Wollongong Australia, MB court case

will_start

Member
Local time
5:05 AM
Joined
Jan 20, 2008
Messages
486
Location
Sydney, Australia
Last edited:
Sorry, But I read it the first time as he was racing around.
I thought it as a guy that was breaking the law.
Had to reread it. Sorry
 
This sort of thing is always going to come up for as long as the measuring of an engine out-put is too difficult to do on the side of a road. We need to be regulated by speed not engine out-put! just another case where there is no certain out come because these are never clear cut cases. I have heard of endless similar cases being thrown out as there is not enough evidence. The police have used motorcycle dynos in the past which are not accurate for testing engines with such small out-puts. I bet if you approached the manufacturer of the dyno and asked "would your machine be accurate enough to test my motorized bike engine?" they would probably laugh at you and tell you it's for testing 100+ horses not 1/4.

Either way I hope this guy is excused for more serious matters that are banked up in our courts. The government needs to change legislation to focus on speed not engine out-put! How much more money and time will they waste on treating commuting citizens like criminals! Just another case of micro managing which is the only thing the 'A' holes seem to be good at.
 
Might I just point out - under the current edition of the Australian Road Rules, a 'power-assisted' bicycle is defined as having an electric motor. ICE is technically excluded from the definition. What does this mean? It means that in the eyes of the law (as legislated), you can fit a well-muffled 1cc thimbledrome model airplane motor to your bike, and be a criminal. That the court has asked for documentation on the power output reflects the duty of the courts to interpret the law in a reasonable manner (in cases like this, the letter of the law is not always reasonable, and the courts have a duty to recognise this). I'm not holding my breath on the current case to resolve this issue, though - it would take a thimbledrome rider (or a couple of them) winning in court to really get the ICE/electric distinction properly quashed.
 
Where is it stated that ICE engines are illegal as a power-assisted bicycle?
It's my understanding, after reading everything that the RTA has to offer, that the only restriction is the motor's power output and not the type of motor.

An excerpt from VSI27:-
A power-assisted pedal cycle is a cycle that:
• Is designed to be propelled primarily by human power; and
• Has one or more auxiliary propulsion motors attached that have a combined output of no more than
200 watts.
This means that the rider must be able to pedal the cycle; the motor is for assistance only.
A rider of a power-assisted pedal cycle does not have to hold a licence, however it is compulsory to
wear an approved bicycle helmet and obey the same traffic laws as bicyclists.

Either way, I don't think this guy will beat it, unless it's one of Rock Solid engine's 200W motors. They're certified.
They don't do 47kph, though, so I suspect that his is a normal output engine - 1200W, I think, for 48cc or 1700W for 66cc.
He shouldn't have told the magistrate that he could do 47kph since he was only clocked at 40kph. Not the brightest move.

MrShorty, a change to our laws would be very welcome, just depends on exactly what changes.
200W is ridiculous - 400W would be reasonable for electrics. ICE engines need to be rated differently.
 
Last edited:
Where is it stated that ICE engines are illegal as a power-assisted bicycle?
It's my understanding, after reading everything that the RTA has to offer, that the only restriction is the motor's power output and not the type of motor.

I stand corrected - this info was actually from a transport SA publication, which is apparently out of date :pinch:

MrShorty, a change to our laws would be very welcome, just depends on exactly what changes.
200W is ridiculous - 400W would be reasonable for electrics. ICE engines need to be rated differently.

Agreed. At the very least the assist should have more power than a third leg, but personally, I'm not comfortable with pedelec, and think that if a separate speed limit is imposed it should only apply to un-faired upright bikes (i.e. MTBs, road racers and sit-up bikes), not 'bents and velos, and that even for sit-up bikes it should be no less tha 50kph...
 
I'm not sure what the variation is state-to-state, but those rules are still current in NSW.
(Possibly not for long, though.)

For now, your "1cc thimbledrome model airplane motor" is safe. Let's race - you might still beat my 200W electric.

Not sure about speed limits, there also needs to be a power restriction, but not a stupid one.
ICE 2-stroke engines only achieve rated power at a very specific rpm, so limiting them to 200W maximum is downright ridiculous. It would mean that they're only usable right in the power-band. 1000W would be fair and, as mentioned earlier, 400W for electrics. (I'm talking about traditional, 'upright', 2-wheeled bicycles.)

I'll try to remember to keep an eye on this case to see the result. (Wollongong is only one hour's drive from here - the police/court attitude will be the same.)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top