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

I have been watching the thread very closely over the last few days and will continue to do so as im quite interested to see how the police have tackled this one. im horrified to be honest, but im glad your now hopefully getting everything sorted!

a couple of things im interested in:

1. FB, where did the police actally measure the 35.9bhp your bike produced from? was it the rear wheel, or the crank, because there is going to be a fairly big difference between the two! or what was the verdict from people? have we decided at the rear wheel or crank?

2. also, im guessing from a previous post the police allow for a 10% error, so in theory when they test the bike it cannot produce more than 36.3bhp?

im still fascinated as to the whole thing. some changes need to be made to the law, so its easier for the rider to follow (ie. not having to pay stupid amounts of money to get the bike restricted), and also so its easier for the police to enforce....

[embee]

Just to clarify my position following what TW and DickyTicker have posted, I have worked for 2 major car manufacturers in Britain and also on contract for 2 major international engine consultancy firms covering over 30yrs. My last permanent position was as Senior Manager responsible for Design, Development, and EMS Calibration for one main engine family, plus Vehicle Fuel Systems and other admin stuff at a major car manufacturer in the Midlands, and as such it was my name on many of the technical release documents. Both engine performance and emission compliance came under my responsibilities covering worldwide markets.

I'm not certain of this, so it needs to be checked, but I believe that when a manufacturer such as Suzuki type approves a restricting device like an ECU, then that Type Approval (more or less by definition) exonerates an end user from having to demonstrate compliance with regulations relating to that device. That's the whole point of type approval, it approves a system by type within the terms of whatever Directive requires it. Otherwise everyone buying a car would have to submit it for SVA or similar individually, which would clearly not be a practical proposition. When it comes to power it is even more relevant due to the (discussed) intricacies of the testing.

Every vehicle (and I'd suggest restricting device sold by a manufacturer with Type Approval) effectively comes with its own Certificate of Conformity by virtue of that Type Approval (when I bought my car in Belgium I physically received the CoC to present when registering the car in the UK, but generally it is taken as read or dealt with by the supplying Dealership).

Now, how any such Type Approval provides the necessary proof of conformity when relating to a restricted power licence is another question entirely. Strictly the restricted licence may well be "absolute", in other words you're only legal if the vehicle is "not more than 25kW net" regardless of what documentation you have, in which case it might be legal one day (when atmospheric pressure was a bit low) and not another day, or legal above 1000m altitude but not at sea level. However, if it was indeed deemed to be absolute then it would almost definitely be unenforceable in any real world situation, though that doesn't mean it isn't written as being absolute, we all know what a mess some laws are.

I await the final outcome with interest.

Originally Posted by embee

I'm not certain of this, so it needs to be checked, but I believe that when a manufacturer such as Suzuki type approves a restricting device like an ECU, then that Type Approval (more or less by definition) exonerates an end user from having to demonstrate compliance with regulations relating to that device. That's the whole point of type approval, it approves a system by type within the terms of whatever Directive requires it.

agreed. if the law was to tackle the restriction properly, it would work in accordance with manufactures, making it their responsibility to produce parts designed to reduce a bikes output to 33bhp. that way, you just cross reference the part numbers on a national database the police hve acess to and you can do it there and then on the roadside.

i know triumph make there own restrictor kits for most of their bikes. i can tell you for certain that they make them for the daytona 600. all you have to do if your a copper is lift up the fuel tank, and its there. 10 min job at the most. cross reference the part number, and boom.. bike = restricted. be on your way sir.

mind you, having said that. at the law in its current state allows for 'home made restrictors'. i simply have some washers with dimentions from the internet for my fzs 600 fazer. nothing official about mine atall.... but providing the bike doesnt produce over 33bhp (at the crank/rear wheel?) im not breaking the law.

i also think that if someone has just spend £700 on insurance, £600 on a bike test, and the rest of their savings on a bike + gear, a 17 year old doesnt really have a lot of money left to pay £200 for an 'official kit' from fi international etc. let alone the labour to fit it. this is where it goes wrong if you ask me. the kits should be available from the manufacturer, and the bike should be inspected by a mechanic to gain an official cirtificate to show the police, proving the bike is restricted. this then suffices if stopped. if the bike is involved in an accident the insurance companies have every right to check its still there, and providing it is, there are no problems.

sound fair?

[timwilky]

slight derail:-

Nice to get a bit of a CV out of you Embee. I had wondered if you were an academic or had worked for a living.


You really do have to wonder that the since 25kW requirement became a reality in 1996 (I think). Are we the first having this discussion? Has it really taken the police 14+ years to decide to seize and test a bike? for compliance with god knows what.

[christopher]

Originally Posted by 0l0dom0l0

agreed. if the law was to tackle the restriction properly, it would work in accordance with manufactures, making it their responsibility to produce parts designed to reduce a bikes output to 33bhp. that way, you just cross reference the part numbers on a national database the police hve acess to and you can do it there and then on the roadside.

Ooh yeah, and if they do this... then I can make a load of cash by selling full power ECU's restamped with the restricted part number

The only real way to know the power of the bike at any given time is to test it, and that's not done by checking some part random number which could be forged on the bike.

That said I don't agree in the slightest how this whole thing has been handled, but there's been enough input already from both viewpoints.

Update required! How did your inspector visit go Flameboy?

[yorkie_chris]

Originally Posted by christopher

Ooh yeah, and if they do this... then I can make a load of cash by selling full power ECU's restamped with the restricted part number

The only real way to know the power of the bike at any given time is to test it, and that's not done by checking some part random number which could be forged on the bike.

That said I don't agree in the slightest how this whole thing has been handled, but there's been enough input already from both viewpoints.

I want somebody with ECU restrictor to disable their STV system and see what happens.

Clock in Flameboy, we're waiting for our fix...

33bhp needs to go about as fast as Gordon Brown does.

What's golden and won't work next week?

Gordon Brown front door key.

[Sid Squid]

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

I want somebody with ECU restrictor to disable their STV system and see what happens.

Now that would be an interesting test.