Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

N/A | National E U Approves Mandatory A B S And Other Bike Requirements

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by robsalvv, Nov 22, 2012.

  1. http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/world/meps-approve-motorbike-safety-rules-574944.html

    MEPs approve motorbike safety rules

    Tuesday, November 20, 2012 - 06:20 PM

    New safety rules which some bikers fear will push up motorcycling costs were overwhelmingly approved by MEPs today.

    After two years of negotiations and revisions, the planned legislation will mean safer, greener motorbikes, three-wheelers and quad bikes, according to the British Conservative MEP who steered the plans through the European Parliament.

    Malcolm Harbour, chairman of the European Parliament’s internal market and consumer protection committee, welcomed a 643-16 show of support for measures including mandatory anti-lock braking (ABS) on powerful motorbikes, advanced braking on scooters, tougher exhaust emissions targets, and basic on-board diagnostics.

    A bid by the European Commission to oblige all bike makers to build in “anti-tampering” measures to avoid high-speed modifications was watered down to apply only to bikes for young or inexperienced riders, where power or speed is already restricted.

    The plans, still needing approval from EU governments, are due to be in force for all new two and three-wheeled and quad bikes – “L-category” vehicles - sold from 2016.

    Quad bikes used exclusively off-road, such as on farms, will be exempt - although “higher-speed” tractors will require ABS.

    Mr Harbour said: “This vote is the culmination of a great deal of listening to biking enthusiasts so that we could put in place a law that makes two, three and four-wheeled machines safer and cleaner, without ruining their cherished hobby.

    “This new type approval framework will secure the future of motorbiking for a generation.

    “There has been significant scaremongering about the purpose behind this law. It was simply to make 15 outdated laws setting technical standards into one current law, which will be easier for manufacturers to decipher. We always had at heart the best interests of millions of people across Europe for whom biking is a way of life.”

    Labour MEP Catherine Stihler said the new rules would help prevent motorcycling deaths, and insisted that “riders will still be able to customise and modify the bikes they already own, so long as they don’t affect safety or the environmental performance of the vehicle”.

    She went on: “Every single dead motorcyclist is one too many. Raising safety standards is our main concern.

    “Also, new emission reduction measures will result in much more efficient, cleaner vehicles entering the market.

    “Over 30 million vehicles labelled as L-category circulate around Europe and their drivers face a much higher risk of fatal or serious injuries than drivers of cars or trucks.

    But UK Independence Party MEP Marta Andreasen said the proposed rules should be scrapped: “This will be a hugely unpopular piece of legislation. The only people that stand to gain are manufacturers by increasing the costs of vehicles, but if people are put off buying new vehicles because of increased prices it will be a pyrrhic victory.

    “Additionally, anti-tampering removes the freedom of choice. It is not up to Brussels to decide what tweaks or customisation bikers make to their vehicles - provided they of course meet the existing and perfectly adequate rules and supervisory bodies that we already have in place in the UK.

    “Nobody, much less the biking fraternity, wants this pointless and deeply interfering law. The motorcycle sector has managed perfectly well for decades without such draconian Brussels interference.”

  2. sheeeez ... the control freaks just can't help themselves can they? What ever happened to letting market forces lead improvement to vehicle technologies?

  3. I call Bullshit.

    Knobheads and deskjockeys that never touched a bike would have made those laws, and passed them.
    • Like Like x 1
  4. It's worrying how much power the EU is gathering, not just from this. People who you haven't elected passing legislation against you..
  5. How else can they justify their very existence?

    Makes a compelling case for a singular world government, doesn't it?
  6. 'a hobby'

    Get fcuked!
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Culmination of a great detail of listening = we tried for shitloads more restrictions but watered it down cause the feedback we got from riders was they didn't want it at all.
  8. Bellends.
  9. The most annoying thing is that all these rubbish EU rules won't disappear, even though the E.U. itself looks unlikely to last more than a year or two before it falls apart.
  10. Pretty pathetic. And I only discovered yesterday that France already has a 100hp limit on motorbikes! Never realised.
  11. Just so wrong. Over-governing doesnt make for safety, it makes for revolution. The whole bike modification thing; what a joke. They need a slap upside the head, they need their range rovers confiscated for a year, and they need to live in the real world like the rest of us, doing a real job.
  12. The MAIDS study highlighted other vehicles as one of the highest risks and couldn't be re-interpretted to show how ABS would have made much of a difference to the outcomes, but yet Bosch's deep pockets and carcentric thinking have persuaded the parliament to bring in these mandatory rules on ABS.
  13. I find it difficult to feel outrage about this. Motor cars already have similar mandates. If you really don't like ABS, you can pull the fuse out. 125s are also exempt.

    As far as I was aware, most of the proposed prohibitions on modifications got scrapped.
  14. #14 Spots, Nov 23, 2012
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2012
    I'll play devil's advocate....
    The US government used to leave car safety to market forces only. It didn't work. Car safety didn't improve much at all in the first five decades of the 20th century. Typical features of a car were a non-collapsible steering columns, pressed steel dashboards, a chassis which is orders of magnitude stiffer and stronger everywhere but where the people sit (and the easiest part of a vehicle to crush is typically the part which crushes first). Oh, and no seatbelts.

    Eventually the insurance companies cracked the shits about having to pay out everyones' hospital fees and life insurance, and together they formed the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety to do car crash safety testing and lobbying of the government for car safety standards.

    To celebrate their 50th anniversary they took a 1959 Chevrolet Bel-air and a 2009 Chevrolet Malibu and smashed them together like a child would playing with toys.

    http://www.iihs.org/50th/default.html <-- Right hand sidebar, "Watch a video of the crash test".

    So no, leaving the almighty dollar to steer safety technologies isn't guaranteed to work. Especially with the outright hostile reaction most riders seem to have about any form of technology which detracts from the purity of an engine, two wheels, handlebars and a seat.
    • Like Like x 2
  15. That's true. But all the 'safety' initiatives in the world, whether that be anti tampering, hi viz, hp limits, abs etc., etc., don't make a blind bit of difference to the fact that at the moment of impact you are no longer attached to your bike. These measures will have almost zero impact on any of their figures.

    All this BS will not stop people falling off of bikes, for whatever reason that might be. Training, both for riders and (more importantly IMO) car drivers, is really what they need to concentrate on.

    But no. Instead we get tighter and tighter legislation and looser, and looser training.
  16. #16 robsalvv, Nov 23, 2012
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2012
    I've written column miles about the mandatory ABS issue.

    The crux of the issue is that ABS works on cars, and works the way you'd intuitively expect because cars are statitically stable, i.e., they are stable at rest on their wheels. Almost everybody, riders included, overlay this vague intuitive carcentric understanding of ABS onto Motorcycles and shrug just like you have a think: "big deal, cars have had it for ages. Makes sense for bikes to have it."

    The problem is that motorcycles are single track and are dynamically stable vehicles. They need to be moving to be stable on their wheels. Motorcycles are not intuitive devices and as a result, ABS can impact them in unexpected ways -except for the narrow part of a bike's operating and dynamic range which is vertically upright riding, which just happens to be the kind of riding they're doing most of the time. The key here is that if you're outside of this defined optimum riding scenario, ABS can impact a motorcycle in unexpected ways.

    The other common mistake that "pro ABS" riders make is that ABS hasn't caused them any grief on their bikes, so it should be OK for all riders on all bikes. There are many rider/bike/riding dynamic combinations, so this assumption is pretty flawed.

    Anyway, I'm not going to rehash everything, suffice to say that pulling the fuse or having ABS switchable and turning it off, might be the safer choice to make IN SOME CIRCUMSTANCES. This is a decision a rider should arrive at on a case by case basis. Know your riding and riding style, know what kind of riding you're about to do, know the ABS programming, limitations and dynamic impacts when ABS is triggered... and see whether the two fully overlap and are complementary.

    Luckily the EU moved away from the very early proposition of making ABS mandatory and unswitchable. The proposal is now that ABS is mandatory, but doesn't prohibit the manufacturer making it switchable.
  17. Northerner is right. Most of these additions do not modify the riding decisions riders make. ABS may stop you from capsizing on locked wheel/s, but if you didn't spot the incident or emerging car, or didn't allow for a risky environment, then ABS will most likely result in a vertically upright collision. It's not a panacea. It can pull a miracle out of the air and stop you in a distance not possible by physics.

    The only add on that contradicts riders decisions and may help avoid unecessary high sides is traction control... or as some riders are finding, "launch out of corner" control. They roll on the throttle with impunity and let the traction control sort it out... makes for exciting corner exits.
  18. :)
  19. Yes, we've been here before!

    ABS will help in some instances. Typically hard upright braking on a wet road or an uneven road or where there is some surface braking. I don't know how many crashes happen in this situation, but it would be a small proportion of the total. Most crashes involve rider error or error of other road users and don't involve full braking where ABS will activate. Most crashes will still happen ABS or no ABS. I would still always buy a bike with ABS.
  20. Dunno if it is as simple as removing a fuse to disable abs.

    Seem to remember some rules re not being able to disable 'safety features' as being mooted.

    Anyway, abs is a definite plus for noobs, danger being that relying on it all the time removes the need for some feel to the braking. We could also be in danger of manufacturers not developing feel becos the abs renders it unnecessary.

    Rules are a balancing act, as they sometimes have unintended consequences. Mandatory abs can deskill riders too.