-
Welcome to Elio Owners! Join today, registration is easy!
You can register using your Google, Facebook, or Twitter account, just click here.
Is This Ruling Going To Effect Elio Since They Are Following The Telsa Sales Model.
- Thread starter Double D in Ohio
- Start date
RUCRAYZE
Elio Addict
ya gotta ask who's behind this? Our government doesn't wake up and decide to examine 3 wheel "things", i.e. what lobbyist (s) represent what companies who might feel threatened at this time, try to squash this project?
50,000 reservationists, millions recently raised, and soon public access to purchase stock, might be getting serious looks from one of the "players"?
50,000 reservationists, millions recently raised, and soon public access to purchase stock, might be getting serious looks from one of the "players"?
Ty
Elio Addict
I don't see this as being a big deal as there is already legislation being worked on to create an Autocycle category of vehicle.I can't figure out how to find more details on this. Is this just saying there will be a future meeting on the subject, or have specific rules already been proposed?
It seems to be simply a statement of a percieved problem, without proposing any particular solution. The problem is, they worry people will assume a 3-wheeler with "car-like" features will meet the same safety standards as true cars. All they are proposing right now is to remove those vehicles from the "motorcycle" definition, but they haven't proposed what to do with those vehicles once they are no longer motorcycles.
I see this going one of two ways: either they will require autocycles to be classified as cars (and thus meet the regulatory and safety hurdles of real cars), OR they will create a sperate autocycle classification.
I see the former being more likely than the latter, since the percieved problem is that the general public will see vehicles like Elio as a car. However, I suppose they might make an Autocycle classification that has similar safety requirements to cars, but is more like motorcycles in other regulatory areas.
But if they become Cars, then EM will qualify for CAFE
John Painter
Elio Addict
Sethodine
Elio Addict
Well, from a conspiracy theory perspective, it does make some sense. IF one of the big automakers was behind this, it could go one of two ways:
1) Elio can't engineer a solution in time, the company goes under, and the autocycle threat disappears forever.
2) Elio engineers a solution that passes gov't muster, gets labeled a "car" and qualifies for CAFE. Big automakers use Elio as an infinite well of credits to offset their stagnant MPG numbers.
So, IF it winnowed down to those two outcomes, then it would be a win-win for the big automakers. However, life is rarely so simplistic. If NHSTA took a third option and made an Autocycle classification that was "safer than a motorcycle" but not as regulated as a car, then neither of the above results would really apply. If that were the case, and Elio was the only one ahead of the safety-engineering game, then Elio would be the only autocycle in town for years while the other projects either adapted or faded into obscurity.
wizard of ahs
Elio Addict
I'm with Ty..........I think it's a push for the "autocycle" 
Elio Amazed
Elio Addict
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2014
- Messages
- 3,507
- Reaction score
- 4,630
Exactly who are these xxxxxx (edited...my bad): "...consumers who purchase these vehicles..."
that "...are likely to assume that these vehicles have the same safety features and crash protection as passenger cars"?
OK... Simple and non-disruptive solution: Require consumers to sign a waiver of acknowledgement before purchase.
Including all new and/or used 3-wheeler purchases.
Require full disclosure and consumers will have been informed and warned.
It's probably a good idea for the mfgs. protection anyway.
It works with countless other products and situations.
What's the problem?
If that's not acceptable, then yes, there's probably more afoot here than meets the eye.
Instead of the government constantly having to "protect" us, it's quite often that we need protecting from the government.
that "...are likely to assume that these vehicles have the same safety features and crash protection as passenger cars"?
OK... Simple and non-disruptive solution: Require consumers to sign a waiver of acknowledgement before purchase.
Including all new and/or used 3-wheeler purchases.
Require full disclosure and consumers will have been informed and warned.
It's probably a good idea for the mfgs. protection anyway.
It works with countless other products and situations.
What's the problem?
If that's not acceptable, then yes, there's probably more afoot here than meets the eye.
Instead of the government constantly having to "protect" us, it's quite often that we need protecting from the government.
Last edited:
Senator Vittor's bill was introduced into congress defining autocycle and its requirements. A law like this would have to be passed by the House and Senate and signed by the president, and this would trump any regulation regulation passed by a governmental agency like the NHTSA. If the definition of 3 wheels equal motorcycle was passed by legislative law a long time ago, before governmental agencies make law as they do today, changing the definition of 3 wheels requires more legislative law.
Who said 3 wheels equals a motorcycle? Lesiglative law or departmental regulations? I think the NHTSA came into existence when Ralph Nador attacked the Corvair. I suspect the 3 wheel definition existed before this time because police had 3 wheel motorcycles before this. NHTSA can only change their own regulations, not another department's regulations, and certainly not legislative law.
I do not believe congress/president or any governmental agency will pass a law/regulation for a vehicle that does not exist. They would look bad. They will wait until the elio is being manufactured. However, ideas and proposals are often made public in advance to gauge public reaction.
(Is this post boring?)
Who said 3 wheels equals a motorcycle? Lesiglative law or departmental regulations? I think the NHTSA came into existence when Ralph Nador attacked the Corvair. I suspect the 3 wheel definition existed before this time because police had 3 wheel motorcycles before this. NHTSA can only change their own regulations, not another department's regulations, and certainly not legislative law.
I do not believe congress/president or any governmental agency will pass a law/regulation for a vehicle that does not exist. They would look bad. They will wait until the elio is being manufactured. However, ideas and proposals are often made public in advance to gauge public reaction.
(Is this post boring?)
Last edited:
floydv
Elio Addict
I'm calling BS on the GreenCar article for a number of reasons:
In the worst case scenario that NHTSA actually completes this change in definition rulemaking and it leaves the Elio in a bind, it seems like the easiest way for EM to address it is to offer the Elio without doors, essentially making the Elio the functional equivalent to the T-Rex and Morgan, which I think are intended to be exempted under the definitional change and continue to be treated as motorcycles (this presumes the change is targeted specifically to Elio and not vehicles like the T-Rex and Morgan). EM can then offer the doors as an option that can be installed at the marshaling centers.
Also, if NHTSA actually does pursue a real rulemaking, I think we can be effective in getting a boilerplate comment letter together that can be sent by the 40,000+ reservation holders to NHTSA during the public comment period. They will take notice of thousands of comment letters against the proposal.
- The author has an obvious bias against the Elio; and
- I've searched through all 179 notices published by NHTSA in 2015 in the Federal Register and could not find a single reference to the proposed rulemaking to change the definition of motorcycle.
In the worst case scenario that NHTSA actually completes this change in definition rulemaking and it leaves the Elio in a bind, it seems like the easiest way for EM to address it is to offer the Elio without doors, essentially making the Elio the functional equivalent to the T-Rex and Morgan, which I think are intended to be exempted under the definitional change and continue to be treated as motorcycles (this presumes the change is targeted specifically to Elio and not vehicles like the T-Rex and Morgan). EM can then offer the doors as an option that can be installed at the marshaling centers.
Also, if NHTSA actually does pursue a real rulemaking, I think we can be effective in getting a boilerplate comment letter together that can be sent by the 40,000+ reservation holders to NHTSA during the public comment period. They will take notice of thousands of comment letters against the proposal.
Last edited: