Dealers and non LAMS bikes?

[ducatilover]

I'm uploading the Honda owner's manual for the CB400 and will post the link here shortly, but on page 134 it states a dry weight of 169kg
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0ByQ3...it?usp=sharing NC39 manual


Sent from a place with google FTW

[Glowerss]

I'm uploading the Honda owner's manual for the CB400 and will post the link here shortly, but on page 134 it states a dry weight of 169kg
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0ByQ3...it?usp=sharing NC39 manual


Sent from a place with google FTW

Shit man, I applaud your dedication to the cause of keeping people honest Glad I'm not the only one bothered by dodgy business practices

I'll certainly be shooting them a second email tomorrow if the adverts haven't been changed by tomorrow. Barring that, I wonder if there's somebody in a slightly higher position then the sales staff you can get ahold of.

I'd like to believe that somewhere there's a manager/owner kind of person who wouldn't be enthused with his/her store fraudulently selling shit. Spose we'll find out

[carburator]

How do custom bikes fit into LAMs? Could someone build a frame, slap in a powerful 600cc engine and lie about the numbers and get it lams approved?

short answer NO...

[ducatilover]

Well, I doubt the Honda owner's manual is wrong, so I'll forward a copy of it to Coleman's tomorrow (although I expect they already have access to these resources)
The Japanese only manual mentions 190kg for the Bol D'or, so I have to somehow figure out the symbol for dry weight in Japanese
Who knows somebody who can manage that?

Hmm so page 122 of this manual http://www.honda.co.jp/manual-motor/...erfour-all.pdf
says: 車両重量 190kg which according to google translate = weight of vehicle.
Perhaps somebody else can help out with some Japanese translation



Sent from a place where I studied German...

[FJRider]

Dry weight in Japanese is ...

乾燥重量

[ducatilover]

Dry weight in Japanese is ...

乾燥重量

I translated as many different variations as I could, before I realised I can simply copy/paste off the manual in to translate and it just says vehicle weight.
The English manual I linked through my google.docs says 169kg dry though. So one could reasonably expect that the (wait for this mouthful) Honda NC39 CB400 Bol D'or Hyper Spec 3 VTEC weighs in at 169kg dry (actually, 174 as Jap manual has a 5kg difference between the SF and Bol Duh) and 195kg wet

Yeah?


Sent from somewhere waiting for Honda to email back

[FJRider]

I translated as many different variations as I could, before I realised I can simply copy/paste off the manual in to translate and it just says vehicle weight.
The English manual I linked through my google.docs says 169kg dry though. So one could reasonably expect that the (wait for this mouthful) Honda NC39 CB400 Bol D'or Hyper Spec 3 VTEC weighs in at 169kg dry (actually, 174 as Jap manual has a 5kg difference between the SF and Bol Duh) and 195kg wet

Yeah?


Sent from somewhere waiting for Honda to email back

There is more likely a bigger difference in rider weights that bike model weights, only in LAM's (etc) that official weights are of any real importance.

Are "Claimed HP" figures really that accurate to be used in "Official" business such as the LAM's list eligibility status .. ???

Sent from a restricted area using code

[ducatilover]

There is more likely a bigger difference in rider weights that bike model weights, only in LAM's (etc) that official weights are of any real importance.

Are "Claimed HP" figures really that accurate to be used in "Official" business such as the LAM's list eligibility status .. ???

Sent from a restricted area using code

These are the Honda specs from their publications themselves, so I imagine they're a teenie bit important?
This model has a claimed 53hp/39kw. Although my earlier one had a claimed 53hp and some have dyno'd near that without correcting from crank HP silly Honda.
I suspect NZTA will use these manufacturer's claims for weight and power eh?
Until Honda themselves tell me otherwise, I will take what I've found so far and go with 169 dry and 39kw
Which results in 150.5kw/tonne if my maff is good

Sent from a place where I'm too tired

[FJRider]

These are the Honda specs from their publications themselves, so I imagine they're a teenie bit important?
This model has a claimed 53hp/39kw. Although my earlier one had a claimed 53hp and some have dyno'd near that without correcting from crank HP silly Honda.
I suspect NZTA will use these manufacturer's claims for weight and power eh?
Until Honda themselves tell me otherwise, I will take what I've found so far and go with 169 dry and 39kw
Which results in 150.5kw/tonne if my maff is good

Sent from a place where I'm too tired

The big question ... is Dry or Wet weight used as "Official standard policy" in LAM's reg's ... ???

[ducatilover]

The big question ... is Dry or Wet weight used as "Official standard policy" in LAM's reg's ... ???

Page 3 of 4 http://www.nzta.govt.nz/licence/gett.../lams-faqs.pdf
Dry weight/tare weight

That be our answer!

[Glowerss]

So, this is the email I sent.

http://www.nzta.govt.nz/licence/gett...torcycles.html

As you can see from the NZTA website, the SV400 does not show up at all. And if you calculate it's power to weight ratio ( 39kw/ 167+90) you'll find it has a power to weight ratio of 151.7 kw/tonne. It is not even LAMS compliant.

The CB400 Superfour Bol'Dor is also not on the LAMS list. As explained above, there are CB400 Superfours on the LAMS list, but they are the 408cc Air cooled models from the 70s *NOT* the 399cc liquid cooled models that were introduced in the 90s. Furthermore, according to the Honda CB400 SF owners manual it has a weight of 168kg and making 39kw. This puts it at 151.1 kw/tonne. Also outside of the LAMS restrictions as well as not being on the list.

All of the above, however, is entirely academic. Even if they could be added onto the LAMS list, neither bike is currently listed as a LAMS bike. You cannot legally sell either bike as being learner approved, because quite frankly, they are not. Any learner or restricted license holder on either bike could be issued with a breach of license conditions if pulled over, and no NZTA instructor would allow them to take a license test on either bike.

Continuing to sell either bike as "learner approved" when you know full well they are not is extremely dishonest, extremely unethical, and extremely ILLEGAL. If the sales staff at Coleman's is not competent enough to sort this out, I'll have no problems taking this to either somebody higher up at Coleman's who wouldn't be excited to see his/her sales staff illegally listing bikes.

Failing that, the Commerce Commission would certainly be interested in a case of falsely advertising bikes, and selling bikes that are not fit for purpose (a learner bike that cannot be legally ridden as a learner).

The ball is entirely in your court.

This is the reply I got: They update the list once a month, don’t worry about it. Our business has over 40 years experience

What a joke

[ducatilover]

I've been told by Colemans that the figures for both bikes have been wrong, which is extremely unfortunate
I will write to Honda JP and tell them their specs are fucked.

Phwoooaaar Glowerss, that's a long winded and eloquent reply they sent you!!!!

FWIW the SV400N is even lighter at 159kg!

Sent from a place where people really just want to sell bikes.

[Glowerss]

I've been told by Colemans that the figures for both bikes have been wrong, which is extremely unfortunate
I will write to Honda JP and tell them their specs are fucked.

Phwoooaaar Glowerss, that's a long winded and eloquent reply they sent you!!!!

FWIW the SV400N is even lighter at 159kg!

Sent from a place where people really just want to sell bikes.

So, it would appear when it comes to Colemans, their reply is "fuck you, we're right, you're wrong, and we're going to continue to sell bikes illegally"

Fucking stand up operation they have going on.

Safe to say I won't be buying anything from them in the future

[ducatilover]

I don't deal with people with that attitude. Just because somebody is a sales does not make them a fucking genius. That's really the wrong attitude to have.
There's too many with the idea like that, but I suppose I'd be a bit miffed if I had imported a bike from Japan that was not on the LAMS list and wanted to sell it as a LAMS bike



Sent from a hate for wankers.

[Glowerss]

I don't deal with people with that attitude. Just because somebody is a sales does not make them a fucking genius. That's really the wrong attitude to have.
There's too many with the idea like that, but I suppose I'd be a bit miffed if I had imported a bike from Japan that was not on the LAMS list and wanted to sell it as a LAMS bike



Sent from a hate for wankers.

They sent me this 5 hours later.

I have personally been involved in approving LAMS bikes with the NZTA since it LAMS started .
I know them formulas and I know what’s involved, and I am in the process of getting several more bikes approved.
At the end of the day all of our bikes fall within the formulas that we claim are LAMS, and the NZTA does always get it exactly right on several models
as I have had to correct and amend a few of the bikes they have already approved or not.
Did you notice that one of the most popular Learner bikes on the road the Hyosung GT250 isn’t on the LAMS list?????

I had the SV400 approved last week as it had previously been rejected because someone had got the formulas incorrect. There are few errors on the list, it doesn’t keep me up at night
and I’m sure it doesn’t keep them up either.

The LAMS is an on-going process and for me the guy that does them is just a phone call away . At the end of the day if a bike is within a maximum power-to-weight ratio of 150 kilowatts per tonne and is under 660cc’s it is going to be approved.
Mike T
Colemans Suzuki


I guess they're confident selling shit that isn't LAMS approved because they feel they can force the NZTA guy to approve things even if they're borderline. It certainly makes clear to me why the SV400 is the special exception to taking into account wet weight when it was disallowed earlier.

Kinda dodgy still to list them without them being LAMS approved yet and doubly dodgy that they feel they (a dealership) can dictate which bikes become LAMS bikes, but whatever I suppose. It only becomes an issue again if 3 months down the line the liquid cooled super fours still aren't approved.