LAMS - worse than Novopay?

[MSTRS]

Trying to fix an anomaly - am I pushing shit uphill?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To whom it may concern

I guess I'm not unique in complaining about the list of approved motorcycles, but I believe I have a genuine problem that should be addressed.
I have a Kawasaki EX500 1995 model sitting unused in my shed, and have had a number of people interested in buying it, who have been put off by it not being on the list. Kawasaki played around with cosmetics and changed the model name for some markets. Here is what Wikipedia says about it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kawasaki_Ninja_500R

Your list includes the EN500 and ER500, which are the same basic bike and share the same engine as the GPZ and EX500, along with the KLE500 which is a different style of bike but has the same engine.

I find it very odd that not all of these models are allowed. Especially when your list includes the EX650 (which is a newer, larger capacity machine) and the GPZ550 which is an older but high performance 4 cylinder model.

Please look at adding all Kawasaki 500 4 stroke, 2 cylinder (twin) derivatives to the approved list.

Thank you

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Good morning,

Thank you for your email dated 3 February 2013.


Your motorcycle has not be requested to be added to the LAMS list. Therefore, if you believe your motorcycle should be on the LAMS-approved list and it fits the primary criteria of being between 251cc and 660cc, and less than 150 kilowatts per tonne, you will need to submit a formal application to the NZ Transport Agency (NZTA) for consideration. Vehicle specifications for the motorcycle should be gathered from your motorcycle manufacturer.


To apply you need to complete the attached application form and mail to: Assessments Team, NZ Transport Agency, Private Bag 6995, Wellington 6141, or email it to exemptions@nzta.govt.nz

Regards

Alex

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In reference to my initial request below and your response below that...

Please find attached my application on your form, and the proof of claim on this model can be found here http://gpz500s.foobuzz.com/info/specifications/
where the pertinent info includes power: 52 bhp (39 kW) @ 9500 rpm (103 hp/L)
and dry weight: 373 lb except California (169 kg) 374 lb (170 kg) (1987-1993), 388 lb (176kg) (1994+)

As you will see, this particular motorcycle has a number of model designations which are essentially all the same as I stated in my initial email.

Please add the EX500 to the LAMS list to stop further confusion as regards the standard Kawasaki 500cc watercooled 4 stroke twin.

Thank you

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Exemptions applicant

This is an auto response message; please do not reply to this.


Thank you for your application for recognition of special interest vehicle/alternative documents/exemption.

Due to a high volume of exemptions applications NZTA hope to start processing your exemption within 10 working days. Depending on the type of exemption application, the processing itself could take another 10 working days.

If this takes longer because your query may need investigating, we will let you know.

Please Note: If you do not appear to have received a response within 20 working days, it would be advisable to check any 'Junk Mail' or SPAM filters which may be installed on your system, prior to any further contact. Our reply may have been erroneously blocked by such software. Alternatively, for help, advice and online services you can visit the website at www.nzta.govt.nz or call 0800 108 809

Regards

NZTA Exemption team

[Grashopper]

Will be interesting to see how long it will actually take and what their reply will be.

But yeah, the mills of bureaucracy grind slowly...

But altogether it doesn't sound too bad. Please keep us posted.

[george formby]

All things considered I think that is quite positive. Certainly not hasty but they did not say, nah,tough. It implies the LAM's list is a work in progress & we can contribute to that in the appropriate manner.

I remember the days when 125cc was the maximum capacity & a lot of those had to be restricted to meet the maximum power output limit. I think it was 12 horsepowers. (Ye Olde UK legislation)

[imdying]

Given you've ignored their clear instructions, I'm with George.

[Glowerss]

Just a couple of nitpickings.

The standard EX650 is *NOT* a lams bike. There's a restricted lams specific variant of it that is.

Also, some of the bike specs you listed, some of them are extremely borderline (39kw and 169kg puts it right at 150.8) and may or may not be listed. I tried to get the SV400 listed as a lams bike, and that was 150.9 or 151 even and was denied.


Anyway, when I submitted a few LAMS applications early on, I heard back from the approval guy within a day. It's possible that they're just dealing with a lot of rollover shit at the moment.

Considering how easy the application is to fill out and mail in, it's a relatively painless process. It's worlds more common sense then I thought it would be.

I don't think they did too bad a job with the whole LAMS system personally.

[neels]

There were really 2 options for the NZTA for this one;

a. Create a list of every motorcycle under 660cc ever made, and then check the specifications of each bike one by one, and eventually after several years publish a complete list which would be correct until next years bike models are announced.

b. Take a reasonable stab at making an initial list of bikes which are acceptable, and then have people apply to add others on a case by case basis, while having a wider range of bikes available immediately.

If I was paying the wages at the NZTA, I know which I'd go for.

[MSTRS]

Given you've ignored their clear instructions, I'm with George.

Just how have I 'ignored their instructions"?


Just a couple of nitpickings.

The standard EX650 is *NOT* a lams bike. There's a restricted lams specific variant of it that is.

Also, some of the bike specs you listed, some of them are extremely borderline (39kw and 169kg puts it right at 150.8) and may or may not be listed. I tried to get the SV400 listed as a lams bike, and that was 150.9 or 151 even and was denied.


Anyway, when I submitted a few LAMS applications early on, I heard back from the approval guy within a day. It's possible that they're just dealing with a lot of rollover shit at the moment.

Considering how easy the application is to fill out and mail in, it's a relatively painless process. It's worlds more common sense then I thought it would be.

I don't think they did too bad a job with the whole LAMS system personally.

Fair enough. I agree LAMS is a better idea than a simple cc cut-off.
But I fail to see why an ER500 and an EN500 and a KLE500 are on the list, but the EX500 is not. They all have the same engine.

[FJRider]

Trying to fix an anomaly - am I pushing shit uphill?



It's your garden rake ... and your dime.


What have you got to lose .. ???

[FJRider]

Fair enough. I agree LAMS is a better idea than a simple cc cut-off.
But I fail to see why an ER500 and an EN500 and a KLE500 are on the list, but the EX500 is not. They all have the same engine.

Depending on the (LAM's) market they were intended for.

And ... if they were not imported as a normal production line of model designated for export from the manufacturering country.

[Glowerss]

Just how have I 'ignored their instructions"?



Fair enough. I agree LAMS is a better idea than a simple cc cut-off.
But I fail to see why an ER500 and an EN500 and a KLE500 are on the list, but the EX500 is not. They all have the same engine.

Short answer is weight. Some of those specs are RIGHT on the 150kw tonne. 5kg here and there makes all the difference between enough and too much. I doubt they all weigh exactly the same thing.

It also depends on what the manufacturers claimed in terms of specs. If kawasaki got a bit ambitious and claimed the bike was just a little bit lighter then it was, then that would be enough to push it out of the 150kw/tonne range as well.

[FJRider]

Short answer is weight. Some of those specs are RIGHT on the 150kw tonne. 5kg here and there makes all the difference between enough and too much. I doubt they all weigh exactly the same thing.

It also depends on what the manufacturers claimed in terms of specs. If kawasaki got a bit ambitious and claimed the bike was just a little bit lighter then it was, then that would be enough to push it out of the 150kw/tonne range as well.

Or claimed a bit more powerful ... to get in the sports market ...

[imdying]

Just how have I 'ignored their instructions"?By referencing a specification source that is not the manufacturer.


Vehicle specifications for the motorcycle should be gathered from your motorcycle manufacturer.

the proof of claim on this model can be found here http://gpz500s.foobuzz.com/info/specifications/

That site doesn't even cite a reference source. I would've just binned your email, at least you got a reply.

[koba]

Just how have I 'ignored their instructions"?


This bit may become a sticking point:
"Vehicle specifications for the motorcycle should be gathered from your motorcycle manufacturer."

Not trying to be a dick, I just expect they will have a clear guideline on source material.
Which, given how much manufacturers lie about power and weight; is kinda silly.
In reality manufacturers are probably the least reliable source! :facepalm:

[Berries]

Given the responses from TPTB in the first post I can't see the link with Novopay?

[Glowerss]

By referencing a specification source that is not the manufacturer.




That site doesn't even cite a reference source. I would've just binned your email, at least you got a reply.


This bit may become a sticking point:
"Vehicle specifications for the motorcycle should be gathered from your motorcycle manufacturer."

Not trying to be a dick, I just expect they will have a clear guideline on source material.
Which, given how much manufacturers lie about power and weight; is kinda silly.
In reality manufacturers are probably the least reliable source! :facepalm:

They will actually take sites that list the specs as manufacturers have listed them. I don't know if they'll be quite happy with a random forum for the specs, however. I used bikez.com as a source for a few of them and they were fine with that.

They *DO* however, double check with the manufacturers as well.

Though I agree with koba, however, that it's a bit pointless considering how much bike makers lie like crazy about their bikes specs. Wet weights and RWHP would have been far more useful (and allowed a shitload more bikes in) but nevermind.

[cxy]

Just how have I 'ignored their instructions"?



Fair enough. I agree LAMS is a better idea than a simple cc cut-off.
But I fail to see why an ER500 and an EN500 and a KLE500 are on the list, but the EX500 is not. They all have the same engine.

ER,EN,KLE all have detuned versions of the ex500 for which Kawasaki have claimed up to 64 bhp
So no mystery

[GrayWolf]

Just how have I 'ignored their instructions"?



Fair enough. I agree LAMS is a better idea than a simple cc cut-off.
But I fail to see why an ER500 and an EN500 and a KLE500 are on the list, but the EX500 is not. They all have the same engine.

That may be true, but the old Gpz500 from the early 80's has the same engine, also in the 500cc cruiser, but the Gpz had a much higher output, so just because its the 'same engine' wont necessarily mean its identical output?

[Ender EnZed]

But I fail to see why an ER500 and an EN500 and a KLE500 are on the list, but the EX500 is not. They all have the same engine.

Because it's not the same engine. It makes more power.

60hp and 179kg dry (http://www.bikez.com/motorcycles/kawasaki_gpz_500_s_1995.php) makes 168kW/T. Quite clearly over the limit.

[MSTRS]

Clearly it depends on the source of the 'specs'. And has everyone included the 90 kg allowed for the rider?

I think Koba is 'on the money'

[Ender EnZed]

Clearly it depends on the source of the 'specs'. And has everyone included the 90 kg allowed for the rider?

I think Koba is 'on the money'

Well, yes. But even your Wiki link had 59hp. You don't have to look very far to find reviews and "specs" that show the ER5 and such as significantly slower than the GPZ500.

I've owned a GPZ500 and while I agree that it'd be a reasonable bike to learn on it's certainly got a bit of top end. They're much faster than GS500 (or anyway 4t 250) anyway.

[Berries]

While TPTB might have been happy to include the EX500 based on the original request they received I imagine that this thread has now cast enough doubt on the power output that they won't.

Woops.

[Eddieb]

Because it's not the same engine. It makes more power.

60hp and 179kg dry (http://www.bikez.com/motorcycles/kawasaki_gpz_500_s_1995.php) makes 168kW/T. Quite clearly over the limit.

Is that including the 90kg LAMS allows for the rider?

[Monkfish]

There were really 2 options for the NZTA for this one;

a. Create a list of every motorcycle under 660cc ever made, and then check the specifications of each bike one by one, and eventually after several years publish a complete list which would be correct until next years bike models are announced.

b. Take a reasonable stab at making an initial list of bikes which are acceptable, and then have people apply to add others on a case by case basis, while having a wider range of bikes available immediately.

If I was paying the wages at the NZTA, I know which I'd go for.

This is the whole problem and solution sewn up in one.
It makes sence to have the public find all those cool, obscure bikes that fit the criteria.

So back to the OP..... LAMS is waaaaaayyy better than novopay. Good system, should have been brought in eariler. IMHO

[red mermaid]

Yeah but some people will never miss the opportunity for a spectacular thread title and a meaningless and pathetic attempt to make something of their supposed fight with beauracracy.



This is the whole problem and solution sewn up in one.
It makes sence to have the public find all those cool, obscure bikes that fit the criteria.

So back to the OP..... LAMS is waaaaaayyy better than novopay. Good system, should have been brought in eariler. IMHO

[Dragon]

The yamaha FZR400 is on the lams list

Surprised as I worked it out at 178kw per ton

Am now considering buying one haha

[Glowerss]

The yamaha FZR400 is on the lams list

Surprised as I worked it out at 178kw per ton

Am now considering buying one haha

Do you enjoy fixing your bike more then riding it? :laugh: Better off with one of these http://www.trademe.co.nz/motors/motorbikes/motorbikes/tourers/auction-560343108.htm

[ducatilover]

The yamaha FZR400 is on the lams list

Surprised as I worked it out at 178kw per ton

Am now considering buying one haha

Get a 3TJ and put an FZR600 lump in it, not hugely hard, and fuck they're a quick wee bugger after it

MSTRS, is this the model ER5 you own http://www.motorcyclespecs.co.za/model/kawasaki/kawasaki_er5 00.htm
Missread sorry, it's an EX, they were the good one. Sadly they're around the 60hp mark

[MSTRS]

Is that including the 90kg LAMS allows for the rider?

I also forgot about fluids. Probably adds about 30kg to the dry weight, if radiator, crankcase and fuel tank are all topped off.

For those that think I'm having a fight with tptb...where the hell do you get that idea? I put a question to them, they engaged in dialogue so to speak and I responded with the pertinent info in and on the form they want.
I started this thread to raise awareness of the incomplete list that is LAMS and how to go about putting up bike models for LAMS consideration, but also as a slight tongue in cheek suggestion that the little person has no chance with big brother.
So RM - you might as well crawl back under your rock, you loathsome little reptile.

[Pickle]

Check out the Australian market where LAMs approved bikes have been out for quite a few years , NSW RTA website has a list of bikes that are approved here - quite a comprehensive list

[MSTRS]

Looks like it won't happen...


Thank you for your application to have the Kawasaki EX 500D2 add to the approved LAMS list.

As part of the approval process for the LAMS bike I have verified the power and weight figures with Kawasaki NZ (the original importer of this bike) and they confirm that that this model has 44kw and a dry weight of 176kg, giving us a power to weight ration of 165kw per tonne.

Even if we were to add 13kg for the 18 litres of fuel that would still give us a power to weight ratio of 157kw per tonne.

Based on these figures the Kawasaki EX 500 is not LAMS compliant.

The other bikes you mentioned in your e-mail the EN500, ER500, EX650 and KL650 have all been confirmed by Kawasaki to be compliant, whilst the GPZ550 was carried over from the Australian list and has been verified by Australian authorities.

Nothing ventured, nothing gained. But still....fuck it.

[ducatilover]

Mint, how cheap are you selling it to me then

[MSTRS]

Price just went up. more exclusive buyer group, you see.

[FJRider]

For those that think I'm having a fight with tptb...where the hell do you get that idea? I put a question to them, they engaged in dialogue so to speak and I responded with the pertinent info in and on the form they want.

As I understand ... the "dialogue" you speak of ... was automated. Hardly "engaging" at best.


I started this thread to raise awareness of the incomplete list that is LAMS and how to go about putting up bike models for LAMS consideration, but also as a slight tongue in cheek suggestion that the little person has no chance with big brother.


The process for getting a bike on the LAM's list has been around some time before the LAM's list came into effect. And there has been threads on the subject. The source of their information to confirm a bikes eligibility to go on the list .... will not include the KB forums. So nothing said in this thread will make the slightest bit of difference to your request.
There are plenty of bikes on the list that have "the same engine" as those that are not.

But good luck anyway ...

[davereid]

Looks like it won't happen... Thank you for your application to have the Kawasaki EX 500D2 add to the approved LAMS list.

As part of the approval process for the LAMS bike I have verified the power and weight figures with Kawasaki NZ (the original importer of this bike) and they confirm that that this model has 44kw and a dry weight of 176kg, giving us a power to weight ration of 165kw per tonne.

Even if we were to add 13kg for the 18 litres of fuel that would still give us a power to weight ratio of 157kw per tonne.

Based on these figures the Kawasaki EX 500 is not LAMS compliant.

The other bikes you mentioned in your e-mail the EN500, ER500, EX650 and KL650 have all been confirmed by Kawasaki to be compliant, whilst the GPZ550 was carried over from the Australian list and has been verified by Australian authorities.

Nothing ventured, nothing gained. But still....fuck it.

It actually seems like someone had a look.

Most unusual for the NZTA. But a real human being did some sums. Wow.

[Eddieb]

also as a slight tongue in cheek suggestion that the little person has no chance with big brother.

I don't see any indication about people not having a chance against big brother in this, the process has been defined and public for quite some time and there is a very specific documented set of requirements for a bike to be included, which yours doesn't meet. Chance does not come into it and there's no indication of the little person being downtrodden by big brother. In fact whoever answered the email even seems to have considered stretching those requirements to see if it could pass and it still didn't.
In fact the process to get a bike added is clearly documented on the same page as the approved bike list the OP refers to, the scrolly bit of the mouse must have been broken: http://www.nzta.govt.nz/licence/getting/motorcycles/approved-motorcycles.html


The process for getting a bike on the LAM's list has been around some time before the LAM's list came into effect. And there has been threads on the subject. The source of their information to confirm a bikes eligibility to go on the list

Which I guess is what he said. The title also screams 'give me attention', a grave injustice has been done when in fact a mountain has been made out of a molehill.

[scracha]

Dear MSTRS,

The EX500 was known as the GPZ500 in many market. Therefore your bike is on the LAMS list so please sell it to a happy learner.

Yours

Scracha:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

[FJRider]

Dear MSTRS,

The EX500 was known as the GPZ500 in many market. Therefore your bike is on the LAMS list so please sell it to a happy learner.

Yours

Scracha:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

Re register it as a GPZ500 ... done.




Your welcome ...

[ducatilover]

Dear MSTRS,

The EX500 was known as the GPZ500 in many market. Therefore your bike is on the LAMS list so please sell it to a happy learner.

Yours

Scracha:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:
Dear Scracha

The GPZ500 is not on the LAMS list.

Yours regratably Some Wanker Doug

[red mermaid]

Dead right.
The thread title screams about how great 'I' am in my fight but in reality the system was followed...an application was made, responded to promptly, investigated and the result made known with the reasoning.

How that can be similiar to the Novopay debacle is beyond me.



I don't see any indication about people not having a chance against big brother in this, the process has been defined and public for quite some time and there is a very specific documented set of requirements for a bike to be included, which yours doesn't meet. Chance does not come into it and there's no indication of the little person being downtrodden by big brother. In fact whoever answered the email even seems to have considered stretching those requirements to see if it could pass and it still didn't.
In fact the process to get a bike added is clearly documented on the same page as the approved bike list the OP refers to, the scrolly bit of the mouse must have been broken: http://www.nzta.govt.nz/licence/getting/motorcycles/approved-motorcycles.html



Which I guess is what he said. The title also screams 'give me attention', a grave injustice has been done when in fact a mountain has been made out of a molehill.

[imdying]

Yeah, I don't see the depth (of malice?) in this that you guys seem too.

But I do think that to give yourself the best chance of working with bureaucracy, you should follow their instructions as closely as you can. Damn nice of them to do some research of their own IMO.

[MSTRS]

Yeah, I don't see the depth (of malice?) in this that you guys seem too.

But I do think that to give yourself the best chance of working with bureaucracy, you should follow their instructions as closely as you can. Damn nice of them to do some research of their own IMO.

Thank you. No malice was intended by me. Unlike one particularly nasty little Snake/God Squad/Fuckwit on here ...
And others who should check the facts before spouting off about what model I should call the bike. And even if the GPZ500 was on the list...I don't tell lies.

[Coldrider]

Unlike one particularly nasty little Snake/God Squad/Fuckwit on here ...
ah but in saturdays paper we had NOVO COP, but she's a gonna now

http://www.hawkesbaytoday.co.nz/news/victim-speaks-out-about-mikayla-paul/1749532/