Welcome to the all new Geo Metro Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are features you can't use and images you can't see. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: Join our community! |
| For the Elio faithful ...; Latest propaganda release from Paul | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jun 14 2015, 01:13 AM (2,194 Views) | |
| scratchpaddy | Jun 16 2015, 05:20 PM Post #31 |
|
Not so fast
![]()
|
Okay, there's the law, and then there's common sense. The law says anything with less than 4 wheels is a motorcycle, but regular folks will more likely use bangin's distinction (reverse, steering wheel, etc.) Different scenarios, different definitions. I guess the legal people just wanted a detail that couldn't be argued, and they happened to pick the number of wheels. Ya know, Dodge once built a motorcycle around the Viper's 8.4L V-10 motor. Given the handlebars and seating position, I think we'd all call it a motorcycle, but it had 4 wheels. ![]() |
![]() |
|
| myredvert | Jun 16 2015, 05:30 PM Post #32 |
|
myredvert
![]()
|
There's really no need to take your ball and run home just because you believe someone may have misinterpreted the intent of your comments. After all, you just turned around and did actually misinterpreted mine yourself to an extent. You DO realize that the internet is a very poor form of interpersonal communication, that people misunderstand/mistake the real intentions of others' words quite often, and there is always the option of you responding by saying.. "I was just trying to point out that there are a whole lot of car-like features on that motorcycle..." or something like that. In which case I could have responded, "You aren't kidding! Then added, "I still have no trouble whatsoever calling it a motorcycle simply because it is one."
|
![]() |
|
| Coche Blanco | Jun 16 2015, 05:37 PM Post #33 |
|
Troll Certified
![]()
|
And you'd be wrong. |
![]() |
|
| myredvert | Jun 16 2015, 05:51 PM Post #34 |
|
myredvert
![]()
|
For Pete's sake... There are no "different scenarios, different definitions." You (me, we) don't get to define what it is, not matter how we would use it, and it's certainly not dependent on whether or not we use reverse. You do realize that there are two wheeled motorcycles with reverse, right? Would you feel the need to come up with a different "definition" of an airplane depending on whether it had a control yoke or a stick? What the F- difference does what you have in your hand to make it turn make with respect to what type of motor vehicle it is classified as? Why do some people who have trouble understanding that really simple facts are simple facts seem to want to attempt hide behind "common sense nonsense, or "oh that law is just something somebody arbitrarily pulled out of their a-- or made becaus they read some internet thread" in order to justify trying to rationalize that something is something it really isn't? Are you trying to imply I and others who have no trouble understanding the reality of this simple distinction (that it is a motorcycle) have no common sense? Can someone only have common sense if they have trouble understanding simple regulations? In the states that define it as a motorcycle, it's a motorcycle. Plain and simple. A motorcycle with lots of car-like features. Just like the Elio. Which is also a motorcycle. Is that really so hard to grasp and live with? ;dunno And you'll probably LOVE this. Your definition of a motorcycle does not apply in at least one state, and several more iirc. In Ohio in particular (and for a very specific, non-arbitray reason) it is defined as a vehicle designed to travel on not more than 3 wheels, which is distinctly different than "having less than 4 wheels..." There is at least one 4 wheeled motorcycle that I am aware of.
Edited by myredvert, Jun 16 2015, 06:31 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| scratchpaddy | Jun 16 2015, 08:05 PM Post #35 |
|
Not so fast
![]()
|
My only problem with what you're saying is your use of absolutes. "In most states, this is legally defined as a motorcycle." True. "In my opinion, this is a motorcycle." Sure! The distinction between a motorcycle and a car is a matter of opinion. Your opinion and my opinion don't match, obviously. But laws do not equal absolute fact. Laws are conditional statements that change depending on where you are. According to Merriam-Webster, a motorcycle is defined as:
I still wouldn't call that a fact. It's the opinion of a highly authoritative source, but still an opinion. There's room for more than one opinion here, is all I'm saying. Despite what you say, you and me both are allowed to come up with our own opinions.
|
![]() |
|
| myredvert | Jun 16 2015, 09:35 PM Post #36 |
|
myredvert
![]()
|
First, out of curiosity, are you aware of any state in which this would be classified as anything BUT a motorcycle? I would love to be there when you say that to a Judge. ![]() "But Your Honor! It has a steering wheel AND reverse and everything! In my opinion it's just your opinion that it's just the law's opinion that this is a motorcycle... " ![]() The simple fact is that there are laws that are established by each state (and in some cases, federally) that specify what is or is not required certifying it for things as crashworthiness and emissions standards, titling it, tagging it, smogging it, getting licensed to operate it, and operating it on the road, as well as what it is named. You can have your opinion about laws, but you can't change the reality of them. It's kind of like physics in that respect, except if you don't like or understand physics you can't just vote in scientists from your party of choice to change the laws of physics to suit your opinion. Or even pay them off to change them like we can politicians. ![]() Call a vehicle that is legally classified as a motorcycle what you want, but the reality is that it still is what it is. Is there a reason why can't you bring yourself to call it a motorcycle (because it really is), and just think of it as a motorcycle that you feel shares some physical characteristics with a car? ![]() Which State's law were you quoting from there? Or was it more of a Wikipedia type of thing? In your opinion is that just an opinion too?
Edited by myredvert, Jun 16 2015, 09:43 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Freeman | Jun 17 2015, 05:41 AM Post #37 |
|
The Family Man
![]()
|
The law is meant to be finite and not open to interpretation. "Common sense" is really just instinct, whatever seems right. If 4 wheels is the line for a motorcycle, then that's all there is! Can't argue with legality. |
![]() |
|
| myredvert | Jun 17 2015, 07:51 AM Post #38 |
|
myredvert
![]()
|
Jim Bede took this design...![]() And turned it into this... ![]() How to Identify a LiteStar or Pulse The Bede BD-200/LiteStar/Owosso Pulse design was a BD-5 (experimental aircraft) fuselage with a forward wheel for steering, a rear drive wheel, and two outrigger wheels placed on the wing stubs. Even though it had 4 wheels total, legally classifying it as a car in any state that defined a motorcycle as "a vehicle having not more than three wheels," only 3 wheels would ever be on the ground at any one time. Which was a problem for those who built or wanted to build one, since it was a kit type vehicle and could never meet legal requirements for a car. Because of this design and Jim arguing/demonstrating/convincing the lawmakers that it still used no more than the same amount of wheels as a conventional 3 wheeled motorcycle, many state laws got changed from "no more than three wheels" to "designed to travel on not more than three wheels." In the end, the re-definition had nothing to do with what you held in your hand to steer it, what type of engine it had, whether or not it was enclosed, or had a seat belt/shoulder harness, or had reverse (some did), and it certainly had nothing to do with the fact it was made directly out of a famous aircraft design and looked just like it without the wings. It had everything to do with what the specific State laws were that determined if a vehicle is a car or motorcycle. It really is that simple. There have been quite a few designs that have challenged our perception of what a motorcycle is or isn't. But like always, for an "outside the box design" program to be successful, it first requires a very clear understanding of what the box is made of and what's inside. You don't see Polaris or Campagna (T-Rex) trying to prey on their potential buyer's ingrained perceptions of what a motorcycle is and brainwashing them into overlooking that it is a motorcycle. But for Elio, in my opinion, this aversion to reality seems to have manifested itself as a fundamental part of their marketing approach. While real companies like Polaris have addressed existing legislation in the hopes of achieving more favorable laws that would favor their motorcycle sales, companies like Elio focus on clouding the minds of their potential buyers with rhetoric, avoidance, and promises. Edited by myredvert, Jun 17 2015, 07:54 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| nwgeo | Jun 17 2015, 09:15 AM Post #39 |
![]()
|
Somewhere Tesla's Supercharger stations around the country, recharging the Model S battery still takes longer than filling up at a gas station if you can find a place to charge it. If your long-distance plans are more spontaneous, a Porsche Panamera hybrid may be a better choice. All electric cars should be painted black for the coal we burn to produce electricity to recharge them. You and I and everyone paying to support the building of these cars..... let the buyer pay the full price if they want the things. Oh, a new one cost over $100,000. So the only people I know that can afford that are the stupid rich. But they still need to take $s from minimum wage earners through taxes to help lower the cost for the stupid rich that will buy one of these as a joke. Edited by nwgeo, Jun 17 2015, 09:19 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Freeman | Jun 17 2015, 11:07 AM Post #40 |
|
The Family Man
![]()
|
"Spontaneous" Seems electric cars would be a great pitch for the average family where spontaneous plans are lacking. Too bad the price is stupid high. If they were serious about these electric cars, they would offer huge tax breaks for the common guy and mandate confirmation from your insurance company that you are using the electric car more than a traditional fuel vehicle. This is to attempt to insure that fraud is minimized. I'm sure you could put some more ropes on the deal and it would still be very appealing to millions. I'd get behind that. Too bad I could buy half a dozen Honda Fits before I could buy an electric car. Edited by Freeman, Jun 17 2015, 11:08 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| PTA2PTB | Jun 17 2015, 11:41 AM Post #41 |
|
I'm totally awesome! I swear.
![]()
|
While I don't have a dog in this fight, or care how they wish to classify it, I do have a MC with a Voyager Trike kit installed on it, at home in my garage. It has 4 wheels on the ground at all times. similar to this: ![]()
|
![]() |
|
| Metromightymouse | Jun 17 2015, 12:02 PM Post #42 |
|
Powdercoat Wizard
![]()
|
I believe the legal difference there is that the extra 2 wheels are added on, not included from the factory. It's a motorcycle when it left the factory and 2 extra wheels from a kit didn't change that fact. Well, in my opinion anyway... |
![]() |
|
| Freeman | Jun 17 2015, 01:33 PM Post #43 |
|
The Family Man
![]()
|
You're getting into weird territory with them training wheels! |
![]() |
|
| scratchpaddy | Jun 17 2015, 02:11 PM Post #44 |
|
Not so fast
![]()
|
Sort of. Connecticut, Hawaii, and Maryland all do not call it a motorcycle. They don't call it anything, because it doesn't fit any of the legal definitions they've written. Texas, Indiana, and New Jersey used to be in this boat, but they've edited their laws.
I'm not making a legal argument here. The law tells us what we need to do, not what we need to think. If the speed limit is 55, I don't have to agree that 55 is the best speed for that stretch of road. I just have to stay close to that speed anyway. If I buy a 3-wheeled car here, I'll happily get the proper license and register and get the emissions tested as a motorcycle in accordance with ARS §28-101(34). And no one will arrest me if I continue to call it a car. Because, in my opinion, if you take a wheel away from a car, it's still a car.
It is what it is, in your opinion. Not everyone agrees. I'll let Connecticut DMV senior attorney Sharon Geanuracos speak for me here, from a letter written to Polaris:
In Connecticut, an enclosed driver's seat and covered engine mean the Slingshot isn't a motorcycle.
No, it was the dictionary. Would you care to write to Merriam-Webster and tell them that their dictionary is wrong?
You got it! It's a legal opinion, backed by the force of law. Still an opinion.
All the companies are trying to skew facts to their advantage. Polaris wants their Slingshot to be a motorcycle so that they don't have to deal with all those pesky safety and emissions standards that apply to cars. Elio wants his vehicle to be called a car because motorcycles aren't safe, and safety is a big part of his marketing schtick.
Sure you can! People get paid to argue with legality. We call them lawyers. That's not the point I'm trying to make here, though.
I agree with your opinion. As myredvert pointed out, most (or all, afaik) states say a motorcycle is designed to have no more than three wheels on the ground. It's like the flip side of what I was saying earlier: if you add wheels to a motorcycle, it's still a motorcycle. It seems the states actually agree with me on that one.
|
![]() |
|
| myredvert | Jun 17 2015, 04:16 PM Post #45 |
|
myredvert
![]()
|
So Connecticut is one of those few states where it is clearly not a motorcycle. Some states such as Ohio are trying to not leave these vehicles hanging in no man's land by developing regulations for "enclosed cab" motorcycles. No telling how they will differ in terms of certification, titling, operations, etc. Right now it appears that the only difference is related to eye protection. Polaris isn't trying to BS their market by glossing over or omitting key legal issues affecting the ownership and operation of their product. Trying to avoid more expensive development and certification requirements isn't something that can be compared to Elio's avoidance of those issues, it's just trying to keep costs down and remain in compliance so they can get them on the road in whatever function each State allows. If I may say, you sure used an awful lot of legal argument after stating you are "not making a legal argument..." And if I may also say, you did quite an admirable job of doing so.. ![]() So Miriam Webster was your "authoritative automotive source?" That seems like an interesting choice when MW won't/can't throw you in jail for disagreeing with their "opinion."
|
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The Geo Metro Lounge · Next Topic » |


Welcome to the all new Geo Metro Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.












Not everyone agrees. I'll let Connecticut DMV senior attorney Sharon Geanuracos speak for me here, from a letter written to Polaris:
It's a legal opinion, backed by the force of law. Still an opinion.
That's not the point I'm trying to make here, though.
7:40 PM Jul 10