AZ 20 mph law

Discussion in 'Laws, Legislation & Emissions' started by astring, Jun 24, 2008.

  1. astring

    astring Member

    Is anyone here interested in closing the loophole that allows cops to give us thousands of dollars in fines for going 21 mph? Lets use this thread to start brainstorming a way to fix that.

  2. GasKicker

    GasKicker Member

    Sell one to a state legislator. Or give it to them. (We know legislators don't actually pay for anything while in office). It's a perc of the job! lol
  3. johnnybiker

    johnnybiker New Member

    Its terrible that they can fine us so much for goin a little over the limit, since i normally go about 22:shock:. I think if enough MBers wrote to them about the rediculous price for the problem they will think about changing it. Motord Bikes are far safer than cars (except maybe for the rider) since its 2 tons of steel barreling down the road 10mph over the limit. Hopefully it will be changed before people stop ridin down here:(
  4. Torques

    Torques Guest

    There IS NO speed limit in Arizona for motorized bicycles. Please be careful to not provide disinformation. The statue references a "manufacturer's specification" but it is NOT a speed limit. The authorities may like to think it is a speed limit but that is their own little fantasy world they are living in. I have the information from the top down (mvd policy analysists, etc), there IS NO speed limit. I recommend keeping it at that speed because of the number of so-called police that have nothing better to do than stick their noses in areas they have NO knowledge of to satisfy their ego/authority trips. Stay tuned......
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 26, 2008
  5. astring

    astring Member

    You have a lot of experience in this and I was hoping you would post here. What change do you feel is needed in the legislation? If it were kept to a "speeding violation only" your fine would have been around $20 and they could not have nailed you with regs and ins and that bs. What do you see as the fix?
  6. Torques

    Torques Guest

    First off, what can we do to prevent a cop from fabricating events and perjuring themselves in court against a citizen who has not broken any laws? In my case there is nothing I could do about it despite the fact I offered proof of my maximum speed that trip. I even recorded the arrest. Those are just two small items in the iceburg, and below the waterline, the iceburg is full of deceit, deception, lies and corruption belonging to the police, prosecutors and court. Thank you Scottsdale. I've been a resident here since 1992 and never realized how * * * * * * up the people are in this so-called kangaroo court justice system and Hollywood/rodeo police force. From my observations, all the players there are corrupt and dishonest, plain and simple. I predict this case is gonna get real ugly for them, sooner or later. It's already ugly, but they are painting themselves into a corner and soon a whole lot of people are going to see them for the scum that they are. Even if I WAS going over 20 mph, there is no citable offense for the statute 28-2516. In other words there is not a word ANYWHERE that assigns a penalty for ANY speed on a motorized bicycle. Not only that, there is not a word ANYWHERE that converts a motorized bicycle into a moped over 20 and then to a motorcycle over 25. DOESN"T EXIST. I believe it is a regular procedure for the police and the prosecutors in Nazisdale to pull false ideas like that out of their * * * to satisfy stupidity. So if I understand your jist correctly, would it make sense to request from the legislature an actual speed limit? I guess so, I haven't really thought about that specifically. It is complicated though, would that be 20 mph with engine running, what if engine is idling as you coast downhill at 25? What if the engine is off and your riding at 26? Then are you going to leave it up to a police officer to render an accurate and fair judgement of what happened? HA HA HA . Yeah right, trust the cops? NEVER.....

    *= MBc EDIT
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 26, 2008
  7. astring

    astring Member

    I mostly would like to take Regs. ins and licence off the table, so that at the worst they could hand out is a $50 fine. And make that statewide so we could eliminate abuses by cities.

    I think it would take a serious effort by all AZ forumites though.
    Last edited: Jun 26, 2008
  8. Torques

    Torques Guest

    Astring, after reviewing my post, I don't think I came to close in rendering an opinion. I get so wired up about those crooks, sorry. I am going to think about it and when I can say something that might be worthwhile, I will post it, thanks.
  9. sparky

    sparky Active Member

    How can you not understand the conversion process from a motorized bicycle to a motorcycle. It's in the definition of the law. Motored bicycle is less than 20mph. If you go over, you are traveling at a faster sustained rate than 98% of all bicyclists... and the government can't have you doing that now, can they?? That means you'll never have to pay for reg, tags, tickets, etc. They can't have you steal their money by finding alternative rides & then pushing it past the limits they set for you. It's just not fair, I say.

    This should really be settled nationally. There should be a federal law stating all motor-assisted bicycles that travel less than 25 or 30 mph are free from all hassles we experience now. I could see a few places where they could hassle you, like not being licensed... or riding from 10pm to 5am... that type of stuff. But the state laws are carp, and it's only going to be up to us to change this mess.
  10. Torques

    Torques Guest

    Between 10pm and 5am? Are you kidding? :shock::shock::shock::shock: They are NOT that loud. I guess people that drill holes etc, that's where the noise comes from correct?
  11. astring

    astring Member

    My main thing is that we not get the no regs, no ins , no licence tickets because it is obvious that that fine is way out of proportion to the "crime". Little $20 or $50 fines for whatever do not really bother me.
  12. no_worries

    no_worries New Member

    Work for me!

    I think the AZ law works fine. We have an extensive network of bike paths (especially here in Scottsdale) that run through parks, lakes, and other public areas. These are not city streets and are filled with joggers, walkers, rollerblader's, children, elderly, etc...

    20 miles an hour is faster than a person should be going in these circumstances. So the minute a motorized bicycle goes faster than that it should become a moped and subject to all applicable laws surround motorized vehicles.

    I've ridden all over Scottsdale and Tempe and have never been stopped. Personally I trust the AZ law officers to make a judgment call as to my speed and if they say I was going too fast then so be it. It is well worth the privilege of be allowed to use, "...rights-of-way designated for the exclusive use of bicycles." under AZ law.

    For those who haven't seen our law I have attached it.

    Attached Files:

    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 15, 2015
  13. astring

    astring Member

    Scottsdale huh, boy are you in for a surprise. It appears that Scottsdale police are issuing citations for no regs no ins no license plate and other infractions for going 21 or 22 mph (many thousands of dollars of fines and possible jail time). Now here is the kicker, the people being cited were not even going 20, but in court the judge believes the officer. Sounds weird huh? look at the posts from the forumite named Torques. If you lived in Phx you would be ok, but in Scottsdale you will probably run into a big problem.

    The reason we need this reform is that we have to make the punishment proportional to the infraction. Currently you will get several thousand dollars of fines for going UNDER 20 mph in Scottsdale.
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 15, 2015
  14. no_worries

    no_worries New Member

    Yep, I've seen Torques postings and am confused by his experiences. I’ve been riding here I Scottsdale for at least 2.5 years and have never been pulled over. Guess we all have different views of the same coin. It will be interesting to see how Torques case comes out though.

    Though you are right about more reforms are needed in AZ personally I would like to see state law supersede local authority to ban motorized bikes in their local. I do think speeding tickets on motorized bikes should carry the weight same as with all motorized vehicles in this state. If motorized bikes were only allowed on streets then there may not be a need but as long as we are allowed in parks other places where there are pedestrians then we need strong fines.

    I do have some personal feelings about people who are convicted of DUI, if Tourque is willing to get behind the wheel of a car when he is drunk then I don’t want him on anything but a bus. Can you image the damage to a child being hit by a bicycle going 19MPH?
  15. no_worries

    no_worries New Member

    I understand you point.

    Don't get me wrong I do see your point that 'if' a law officer decided; to he could conceivable under current interpretation of AZ 28-2516 slap you with a huge amount of citations and thus fines. Maybe this loophole does require additional legislation and I would be happy to support a serious attempt at legislative change. But not under the banner of or using Torques case as an example I wouldn't touch it, the general public in AZ would laugh that one out of the system.
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 15, 2015
  16. stude13

    stude13 Active Member

    i hope sparky isnt on the legislative panel. libertarian thought might suffice. you dont have to give up your rights they are being stripped every day. someday you might look back and say why didnt i put up a fight.
    Last edited: Jul 8, 2008
  17. astring

    astring Member

    I am not a libertarian, but I am a strong proponent of punishments being proportional to the infraction.
  18. no_worries

    no_worries New Member

    I was a Libertarian for many years when I was younger and fought hard for reduced penalties on victimless crimes. However, now with a few more years of experience I find that rights are only being stripped away because some ‘person’ has abused or taken advantage of the right and hurt other people. It is ashamed that so many of our rights are curtailed but you can’t blame the government only the yahoos who think they can abuse the good people of a society.

    It this case I gotta’ agree with Astring, we do need some more laws but at least Arizona has made a good start.
  19. loquin

    loquin Active Member

    The entire subject of a fixed "speed limit" on a 'vehicle' which
    • can be operated with the motor off or disengaged
    • can be operated faster with the motor off or disengaged that it can go with the motor on
    • which has so little power that going up hills slows it down to a crawl or a stop
    • Requires peddling when starting and going up hills
    • which goes substantially faster with the wind at your back, and
    • substantially slower when driving into the wind
    seems VERY contrived to me.

    I would suggest that a viable alternative be the ability for the motorized bike to go uphill without peddling. Define a standard slope and rider weight. Assume for argument, that the slope should approximate the maximum slope you would see on mountain roads. An 8% slope, while greater than the maximum allowable freeway slope, is often seen in hilly or mountainous roads. And, could assume a 180 pound weight for the mythical 'standard' rider.

    Any 'motor vehicle' should be able to proceed under its own power on the nation's roads, even when climbing mountain roads.

    It's also fairly easy to calculate the maximum slope that a given motor, drive-train, and bike should be able to climb unassisted.

    For instance. Assuming a Staton chain drive, 'tuned' for a maximum speed on level ground of 30 mph. (18.75 to 1 gearbox reduction, 16t drive sprocket, 16t driven sprocket) Robin - Subaru EHO35 33.5cc motor, bike with 26 inch diameter wheels, 180 pound rider, and 85% efficient drive train, and that Bike + motor + fuel weighs 50 pounds.

    Max torque is 1.3 foot-pounds (at the engine) at 5000 RPM
    Speed at max torque (5000 RPM) on level terrain is 20.6 mph (assuming no air resistance)

    Max torque at the rear wheel: 20.72 foot-pounds @266.7 RPM (assuming 85% efficiency.) The max force is therefore 20.72 foot-pounds/13 inch radius/12 inch per foot , or 19.1 pounds. At 21 MPH, the air resistance should be on the order of 5 pounds, spread out over the riders body. (A bike & rider just isn't very aerodynamic!) Thus, the NET driving force available is about 14 pounds at the engine's maximum torque RPM.

    The total weight to be pushed up the hill is 180 + 50, or 230 pounds.

    The maximum possible slope that this bike could climb, without peddling, is *approximately the ratio of 14/230, which is a 6.1 percent grade (3.9 degrees.) At this slope, the bike would be right 'at the edge.' Any wind gust, any temporary greater slope would cause it to slow down a bit, which would pull the engine 'off' its max torque peak, which would cause the bike to slow more, pulling the torque down even more... and the bike slows to the point where the motor dies (or the centrifugal clutch will release.) Essentially, once the motor slows down, even a little, it can no longer produce its max torque, starting a downward spiral.

    * It is actually the tangent(inverse sine(14/230)) However, at angles less than 10 degrees, the sine and tangent calculations yield approximately the same result)
    Last edited: Jul 9, 2008
  20. no_worries

    no_worries New Member

    Umm, good food for thought!

    Interesting ideas Lou, and if I am following what you are saying correctly I wonder how courts would handle verification or at least the perception of verifiability?

    I mean to say how is a law officer supposed to know if your motor is off or disengaged when you're rolling down a hill doing 30MPH? My understanding has always been that it is not his job to determine guilt or innocence at the scene of an alleged violation, only to issue the ticket. Then let courts decide the mitigating circumstances by whatever proof I could offer at the time of trial.

    Not sure I could prove I had the engine disengaged, just as Torque was unable to prove he wasn't speeding at the time of citation. Like it or not courts will always take an officers word over a citizens and arguing the point will only **** off the judge...I know from personal experience.

    It does cause me some thought that by just disengaging or turning off the engine it suddenly becomes a bicycle? I would suspect that as long as it has an engine attached it is not a bicycle, would be nice to have it both ways though.

    Also I wonder about wind speed? My truck will go faster or slower depending on strength of wind at my back...isn't it my duty as a driver to stay within the speed limits regardless the amount of gas I am pumping in?

    I would really like to be like CA and have a 30mph speed limit for us. However, if I was to work towards that end I would have to insist that we not be allowed on multi-use pathways and are limited to just surface street use.
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 15, 2015