Categories: all aviation Building a Biplane bicycle gadgets misc motorcycle theater
I was just discussing and pondering the concept of tiered access
motorcycle licensing. This is something I've been thinking of for a
while, probably several years. I always figured I was alone in my
interest in this subject, and was therefore surprised to find this:
Tiered licensing: reader responses from motorcycledaily.com.
Most interesting!
The thought which has occurred to me, which I haven't seen mentioned yet, would be to base the tiers not on horsepower or engine displacement, but on power:weight ratio. This would have a number of interesting effects.
First, it would mean that someone wanting to get a Sportster 883 (relatively low HP, relatively high weight), would be able to do so in the first years of ownership. The ratio of power to weight is completely independent of absolute horsepower or weight or engine displacement -- it has everything to do with how fast the bike will rocket you into the next state, though.
Second, it would provide an incentive for motorcycle manufacturers to stop inflating their HP and deflating their weight numbers. Right now, most manufacturers do whatever they can to make the HP of a motorcycle look as high as possible -- measure at the crank, strange lubricants, etc. They post that number prominently in the marketing materials, and it can be a deciding factor for some buyers.
Similar story with weight. They post a "dry weight" which is impossible to achieve with a production motorcycle. Does it include the battery? Does the battery have electrolyte? Fork oil? Brake fluid? No one knows. The dry weight is always this impossibly low number, but again, it makes the bike look better, and some buyers may make a decision based on the number.
But if the HP is high, and the weight is low, then the power:weight ratio will be high, probably artificially so. If the P:W is high, then the bike is out of reach of the tiered license holder. Hold on for a second, the manufacturers might say. If we publish the rear wheel horsepower (typically 10-15 HP less than crank HP) instead, and give the curb (ie, fully-fueled and in a real-world condition) weight, the P:W ratio goes down! It becomes accessible to more riders! We can sell more of them!
It's curious logic, but I think it might work.
Of course, the problem with all this is that the first (and most selfish) thought that spurred this interest was a desire to see more 250-500cc bikes in the country. Those bikes won't necessarily have the lower P:W ratio that would meet the license restrictions, so no one would necessarily have any incentive to import them.
Hmm. That's no good. (Yes, I'm being slightly silly, but bear with me.)
How about a system where the first tier is a displacement limit, like 400cc, and the next tier is a P:W ratio limit? That might be the best of both worlds, although it starts to get complex. A P:W ratio limit is difficult to legislate, since you have to define which numbers to use (ie, manufacturer numbers? measured numbers? who does the measuring? how do you pay for the (necessarily standardized) measurement?).
Another wrinkle, raised by one of the commenters in that link I mentioned above, is that anything mandated which would decrease interest in motorcycling is likely to be a death-knell for motorcycles. Motorcycle owners are, on average, aging pretty quickly, which means that we're not getting a lot of fresh blood in the form of young riders. If we do anything which kills off interest in riding a motorcycle, that process will likely accelerate.
It's an interesting problem, and one I'm going to continue thinking about.
Posted at 11:34 permanent link category: /motorcycle
Categories: all aviation Building a Biplane bicycle gadgets misc motorcycle theater