FUV State requirements
#1
    Go To Post #1
As delivery time draws closer, I'm certain future FUV owners' thoughts turn to operator license and helmet requirements.
As the FUV is a fairly different configuration than the Elio, the Elio Maps won't apply in many states and provinces.
Let us know what you've found out about your region's operator license and helmet requirements.
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
#2
    Go To Post #1
Well Oregon will allow you to drive an FUV without a helmet or motorcycle endorsement. That I know for sure. Big Grin
Reply
#3
    Go To Post #1
Colorado, no helmets for sure. As for classification I do not know, yet
Reply
#4
    Go To Post #1
Washington - I haven't pursued the license yet - would be fun to take a motorcycle license test on the FUV
For helmet- The FUV should be exempt with seat belts and roll bar but it has to be inspected by the state patrol.
Reply
#5
    Go To Post #1
I live close to the state borders where Kansas, Oklahoma & Missouri meet.  So, I have three sets of state laws to concern myself about.  Arkansas is at the extreme limit of the FUV's extended 130 mile range, so it would rarely be an issue.  Kansas & Oklahoma do not require helmets for riders over 18, but Missouri does.  The Arcimoto FUV does not fit the definition of an autocycle as currently described by legislation in all three states.

Kansas law treats three-wheeled motorcycles the same as every other motorcycle, even though the riding skills are completely different.  I found parts of my riding skills exam were ridiculously easy on my trike, and other parts such as the high-speed slalom to be difficult.  The Kansas motorcycle written exam ignores the very existence of trikes.
Reply
#6
    Go To Post #1
Colorado - We have no helmet requirements and the FUV would be considered a trike. So you will need a motorcycle or 'trike' license in this state.
Reply
#7
    Go To Post #1
(01-06-2019, 04:19 PM)ricschug Wrote: Colorado - We have no helmet requirements and the FUV would be considered a trike. So you will need a motorcycle or 'trike' license in this state.
Does Colorado have a current defined autocycle waiver?  I so, and it’s steering wheel inclusive, perhaps the handlebar amendment will apply, that was recently passed in Michigan and hopefully in my State of Idaho and others as well.
 
[+] 1 user Likes Rickb's post
Reply
#8
    Go To Post #1
(01-07-2019, 12:19 AM)Rickb Wrote: Does Colorado have a current defined autocycle waiver?  I so, and it’s steering wheel inclusive, perhaps the handlebar amendment will apply, that was recently passed in Michigan and hopefully in my State of Idaho and others as well.

God protect us from politicians who make the laws. From what I can tell, I'm not a lawyer, the FUV would not be considered an autocycle but would be considered a trike. Too bad because an autocycle only requires a standard drivers license.


Autocycle: "A three-wheeled motorcycle that does not use handlebars or any other device that is directly connected to a single front wheel to steer and in which the driver and each passenger ride in a fully or partly enclosed seating area that is equipped with safety belts for all occupants that constitute a safety belt system, as defined in section 42-4-237(1)(b).  For purposes of this subsection (7.5), “partly enclosed seating area” means a seating area that is entirely or partly surrounded on the sides by the frame or body but is not fully enclosed."

Motorcycle: "[i]An autocycle or a motor vehicle that uses handlebars or any other device connected to the front wheel to steer and that is designed to travel on not more than three wheels in contact with the ground; except that the term does not include a farm tractor, low-speed electric vehicle, or low-power scooter"
[/i]


Colorado has a new classification of motorcycle called 'trike' that only applies to trikes. So assuming a trike classification it will require a motorcycle ('M') or trike ('3') endorsement. The '3' endorsement would allow you to take the test with the FUV where you could not use the FUV for an 'M' endorsement.
Reply
#9
    Go To Post #1
Oddly, both the autocycle and motorcycle definitions reference a SINGLE front wheel typical to trikes and does not technically cover reverse trikes

I can’t knock the politicians since my Idaho State Senator was surprisingly responsive to my 2014 request to draft and pass the autocycle legislation needed to exempt both the “SRK” (FUV) and the Elio concepts.  I didn’t see any issue with steering wheel at the time, because both had steering wheels.  That was 2-3 years ago and still no FUVs or Elios registered and licensed in the State of Idaho.  When I can drive MYFUV to his office, so he can see it, touch it, and drive, I’ll request he consider writing a handlebar amendment to the current autocycle definition.  I can only hope Arcimoto’s legislative guy beats me to it.
 
Reply
#10
    Go To Post #1
I think this is Maryland's current definition of an Autocycle (which wouldn't require a motorcycle endorsement).

Autocycle: a motor vehicle that has two front wheels and one rear wheel; has a steering wheel; has permanent seats on which the operator or a passenger is not required to sit astride; has foot pedals to control acceleration, braking, and, if applicable, a clutch; and is manufactured to comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards applicable to motorcycles.

It looks like the Arcimoto fails that definition because of the handlebars and because it is missing a foot pedal for acceleration. Do you think sitting with your legs on each side of the battery box is "sitting astride" or not?
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)