To restrict or not to restrict...that is the question?

Eye

Ok, well to try and keep this short and sweet, i passed my A license test last october so i can now drive bigger bikes just means they need to be restricted to 33bhp until october '07.

On saturday i picked up my new bike, a brand spanking new Yamaha FJR 1300 (ABS model). Now i have ordered that restrictor kit for the bike even though the guys in the shop both said that i really wont need it, i said i wanted it for my own piece of mind if anything was to happen then at least i know i'm fully covered.

Have been talking to some friends (including two cops) and all have said that there is no point restricting the bike as the cops don't have a clue how to check for it. One of the cops i know is actually on the bikes himself and even he said the same thing, they don't teach them anything about it in templemore and if i got stopped they would only check to see that i have a full license and the restriction would'nt be an issue as they have no easy way to test it aside from jumping on the bike and going 0-100mph (which your not going to let them do) or else throwing it onto a dyno and test it there (of which he said there are about 2 in the south east of ireland where they can do it)

So now i'm having second thoughts about actually putting in the restriction kit, i know i should have it in there to be completly covered insurance wise etc. but i would be so happy right now not to have to restrict it..... just dunno what to do.....

anyone else in the same boat?

Slaanesh

It's a tricky one. I'd probably go for the piece of mind tbh. However, would you do one little check for me? Look at your license and tell me do you actually see the restriction on it?

For some reason when I was issued my license I have 10 years in the unrestricted part

akn

If you dont restrict it and you have an accident. The insurance company will come out and access the bike, the first thing they will check is if the kit is there. It is quite easy to find as they are just big washers in the carbs.

If they find you dont have it restricted it means both your insurance and licence are invalid, obviously meaning they will wash their hands of you and you will have to pay damages etc.

A restriction kit doesn't effect the speed of the bike through the gears, just when you hit about 130kmh/90mph it won't go any faster.

I would put it in the bike man, not worth the risk. I worked in a bike shop for almost 4 years and saw people doing this and getting caught.

Kinetic^

Restrict, its not going to be that big a deal to have it on for a year and a half.

Sesshoumaru

akn wrote:

If you dont restrict it and you have an accident. The insurance company will come out and access the bike, the first thing they will check is if the kit is there. It is quite easy to find as they are just big washers in the carbs.

If they find you dont have it restricted it means both your insurance and licence are invalid, obviously meaning they will wash their hands of you and you will have to pay damages etc.

A restriction kit doesn't effect the speed of the bike through the gears, just when you hit about 130kmh/90mph it won't go any faster.

I would put it in the bike man, not worth the risk. I worked in a bike shop for almost 4 years and saw people doing this and getting caught.

You don't have to lie to the insurance company. You can tell them its not restricted in the first place.

pbergin

Sesshoumaru wrote:

You don't have to lie to the insurance company. You can tell them its not restricted in the first place.

I presume you are joking!
The insurance company will just say you do not have the licence for that bike and will not insure you.
Thats the same as me getting in to drive a bus without a bus licence.

Kinetic^

pbergin wrote:

I presume you are joking!
The insurance company will just say you do not have the licence for that bike and will not insure you.
Thats the same as me getting in to drive a bus without a bus licence.

I hope he's joking too.

Sure if it works, I'm getting an R1 and going to drive it on my A1 licence

BigCon

The insurance company don't ask if a bike is restricted!
When I got insured I asked them is it cheaper if I had the bike restricted and they told me "no, we insure all bikes as if they have no restrictor fitted".
So I'd advise the OP to work away, he has the full licience anyway so that's all the Guards will check...

akn

Yes the insurance company do ask if your motorcycle has any modifications including a restriction kit fitted to it. If you say no they will not insure you. If you say yes they will often ask you for the restriction cert. Either way if you happen to slip through the loop and get insured without it. If you have that 1 acident it will be copped on.

Don't be stupid and get it restricted. It is only for 2 years anyway.

pbergin

BigCon wrote:

The insurance company don't ask if a bike is restricted!
When I got insured I asked them is it cheaper if I had the bike restricted and they told me "no, we insure all bikes as if they have no restrictor fitted".
So I'd advise the OP to work away, he has the full licience anyway so that's all the Guards will check...

The reason they dont give a discount for restriction is because people remove them. If you have a restricted licence its up to you to restrict your bike, God help you if you have an accident and they realise your bike isnt restricted, you will find out very quickly if you are insured or not

akn

You can get a discount for a factory restricted bike as in the Suzuki Bandit as it is pre installed. It used to bring the bike from group 10 to 5.

The F1 International kits have to be fitted by an Authorised Dealer but you can leave the dealer and take them out so there isn't a discount.

Harley Man

I'll be moving to Ireland this summer and bringing my 1999 Harley-Davidson and I just got a quote from AON. There was no mention of a restrictor on the bike. The only thing that was stated is that they would not insure that size bike (1450cc) on a A1 unless I receive a certificate from a Rider Training course.

What's the power to weight ratio for your bike? Although my engine is 1450cc, my bike is 286kg with a power rating of 60HP. This puts me around .202bhp/kg which is under the .212bhp/kg specified by the law.

Krusty_Clown

BigCon wrote:

The insurance company don't ask if a bike is restricted!
When I got insured I asked them is it cheaper if I had the bike restricted and they told me "no, we insure all bikes as if they have no restrictor fitted".
So I'd advise the OP to work away, he has the full licience anyway so that's all the Guards will check...

They may not ask you if it is restricted. They may not even care. But you can be sure of one thing - have an accident and they will will be extremely interested in whether or not you are licensed to ride that bike. If you're not licensed, you're not insured (read the ickle print).

Having said all that, I was stopped by a Garda while I was still in purgatory, and he confirmed what the op had to say, i.e. that they had no way of telling if the bike was restricted or not other than taking it for a spin.. The fecker then had the cheek to ask me for a go... :rolleyes:

If you've ordered the restrictor anyway, there's no harm in getting it installed.. It may ease the transition from a lower powered bike to the FJS.

Enjoy it!....
Safely!.....

Sesshoumaru

I've never heard of a single instance where someone had an accident and the insurance company didn't pay out because of a licence issue. What's the story then with the couple of hundred thousand provisional licence car drivers? Legally speaking they are in the exact same boat as someone riding an unrestricted bike. I know of a couple of provisional licence holders who had accidents while driving by themselves, but I haven't heard of any insurance company not paying out.

BigCon

I've never heard of a single instance where someone had an accident and the insurance company didn't pay out because of a licence issue. What's the story then with the couple of hundred thousand provisional licence car drivers? Legally speaking they are in the exact same boat as someone riding an unrestricted bike. I know of a couple of provisional licence holders who had accidents while driving by themselves, but I haven't heard of any insurance company not paying out.

Exactly - that's why the insurance companies don't care wether there's a restrictor fitted. Can anyone link to a case (I'll even accept heresay) where an insurance company didn't payout because a rider didn't have the correct licence for the bike they were riding?
It's just like the provisional car licence thing.
The licencing laws are a joke in this country tbh - I can't imagine any other first world nation having a category of licence whose category cannot be checked (i.e. wether there's a resrtictor fitted or not).

OT - I ride a Yamaha Virago XV535 on an A licence - can anyone tell me if this is below the permitted power/weight ratio thingie, as I haven't got a clue (nobody asked me, or cared when I was getting it insured)
I'm doing my test next month in any event so hopefully I'll be in the same boat as the op...

SuprSi

Whether you restrict it or not, I'm completely and utterly envious of you picking up a 2006 FRJ1300 - my dream bike. What colour did you go for? Would you mind giving me a ball-park figure for how much it cost?

I saw a video for the 2006 model a while back and it had the equivilant of tip-tronic gears, on the handlebars - is that standard or an extra option?

Krusty_Clown

Sesshoumaru wrote:

I've never heard of a single instance where someone had an accident and the insurance company didn't pay out because of a licence issue. What's the story then with the couple of hundred thousand provisional licence car drivers? Legally speaking they are in the exact same boat as someone riding an unrestricted bike. I know of a couple of provisional licence holders who had accidents while driving by themselves, but I haven't heard of any insurance company not paying out.

Are you recommending that Eye put this to the test, by riding his bike unlicensed? Just because you have never come across a case, and your friends got away with it, doesn't mean it doesn't happen.. Unless of course you work in an insurance company, or are a member of an Garda Siochana, in which case I'll bow to the better informed.

Insurance companies tend not to act on the 'nice' end of the scale.. I can just picture it 'So you had an accident while riding a bike you didn't have a license to ride? That's a shame.. Don't worry about a thing, even though yoy invalidated your insurance policy, and were as such 'uninsured', we'll happily pay out on the insurance policy you didn't have anyway.

Dunno if I would put my faith (and the price of replacing a shiney new 2006 FJR1300) in the niceness and friendliness of the insurance trade.


Oh, and I too am utterly envious...:)

BaldiePablo

I have an unrestricted GSXR 750 on an A Licence (because it takes a poxy year to get the test) ...
The insurance company doesnt ask whether you have a restrictor because they're gonna load you anyway. It's true if you have an accident (they only really check if it's a bad one) you'll be screwed but hey ... don't have an accident

It is quite easy to find as they are just big washers in the carbs.

Not necessarily ... this is the case for Carb bikes but many these days are fuel injection and that is a different kettle of fish altogether!! I'd challenge even the best mechanic to spot that one easily... friends in the Gardai tell me they wouldn't have a clue!

End of the day .. if it bothers you put it in but the chance you'll be caught is pretty slim!

Sesshoumaru

Krusty_Clown wrote:

Are you recommending that Eye put this to the test, by riding his bike unlicensed? Just because you have never come across a case, and your friends got away with it, doesn't mean it doesn't happen.. Unless of course you work in an insurance company, or are a member of an Garda Siochana, in which case I'll bow to the better informed.

Insurance companies tend not to act on the 'nice' end of the scale.. I can just picture it 'So you had an accident while riding a bike you didn't have a license to ride? That's a shame.. Don't worry about a thing, even though yoy invalidated your insurance policy, and were as such 'uninsured', we'll happily pay out on the insurance policy you didn't have anyway.

Dunno if I would put my faith (and the price of replacing a shiney new 2006 FJR1300) in the niceness and friendliness of the insurance trade.


Oh, and I too am utterly envious...:)

I am not recommending any course of action. I am just offering my opinion on the matter of whether insurance companies will pay out or not. We have ALOT of provisional licence drivers on the road atm. Thats both bikers and car drivers. As far as I can see its been tested by a couple of hundred thousand drivers already over the last few years and the results of that test is that yes insurance companies do pay out.
From my own personal experience I can remember when I got my first bike, it was a 40bhp CBR250. I was on a provisional licence at the time and asked for a quote from the insurance company. I didn't bother lying to them, I just told them it was 40bhp, I had a provisional licence and that I wasn't going to fit a restrictor. They didn't have a problem with it, they took their money and I took my insurance policy. I also filled out all the forms truthfully, making sure to fill out the bhp field correctly and the "is the bike restricted?" field correctly as well. You would imagine they would be legally obliged to refuse me insurance based on the information I supplied them with if they couldn't offer me a valid insurance policy. I don't see the problem(insurance wise) as long as you don't lie. Remember its not the insurance companys problem to police our roads. They can see you have a full licence, you passed your test etc and they can give you a quote based on the probability of you having an accident on whatever bike you ride. When you look at it from the insurance companies perspective, what benefit is it to them to refuse people insurance based on this law? They are out to provide people with a service and make a profit. Not to police our roads. Thats the Gardai's job.
But on the other hand I did treat myself to a new Ducati Monster(factory restricted) after I passed my test. As far as I'm concerned Eye passed his test and proved he can ride a bike in a safe responsible manner if he wants to. It's not a logical law anyway, they don't retest you a second time after 2 years. So let him make up his own mind without all the scare mongering about insurance companies not paying up.

murphaph

Sesshoumaru wrote:

..What's the story then with the couple of hundred thousand provisional licence car drivers? Legally speaking they are in the exact same boat as someone riding an unrestricted bike..

It's not the same. If I hold 1st, 3rd or subsequent provisional in category B and I drive unaccompanied, I am breaking the licencing laws but I do hold a licence to drive that category of vehicle and that's all the insurance small print says; "you must hold or have held a licence for the category of vehicle insured" it will say in all policy documents. Now, if I pass my A test, apply for the licence right away and the licencing office does things properly I will get a 2 year period inserted in the restricted section and another 8 years in the unrestricted section. I will not hold nor will I have ever held a licence for an unrestricted bike for another 2 years, so I will not fall under the clause above and I will not be insured.

It's no different to me passing a car test then driving a lorry around. Even though I can pay for insurance, I won't have any because I don't hold or have ever held the category C licence.

Eye

Wow, did'nt think this would spark of such a sizeable debate in such a short period of time sorry it's taken a while to reply again.

Thanks for all the info both good and bad ... for and against, i've pretty much decided to throw in the restrictor now if only for my own piece of mind, I'd rather not have that as a little thing to be worrying about for the next 18 months or so. I know I could 'get away' with it, but i think the real issue is that although I can do it, I know myself I would'nt be 100% comfortable until I knew I was fully covered should anything happen.

I dont plan to go out and have an accident....but then nobody does, yet they still happen

Was just curious as to what others had to say about it and see if anyone else was in a similar situation.

SuperSi, i went for the Galaxy Blue, have the yamaha Top box ordered for the back and also a tank cover and bag to match, should look pretty nice when all is said and done. with regards to the gears i do believe the tip-tronic gears as you put it are available but it is an extra i think. Prices for the bike are €15,900 for the standard and then €16,900 for the ABS model.

It's a dream to drive i have to admit, i've had a xvs650 dragstar for the last 5 years and have only ever riden cruisers so this was a little bit of a change alright for me, have to say i love it though, riding position is very comfortable even for me @ 6ft adjustable windshield comes in very handy, and the power

here is a little piccy of it for ya, not yet complete, should have top box and tank cover/bag in the next week or two

SuprSi

That is a stunning piece of machinery, in my favourite colour and all! I definitely want to have one at some stage over the next couple of years. Hope you enjoy it!

Can you post another pic when it's fully kitted out?

Eye

sure will SuprSi, my brother just picked up a nice silver 01 fjr today, so once i get mine fully kitted out i should get some nice pics of both machines together, will get back on here and post em up when i have em

SuprSi

Excellent

Krusty_Clown

Sesshoumaru wrote:

....they took their money and I took my insurance policy. ...what benefit is it to them to refuse people insurance based on this law? They are out to...make a profit. So let him make up his own mind without all the scare mongering about insurance companies not paying up.

I'm not scaremongering, I'm just trying to provide a balanced argument that takes into account the law, the contract you agree with your insurance company (remember signing on the dotted line?), and speculating on whether or not a business out to make profit will ignore the fact that you broke a contract with them, and still pay out..

I'm with Aon/AXA and here's what it stipulates on my certificate of insurance:

6. Drivers, or classes of drivers, whose driving is covered
(a) the insured
Provided that the person driving holds a license to drive such vehicle or, having held such a license, is not disqualified from holding such a license.

My documentation also stipulates:

Please ensure that you hold the correct category of motorcycle driving license for the vehicle you have on cover. If under the terms of your license a restrictor is required, it is your responsibility to do so. If in doubt, please check the licensing requirement with your appropriate motor tax office.

Maybe they ignore this clause in their contract, maybe they don't. I'm not saying I complied with the law during my licensing purgatory, just presenting Eye with the facts so he/she can make an informed decision.

Krusty_Clown

Fantastic looking bike, btw Eye.... Green with envy..
Keep it between the ditches.