Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Center Headlamp
#1
EVM says...
One of our certification requirements was to add the single “cyclops” head beam on the frunk. What do you think of the new look?

[Image: 23561477_1529989143762317_81038156194690...e=5AA5B55C]
Reply
#2
(11-14-2017, 02:21 PM)DiscjockeyDale Wrote: EVM says...
One of our certification requirements was to add the single “cyclops” head beam on the frunk. What do you think of the new look?
I think it's horrid and will mess up the aerodynamics.

What is this requirement? Solo is not a motorcycle. Solo has the usual lighting pattern. What use is one more light? This is just silly.

I don't know any vehicles except motorcycles and low-speed things that have a light on the centre-line. My snowblower has one light, just off centre. What possible issue of safety is met by a light on the centre line? If they just need more illumination, why not increase the power of the existing light?
My blog is an eclectic list of rants and commentary about things for which I care. See MrPogson.com It's been around a decade...
Reply
#3
(11-14-2017, 03:19 PM)pogson Wrote:
(11-14-2017, 02:21 PM)DiscjockeyDale Wrote: EVM says...
One of our certification requirements was to add the single “cyclops” head beam on the frunk. What do you think of the new look?
I think it's horrid and will mess up the aerodynamics.

What is this requirement? Solo is not a motorcycle. Solo has the usual lighting pattern. What use is one more light? This is just silly.

I don't know any vehicles except motorcycles and low-speed things that have a light on the centre-line. My snowblower has one light, just off centre. What possible issue of safety is met by a light on the centre line? If they just need more illumination, why not increase the power of the existing light?

Yes, Solo is a motorcycle according to the US NHTSA.
The last I heard (some time ago) it's exclusive to only the US models.
But we'll have to wait on the official word from EMV to confirm.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/571.108
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/.../subpart-B
Required listening... House of Lords - Can't find my way home
This version kicks. There's just no other way to describe it. Shivers. Turn...it...up!
Disclaimer: No false statistics were supported, displayed or harmed in the making of this post.
Reply
#4
OMG!  I preferred the original hood scoop styling body color matched.  It was early on exclusive to meet USA certification requirements, but Jerry stated it looked so good it was going to be an option.

The new cyclops fixture.........not so much.
White Hot Solo #166
Reply
#5
(11-14-2017, 04:15 PM)DiscjockeyDale Wrote: Yes, Solo is a motorcycle according to the US NHTSA.
The last I heard (some time ago) it's exclusive to only the US models.
But we'll have to wait on the official word from EMV to confirm.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/571.108
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/.../subpart-B

Oh, that's a poor definition of motorcycle...

"Motorcycle means a motor vehicle with motive power having a seat or saddle for the use of the rider and designed to travel on not more than three wheels in contact with the ground."

and they require one light on centre or two no more than 200mm apart...

"S10.17.1.2.2 If the headlamps are horizontally disposed about the vertical centerline, the distance between the closest edges of their effective projected luminous lens areas must not be greater than 200 mm."

It's clear those definitions may be relevant to a two-wheeled motor-cycle with perhaps a side-car, not a car like Solo. The 200mm limit makes no sense at all for Solo. Are they going to remove two lights? That makes no sense for a really wide motor-cycle if that's what they think Solo is. Does anyone have any idea why there is a 200mm limit except to prevent headlights hanging way outside the body of the motor-cycle? Doesn't such a limit create a danger that approaching vehicles may not see the full width of the Solo until it's too late? Would anyone think a car was safe having just one headlight on the centre-line? There's an infraction of the law here in Manitoba if you have one headlight not working.

Thank Goodness I live in Canada where Three Wheeled Vehicles are allowed to exist. I hope EMV moves on to certify in Canada while waiting for USA to figure that out.
My blog is an eclectic list of rants and commentary about things for which I care. See MrPogson.com It's been around a decade...
Reply
#6
(11-14-2017, 06:21 PM)pogson Wrote: Oh, that's a poor definition of motorcycle...

All true Pogson, All true.
Myself and others have known about it for a year.
As a matter of fact there are plenty of threads on the forum about it.
Including pictures of the Red Solo with a dual lamp cyclops scoop sent off to the third party testers.
I've not seen anything but detriment in that particular regulation in regard to the Solo and zero benefit in the final tally.

if you dig deeper into those US regulations, you'll find the States really have no power at all over the physical requirements.
The states cannot deviate in their regulations for any particular vehicle from what the NHTSA has set. None. NADA.
If anyone tells you different, (unfortunately I didn't mark the section) find that language in there and direct them to it.
The ONLY thing the US states individual designations of autocyle being applied to these three wheelers affects...
Is the helmet requirements and endorsement requirements for driving these "autocycles".
Required listening... House of Lords - Can't find my way home
This version kicks. There's just no other way to describe it. Shivers. Turn...it...up!
Disclaimer: No false statistics were supported, displayed or harmed in the making of this post.
Reply
#7
OMG this is horrible. There HAS to be a better way. LED lighting has come a long way in the last few years we don't need a giant stupid afterthought eyeball sticking out of the hood. Thank God this isn't a requirement in Canada.
Reply
#8
Butt-ugly, but I am not surprised. I work in mass transit and deal with the CFR all the time. Many of the regulations are obsolete but they have never been revised. The rail section (231) still deals with steam locomotives. Getting anything changed in the CFR is rarely possible. We still make grab handles for rail "one piece of forged steel" when welding is now highly controlled and testable, and carbon fiber is so much lighter. This was fine in the 1930's but ridiculous now.
[+] 1 user Likes Hog's post
Reply
#9
Jerry Kroll should do whatever is necessary to seek a waiver on this MC requirement since the SOLO's headlight configuration meets Auto headlight requirements and the out of place, butt-ugly add on center light is NOT a safety requirement for this vehicle platform.  Laws can be modified, start the process and do it!  I thought the original hood scoop design was acceptable........why the change?  

I have to see it from various angles to better determine if it's a deal breaker design element.  My first impression is that it's a ridiculous looking focal point of the vehicle.  I'm unable to move to Canada.
White Hot Solo #166
Reply
#10
Good thing that the OP captured the photo from Facebook.  The EMV post appears to have been removed.   I suspect that the reaction was more negative than they expected.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)