Getting a safety with fender eliminator? | GTAMotorcycle.com

Getting a safety with fender eliminator?

M

migggy

Member
Long story short (looked around the forum for relevant time stamps and information), bought a bike with a fender eliminator. Safety standards stated that the OEM fender needs to be on in order to pass safety. Does anyone know of someone who would pass a motorcycle with a fender eliminator?


It's a 2016 Yamaha R3, so other than the fender eliminator, cant imagine it needing anything to pass.
 
I take it that you already tried to get it inspected, and it failed.

If you have a way to take the bike around, best bet is to do that and just ask around. A statement that a certain mechanic is willing to overlook a legal requirement isn't a good thing to have out in public. Also, the rest of us (who haven't seen your bike) don't know what sort of "fender eliminator" we are talking about here. Some of them are borderline okay (license plate in a decent location and properly oriented and with working illumination and maintaining the functionality and required separation distance of the turn signals - just not the stock fender), and some of them are never going to pass because of multiple violations (wrong license plate position and orientation and no lighting, "integrated" turn signals or ineffective LEDs that claim to be turn signals, etc).

You may have to install stock parts if you have them - or buy them if you don't.
 
Brian P said:
I take it that you already tried to get it inspected, and it failed.

If you have a way to take the bike around, best bet is to do that and just ask around. A statement that a certain mechanic is willing to overlook a legal requirement isn't a good thing to have out in public. Also, the rest of us (who haven't seen your bike) don't know what sort of "fender eliminator" we are talking about here. Some of them are borderline okay (license plate in a decent location and properly oriented and with working illumination and maintaining the functionality and required separation distance of the turn signals - just not the stock fender), and some of them are never going to pass because of multiple violations (wrong license plate position and orientation and no lighting, "integrated" turn signals or ineffective LEDs that claim to be turn signals, etc).

You may have to install stock parts if you have them - or buy them if you don't.
Click to expand...

It didnt fail, just haven't gotten around to doing it.

I guess wasn't really thinking it through as for having that kind of info public. It's an R&G fender eliminator, but I have the stock fender. I guess the best bet is to just put it back on for the safety and swap it back after the safety. I guess I didn't want to do it if i didn't have to.
 
For sure, just put the stock bits back on ... then you have no worries.
 
Most shops won't care and it will pass no issues

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
 
Yeah, I'd think as long as the eliminator that's on there supports the OE turn signals and displays the licence plate clearly (and in a near-stock orientation and position) you'd be okay. Eliminators that get rid of turn signal stalks and put the plate up under the seat will likely draw the ire of the tech.
 
Any fender eliminator that puts the licence place in an intentionally difficult to see location will be more apt to draw attention from the inspector, and will most certainly draw the attention of the police after the fact.

Nonstandard stop and turn signal sizes and locations are your second issue with the inspector but are open to a lot of interpretation.
 
$_1.JPG

This is a picture of the fender eliminator on the bike now. Wasn't able to upload an actual pic, so grabbed one from google.
 
That's one of the better kits. Plate is in a decent location and it keeps the stock turn signals. Some mechanics may fuss about the lack of stock mudguard and reflectors ... some might not.

I'd just toss the stock parts back on, given that you have them and it's likely just a few bolts and a couple of wiring connectors to swap over, because then there is no issue at all.

P.S. I'm not anti-modification; I don't own a vehicle that is not modified.
 
Brian P said:
That's one of the better kits. Plate is in a decent location and it keeps the stock turn signals. Some mechanics may fuss about the lack of stock mudguard and reflectors ... some might not.

I'd just toss the stock parts back on, given that you have them and it's likely just a few bolts and a couple of wiring connectors to swap over, because then there is no issue at all.

P.S. I'm not anti-modification; I don't own a vehicle that is not modified.
Click to expand...

That sounds good. Thanks for the info. I'm just going to spend a lazy afternoon to put the OEM back on. Then after the safety I'll swap it back:eek:
 
You need to find this guy for bikes:
Nice+guy+dr+nick_10ad06_4697658.jpg
 
I think you'd be hard pressed to find a shop that'll fail you based on that plate location/mod.

Not one bike in my life (10+ bikes) has had a fender from the factory - all were reasonably placed kits such as yours - now, if it was pushed to the ****** unlit part of the fender, then fail you should.
 
Brian P said:
... Some of them are borderline okay (license plate in a decent location and properly oriented and with working illumination and maintaining the functionality and required separation distance of the turn signals - just not the stock fender), and some of them are never going to pass because of multiple violations (wrong license plate position and orientation and no lighting, "integrated" turn signals or ineffective LEDs that claim to be turn signals, etc).

You may have to install stock parts if you have them - or buy them if you don't.
Click to expand...

Again, a broken record of bad information. There is zero issue with signal lights, even not having them.



OP, search and have a read of the history of this topic on the forum. You'll get better answers than here so far. http://www.gtamotorcycle.com/vbforum/showthread.php?196377-Undertail-Integrated-Tail-Lights
 
Last edited:
Brian P said:
HTA requirements aren't the same as safety inspection requirements.
Click to expand...

Show us where the ON motorcycle safety inspection requirements include meeting federal safety standards. https://www.ontario.ca/laws/regulation/900611

kwtoxman said:
CMVSS are FEDERAL safety standards, which are primarily directed at manufacturers for the production, development and importation of vehicles/etc. Transport Canada Inspectors enforce it. Municipal and provincial police enforce PROVINCIAL standards, which are the HTA and related regulations. In those PROVINCIAL standards, including the safety inspection regulation, there is zero mention of rear turn signal metrics for motorcycles. In fact, signal lights are not even required on a motorcycle in ON as per ON legislation and regulations.

Again, CMVSS has no bearing on provincial and municipal police enforcement, so it is irrelevant.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
https://www.ontario.ca/laws/regulation/900611

Specifically, schedule 6

https://www.ontario.ca/laws/regulation/900611#BK8

See sections:

1. (1) (a) my interpretation note: If there was a mudguard originally installed, it has to have one per this requirement - but it doesn't necessarily have to be the original one. Fender eliminator kits should fail this.

6. (1) (c) my interpretation note: The problem is the word "prescribed". Prescribed by what? If it's prescribed by HTA then I will grant the point because the HTA doesn't require turn signals on motorcycles and it's silent on requiring reflectors (any of them). If it's prescribed by "as installed by original manufacturer" then everything originally installed has to still be there and work (or be replaced by substitutes that are equally functional). If it's prescribed by CMVSS 108 then same situation.

Having said that, I think you will have a hard time finding a mechanic who would pass a motorcycle built since the 1970s if it doesn't have functional turn signals. It doesn't matter in this particular case, because obviously the original turn signals are still there. The problem is the lack of the mudguard or any equivalent substitute ... It's the very first line item in the inspection requirements ...
 
Brian P said:
https://www.ontario.ca/laws/regulation/900611

Specifically, schedule 6

https://www.ontario.ca/laws/regulation/900611#BK8

See sections:

1. (1) (a) my interpretation note: If there was a mudguard originally installed, it has to have one per this requirement - but it doesn't necessarily have to be the original one. Fender eliminator kits should fail this.

6. (1) (c) my interpretation note: The problem is the word "prescribed". Prescribed by what? If it's prescribed by HTA then I will grant the point because the HTA doesn't require turn signals on motorcycles and it's silent on requiring reflectors (any of them). If it's prescribed by "as installed by original manufacturer" then everything originally installed has to still be there and work (or be replaced by substitutes that are equally functional). If it's prescribed by CMVSS 108 then same situation.

Having said that, I think you will have a hard time finding a mechanic who would pass a motorcycle built since the 1970s if it doesn't have functional turn signals. It doesn't matter in this particular case, because obviously the original turn signals are still there. The problem is the lack of the mudguard or any equivalent substitute ... It's the very first line item in the inspection requirements ...
Click to expand...

LOL. Talk about moving the goalposts. So what about the ON law applicability of the CMVSS requirements that you noted and their signal light separation distance you mention? Again, show us where the ON motorcycle safety inspection requirements include meeting federal safety standards.

Mudguard is very open to interpretation, there is no need for an "equivalent substitute" as you put it. You continue to impart language and interpretations that are not supported by the text of the legislation.

As for signal lights you continue to wiggle and lose. This was gone over in detail in the link I provided earlier. Neil V even spoke with an MTO rep. Signal lights are not required and "prescribed" is discussed as per its use in the legislation.
Neil_V said:
Another thread reminded me to update this, so here it is;

In regard to integrated signals: Legal.

(1) Prescribedlamps and reflectors shall be inspected and tested and,
(a) each circuit shall light the filaments of all lamps on the circuit when the appropriate switch is in the “ON” position, and each indicator lamp shall indicate correctly;
(b) the operation of any lighting circuit shall not interfere with the operation of any other circuit;
(c) each lens and reflex reflector shall be correctly installed and shall not be discoloured or missing in whole or in part;
(d) each lamp and reflector shall be securely mounted on the vehicle and none shall be missing;
(e) the turn signal lamps and the flasher unit shall operate properly;
Reg 611, Schedule 6, s. 6 (1)

Now the key word of contention was/is prescribed, and according to the MTO representative I spoke with that simply means "as prescribed in the HTA" which is defined as;


Lamps required on motorcycles
(2) Subject to subsection (3), when on a highway at any time every motorcycle shall carry two lighted lamps in a conspicuous position, one on the front of the vehicle which shall display a white light only, and one on the rear of the vehicle which shall display a red light only.
R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 62 (2).
Click to expand...

This topic keeps coming up every six months and you continue to give the same bad advice over and over again, even when it has been shown to be incorrect. Very bad form and perplexing..... not good for your rep either.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom