utv's ans side by sides (razors etc.) - Page 2 - Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest

Go Back   Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > 4x4 Land Use > Rules, Regulations, Trail, and ORV Park Chat
GL4x4 Live! GL4x4 Casino

greatlakes4x4.com is the premier Great Lakes 4x4 Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Search
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old January 6th, 2013, 05:55 PM   #21
kb8ymf
Not as old as Whiterhino
 
kb8ymf's Avatar
 
Join Date: 06-01-06
Location: Dryden,Mi.
Posts: 1,112
iTrader: (5)
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by High Center Hancho View Post
the law says less than 50", which means in the court 50" or less...you end right at 50" not 50 1/4"...50"
If you say you have less than a dollar do you have a dollar? I suspect you have $0.99. Think about it............
j-kb8ymf
kb8ymf is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old January 6th, 2013, 06:48 PM   #22
CheapThrillB2
FAWK YEAH!!
 
CheapThrillB2's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-06-06
Location: Middleville, MI
Posts: 31,516
iTrader: (62)
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Default

http://www.glfwda.org/showthread.php...-GLFWDA-Stance

For those that are members of GLFWDA and why I was asking.
CheapThrillB2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7th, 2013, 12:37 AM   #23
oz97tj
Wasn't this attached?
 
oz97tj's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-06-07
Location: Fenton, MI
Posts: 4,009
iTrader: (16)
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Default

If you take a 50inch Rzr on an ATV trail, you would be fine. That's reality. Nothing has been challenged in court. Could you potentially get a ticket from an overzealous cop, or a "prick" like me? Maybe, but it would be like getting a speeding ticket for going 55.1 mph. That's just not the point or the intent of the law. Now take a 65 inch Rzr XP down a ATV trail, and it's pretty clear there would be a violation. Besides that, cops down carry tape measures and they surely aren't out measuring every vehicle that comes down the trail.


We could all argue semantics on this little BS all day, but the court doesn't give a shit and the cop surely doesn't give a shit so there shouldn't be a big deal made from the peanut gallery (whiterhino) because they want to make a case to prove nothing.
__________________
Support the sport. Join GLFWDA!
********GLFWDA.org********

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alter Ego View Post
Oz's Jeep is downright anti-bling.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Green again View Post
Will someone please argue with me?

Last edited by oz97tj; January 7th, 2013 at 12:41 AM.
oz97tj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7th, 2013, 07:49 AM   #24
whiterhino
I'm not old, honest...
 
whiterhino's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-07-06
Location: Davisburg MI
Posts: 22,089
iTrader: (22)
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Default

Sorry but no, I'm not making an issue where there isn't one. The OP asked for an actual law to be cited, not opinions. To my surprise, the only thing anyone has posted to date is the handbook which says less than 50".

Sorry if you got your panties in a bunch because I jokingly called you a prick. I thought you knew me better than that.
__________________
GLFWDA member since 1979.
Member Southern Michigan Rock Crawlers.
whiterhino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7th, 2013, 09:29 AM   #25
High Center Hancho
rack tap re-rack click
 
High Center Hancho's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-10-07
Location: Genesee County
Posts: 13,521
iTrader: (40)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

and beside that...many not all but many of the 50" trails have poles blocking the trail, set at? You guessed it...50"!!!!! Not 49 63/64...50" is the rule
High Center Hancho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7th, 2013, 09:32 AM   #26
dreezy
Haggard Fab
 
dreezy's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-28-08
Location: Holland Mi
Posts: 10,270
iTrader: (7)
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to dreezy Send a message via MSN to dreezy
Default

I always figured if it fit though the posts at the trail head, its legit.
__________________
"you think you're precious, I think you're shit."

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScOoTeR View Post
Ryan, if I wanted any shit from you, I'd go looking for Leah's strap-on.
dreezy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7th, 2013, 02:42 PM   #27
whiterhino
I'm not old, honest...
 
whiterhino's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-07-06
Location: Davisburg MI
Posts: 22,089
iTrader: (22)
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Default

Well, a little more digging gives us this.

In all actuality, 324.81101(a) defines (in part) an ATV as a vehicle that has a seat designed to be straddled by the rider. Read further down to 324.81101(o) and it describes what defines an "ORV." As it reads a side by side is an ORV, not an ATV.

So it could be argued, by legal definition, a side by side cannot legally travel down a trail designated as an "ATV" only trail no matter if it's at or under 50" because it's an ORV not an ATV.

Here's the law;

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(wkz...=mcl-324-81101
__________________
GLFWDA member since 1979.
Member Southern Michigan Rock Crawlers.
whiterhino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7th, 2013, 04:38 PM   #28
High Center Hancho
rack tap re-rack click
 
High Center Hancho's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-10-07
Location: Genesee County
Posts: 13,521
iTrader: (40)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by whiterhino View Post
Well, a little more digging gives us this.

In all actuality, 324.81101(a) defines (in part) an ATV as a vehicle that has a seat designed to be straddled by the rider. Read further down to 324.81101(o) and it describes what defines an "ORV." As it reads a side by side is an ORV, not an ATV.

So it could be argued, by legal definition, a side by side cannot legally travel down a trail designated as an "ATV" only trail no matter if it's at or under 50" because it's an ORV not an ATV.

Here's the law;

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(wkz...=mcl-324-81101
the state also limits the engine size of an ATV to 500cc's Not many ATV's sold today have engines smaller than 500cc's. Also the trails are not limited to ATV's they are limited to vehicals less than 50 inches...the state calls them "forest trails"
High Center Hancho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7th, 2013, 04:49 PM   #29
oz97tj
Wasn't this attached?
 
oz97tj's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-06-07
Location: Fenton, MI
Posts: 4,009
iTrader: (16)
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by whiterhino View Post
Sorry but no, I'm not making an issue where there isn't one. The OP asked for an actual law to be cited, not opinions. To my surprise, the only thing anyone has posted to date is the handbook which says less than 50".

Sorry if you got your panties in a bunch because I jokingly called you a prick. I thought you knew me better than that.
Screw you. It never was or is personal. Its called sarcasm. Its fun.

As for the laws, I've said before and will again there are laws upon laws that are contradictory. What matters is what is enforced in today's world. 50 inch is 50 inch. Its that simple.
__________________
Support the sport. Join GLFWDA!
********GLFWDA.org********

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alter Ego View Post
Oz's Jeep is downright anti-bling.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Green again View Post
Will someone please argue with me?
oz97tj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7th, 2013, 06:04 PM   #30
whiterhino
I'm not old, honest...
 
whiterhino's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-07-06
Location: Davisburg MI
Posts: 22,089
iTrader: (22)
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oz97tj View Post
Screw you. It never was or is personal. Its called sarcasm. Its fun.

As for the laws, I've said before and will again there are laws upon laws that are contradictory. What matters is what is enforced in today's world. 50 inch is 50 inch. Its that simple.


oh, and



__________________
GLFWDA member since 1979.
Member Southern Michigan Rock Crawlers.
whiterhino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7th, 2013, 06:15 PM   #31
oz97tj
Wasn't this attached?
 
oz97tj's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-06-07
Location: Fenton, MI
Posts: 4,009
iTrader: (16)
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by whiterhino View Post


oh, and



Thats the cranky bastard I expect.
__________________
Support the sport. Join GLFWDA!
********GLFWDA.org********

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alter Ego View Post
Oz's Jeep is downright anti-bling.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Green again View Post
Will someone please argue with me?
oz97tj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7th, 2013, 07:09 PM   #32
kb8ymf
Not as old as Whiterhino
 
kb8ymf's Avatar
 
Join Date: 06-01-06
Location: Dryden,Mi.
Posts: 1,112
iTrader: (5)
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oz97tj View Post
If you take a 50inch Rzr on an ATV trail, you would be fine. That's reality. Nothing has been challenged in court. Could you potentially get a ticket from an overzealous cop, or a "prick" like me? Maybe, but it would be like getting a speeding ticket for going 55.1 mph. That's just not the point or the intent of the law. Now take a 65 inch Rzr XP down a ATV trail, and it's pretty clear there would be a violation. Besides that, cops down carry tape measures and they surely aren't out measuring every vehicle that comes down the trail.
That's my point exactly OZ, LEO's will quote that aspect of the law all day as will Judges and Magistrates. The 'intent' of a ATV Trail was for 'straddle' style vehicles, (see my quote to HCH below) NOT sit in with seat belts AND sometimes hundreds of pounds heavier. While not as old as Whiterhino, I have the distinct benefit of knowledge of being around when the original ORV law was written and enacted. And the revision in 91 where we got screwed by the ATV's!
However, while the industry may have found a loophole @ 50" which allowed their side by sides to be on the same trails as ATV's, their future presence isn't necessarily guaranteed. All that needs to happen is some accidents occurring between those vehicles types and an ATV and I predict a huge uprising in the M/C and ATV community to the point some friendly Legislator will find a way to insert it into an upcoming revision to P.A. 451.
I also suspect that MANY of their Razor's have updated equipment and probably measure wider that 50" anyhow. All you need to do is have a law that requires measurement and LEO's will carry tape measures, right?
But I'm not sure that even matters. Just look at the Lift Law. LEO's wrote tickets without even measuring. Granted some lifts may have been flagrant but does a LEO 'have to ' prove you're wider than 50" if his understanding of the law is that Trails are designated for ATV's and M/C's.
Further proof is the push not to long ago to increase the width to 60" to allow side by side on ATV trails. We saw how successful that was.

P.S. I got a ticket for 56 in a 55 because the young know-it-all cop 'thought' the speed limit was 50 and wrote for for 6 over, so he thought. My attempt to tell him he was wrong was not sitting well with him @ 4:30 in the morning. In court he apologized to the Magistrate, NOT me, for not knowing the speed limit in that part of Rochester road but the Magistrate turned to me and said.......'You were still speeding at 56'.........(write the check and shut up!) So........there are always overzealous LEO's that will try to make a point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by whiterhino View Post
Sorry but no, I'm not making an issue where there isn't one. The OP asked for an actual law to be cited, not opinions. To my surprise, the only thing anyone has posted to date is the handbook which says less than 50".
What am I 'chopped liver'? I posted a snipit from the ORV law. It had the exact MCL number at the top.

Quote:
Originally Posted by High Center Hancho View Post
and beside that...many not all but many of the 50" trails have poles blocking the trail, set at? You guessed it...50"!!!!! Not 49 63/64...50" is the rule
So if you 'touch; the poles you technically don't fit. Because it say's LESS than 50". 50" isn't LESS than 50. Otherwise it would have said '50" OR LESS'. Just because I can squeeze through some trees, I'll guarantee the DNR will say I'm not on a legal road.
But in case you want to still argue........see my comment on 'intent' above.

Quote:
Originally Posted by High Center Hancho View Post
the state also limits the engine size of an ATV to 500cc's Not many ATV's sold today have engines smaller than 500cc's. Also the trails are not limited to ATV's they are limited to vehicals less than 50 inches...the state calls them "forest trails"
Not how I read it:

Sec. 81101.

As used in this part:

(a) "ATV" means a 3-, 4-, or 6-wheeled vehicle designed for off-road use that has low-pressure tires, has a seat designed to be straddled by the rider, and is powered by a 50cc to 1,000cc gasoline engine or an engine of comparable size using other fuels.



jim-kb8ymf

Last edited by kb8ymf; January 7th, 2013 at 07:22 PM.
kb8ymf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7th, 2013, 07:26 PM   #33
oz97tj
Wasn't this attached?
 
oz97tj's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-06-07
Location: Fenton, MI
Posts: 4,009
iTrader: (16)
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Default

All these semantics are for the lawyers and judges. The cops on the street, or woods in this case, just enforce the law to the intent of the law. Sure there are some dickbags out there, but those are not the norm.

In the case of the speeding, it's like this; if you go 56 in a 55 you likely aren't going to get a ticket because it's not the intent of the law. It's just setting a limit. Same with the width issue. Could you be cited for running an ATV or a UTV that is 51"? Sure, but again it's not the intent. Same with lift laws. A limit has to be set on things so that's where they set them. Now to be clear, if you are over you are in the wrong and you will be held accountable, but again the intent isn't to screw over people that are barely over or who are trying to be within the law. It's to penalize those that are clearly in violation.
__________________
Support the sport. Join GLFWDA!
********GLFWDA.org********

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alter Ego View Post
Oz's Jeep is downright anti-bling.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Green again View Post
Will someone please argue with me?
oz97tj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7th, 2013, 07:33 PM   #34
kb8ymf
Not as old as Whiterhino
 
kb8ymf's Avatar
 
Join Date: 06-01-06
Location: Dryden,Mi.
Posts: 1,112
iTrader: (5)
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Default

You keep saying 'intent'. and I've shown you were the 'intent' was clearly spelled out in the law..... 'Straddle Type Vehicles'.
j-kb8ymf
kb8ymf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7th, 2013, 07:35 PM   #35
kb8ymf
Not as old as Whiterhino
 
kb8ymf's Avatar
 
Join Date: 06-01-06
Location: Dryden,Mi.
Posts: 1,112
iTrader: (5)
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oz97tj View Post
In the case of the speeding, it's like this; if you go 56 in a 55 you likely aren't going to get a ticket because it's not the intent of the law.
Tell my bank account that!
kb8ymf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7th, 2013, 07:41 PM   #36
High Center Hancho
rack tap re-rack click
 
High Center Hancho's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-10-07
Location: Genesee County
Posts: 13,521
iTrader: (40)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kb8ymf View Post
The 'intent' of a ATV Trail was for 'straddle' style vehicles, NOT sit in with seat belts AND sometimes hundreds of pounds heavier.


jim-kb8ymf

The state doesn's have ATV trails...it has forest trails that say very clearly "vehicles" not ATV's
High Center Hancho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7th, 2013, 07:41 PM   #37
oz97tj
Wasn't this attached?
 
oz97tj's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-06-07
Location: Fenton, MI
Posts: 4,009
iTrader: (16)
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Default

Clearly spelled out in the law, and clearly what is enforced is different. Clearly by law, you can only have sex in the missionary position too (honestly, it's on the books), but what is allowed is another story based on todays world. The laws will stay that way until a case comes up to change the wording or another law is written that contradicts the first, or better yet where the law is more or less ignored because of the "intent" of the law.

Point is, the black and white written law that people think exists just doesn't. There is the letter of the law, the intent of the law, the interpretation of the law, etc. When it comes to something like UTVs, it's just not worth the time or money to push the issue. Have a 50 inch Rzr? Go run ORV trails (50 inch) all day. Have a 65in Rzr XP, get it plated and run ORV Routes and forest roads and everything else that isn't width restricted.
__________________
Support the sport. Join GLFWDA!
********GLFWDA.org********

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alter Ego View Post
Oz's Jeep is downright anti-bling.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Green again View Post
Will someone please argue with me?

Last edited by oz97tj; January 7th, 2013 at 07:46 PM.
oz97tj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7th, 2013, 07:42 PM   #38
whiterhino
I'm not old, honest...
 
whiterhino's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-07-06
Location: Davisburg MI
Posts: 22,089
iTrader: (22)
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Default

Yes, you are chopped liver. Now respect your elders.

Back to the point of the OP, in my opinion, side by side UTV's are not intended on the ATV 50" trails. Polaris just happened to make one that is right at the limit.

Now, in an engineering world, less than 50" is not = 50". As the youngster said, it would say "less than or equal to". But, what I now got out of this is that if I can push the poles apart and fit through them at say............ 54-55", I am legal. Because the poles are just a guideline but not intended to be absolute.
__________________
GLFWDA member since 1979.
Member Southern Michigan Rock Crawlers.
whiterhino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7th, 2013, 07:45 PM   #39
oz97tj
Wasn't this attached?
 
oz97tj's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-06-07
Location: Fenton, MI
Posts: 4,009
iTrader: (16)
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by whiterhino View Post
Now, in an engineering world, less than 50" is not = 50".
Engineers don't live in the real world where things aren't black and white.
__________________
Support the sport. Join GLFWDA!
********GLFWDA.org********

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alter Ego View Post
Oz's Jeep is downright anti-bling.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Green again View Post
Will someone please argue with me?
oz97tj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7th, 2013, 07:51 PM   #40
kb8ymf
Not as old as Whiterhino
 
kb8ymf's Avatar
 
Join Date: 06-01-06
Location: Dryden,Mi.
Posts: 1,112
iTrader: (5)
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oz97tj View Post
Engineers don't live in the real world where things aren't black and white.
Yeah but if it weren't for engineers you still be chasing us on horseback!
j
kb8ymf is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > 4x4 Land Use > Rules, Regulations, Trail, and ORV Park Chat

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:51 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright 2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd. Runs best on HiVelocity Hosting.
Page generated in 0.33076 seconds with 80 queries