Darksider - conviction registered | Page 3 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Darksider - conviction registered

Dont mean to open a can of worms and Bill im not doubting the quality of the work that went into your side car but is it even legal to build you own side car. What i read was that you cannot add an seat to your vehicle. So unless the sidecar is OEM its not legal.
 
Bike Cop said:
The bike that I stopped was a Vulcan 900, no sidecar, MC tire on front, car tire on the rear. I can see how you would have an argument for car tires if you were driving a three wheeled MC (piaggio mp3's need not apply), or if you had machined or otherwise modified your rims to accept the different car bead. You will however, have an uphill battle all the way with the officer and the court as they will be unfamiliar with your unique setup.

I did consider it to be a safety issue in this case and charged the driver. It was an enforcement initiative focused on bike equipment, that was the reason for the inspection.

And last time I checked no one was keeping track of Brownie points. Tell that to some of my co-workers who are content to show up for work and log hours in the local Tim's parking lot.
Click to expand...

So you considered it to be a safety issue.My question to you would be is what credentials do you hold to make a call like that?Are you a licensed mechanic or an engineer?Or did you just read something on the internet that said CT's are bad on a bike?Just wondering because the 1800 Wing loves a CT on the rear and there are hundreds out there that have been running them accumulating millions of miles since 01 when the 1800 came out.Nowhere have I heard of a CT failure on these bikes and believe me the naysayers would be all over it ,but I sure have heard of a lot of MT failures.Sometimes engineering reports just don't equal real life testing.So taking some overly vague law and your opinion and charging this guy was just wrong and for the judge to back it was even worse.JMHO.

Saying all that you should sleep real well these days knowing that you are saving the world one CT at a time.
 
Wait....... What? People put car tires on their motorcycles!? LOL That's the first time I've heard of this.
 
It takes neither a mechanic nor an engineer to identify the type of tire installed on a vehicle ... only the ability to read what it says on the sidewall. It is not the judgment of the person writing that ticket whether that type of tire is a safety issue or not ... it was the engineers who designed those respective tires, and the people who wrote the legislation who listened (sort of) to what those engineers had to say. I'm well aware of the tire-life and load-capacity issues that Gold Wing riders have had.

If you are convinced that a car tire ought to be a legal application on the rear of a Gold Wing then I encourage you to get in contact with the vehicle manufacturer and the tire manufacturer in order to see if they will approve it. Might take some effort ... might not happen ... but if you actually get a document from someone with the appropriate qualifications who represents the vehicle and tire manufacturers then you might have a chance in court.
 
No cans of worms have been opened. A sidecar in and by itself is considered a 'bolt on accessory' - it is not a registered vehicle all by it's lonesome. In my case, tbe body shell is mostly of commercial manufacture. The frame and other parts are modified or of new fabrication under oversight of a skilled trades-person.

Attached to a motorcycle, it is subject to 'safety' requirements including mechanical fitness.



Sent from my SGH-I337M using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Bill, can you post up some pics of your sidecar ?

maybe add some cool details, like how long it took, etc..
 
Fatwing said:
So you considered it to be a safety issue.My question to you would be is what credentials do you hold to make a call like that?Are you a licensed mechanic or an engineer?Or did you just read something on the internet that said CT's are bad on a bike?Just wondering because the 1800 Wing loves a CT on the rear and there are hundreds out there that have been running them accumulating millions of miles since 01 when the 1800 came out.Nowhere have I heard of a CT failure on these bikes and believe me the naysayers would be all over it ,but I sure have heard of a lot of MT failures.Sometimes engineering reports just don't equal real life testing.So taking some overly vague law and your opinion and charging this guy was just wrong and for the judge to back it was even worse.JMHO.

Saying all that you should sleep real well these days knowing that you are saving the world one CT at a time.
Click to expand...

Well your argument holds no water at all. as Brian stated He doesn't need to be an engineer, or a mechanic. You ask if he has the credentials to determine safety of this issue then you immediately argue that engineers can't be trusted as they don't do "real world testing". So tell us do you want an engineer, (who you argue doesn't know), to patrol and make a determination at the road side?

I will address the engineer argument in a moment. For now let's focus on the mechanic. What qualifications does a mechanic obtain to determine the safety or using a car tire on a motorcycle?? Goodness knows a mechanic has NEVER fudged a safety certificate for a vehicle... LMAO I doubt they have run testing, to measure the effects of the turns and leaning on a bike to a car tire as opposed to a bike tire. Have they tested every make and model of car tire and the sidewall strength as opposed to the sidewall strength of the bike tires? I have seen MANY things that various mechanics have done on bikes, cars and trucks, that are FAR from safe.

Now for the engineers, I am sure the tire manufacturers have tested their products every way from Sunday to see if they could be used on bikes, (as this would be a new and expanded market for them, (I am talking of the manufacturers who don't already have a bike tire line). Just as I said earlier I am also sure that the bike manufacturers have tested various types of tires to see if they can be deemed safe. As for your comment that engineer reports "just don't equal real life testing" Do you honestly think the various engineers employed by bike manufacturers and tire manufacturers just run some computer simulations and write a report without ever actually testing these theories out?? GMAFB

Now "maybe" a car tire is well suited for the Goldwing, (I don't know I am NOT an engineer, nor do I THINK I am smarter than an engineer or that I KNOW better). Ok YOU have never heard of a Car Tire failure on a bike?? Have you not looked at various forums and I am sure youtube has more than one example. I can think of at least 3 reports of Road Star owners in the US who have reported failures as a result of the tire bead not holding up. There are also more than a few threads on the Roadie forums of riders who went dark side and then switched back saying they felt "unsafe" during cornering etc when cornering, but I guess they are all just terrible riders. But I guess because YOU have never heard of it it didn't happen. IF the goldwing is safe using a car tire, (with full engineering studies etc, then why hasn't the goldwing owners lobbied to have it "certified" as the one bike that should be permitted to run car tires???

Now even IF the Goldwing 1800 is somehow the ONE bike that is suited to run a car tire, (even that takes a HUGE leap of faith), As I stated earlier the legislation is written to cover ALL bikes. It would be impossible, (because first Honda, and then a car tire manufacturer would have to "certify" that this combination is a safe operating condition), good luck with that one. Why wouldn't they you ask LIABILITY, secondly using your own argument HOW could the engineers say this after all according to your analysis those engineers "reports" don't stand up against real world testing which they obviously, (according to your argument), don't do...lol So again If the goldwing is the only bike that this combination works on they would then have to write a new section to the HTA stating that ONE model can operate using a car tire. Do they then only allow "certain car tires" which have been tested??

Did the officer charge a GOLDWING owner?? No but I guess if a car tire is suitable for a goldwing then it must be for a Vulcan as well after all the goldwing and Vulcan have identical specs and characteristics..LMAO

Maybe you should go to the MTO and impart all your experience and knowledge to them I am sure they will have a new piece of legislation ready the moment the election is over..lol
 
Last edited:
hedo2002 said:
...
Now "maybe" a car tire is well suited for the Goldwing, (I don't know I am NOT an engineer, nor do I THINK I am smarter than an engineer or that I KNOW better). Ok YOU have never heard of a Car Tire failure on a bike??

...
Click to expand...

If you are faith-leaping, you may as well also include the Piaggo scooter "MP3" as another example of a vehicle that can take a car tire exceptionally well...
 
infernobuster said:
Wow. Way to go there "CHiPs" ..

Forget all the drivers speeding, or doing other stupid **** and you get this guy for improper tire! lmao ..
Click to expand...

There are much worse things than speeding, IMO. Although speeding is often accompanied by other "stupid ****". Running a car tire is not something worse than speeding, but it is about as smart as the whole "loud pipes save lives" and ape bars.
 
I imagine that if you were to call Honda Canada or USA about support for use of automotive radials on a Wing, their first question is going to be "what is your warrenty file no...?" ..in order to void it.

I understand why 1800 riders would want a more economical, long lasting tire - a 5 hour bill just to pull the rear end off a Wing to get at the wheel assembly would piss me off also.. but safety should come first and foremost - part of the cost and responsibility of ownership. A Wing rear rim assembly is built to motorcycle specs.. not to Honda Civic specs.

Sent from my SGH-I337M using Tapatalk
 
WoBblyCaT said:
Hey Bandit Bill, I remember meeting you and seeing your side car rig years ago at Port Dover. I also remember reading about your health problems. I'm sorry you had to get out of motorcycling completely. I hope you're doing well.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the sympathy - I am not out of motorcycling completely - I do have a full garage of toys, just waiting for a better day. Life is full of challenges, and the past number of years has had more than it's fair share of surprises.. but it is what it is.. I had 20+ years in, before crap happened .. once things stabilize for the better, hopefully i'll have another 20.. or Antiques Roadshow will have lots of fun in my garage, eventually...

At this point - 2015 is the 'rebuild' year.. fabricating a reversing drive for the rig, and bringing it back to life and maintaining it after a few years slumber. I should be back eventually.

Sativa Quemador said:
Bill, can you post up some pics of your sidecar ?

maybe add some cool details, like how long it took, etc..
Click to expand...

It was a 3 year project in the making. I had badly crashed (for me .. the bike was relatively ok to rebuild) my Bandit in 2002, and consequently lost all self-confidence in riding a single track motorcycle - I had owned and ridden sidecar rigs in the past. By good fortune, i found the sidecar in Niagara Falls, derelict, and got it for very cheap.. the project was done from 2003-2005, done in stages.

In the sidecar world - it is considered a 'medium performance sidecar'. Differences in suspension setup, generally make the difference between what is considered 'medium' and 'high' performance. With the modified leading link front end, it is firmly classed in the 'medium' category. Google "high performance sidecar" for images.. and boggle at the creations there. I chose that front end, because it was an easier technical and engineering challenge to take on, than a more advanced centre-hub 'high' performance setup.

Modifications included:
1. swaybar setup
2. total front end replacement
3. redesign and fabrication of totally new sidecar suspension setup.
4. machining of rear hub adapter assembly to use Civic car rim.
5. fabrication of sub-frame, semi-permanently mounting sidecar frame to bike frame.
6. fabrication of sidecar braking system.
7. lots more that i've forgotten about since.

Unfortunately a HD crash took out one batch of construction and fabrication files, the loss of my hosting site a few years back, took out the rest. I have a few things left to give you an idea of what i've been blathering on about..

Vanity shots..

4.jpg


487333_10151088707245628_842711671_n.jpg


Front end (not correct shocks - it's obvious these are too weak in the photo, just at static rest):

frontend-detail.jpg


At Parry Sound, in 2006. All good fun.

[video=youtube;NsLMjo5NNY0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=NsLMjo5NNY0[/video]
 
Last edited:
Bandit Bill said:
I imagine that if you were to call Honda Canada or USA about support for use of automotive radials on a Wing, their first question is going to be "what is your warrenty file no...?" ..in order to void it.

I understand why 1800 riders would want a more economical, long lasting tire - a 5 hour bill just to pull the rear end off a Wing to get at the wheel assembly would piss me off also.. but safety should come first and foremost - part of the cost and responsibility of ownership. A Wing rear rim assembly is built to motorcycle specs.. not to Honda Civic specs.

Sent from my SGH-I337M using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

So what genius told you it was 5 hours to change a rear wheel on an 1800,the same guy that told you a CT wouldn't be safe?It's a single sided swingarm.It takes less than 15 minutes.Bottom line is that it was the cops OINION that it wasn't safe and nothing else unless he can enlighten us as to some other facts.
 
Fatwing said:
So what genius told you it was 5 hours to change a rear wheel on an 1800,the same guy that told you a CT wouldn't be safe?It's a single sided swingarm.It takes less than 15 minutes.Bottom line is that it was the cops OINION that it wasn't safe and nothing else unless he can enlighten us as to some other facts.
Click to expand...

What have the tire manufactures and motorcycle manufactures said?
The cop may have had that opinion but its also in legislation (although vague like all or darn laws) and its there based on safety rightly or wrongly.
 
Last edited:
Fatwing said:
So what genius told you it was 5 hours to change a rear wheel on an 1800,the same guy that told you a CT wouldn't be safe?It's a single sided swingarm.It takes less than 15 minutes.Bottom line is that it was the cops OINION that it wasn't safe and nothing else unless he can enlighten us as to some other facts.
Click to expand...

I am going by what i remember a Honda mechanic once told me eons ago. My memory may have slipped - I do remember it being in relation to the cracked frame issue with the early 1800 Wings, and him bitching about the tear-down of a Wing to get at that rear end. Perhaps i was in error.. he ain't a genius, but he's a damn competent mechanic in the USA. As for the rest of your rant - if you've been paying attention to this thread, you would have known i did my research on this quite some time ago.

Your 1800 Wing possesses no magical properties. It shares the same motorcycle specific bead profile as any other motorcycle. Being a Wing, does not make it immune to the laws of physics when you mate two mis-matching components together, that were specifically designed to be incompatible, so that lunk-heads wouldn't be splattering themselves road-side on-mass, going dark-side.

Don't like it.. stop bitching at me.. I can't change the fundamentals of the Reality that you choose to ignore. Talk to the engineers at both the tire manufacturers, and those who designed the cross-incompatible rims for specific, separate uses.

You mad?
 
You can get insurance for a motorcycle with a side car added? I can't even find a company that will allow a cold air intake on a car or allow it to be lowered 1/2". I found a (completely legal) kit for adding seats to the bed of a pickup and every company said it was perfectly legal to install it but there was no way I'd find anyone that would insure it... A sidecar seems like a much bigger modification than any of those unless it came on the bike. I presumed the only way to get one on the road was to buy a ural or something.
 
Another angle on this charge and I like it.

If a person A) stays with 10 percent of the speed limit, B) doesn't drink and drive and C) doesn't use a cell phone they will likely never get a ticket even though they lane hog, make unsafe turns, unsafe loads, don't signal, or do any of the multitude of things that cause problems.

By laying some of the more obscure charges it will make drivers realize that there's more to safe driving than following the three A,B,C's. A thinking driver is a safe driver.

Nah, just a pipe dream, Sorry for the daydream. Won't happen. Blame everything on an attitude cop with a quota to fill :(
 
unL33T said:
You can get insurance for a motorcycle with a side car added? I can't even find a company that will allow a cold air intake on a car or allow it to be lowered 1/2". I found a (completely legal) kit for adding seats to the bed of a pickup and every company said it was perfectly legal to install it but there was no way I'd find anyone that would insure it... A sidecar seems like a much bigger modification than any of those unless it came on the bike. I presumed the only way to get one on the road was to buy a ural or something.
Click to expand...

There were a few insurance co's that wouldn't write insurance on a sidecar rig, but i was able to insure the 3 rigs that i've had over the years with minimal hassle involved.

I wonder if it did present an issue, if i could appeal/register a complaint citing discrimination, being that i now have to have a sidecar setup due to those health issues - rather than being a potential choice based issue as in the past?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom