Campaigns
MAG Position - Anti-Tampering
The origins of this idea may be traced to France where young riders of mopeds have been tuning their engines to provide performance substantially in excess of that appropriate to the frames and brakes of this class of machine. In consequence the French authorities proposed a set of construction criteria by means of which it was hoped all efforts at tuning these vehicles would be obstructed, for all practical purposes.
MAG has no argument with this initiative since by definition mopeds are vehicles with specified performance limits, in recognition of which they are accessible to riders at a younger age than that which must be reached before access to larger motorcycles is permitted.
What concerns us is the attempt by the European Commission who have taken the French plan as a model for European harmonisation and extended it to cover all classes of motorcycle.
The details of the anti-tampering proposals are extremely complex and detailed. What the architects of this legislation have done, is explore all the methods by which owners endeavour to boost the power of their machines, and then contrived engineering obstacles to such modifications. For example the thickness of head gaskets which can influence compression ratios, have been specified, while shear bolts (which have heads which snap off at a certain torque rating), have been prescribed for critical locations. Gear ratios which can determine top speed or acceleration characteristics have been specified through identifying sprocket and pulley diameters. Furthermore the interchangeability of parts within a model range has been threatened by prohibiting the manufacturers from utilising such flexibility of production. The kind of 'problem' which is anticipated stems from an owner with, for example, a 750cc motorcycle fitting a cylinder head from a 900cc to his engine. Under the most severe application of type approval, such a modification would be outlawed if it offered more than a 10% increment to power.
Many owners make modifications to maximise specific areas of potential which their machine possess. For example a touring rider may wish to raise the gearing for optimum fuel economy a legitimate modification which would not be allowed if the Commission's worst plans were realised.
It should be stressed that not only would such a modification by an owner be prohibited but the manufacturer would be forbidden to produce a model range which accommodated such possibilities. ie 900cc cylinder heads must only fit 900cc engines. Manufacturers such as the re-born Triumph company here in the UK employ the modular design concept which depends upon such flexibility as a means of minimising production costs. If Type Approval were to be introduced for all categories of motorcycle then it is anticipated that the Triumph company would have to reduce its model range, as to retain the present choice would not be financially realistic.
In short, we have a bizarre situation in which politicians are trying to design motorcycles, with little or no concept of the industrial havoc they are wreaking by so doing, in order to address a largely imaginary problem, the proportions of which they have conspicuously failed to identify
Motorcycles offer an economic and practical mobility option for millions by which traffic congestion and pollution can be significantly reduced. At a time when governments should be promoting motorcycle use for these reasons, it is ironic that the European Commission should be doing everything within its power to obstruct manufacturers and discourage owners.
MAG UK© October 2001 All rights reserved.
