Would you change the 250 law? [Archive]

mynameis

27th November 2006, 17:09

The law is an ass, in this case.
I think a weight / hp restriction is far more sensible.

And who would find out the actual HP of a bike and how??

Like all bikes run at the max horsepower stated and literally every dealer in the country has a dyno run machine and it's like $5 to get one done.

This prevails the current sensible option which is in place now which is cc rating.

mynameis

jeremysprite

27th November 2006, 17:10

Why can a Learner ride a CBR250R but not a ER500 even tho the CBR prob has more grunt?

Just 'cause the laws been that way for a long time. I agree, license exemptions are 'often' granted for weight/height issues, but do you think the receiver of said exemption rides a nice, gutless bike? No, they buy a ZX-7R, (aye Gremlin?)

And yeah, the RR has more grunt than an er-5

jeremysprite

27th November 2006, 17:15

And who would find out the actual HP of a bike and how??

Just off the manafacturer's specs. In Aus they also exclude certain bikes for learners -NSR, RGV, TZR, - can't remember if they exclude the sports inline 4's, like the CBR RR etc.

hXc

27th November 2006, 17:16

It's a stupid law, the way we have it. But really, with our government and police force, there isn't much else to do. I don't know how they do it in Aussie or where else the law is like that, but here, it wouldn't be an easy thing to police.

Although, I've had people who ride bikes, and cops too, comment on how light my Spada feels. A common response is "Geez, this is light for a 600." Hmmm, well it's a 250, but the cops and most others don't know that. People do get away with riding 400's or whatever else on a L/R lisence, because the cops fail to look at the bike model/size on the rego, only the date.

hXc

27th November 2006, 17:17

Just off the manafacturer's specs.And that would prove anything how? Manufacturer's specs are often wrong. And each bike will be different, with an aftermarket pipe, or high k's, or how it's been ridden. It would have to be dyno tuned, which isn't cheap and isn't feasible.

James Deuce

27th November 2006, 17:18

Power to weight ratio is a much better plan for deciding what bikes are learner "safe". The current cc rating law means that you end up with manufacturers squeezing every last drop from an engine making them peaky, which usually translates to more difficult to ride than something that makes smooth progressive power from nowhere.

A 650cc bike making 40HP usually makes 100 - 150% of the peak torque of a 250cc bike making 40HP, meaning that the generally larger populace, much larger than when the law was introduced, can buy a bike that doesn't feel like an aneamic weed whacker to ride. When I were a lad, two strokes ruled because they not only felt quick to ride, they WERE quick within the parameters of the day.

It certainly opens up the learner market and would finally get rid of the almost despotic hold 10-15 year old bikes have on the "performance" learner market. Sid and Mabel would be able to buy new, matching 883 Sportsters when the kids move out of home (finally).

Not all states in Aus subscribe to the KW/KG rule either. I think it's only NSW and Queensland.

kiwifruit

27th November 2006, 17:19

James Deuce

27th November 2006, 17:21

And that would prove anything how? Manufacturer's specs are often wrong. And each bike will be different, with an aftermarket pipe, or high k's, or how it's been ridden. It would have to be dyno tuned, which isn't cheap and isn't feasible.

It's very easy to do actually hXc. Ban aftermarket pipes (I know I've got one, but I didn't actually NEED it) as the manufacturers tend to know what they are doing in that realm.

Fuel injection and electronic ignition is becoming the fuel system standard. Again very easy to see if it has been dicked around with.

The law would apply to new motorcycles sold at such and such date, and I believe it would be hugely advantageous to motorcycling as a whole. More choice = more motorcyclists.

jeremysprite

27th November 2006, 17:21

And that would prove anything how? Manufacturer's specs are often wrong. And each bike will be different, with an aftermarket pipe, or high k's, or how it's been ridden. It would have to be dyno tuned, which isn't cheap and isn't feasible.

As far as I know, they just have a list of bikes that are/aren't allowed to ride as learners. No idea how they police it, probably just the fact of no insurance if you crash. That deters a lot of people.

James Deuce

27th November 2006, 17:26

Just to wind Ixion up, compulsory 3rd party insurance in Aus tends to help with the application of the LAMs laws.

The list is actually a positive list in that it lists the bikes you can ride, and includes a lot of venerable Brit/Euro/US iron. Paul in NZ's Triumph would be learner legal in NSW.

mynameis

27th November 2006, 17:28

Just off the manafacturer's specs. In Aus they also exclude certain bikes for learners -NSR, RGV, TZR, - can't remember if they exclude the sports inline 4's, like the CBR RR etc.

If you take a sample of 500 CBR 250 RR's and 500 ZXR 250 more than 900 will have less than 40 hp.

And that would prove anything how? Manufacturer's specs are often wrong. And each bike will be different, with an aftermarket pipe, or high k's, or how it's been ridden. It would have to be dyno tuned, which isn't cheap and isn't feasible.

Couldn't agress less.

mynameis

27th November 2006, 17:29

From the manufacturers specs, it won't be higher thats for sure!

It wouldn't be higher but bikes can still be modified to output more power irrespective of how much power hence the CC rating law which is the most obvious and logical option. Instead of a much more costly option of weight/power of a bike. Plus we've got a very small bike market in NZ unlike UK or other countries. And the law has to be definite and precise as opposed to " being vague "which is exactly what would happen if they went to HP/Weight system.

mynameis

Grahameeboy

27th November 2006, 17:35

HP limit in UK.....used to have CBR900'S restricted to keep within the HP limit......pass your test for next level and just de-restrict..

jeremysprite

27th November 2006, 17:43

[QUOTE=mynameis;838757]If you take a sample of 500 CBR 250 RR's and 500 ZXR 250 more than 900 will have less than 40 hp.

QUOTE]

That's fine, but realistically, it's not about numbers, its about how safe that particular bike is in the hands of a 15 yo .I'm not saying these bikes aren't safe, blah blah blah, but that the government tends to err on the side of caution, as 1 Cletis will kill himself at 15 doing 190 into a wall, and then people get sued, government makes laws etc.

hXc

27th November 2006, 17:43

From the manufacturers specs, it won't be higher thats for sure!And how are you sure of that? It's not hard to make a bike put out more hp than the manufacturers say it's got.

Ixion

27th November 2006, 17:48

Well, that's not really the point, is it. On the same bsis, one could overbore a 250 now to make it a 300. How many people would bother.

The NSW rule is a sensible on, it's simple and straightforward, anyone can check th elits and see, and it allows learners to ride more "mature" bikes.

James Deuce

27th November 2006, 18:54

Here's the list.

God, I WISH I could have had a selection of bikes like this to chose from when I started riding.

http://www.transport.sa.gov.au/educational/training/ridersafe/index.asp

McJim

27th November 2006, 19:06

I think it should be like the UK - 125cc max on a learner and once you pass it's open season on anything you like.....none of these time limits - if you pass the test you're good enough and don't have to wait 6 months.

James Deuce

27th November 2006, 19:11

Ahh but it ISN'T 125-open season anymore McJim.

There's a 33hp limit step in between now.

The 125s have to be 12hp or less. Bit flipping dangerous to use as daily transport if you ask me.

Hitcher

27th November 2006, 19:12

I like the LAM system used by some Australian states. It just makes so much sense.

awesker

27th November 2006, 19:21

I think it should stay as it is, Ive gotten into trouble to many times on my cib and if I where on a bigger capacity I might havent have gotten away with them!

Most of the time I curse the 250cc limit, but when it matters I think its a good way to do it. Also in oz isnt it only a couple of states that allow like 500s and such to learn on? (correct me if Im wrong!)

jeremysprite

27th November 2006, 20:07

yup,
Do you mean if you were on a bigger capacity you could have done a runner?
'cos not with the 500's etc that are on the list, they have to be under a certain threshold of power to weight ratio,

jeremysprite

27th November 2006, 20:10

just looking at that list, vfr400 is too powerful/light, but rvf400 isn't? Strange.
Cool- post-war 350 singles.

James Deuce

27th November 2006, 20:45

just looking at that list, vfr400 is too powerful/light, but rvf400 isn't? Strange.
Cool- post-war 350 singles.

Dead right. NC23-24-30 were more powerful.

McJim

27th November 2006, 21:11

Ahh but it ISN'T 125-open season anymore McJim.

There's a 33hp limit step in between now.

The 125s have to be 12hp or less. Bit flipping dangerous to use as daily transport if you ask me.

Hmmm - maybe we're better off with the 250 system here after all.

xwhatsit

27th November 2006, 23:52

I think there's a few rules that could be changed for the learners and restricted licence periods; 70kph rule is fucking dangerous, 10pm curfew is a bit bizarre and damned difficult for uni students who often have night-time jobs, but the 250cc rule is reasonable, and if you're going to change it, just make something which has the same intentions but is more accurate. Effectively, with the 250cc rule, you're trying to restrict the power a n00b can have. However we've got LCs and NSRs under that rule. Clearly this is not too smart. I'm quite the fan of 2-strokes, I love that sound; however I wouldn't be too upset if they banned them for learners. An NSR250 is a pretty damned capable sportsbike; I imagine in good hands it could keep up with many 600cc sportsbikes, am I not too far off? And being a 2-stroke it's going to be far less easy to control than a 600cc 4-stroke. How about a 150cc 2-stroke limit or something?

Or the better idea is the one mentioned earlier in the thread, the power limit. This gets to the core of what the 250cc limit is designed to do; restrict power. It also gets around the issue of the big tall fat guys on miniature little sportsbikes; buy a nice big comfy bike and have it restricted in power, then de-restrict it later on.

I still have to put up with this 250cc limit for some time to come, but I think sometimes we just need to stop whingeing and actually knuckle down and learn some skills so we can put them to use when we get bigger bikes later on.

Hellraiser

28th November 2006, 08:18

You have to remember the old Keep it Simple rule and you couldn't get much simpler than it is.

How are the boys & Girls in Blue ment to police how much Power your bike has, as of yet i have not seen a Dyno that will fit in the boot of a Patrol Car.

In all honesty i think the law is alittle to easy and should be changed and made even harder.

law should be <250cc 4 stroke

It should be made compulsary to do something like the RRRS programe before you are aloud to sit your Restricted.

Get rid of the 70km

Raise the driving age to 18

Increase the Learners Period to 12 months

Allow you to ride a bike <650cc while on restricted

Time Period on Restricted should be 12 months and again you would need to complete an advanced rider programe before you can even think about sitting your full.

I am also a firm believer that these sort of restrictions should be put into place for cage drivers as well i.e. on a lerners you can't drive anthing with a turbo and must be <1600cc, complete compuslery driving programes between leaner - Restricted, Restricted - Full etc etc

Now i know there is always execptions to the rule we are always going to have the red neck hill billy from Invercargil thats going to say "my ma & pa let me ride from the time i was a youngn so i had a way of getting to the padock to shag Baaaabara why should i have to follow the rules i know how to ride" or i'm 6 3" and 200kg, to be honest why should we give a rats arse how long you have been chasing the sheep on your bike and there are big 250's on the market that would suit a tall person, as for the 200kg's go on a fucken diet.

One last thing all the rider training programes should be at our own expence i.e NO Government funding. Now for the students that say But we can't afford it, you always have the option to catch the bus or get a bycycle or even better try a pair of bartabullets.

end of rant

Sketchy_Racer

28th November 2006, 09:09

The rules are fine as they are.

A GN250 has more power than what is needed on NZ roads.

The Driving age needs to stay where it is. People start work or uni at 16 easily, and they need a licence of somesort to get themselves there.

they do need to take away the 70kph limit on learners. It's dangerous

terbang

28th November 2006, 09:11

The Aussies have got it..!

wybmadiity

28th November 2006, 10:30

it should be a truely graduated system, whereing, learners licence must ride 250cc single or twin cylinder 4 strokes, and restricted can ride anything up to 400cc

I agree with this, I have seen learners on bikes that are simply too big for them and its their riding that suffers.

jeremysprite

28th November 2006, 17:00

Yeah I'd say age should still stay the same, I wouldn't want to give up riding til I'm 18! Thats only 3 years, then I'll be married, and there goes bike for ever!! (pt)

I think if 250 2 strokes were illegal for learner/restricteds, it'd still be on my list for a weekend twisties bike after I get my full. Anyone else concur?

Pathos

28th November 2006, 17:12

I like the law as it is but the 18 month time period for the restricted licence is too long IMHO.

In terms of general riding I don't think I've really improved since the first 8 months just because theres nothing more to learn (the track is a different story).

Then again I've had 10 years on the road and 2 driving before I got my first bike. I don't recommend starting on the road with time on a bicycle or car.

Hitcher

28th November 2006, 17:14

Married at 18? Now that's ambition.

Ixion

28th November 2006, 17:16

Gosh, you are a quick learner. I've been riding (and driving ) for 40 years, and I still have heaps to learn.

jeremysprite

28th November 2006, 17:16

Married at 18? Now that's ambition.

No, no, married at 21.

Oh what the hell, yeah married at 18. Got anyone in mind?

jeremysprite

28th November 2006, 17:18

Gosh, you are a quick learner. I've been riding (and driving ) for 40 years, and I still have heaps to learn.

Lol good call.

Yeah although I would like a new bike, I enjoy pushing the FXR to its limits, and testing how far I can go. Had the front tyre squealing on me today while attempting a stoppie from 95km/h. That disc was REALLY hot when I got home.

Mr. Peanut

28th November 2006, 17:20

And who would find out the actual HP of a bike and how??

Like all bikes run at the max horsepower stated and literally every dealer in the country has a dyno run machine and it's like $5 to get one done.

This prevails the current sensible option which is in place now which is cc rating.

mynameis
Eligible Motorcycles in the category 0-260ml

All models with the exception of:

Make Model

Suzuki RGV250
Kawasaki KR250 (KR-1 and KR1s models)
Honda NSR250
Yamaha TZR250
Aprilia RS250

:killingme :wavey: :spudbooge :nya: :motu:

And yet, under NZ law, I'm not allowed to ride a 300cc Royal Enfield Diesel... Hahahaha....

I'd be riding a DR650 if we were under the AUS rules. I oculd have bought it for about $4000 and it would have lasted me a good 6 years of riding. Ah well.

Hitcher

28th November 2006, 17:27

Got anyone in mind?

It's your ambition.

Mr. Peanut

28th November 2006, 18:42

The message you have entered is too short :whocares:

lukelin250

28th November 2006, 19:29

should be like a car, ride what you can afford

jeremysprite

28th November 2006, 21:27

wouldn't you be a bit worried about some rich gimp on a gixxer 1000 trying to overtake you down the straights, or even worse round a corner?

And if you can look at people like skidMark, who ride crazy on a 250C, what would they do on a more powerful bike???

hXc

28th November 2006, 21:31

what would they do on a more powerful bike???Die. Simple as that.

jeremysprite

28th November 2006, 21:43

Die. Simple as that.

Well, yeah. Would you trust yourself to buy and ride within your limits?

hXc

28th November 2006, 21:45

Well, yeah. Would you trust yourself to buy and ride within your limits?Yes, I would. I plan to go from my Spada (250cc v-twin) to an SV1000s. It's a big step, I know, especially for a young guy. But I'll be careful and ride within my limits. I may crash, but it'll be my fault only.

Some people need to control the urge to whack the throttle full tap everytime they can. I've learnt to, anyone else can.

jeremysprite

29th November 2006, 08:49

Morcs

29th November 2006, 11:37

as of yet i have not seen a Dyno that will fit in the boot of a Patrol Car.

In Germany they have them, only ever seen them use them for scooters though (the germans go crazy with their tuning...)

McJim

29th November 2006, 11:44

Fair enough then. I don't know if riding an fxr has been good for me, as it's taught me how to ride a slow bike fast, or bad, because I go everywhere with throttle pretty much wide open.
Could be a bad point about 250's (or maybe just slow 150's) - it teaches you to ride with no holds barred

Yeah - often wondered about that - never ridden a big bike - ride the 250 with 2 throttle settings fully closed and fully opened...will this not work on a Sports thou then? Will I have to unlearn all that I've learnt?

Bend-it

29th November 2006, 11:50

I learnt that real quick going from a 250 to the RF900... Can imagine what it'd be like on a sportier 1000!

jeremysprite

29th November 2006, 13:39

Yeah - often wondered about that - never ridden a big bike - ride the 250 with 2 throttle settings fully closed and fully opened...will this not work on a Sports thou then? Will I have to unlearn all that I've learnt?

Nah you just have to learn to do all the other stuff 10x faster, like stopping. And recognising that that speck of white behind the line in your vision which is actually a 4m wide tree, is a car thats pulling out on you.

Kupe

30th November 2006, 14:08

It's like a lot of laws in this country. They don't tend to suit everyone, but what will? Enjoy your time on a 250...it's all about learning anways. The only question I have is why 70kph was chosen as the speed limit for learners. The L plate comes off when I hit the open road cos it's downright dangerous to be a law abiding citizen and hold up impatient cage drivers with a motorcycle.

jeremysprite

30th November 2006, 14:16

it's downright dangerous to be a law abiding citizen and hold up impatient cage drivers with a motorcycle.

Too right there. I don't think cops really police the 70k rule.

McJim

30th November 2006, 14:23

Seriously though - I'm happy enough with the VTR for the moment - I had a ride on a 636 - didn't even try to fang it - just tickled it along the road.

Also tried an XT660 - well torquey and heaps of fun - too wide for comfortable lane splitting though.

I might just stick with the VTR once I've got my full - it's still faster than going to work in a car. The only time it feels lacking is on Thursday nights and on trackdays...so I'll stop doing Thursdays nights and track days - simple.

jeremysprite

30th November 2006, 17:44

I might just stick with the VTR once I've got my full - it's still faster than going to work in a car. The only time it feels lacking is on Thursday nights and on trackdays...so I'll stop doing Thursdays nights and track days - simple.

You should put one of those Neptune mufflers on and remove the baffle - someone on here did it, watched the video like 5 times, just to hear that sweet unchoked vtwin again...

If the FXR had a bit more top end I'd keep it, it's comfortable, light, and I've grown attached, but wringing it to go 130 ain't that fun.

Quartermile

2nd December 2006, 11:57

I've lernt to ride on a FXR and yea although you rip it back :yes: going anywhere atleast when I get a 250 ( soon) or higher I'll be fine and dandy confidence wise but this may prove a bad thing.:sick:

Quartermile

3rd December 2006, 21:43

Maybe they should leave Restricted at 250 and change Learners to 150:dodge:

jeremysprite

4th December 2006, 09:17

Yes! Then my FXR would be worth heaps!

Hitcher

4th December 2006, 09:51

Maybe they should leave Restricted at 250 and change Learners to 150

And the point of that, exactly, would be what?

Ixion

4th December 2006, 10:00

I see value in a variation between L and R. Arguably 250cc, given modern bikes , is too powerful for a true learner (I don't mean folk who have been riding for years on an L ).

But reducing the capacity/performance for restricted would be overly onerous.

The actual capacity figures (and whether it should be cc, a list, or a hp figure) are debateable.

Though I should add that i say that in the context that I would like to see the age for a class 6L reduced to 14, but the age for a full (class 1 or 6 ) increased to at least 18. (I'd leave the 6R at 15, same as 1L) .

And offer something like the CBTA direct access for over 25s.