Quote:
Originally Posted by Shnabdabber
*sigh*
This ATV set of standards you are complaining about is set, made, improved by engineers who; through R&D and testing find out whats safe and whats not. I would trust people who make quads to know what is safe for a quad over a suit that works for the government.
|
I call bullpoop on this one.... did you actually even watch the video that I posted in my op? .... Parts 1
and 2.... not just Part 1?
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNew...1024?hub=WFive
Quote:
....Alberta is a hotbed of ATV accidents. Every year more people are injured in ATV accidents there than in any other province or territory. What's more, 117 people have died in ATV accidents in Alberta since 2002.
......ATV safety and the stability of the vehicles first came to the attention of the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission more than 20 years ago. The CPSC took legal action against ATV manufacturers claiming in legal filings that the machines presented an "imminent and unreasonable risk of death and severe personal injury" and accused them of promoting "an illusion of stability."
In response, American ATV manufacturers agreed to minimum safety standards including lateral stability. Essentially, the industry agreed not to build any ATVs that were more prone to tip than the least stable model already sold. A complex mathematical formula determined a minimum lateral stability or Kst value of 0.89. That standard was also applied in Canada on a voluntary basis.
.....So far, the Canadian government has allowed the ATV industry to continue setting its own standards for vehicle safety and stability.
|
Basically the industry promised not to make a quad any more dangerous than the most dangerous one manufactured at the time 20 years ago... and since then they say they haven't .... but who knows because nobody actually tests them... the industry polices themselves.... ya right...