LATEST NEWS
We are pleased to anounce we are now a distributor for
Putoline Oil
Putoline Oil has developed into a worldwide, leading brand in the industry of motorbike lubricants and maintenance products.
In stock for the 1300
Engine
Super DX4 10W40
Fork Oil
HPX10w
HPX15w
Rear Diff
Heavy Gear Oil
Radiator
Ice Cooler
Coolant NF
Fuel Tank
Fuel Stabilizer
Octane Booster
Fuel Conditioner
Some of you may know we are moving to new a workshop.
We are still waithing for the new building to be finished, we have new roof, new floor, electric and have just started to paint the inside.
New address will be announced as soon as we are ready to move in
CHARITIES
WE ARE HAPPY TO PROMOTE & SUPPORT
ASPIRE SPINAL INJURY SUPPORT FOR BIKERS
National Association for Bikers with a Disability
TESTIMONIALS FROM SOME OF OUR CUSTOMERS
WORKSHOP ADDRESS
ZEDPARTS
UNIT 3
FAIRFIELD COURT
STOURBRIDGE ROAD
FAIRFIELD
B61 9NJ
WORKSHOP OPEN
10am-4pm
MON TO SAT
This fantastic new road safety initiative for two wheelers was officially launched at the Carole Nash Motorcycle Live event at the NEC in Birmingham 2010.
Support continues to arrive from all corners of the motorcycle industry and from those involved in Highway construction and casualty reduction.
But you, the riders, are the people who will make this campaign successful, by telling us about road defects and dodgy manhole covers and by helping us to create change and improve the situation for everyone.
The GET A GRIP! website will evolve and develop - so make this the first of may visits. The campaign success will be down to you and other riders who air their concerns and report those dangerous road surfaces.
GET A GRIP! If you use 2 wheels instead of 4...you’ll know how important it is to have consistent grip under your tyres.Slipping on gravel or a manhole cover, especially in the wet, can be frightening at best, catastrophic at worst. If visibility is good you will probably try to take avoiding action, but that can make you alter your line - a potentially hazardous activity too! Potholes can have exactly the same effect, but with the added danger of suspension and wheel damage, or extreme deflection into oncoming traffic. |
M.A.G
PAGE FOR ARCHIVED NEWS click
For mor information and ways to join please vist
MAG
BIKING
OUR WAY OF LIFE - SO LETS PROTECT IT
TYPE APPROVEL IS HERE (NEARLY)
LATEST NEWS FROM BRUSSELS
The proposed EU Regulation on type approval and market surveillance that we've come to know and love over the past 16 months, did pass its 'first reading' on 5th December when the Internal Market and Consumer Protection Committee (IMCO) voted on it and the near 300 amendments that been put forward.
You'll also be aware (unless you are new to these mailings) that not only did they accept the bulk of the original proposal, but added a few extra bits that aren't exactly in the best interests of the consumers they are meant to be protecting. One of my emails last week outlined horrified responses from both the European motorcycle retailers (ETRA) and the manufacturers association (ACEM) so it's good to know that apart from the UK Government, much of the rest of the bike industry is now aware of the power and possible outcome of this legislation. ABS for everything from 50cc up and the new article 18a which now covers modifications 'by the users or those acting on their behalf', which has got the retailers and bike shops upset. The new article 3 paragraph 68 now also specifies 'engine management systems or any other control module' which of course covers the power commanders etc that we highlighted a year ago and were told was nonsense. It also reiterates 'the transmission and its control, either a drive shaft or belt drive or chain drive, the differentials, the final drive and the driven wheel tyre (radius)' which is all a bit belt and braces.
But aside from the content, there is much that is concerning about the legislative process, as was highlighted last weekend when MAG organised another Riders Are Voters event in Crawley at P&H Motorcycles.
Peter Skinner, Labour MEP for the South East has received more correspondence on this Regulation than any other (he first became an MEP in 1994) so he agreed to meet riders in one go so that he could hear all the concerns.
The bulk of the questions he was asked were about procedure:
How could the Committee have voted before the impact assessment results were in?
Why does the EU Parliament have to vote on a regulation when the specific technical elements of what is affected, will be decided after the vote?
How can they make an informed decision when the 'Delegated Acts' (the technical bits) that are central to this, will be written later?
If we are now seeing drafts of the Delegated Acts and they include mention of cycle parts, surely that is outside the scope of the Regulation?
If the Commission didn't do the research before they introduced the proposal (saying as they did, that they had no baseline data but hoped they'd get some later) is it even legal?
Mr Skinner was really taken aback by the breadth of knowledge the assembled 100 or so riders had, and their articulate nature, but he was more taken aback by the legislation itself, having had to read it all before the event (which is of course, the very nature of what MAG does- getting representatives to actually read what they are going to vote on.)
He did say that we must never stop writing to MEPs about this, but what surprised me was that he said pro-forma letters are still OK, if you add the following; Please reply to the Central Office of the Motorcycle Action Group who are compiling responses.
His advice was that a standard and irrelevant response cannot be churned out by reply. The MEP will have to direct their attention to every part of the letter as numbers grow, in the knowledge that their response will be made very public, that they will be publicly held to account and that their later vote in the EU Parliament will be monitored. On the plus side, they only have to write one letter! Everyone's a winner.
So, given all of the above here is a suggested letter. If you don't wish to use it, please do try to use some of the points within it.
Please click here www.ridersarevoters.org and press the button that says 'Find Your MEP'. Remember, you probably have 6 or 7 MEPs so please write to each one of them.
Dear
As a constituent, I would like to raise my concerns regarding the content and progress of a piece of European Legislation, currently timetabled for Plenary vote on 14th March.
The proposed EU Regulation on Type Approval and Market Surveillance of two and three-wheeled vehicles passed its first reading, Committee stage, on 5th December even though an impact assessment on many elements of the proposal was ongoing.
Some new text adopted by the (IMCO) Committee, especially the extension of mandatory ABS to all scooters and motorcycles, the introduction of a new Article 18a (see below) and the Delegated Acts (drafts of which are now available), appear to have moved well outside the scope of the Commission's original proposal. Article 18a also relies on Member States to establish National policing.
ABS is being adopted by some riders, but the technology is not as advanced as for cars and there are many riding conditions where it is not suitable, or where combined braking systems (in which the industry has invested heavily) are more suitable, especially with smaller scooters. The Commission's mandating of ABS is therefore inappropriate for both the market and manufacturing.
Articles 17 and 52 also directly impact on motorcyclists as consumers, controlling the sale and availability of after-market parts within the EU and the modification of certain aspects of the machine to suit riding conditions.
The Plenary session vote has now been timetabled for 14th March, which is too soon to enable sufficient discussion beforehand and which permits no time within the chamber for debate.
This debate is necessary, as there are many parts of this Regulation which I, as a rider and consumer, welcome, so this cannot be a yes/no vote on the acceptance or rejection of the proposal as a whole.
It is welcome for example, that Article 22 will lead to CO2 emissions being published at point of sale for every model. Similarly, paragraph 9 (page 11) which aims to over-turn the earlier decision to introduce power limits for motorcycles (1995), on the basis that no evidence can be found of a correlation between safety and power. This assertion rather undermines one of the central tenets of the whole proposal, that speed or 'tuning' has a detrimental effect on safety, again forcing the assumption that the Commission's proposals appear not to be evidence led.
I urge you to read the Regulation COM (2010) 542 and the consolidated text post the IMCO Committee vote, which is not in the public domain and use your influence to delay the Parliamentary vote.
Could I respectfully ask that you send your reply to Central Office of the Motorcycle Action Group who are compiling replies in order to monitor voting behaviour. This can be either electronically to
campaigns-coordinator@mag-uk.org
or by post to
MAG (UK)
PO Box 750
Warwick
CV34 9FU
Yours Sincerely
The European Commission has proposed that part of its controversial new 'Anti-Tampering' regulations, which will affect all future bikes registered for the road, should be re-written to prevent chop-builders from using 'long-forks'.
The Commission now proposes that any bikes being put through the Individual Vehicle Approval test (the safety inspection made before non Type-Approved imports, one-off specials, etc. currently known as Motorcycle Single Vehicle Approval) would have to complete a slalom and U-Turn before being registered, to prevent modifications to
the length of the forks.
Up to now, the draft regulations have only talked about requiring manufacturers to design the 'power-train' (engine, transmission, final-drive) so that it becomes difficult for owners to modify them from standard.
The UK representatives in the technical discussions joined FEMA and others in opposing the proposal, not least because the Commission cannot produce any evidence to show that modified bikes are unsafe.
The Commission is expected to continue to seek further restrictions on the ability to modify bikes in future despite mounting criticism that it has failed to consider whether there is any demonstrable case for restricting riders liberty to modify their bikes to suit their own needs.
MAG had previously warned that the vagueness of the Commission's proposals to restrict modifications could mean the ambitions of those who want to save us from ourselves might extend beyond the draft proposals that have been under discussion since 2010. We've drawn attention to Annex 2 (item 12) of the EU Type Approval and Market Surveillance Regulation before, which wishes to measure/control steerability, cornering properties and turn ability and this is what is playing out now.
MAG's campaigning against the creeping scope of interference in riders' right to choose what kind of bike they ride continues in 2012 – make sure you know what's going on by subscribing to our activists' e-mailing list, which is just to the right of this page.
Following confirmation that hi-viz is to become compulsory in France from 2013 and Ireland from 2014, MAG member Jon Wilmer (Regional Rep for Thames Valley) has launched a petition calling on the British Government to put pressure on the European Commission to discipline any member state that imposes clothing standards such as hi-viz on motorcycle riders.
The e-petition http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/26931 has gone live and runs for 3 months.
A recent review of road safety studies carried out by Plymouth University on behalf of Cornwall County council, demonstrates that the evidence for the road safety benefits of hi-viz clothing is unclear. Some studies finding that riders who wear reflective or fluorescent clothing are around one-third less likely to be involved in a crash, but other studies finding no such benefit.
MAG says that questions such as whether safer riders are more likely to choose to wear hi-viz, whether the colour of bike/clothing has more or less visual impact depending on the colour of the background or the prevailing weather demonstrate that the case for compulsory use at all times and in all circumstances is fundamentally flawed.
MAG policy is to defend the rider's freedom of choice over riding equipment such as hi-viz and other types of clothing with various safety features.
The French Government has finally confirmed how it will implement new regulations for motorcyclists regarding reflective clothing and number plates.
As of 1st Jan 2013 it will be an offence, punishable through a fine and the loss of points, (in France you lose them, don't gain them) not to wear at least 150cm2 of relective clothing between the waist and the shoulders and not to be using an enlarged number plate.
You may remember that this was first mooted as an accident reduction issue, but most accidents involve 125cc bikes and below, and these are exempt from the new rules.
Riders in France must already use their headlights all the time and carry reflective stickers on their helmets.
You may also remember that the French Government then said the regulations were to ensure other motorists could see if riders were lying in the middle of the road at night...
FFMC's Frederic Jeorge said "It will be considered almost as bad as driving without a helmet, even if you are wearing full leather armour, on a bike with the headlights on and knowing that our helmets already have 4 mandatory reflective stickers... Also, it will NOT include the mopeds and 125cc, where's the logic?"
Logic? We are not sure that's generally considered when creating legislation for motorcyclists.
MEMBERS OF THE
FEDERATION of SMALL BUSINESSES
