Search results

A bit late but: ETRA - News (Common Issues) - Call for experts I'm not that happy with decisions on things like this being heavily influenced by a coterie of manufacturers..... Maybe we should have an input? Jeremy?

I guess I was thinking of the acceleration test with regard to DIY bikes. Weight and speed would be a much more sensible way to go but I just don't see it being accepted, somehow.. There are too many people who use power as a fear factor not to have it tested for, in some way....

Thanks for the graph Jeremy. Curious but it makes more sense than 250W cont. power. At least acceleration rate could be argued to have some relation to safety... What happens with bikes which have the motor acting through variable gearing, though? If they're tested at the gear that peaks at...

I was thinking that you could use a dyno to do a static Annex D acceleration test? Yes, I think our bottom line should be either "speed & weight" or "acceleration test" and not "max. cont. power", which is a nonsense.

Ref: Endless-sphere.com • View topic - Aussie 200 Watt Limit Thread http://www.xrv.org.uk/forums/riding/36130-bikes-restricted-license-what-do.html

Agreed. I think we should present this as our wanting to be on equal terms with the commercial market, in terms of specification. If there is a need to simplify testing for practical/economic reasons then this should be weighted in our favour and not the other way around.....

I think we should have more than one tactic prepared. We don't want to be like ETRA and end up with nothing......

Me too, but it's probably the least likely thing to happen....

This is exactly the thing that worries us, David. If we don't get our act together in any other way, we should, at least, put together a document and take up David's kind offer.

Alternatively, as was said before, a system for testing DIY conversions to meet the acceleration test in EN15194, preferably without trekking 30miles and forking out 50quid...

They should state exactly what they want to limit and devise a test for that. If the acceleration test in EN19154 achieves that objective, there should be absolutely no mention of 250Watts continuous in the legislation.

It has to be recognised that, using the acceleration test in EN15194, this is potentially continuously available power and not just "peak" power.

What they should have done was set an absolute limit of say 750 Watts and output could be limited to that. Using a continuous rating for motors with hugely different thermal time constants is a nonsense to start with. If the concern is with acceleration rates, then it's torque that needs to be...

What the power test in EN15194 has to do with a motor's continuously rated power is also pretty confusing......

I'm inclined to agree. At the talks, so far, have been two trade associations and the CTC.... How do we organise? Request forum section here? Separate forum? Scope?

Count me in, Jeremy.

It occurred to me, too... My only contact with them was 5 years ago, with respect to the possibility of relaxing the helmet requirement for the Low Powered Moped category. I'd be keen to take part in a lobbying exercise, especially if it also addressed aspects of the Type Approval process...

If things had gone differently WRT Type Approval, that idea might have stood a chance... It seems pretty unlikely that it would happen, now...

Thanks Mark. So, as Jeremy says, it would have to be simple test. Done at the existing MSVA centres?

I guess we can't expect a trade association to lobby for something outside of their commercial interests.....