Who Support change of Bike Licensing System ?

[Baal]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_driving_licence

 

2B changes to Euro A : Limited to 25 kW (33hp) and 0.16 kW (0.21hp)/kg.

 

2A changes to Euro A2 : motorcycles of a power not exceeding 35 kW (47hp) and with

a power/weight ratio not exceeding 0,2 kW (0.27hp)/kg and not derived from a vehicle of more than double its power.

 

However, the 1 year interval & associated training & TP test still applies.

 

Reason :

 

1) To be more in sync with other 1st world countries.

2) To see more variety of bike models. Especially for Classes 2A & 2.

3) More feasible while complying with Euro emission standards.

[mechwira]

Been there nearly a decade ago, discussed that, wrote in, got sincere sounding reply, but NATO.

 

http://www.singaporebikes.com/forums/showthread.php/77136-Revision-of-Class-2-license-system

 

But dun let my past effort put you off, I think bikers shd keep bringing up issues that matter to us.

[Baal]

Thanks Mech. Sometimes, I also think to myself that the day they do it will be the day they have diff COE Cats for bikes (or some other way to penalize us...), as from history, changes always seems to leave motorist worse off.

 

But must be positive ( cheesy), & "keep the pressure on"...

[mechwira]

But must be positive ( cheesy), & "keep the pressure on"...

 

yeah, sure beats being a keyboard warrior sitting behind a screen typing all complains under the sun and doing nothing else about it.

[haoKR]

at least make cls 2b till 250cc..

[Baal]

The 250cc style was the previous euro system where new licensees are restricted to 250cc/33hp for 2 years & then can ride anything they want.

 

Existing Euro A will seem closest to this.

[mechwira]

my stand remains the same as when i first tabled it for discussion in the forum nearly ten years ago.

 

1) our licensing system is outdated full stop. it is based on japan's old system (which also followed the old 2-stroke racing categories), and at that time japan really produced bikes based around this system. but even japan did away with this system nearly two decades ago, and current bike production does not fit this current system.

 

2) yes we should have some form of restriction or tiered system. we dont want a newbie being able to jump straight onto a 1000cc sportsbike. even a 600 supersports is too much for a newbie.

 

3) but restriction based on cc is stupid. a current 4 stroke 250cc makes the same power as last generation's 2-stroke 125/150cc. why would you need a 2a license to operate today's 250cc 4-stroke if one generation ago they can get on a bike with the same power straight with 2b? restriction should be based on power/weight. that makes a whole lot more sense. a power/weight restriction will also easily differentiate a single-cylinder CBR250R that is eligible for new riders and an inline4 CB400 for more experienced riders.

 

but exactly where to draw the line with power/weight, and how many tiers, well thats up for discussion.

[Baal]

a) Thanks for sharing the 2 stroke origins. Learnt something new.

 

b) agree that it should be tiered. Hence, I am for the 1 yr interval with

associated requirements & tests.

 

c) Exactly. Even the 250cc or even 300cc (2 cyl....sorry no offence)

will likely not match the top speed/acceleration of a 150cc stroker.

Power to weight is more future proof. Doesnt method how trends/technology

evolve. And the respective hp cap adds another layer of protection to

abuse. Even if KTM (from what I read) successfully revive the stroker

bikes, still the Euro system will be applicable to it.

 

 

I feel the Euro classification power & power/weight ratio is conclusive enough

to draw the line. Since manufacturers (Jap Big 4 & COnti are largely producing

bikes based on it. Even if 1 day bikes become turbo charged....the rules

are still relevant.

 

So its adapting 2B & 2A to the Euro, and still having Class 2 to err to the

side of caution. The training centres can still use the existing 2B bikes

for training & the S4 in the detuned state can still be used for 2A.

 

Existing bikes like S4 at 52hp that are already imported/in the midst of COE

( and bikes caught in similar situations ) can

be granted exceptions on a model by model basis.

[lv3338]

Imho, it not easy to change the system

 

1, the accident rate is high from motorbike and biker are the always consider less protected group..

 

2. Class 2x are often discrimated like no entry to sentosa , or some commercial propert dun provide parking space for class 2x

 

Unless perception of such duscrimation could change over night... Else the move to review bike license category very hard to take place

[Jehuty]

Honestly, 33hp and 47hp isn't much of a difference.

[guangwei]

Honestly, 33hp and 47hp isn't much of a difference.

No. It made a big different for bikes tho not for cars.

A sp produce a horse power of about 39hp and is about 125kg. Cbr400 produces 53hp and weigh around 160kg.

take a quick look on our road here and u can reconsider the differences in the engine performance with a mere 14hp differences made on a vehicle about 35kg heavier,

 

But with the new rule, sp will become 2A bike from now, new riders will be forced to ride kups finally. lol

my cbr400 will also become class 2 bike as well since it exceeded 47hp by a gap.. but then, driving center will have to sell all their revo n buy new 2a bikes as revo by itself produces 53hp at 11k rpm too, so it exceeded the new class 2a as well.

 

class 2a and class 2b holders like me will properly whine **** load abt it unless u are saying this would be enforced on new license takers only. i hope its not official

Edited November 17, 2013 by guangwei

[guangwei]

Been there nearly a decade ago, discussed that, wrote in, got sincere sounding reply, but NATO.

 

http://www.singaporebikes.com/forums/showthread.php/77136-Revision-of-Class-2-license-system

 

But dun let my past effort put you off, I think bikers shd keep bringing up issues that matter to us.

i dont like ur system as well, its just age discriminating younger riders. so the older rider aged 21 who doesnt even know where the throttle of a bike is located can ride bigger 400cc bikes, regardless of experiences.. while a 2 year experienced 20 years old rider would be stucked with his sp for another year? zzz. this is just so bad to the younger bros here. guess cus i can still feel their pain since i just cleared 2a awhile ago. :/

 

*disagree though im old enough to be advantageous out of this as well.

[mechwira]

i dont like ur system as well, its just age discriminating younger riders. so the older rider aged 21 who doesnt even know where the throttle of a bike is located can ride bigger 400cc bikes, regardless of experiences.. while a 2 year experienced 20 years old rider would be stucked with his sp for another year? zzz. this is just so bad to the younger bros here. guess cus i can still feel their pain since i just cleared 2a awhile ago. :/

 

*disagree though im old enough to be advantageous out of this as well.

 

if you go to page 3, i will explain that in my final letter that i sent, i removed the age limit proposal. what you read on page 1 was simply my first idea.

 

my final letter consisted of the following proposals:

 

Proposals and merits

 

1)optional 2A (can immediately take Class 2 after 2 years of 2B)

 

- eliminates hassle for bypassers since for them 2A is not beneficial anyway

- very identical to current system thus is the simplest change of all to execute

 

2)raise 2A to 600cc

 

-will once again make 2A a viable option and the original intention of 3-tier to encourage gradual upgrade will be met and followed again

 

now though i feel that the classification should be based on power/weight in light of current bike models developments.