post

imported post

icanpopawheeli wrote:

"things get created for one purpose and used for another all the time(viagra)."

Is this something that can work for my bike Al?

well..... i'm not sure popawheelie
we could put your bike on viagra by tossing your engine and putting in my ktm 525.
then mine could get hopped up with a 2 stroke twin 500cc 8 speed wide ratioed direct injected powerplant.
ahhhh, fantasy land.
i guess thats more than viagra, its an implant.

 

[zoo]

imported post

imported post

This is just typical bc(canadian) way of doing things. Instead of looking into the laws and actually researching if those expectations and laws are adequit, They just use the laws written 30 years ago. Its clear that a manufactured dirt bike should be able to be made street legal alot easier than building up a custom Harley.

They should actually spend some time on this one before making a final decision which will effect 1000's of riders in BC. Maybe we should all be writing letters to them.

And how is it a KTM, Husky can be legal and get the street sticker when they appear to be no different than a XR 650 with all the lights and signals etc. on it.

This problem is'nt a question of unsafe vehicles, its a law made 30 years ago that they do not want to take the time to re-word to suite todays needs and changes.

 

[redpillar]

imported post

imported post

OK, so what do the Husaberg FE models say an their labels?
I noticed that the 2010 model 570 FS (sm) models have licence plate holders and turn signals on them. I wonder what they say on their label. If it is designated as MC and there is no difference between the 570 FE and the 570 FS except wheels etc then what is the 570 FE designated.

What do the TE 610 Huskies say on their labels? They are OK in the US and imported regularly to Canada, inspected and plated.

 

[cactusreid]

imported post

imported post

does anyone know who we should approach on getting this bulliten recinded,or at least studied by a gov funded "working group"? ramming this type of thing down the publics throat/picking on one group of bikers and not everybody equally is not kosher by my standards!

 

[kaos]

imported post

imported post

i think you will find the husabergs and huskys are ''competition'' bikes too.the euros just use different terms,so no ''rum'' designation.but still not for ''highway use''

 

[franhoser]

imported post

imported post

From what I understand Husky's especially the 610 meets and exceeds all DOTrequirements in the States but it's such a big bureaucratic process up here with Transport Canada that Husky just never bothered cause of lack of sales volume in Canada.

To second some of Fatypants clarifications, he's right with the interpretation of the rules but I disagree with the fact about RUM bikes are not classified as Highway use because of their design.

From what I understand, it's a big bureaucratic process for a manufacturer to get a Highway use motorcycle on market. Not because of components or design or anything like that, just the mere fact of what they have to jump trough with Transport Canada for eliviate all liabilty concerns. Most RUM bikes with a few minor modification would meet all Transport Canada conditions these day's it's just a matter of costs and time for the manufacturer to go trough the endless bureaucratic process. So many chose not to cause they look at the number of how many bikes they would sell for that speciffic model and figure out that it's just not worth it.

Case in point look at the KTM 06 450 EXC and 07 model. Show me a difference between the two other than one has lights, signals,horn, dot tires... well you get the point. There is abolutley no difference in fuel delivery or anything else. It's the same bike.

KTM realized that there is a dual sport market in Canada and decided to make the investment in paying off our officials to meet their criteria.

 

[spc]

imported post

imported post

When I am buying a new helmet I look for one that met a certain safety standard such as Snell, FMVSS 218 (DOT), etc. If I am buying body armour I also look for a safety standard suchCE. I do this because I want to know the quality of the protection that I am getting.

An uncertified helmet, body armour, etc may or may not stand up in case of an accident but I have no way of knowing until it fails (at a time when a certified part would not) and that may be too late.

It is the same with dirt bikes. Until a manufacturer submits a bike for testing and is allowed to certify it as a “motorcycle” we do not know how well it will stand up on the highway. The idea of a dual sport is to be able to ride to the trails and back home again.

Crashing on a single track at 30kph is not the same as crashing on pavement at 100kph on the way to the trail.

We all make fun of the guys wearing a beanie (which are uncertified) but if you are riding a RUM on the highway you are doing the same thing.

 

[fartypants]

imported post

imported post

Brimstone wrote:

So the issue essentially then is that while a bike "could" be modified to be compliant, the government has taken the easier approach to just completely remove that option. In essence forcing consumers to purchase bikes from manufacturers which have produced compliant bikes. Whom I'm sure didn't lobby for this legislation...

The government (ICBC) is taking the easy way out by simply not giving owners the option to bring an existing bike up to compliance. That is what I have a problem with.

The fact that it may be easy or not to modify an existing bike as opposed to having the knowledge and ability to ubuild a bike should not be an issue. I'm not entirely convinced that the guys building any custom bikes are completely qualified anyway. What makes someone qualified to manufacture a bike? Engineering degree? Good with tools? Great metal fabricator? Even Fartypants, who arguably sounds like he knows exactly what it would take to modify an existing bike isn't allowed under the current rules.

I guess it was inevitable that the government would start to clamp down. Now it's our responsibility to pressure manufactures to build the kind of road legal dirtbikes we all want...

Lee J
Kelowna, BC

The only way these bikes could be made compliant is to pay an engineer to see if it meets all the standards of a bike branded as a MC.Everyone seems to be missing the fact thatadding lights and tires does not make it compliant.

Here is a link to Transport Canada's Schedule. It shows what standards apply todifferent bikes.You will not a lot of "X's" missing on the RUM`s.

http://www.tc.gc.ca/acts-regulations/regulations/crc-c1038/sch-iii/menu.htm

Everywhere there is an X for a motorcycle and not for a rum means an engineer would have to do all the testing for that standard. About 3 years ago an engineer was hired just to check a vehicle for compliance with the lighting standard (108). It cost just over $5000 for this testing. There appears to be ten standards that a rum does not meet/hasn`t been tested. Better get out the Platinum visa. Also to test the fuel system integrity the tank will bedestroyed.

 

[fartypants]

imported post

imported post

cactusreid wrote:

Brimstone wrote:

I guess it was inevitable that the government would start to clamp down. Now it's our responsibility to pressure manufactures to build the kind of road legal dirtbikes we all want...

Lee J
Kelowna, BC

I think it's time to pressure the government to back off! NEXT TO THE HST BEING GOOD FOR US,this is the biggest waste of taxpayers money i've heard about all summer!

How much money do you think "this "costs?

Once again I'm not following you.

 

[fartypants]

imported post

imported post

Sweet wrote:

What makes a factory street legal dirt bike any safer than a RUM bike that has been converted with a dualsport kit and DOT tires? The sticker!? What a joke! Yet another case of Government B.S.

Follow the link above I posted and you will see, lights and tires are a very small part.