"33bhp?" Yes "i dont believe you, I'll seize your bike and take you to court"

[yorkie_chris]

Originally Posted by Dicky Ticker

but this is akin to somebody souping up a car without telling their insurance,thereby making it invalid and driving without insurance.

As far as I understand it that's not an offence either, as you can't invalidate the 3rd party bit of your insurance, though you may leave yourself open to civil action later when the insurance company reams you for whatever they paid out on the "invalidated" insurance. Unpleasant, sure, but not the same thing as driving without insurance.

You may be right on that YC but I wouldn't want to be the one arguing the toss with the insurance or the law because as far as I am aware it constitutes a false declaration and they can walk away from any claim

[yorkie_chris]

Yeah, but IMO it's not a police matter. Whereas "other than in accordance with a license" is an offence the police prosecute for.

Not quite the same as souping a car without telling the insurers.

Riding an unrestricted bike is the equivalent of driving a car with no license, or driving a car with no supervisor or L-plates as a provisional license holder.

Aside from the legal part I was using it as a comparison as something that is not obvious to the naked eye and would require technical investigation before it can be ascertained what the actual output of the engine is.
I have been looking at the regulations and I can't find if it is defined as "At the crank" or "At the back wheel" A technicality I know but as I am not an electrical genius,the ECU may not show exactly 33bhp output and knowing that dyno's can have a discrepancy from one machine to the other how do they overcome the problem of type approval and calibration on the test equipment?
Should the difference be 33bhp as against 68bhp,this would show up blatantly but if it is 33bhp against 36bhp how would you stand?
Hypothetical questions of a curious mind

Originally Posted by Dicky Ticker

Should the difference be 33bhp as against 68bhp,this would show up blatantly but if it is 33bhp against 36bhp how would you stand?
Hypothetical questions of a curious mind

I have also though this.....and I remember one of the coppers previously posting basically that the law says 33 so tough luck.
But it would be fairly obvious that the rider has had a restriction attempted due to the bhp being more or less halved. Surely its not the riders fault if they have been misled after willingly paying money for a service for the bhp to be reduced but not right to the correct decimal???????
Especially if you pay a so called proffesional to carry out the work, its not the riders fault if they have it done but its not been done effectively. How would you know?????

[yorkie_chris]

See embee's post earlier, a dyno can be made to read basically whatever you want it to.

Any brief with the slightest grasp of physics would make the CPS look rather silly in court if they tried to do you for 33.1bhp.

When I put my restricted ER5 on the dyno (I restricted it but wanted to get a dyno reading for proof to insurance company) it read spot on 33.0bhp and then 33.1bhp.

[hindle8907]

Originally Posted by instigator

When I put my restricted ER5 on the dyno (I restricted it but wanted to get a dyno reading for proof to insurance company) it read spot on 33.0bhp and then 33.1bhp.

My SV came in at 35.9 ... restricted VIA ecu lol but like others have said a dyno isn't really that accurate due to all the other factors that come into play.

[embee]

Yes, the underlying principle I was getting at was that there must be a specified test procedure somewhere as to exactly how this power is measured. In industry we had to do "witnessed tests" when the man from the ministry came to the test facility and witnessed the engine output certification/homologation test and we had to provide all sorts of evidence and documentation regarding the calibrations etc, and the procedure specified exactly how the test was to be run, how many tests, how the results were treated and the limits within which the variation in measurements must lie and what tolerance you were allowed compared to what you had previously declared. It was all very clearly defined.

For the "25kW" limit to be applied in any legal sense ther must be a clearly defined test procedure and requirements for the facility to conform to, if there isn't then it could not be enforced (or I'd like to see someone try it, any expert would demolish it in court if there isn't a defined procedure).

This all smacks of the kind of half-baked legislation we get nowadays, if they did it properly there would be a requirement for some form of certification and registration (declared to DVLA for example), as it is there appears to be no requirements of any kind, only that the rider is licenced to ride a bike not exceeding such and such power.

It's a bit like Building Regs vs Water Bylaws, I recently had to replace a water service pipe to my house and enquired what was required, the answer was that I had to do it in compliance with the Water Bylaws but there was no requirement for any documentation, the onus was on me to comply with the rules and that was all, it would only be challenged if something cropped up in future and someone decided it wasn't in compliance. Convenient for me but a bit "laissez faire".