Fast Motorcycle Industry News

cyril-Huze-fast-news74Jesse Rooke and HardDrive V-Twin Products Form Alliance. HardDrive American V-twin, a division of Western Power Sports (WPS) Products, and Jesse Rooke are pleased to announce the formation of an alliance that will see the bike builder serve as HardDrive’s creative ambassador for the foreseeable future. Rooke brings years of custom bike building experience and his own unique style to HardDrive as he sets to work designing signature V-twin parts for the brand. As part of the agreement HardDrive will also now serve as the official distributor of Rooke Customs products.

Harley-Davidson Inc. Board Approved A 13% Increase Of The Company’s Quarterly Dividend and authorized the repurchase of as many as an additional 20 million shares. The quarterly dividend was raised to 35 cents a share, an increase of four cents a share, to yield 3.5%. The increased dividend is payable to shareholders of record as of Feb. 14. Tony Macrito, a spokesperson for Harley, said one of the top priorities for the company was to return value to its shareholders. “Looking forward, we expect to continue to return excess cash to our shareholders in the form of increased dividends and continued share repurchases,” Macrito added.

Tennessee Proposed Bill To Allow Motorcyclists To Ride Without A Helmet. Tennessee is one of 19 states with a helmet law. The proposed legislation would allow anyone 21 or older to ride without a helmet. A new legislation aiming to give motorcycle drivers the option of being on the road without a helmet has passed a House Finance subcommittee. The bill has some limitations. You have to be 21 years old, and be covered by private health or medical insurance. Supporters of the bill cited a Pennsylvania study showing motorcycle registrations go up after a helmet law is repealed. There are more than 167,000 motorcycles registered in Tennessee.

Zipper's

32 Responses to “Fast Motorcycle Industry News”


  1. 1 JohnnySpeed Feb 7th, 2016 at 10:31 am

    Tennessee needs to look hard at the study just done on the increase in fatalities and length of hospital stays after Michigan repealed their helmet law in the same fashion.

  2. 2 nicker Feb 7th, 2016 at 2:54 pm

    How nice of Tennessee to “Allow” riders to not wear helmets….
    Perhaps that will influence NY to allow me to Drink large cups of Soda… ya think…???

    -No- Johnny… what you “need” to do is realize that being alive doesn’t entitle you to a trauma free existence. If you don’t like the risk of riding without a helmet, then by all means wear one. But don’t expect me to validate your decision by wearing one too. Better yet go take up golf and leave the rest of us alone.

    At what point will the Progressive Leftists running nanny states figure out its not their roll to run everyone’s life.

    -nicker-

  3. 3 Jeff Nicklus Feb 7th, 2016 at 3:30 pm

    Well said Nicker!

    Over & Out,

    Jeff

  4. 4 rebel Feb 7th, 2016 at 4:14 pm

    I also agree, like I have always said, let me worry about me

  5. 5 Mike Greenwald Feb 7th, 2016 at 6:15 pm

    JohnnySpeed,
    Are you saying motorcyclists still die with and without helmets? Are there other laws or taxes that have been equally effective in controlling motorcyclists?
    Does motorcycle safety improve by making motorcyclists comply with anything that victimized the user or the vehicle, such as tax, law, or regulation?
    Thank you for your benevolent thoughts.
    Mike Greenwald

  6. 6 Dave Blevins Feb 7th, 2016 at 8:01 pm

    Tennessee does not require motorists to have automotive insurance, which means there may be no insurance to pay if injured. Could likely be the reason they would require motorcyclists to have health insurance to ride without a helmet. Wait a minute, that makes little sense now that the affordable health care act requires everybody to have health insurance… I hate how stupid and afraid our government has become.
    But I still love my bike, and I like riding without a helmet most times, until I wanna ride down to Nashville or the Smoky Mountains and have to wear a goofy helmet. Hope it passes.

  7. 7 nicker Feb 7th, 2016 at 8:32 pm

    RE:
    “… I hate how stupid and afraid our government has become. …”

    Dave, you should be more angry about “how [controlling our government has become.”

    The stupidity is in the voters who continually ellect these clowns, presumably because they swallow this “we’re all in it together BS….

    -nicker-

  8. 8 Pat h Feb 7th, 2016 at 9:39 pm

    Nicker for president 2016

  9. 9 Moses Ledford Feb 8th, 2016 at 12:16 am

    Well according to me, wearing a helmet while driving a motorcycle is very necessary. I can understand about the enjoy of driving a motorcycle without the helmet, but I don’t think there is any thrill to enjoy riding the bike on the cost of your life.
    A blog, which was basically based on motorcycle hauling at http://www.wewilltransportit.com/motorcycle-transport/ gives the best answers regarding the advantages of wearing a helmet and why every rider should wear it.

  10. 10 James just another crazy kiwi Feb 8th, 2016 at 3:38 am

    Quick get the T Shirts printed :-0

  11. 11 Brian J Feb 8th, 2016 at 7:51 am

    Argue as you will, but the fact that helmets prevent or mitigate head trauma in an accident is not disputable. Seat belt laws,for instance, also probably opposed by some of the same folks I’m sure, have and do save lives. I for one am tired of my premiums paying for the idiots of the world sucking on the tit of others when they crash. I ride and race and have seen and experienced the benefit of safety gear. I’m still here because of it. YMMV

  12. 12 Mike Greenwald Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:21 am

    Moses Ledford, Brian J, et al, the argument is not about helmets.
    Government overreach or collusion of government with financial instruments through various industries is the issue.

  13. 13 BobS Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:45 am

    I’m all for more freedom but I think the biker community will struggle with this issue for a long time. I also bicycle and snow ski, two other activities susceptible to accidents that cause head trauma. In these communities not only have we embraced protective gear but we demand high quality gear from the manufacturers. Pretty much the opposite of bikers who shun gear and demand the cheapest least protective helmets because they’re afraid they won’t look cool to their poser buddies wearing a decent helmet. Have you ever noticed riders whe wear Shoei, Arai, or Schuberth never complain about wearing a helmet? Because quality counts. The riding experience, like skiing or cycling, can be enhanced with the right gear, not reduced. If and when bikers do decide to take care of themselves you’ll see much fewer attempts by politicians to force them to. Very few legislatures debate mandatory helmet laws for cyclists and skiers. No need when they’re already wearing them.

  14. 14 Mike Greenwald Feb 8th, 2016 at 9:08 am

    BobS,
    Are you saying that it isn’t that motorcyclists have an issue with helmets, rather, the issue is with government making laws?
    Concerning your comments about higher quality helmets, somebody will always market a better mousetrap.
    Mike Greenwald

  15. 15 Robert Pandya Feb 8th, 2016 at 9:14 am

    Congrats to Jesse – best of luck to all involved.

    Robert Pandya

  16. 16 D Ray Feb 8th, 2016 at 9:56 am

    lady in a car ran a stop sign; i t-boned her. upon impact, my head bounced off her front fender. the helmet did it’s job well. i went to work that night. i am not a leftist/progressive at all, but based upon my experience, i am all for mandatory helmets. this is one area i don’t believe the nanny state is overreaching.

  17. 17 Pat h Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:28 am

    They should just outlaw motorcycles all together, to dangerous and not a necessity, don’t forget to put the safety nets in your showers at home, the government and legislators know what’s best for you, give up your liberty for security deserve _________ , fill in the blank.

  18. 18 USAYGO Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:54 am

    Jesse who???, just had to say it

  19. 19 BobS Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:26 am

    Mike G what I’m saying is if bikers took more personal responsibility for their own safety there would be much fewer attempts by legislative bodies to force it upon them. Obviously this is a huge over generalization, but bikers have created a culture here where protective gear, and even more importantly quality protective gear is shunned. How many times have you seen or heard the question, “What’s the thinnest lightest helmet that won’t give me ‘mushroom head'”. Well, that question is asked by a person who obviously cares too much about what others think about his looks. How often do you see bikers in states with helmet laws riding around in stupid little plastic beenies that cost 50 bucks and offer practically no protection at all? Gee, he put a piece of crap on his head and now he complains about how uncomfortable he is wearing it. But at least he looks like a tough biker guy. This isn’t cool, it’s stupid. What I’m saying is if or when bikers ever do embrace en masse protecting themselves like the cyclists and skiers do, the push to legislate saftey loses it’s basis.

  20. 20 FlaNativ Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:48 am

    The movers behind the helmet law push are actually the insurance companies. They don’t want to lose even a penny of their profits by paying them out for head injuries. The lobbyists push and sometimes even write the legislation that makes helmet usage law.
    What BobS posted is right,if biker’s embraced decent helmets and wear them,insurance companies would have minimal losses therfore no one would care. Here’s another thought on it. If you choose to ride without a helmet,fine,enjoy yourself. But,if you are injured ,specifically a head injury caused by doing that,then you aren’t able to get any assistance from insurance or the public dole. Your choice,you accept the responsibility.

  21. 21 Mike Greenwald Feb 8th, 2016 at 12:01 pm

    BobS,
    People that use a shower have many more head injuries as a group than motorcyclists. Yet, no helmets. The beanie helmets are worn to mock the government, not as a prophylactic exoskeleton that does not prevent traumatic brain injury.
    The paint and upholstery improvements are not up to the task. Cloth, metal, wood, nor plastics, accomplish the task. No amount of transfusions nor transplants will ever revive this dead horse issue. Any laws for or against the mandate of helmet usage are a money scheme to enrich a third party.

  22. 22 Chris Feb 8th, 2016 at 12:47 pm

    . . . meanwhile, back at the ranch, Harley is laying off workers, the quality of their bikes continues to suffer, but dividends to share holders look nice and shiny. Keep up the good work.

  23. 23 New York myke Feb 8th, 2016 at 12:56 pm

    Wow this is as eye opening as watching how many Americans would vote for a Bernie Sanders! It’s about freedom and less government whether its economic freedom or personal safety. When I wear a helmet by choice it’s the best full face carbon fiber and that’s because if a lot of reasons none of which are safety. I’ve crashed without a helmet & with a beanie and I’m will continue to ride the way I enjoy, with reluctant compliance, when I have to but when I’m riding like hell for long distances in bad or questionable weather I’m wearing that full face and praying I don’t crash and break my neck or have some amateur remove it and cause more damage. It’s depressing how many Americans don’t have a clue about the ONLY thing that makes this country great, freedom and that’s it. America is not the most beautiful place on earth because of mountains or trees but only because of a people who are free; free to create, to believe, free to live as they (we) want to live as long as we’re not hurting others, and whether or not premiums go up or down is about a marketplace that should never be influenced by laws. Imagine a law that says when it’s less than 40degrees kids have to wear clothing to keep them warm, or when it rains they have to wear rain gear, or worse that same law aimed at adults! No, it’s not about helmets, it’s not even about a government intrusive enough to make helmet laws. It’s about American people ready and even anxious to destroy the one thing that makes us a great country; a country I once fought for and watched others die for! Sad, depressing and to me personally disgusting!

  24. 24 Woody's Feb 8th, 2016 at 2:49 pm

    If Tennessee REALLY cared, they’d outlaw motorcycles completely, but require helmets in the rest of our daily life, right? And convertible cars, they’ll have to go, too. For sure they’d have to make bathtubs illegal, waaaaaay too dangerous compared to a walk-in shower with a built-in bench. ‘scuse my while I go weep for my country.

  25. 25 Blackmax Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:30 pm

    1. Heard the news while at the V-Twin Expo from Hard Drive
    2. They need to do something to stop the bleeding, like,
    Hmmm, Make A Better Motorcycle, maybe ????
    3. I’m in agreement with all of the above
    Riding thru Tenn. is a pain !!!
    Losing Tourist /Visitor $$$

  26. 26 BobS Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:57 pm

    At least there’s no melodrama in this thread.

  27. 27 deadwood1783 Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:47 pm

    Tennessee does not require motorists to have automotive insurance, which means there may be no insurance to pay if injured. Could likely be the reason they would require motorcyclists to have health insurance to ride without a helmet. Wait a minute, that makes little sense now that the affordable health care act requires everybody to have health insurance… I hate how stupid and afraid our government has become. But I still love my bike, and I like riding without a helmet most times, until I wanna ride down to Nashville or the Smoky Mountains and have to wear a goofy helmet. Hope it passes – See more at: http://cyrilhuzeblog.com/2016/02/07/fast-motorcycle-industry-news-214/#comments

    WRONG: Tennessee does require you to have auto/motorcycle insurance. It’s called the Financial Responsibility Act and has been Law for many years and sir it carries a fine. You should check your facts Dave Blevins! Helmet laws are nanny state bullshi* !

  28. 28 nicker Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:45 pm

    New York Mike has it Spot-on…!!!!…. Read it and believe it.

    Unfortunately we have to deal with the clueless who yammer:

    “…but I don’t think there is any thrill to enjoy riding the bike on the cost of your life…”

    What they “think” the rest of us should or shouldn’t risk and “enjoy” is inconsequential in the broad scheme of all things socioeconomic.

    Had the country relied on such judgement it would never have grown past Ohio, let alone put a man on the Moon….. (the sniveling twits).

    -nicker-

  29. 29 Andygears Feb 9th, 2016 at 5:08 pm

    Interesting combination of articles. I met Jesse some 12 years ago when he was set up under a small pop up near the Daytona post office during bike week. His “Bicycle” style, no gas tank, single sided girder, hidden solo rear brake caliper on a rotor/sprocket, electric fuel pump motorcycle was truly innovative. And surely would not pass any engineering muster, being deemed “Unsafe at any speed”. The public cost of bare headed riding is assuredly borne by the rider by requiring health insurance, a system that works well in Florida. But do we want to stifle all creativity by requiring custom builders to pay for engineering studies on any new concept before allowing registration? Freedom has it’s limits dictated by the courts in our litigious society when unsafe products are sold to the public. Dictating that helmets be worn predict that we will be “Safe” if we follow the law. Can we then sue the state when we wind up dead despite wearing a helmet?

  30. 30 nicker Feb 9th, 2016 at 8:57 pm

    Look, talking about “the public cost of [anything]” is what the Progressive Left uses to beat the majority into submission. Any thing we do, even breathing and exhaling CO2 (according to the EPA) has a “public cost.”

    As long as there is “a Public” there will be costs….. Hitler, Stalin, & Pol Pot had solution that got rid of many millions of people…. not a very nice story.

    Le-me suggest that talking about “public costs” is a waste of time and never leads to any worth while solutions…. about ANYTHING….!!!

    -nicker-

  31. 31 Brian J Feb 11th, 2016 at 9:23 am

    I get it. Some of you are an angry ‘revolutionaries’ spouting kool-aid from all your holes. I will not shed a tear on the day your ilk are laid out on the tarmac then. Later.

  32. 32 Chris Feb 11th, 2016 at 9:25 am

    @ Nicker,

    Let me use a hypothetical to see if I read you correctly.

    I want to start a lead-acid battery recycling business that will employ 500 people. So far, so good. I need to get rid of the lead-oxide and other toxins in the batteries and my factory happens to be right on the Mississippi River.

    How about I just dump all of the toxic waste into the river? It’s big enough to hold all my garbage and the water will wash the waste out of my neighborhood. So far, I’m winning.

    Now certainly you must agree that there is a public cost associated with my business plan. By your logic, this is okay?

    I “think” that dumping toxic waste into a river inhibits my and millions of people’s ability to “enjoy” our lives. If you think that’s inconsequential in the broad scheme of things socioeconomic, then expect me to buy the lots surrounding your house and build a moat into which I’ll to dump my toxic waste.

    Seems legit.

Comments are currently closed.
S&S
S&S
S&S
S&S
Barnett
Affliction Holdings, LLC

Socialize

Facebook Google+ Twitter