11 Responses to “Road rule trivia: Empty bike racks”

1. Isn’t this the case with tow-bars as well? (for trailers)

   Posted by eccles | 3 December 2007, 1:55 pm
2. Yeah, the way the rule is worded seems like you can leave the rack on when the car is parked. Which makes sense for those who drive somewhere for a return ride.

   Personally, I believe that it should be removed when parked so somone doesn’t walk into it. Especially if it is easily removable. In that photo a single (albeit chunky) pin is all that is preventing the rack and tounge from being removed….

   eccles: Whether or not to remove tow bars can up with a coworker a while ago. All we could find was the following at the end of the Tow Bars and Couplings‘ vehicle standard:

   “A towbar tongue can be a dangerous projection when a trailer is not attached. The towball may also obscure the number plate. Therefor the towbar tonge and towball may need to be removed when the vehicle is not towing a trailer.”

   However, he said that he always removed it so he wouldn’t bang into it.

   Posted by Stephen | 3 December 2007, 6:59 pm
3. I don’t own one of those type of racks but everyone I know who does removes it when they park—probably because they are the ones most likely to walk into it! And most racks are pretty easy to remove, so from a theft-prevention point of view it’s not a bad idea to stow them inside the vehicle (I know, who the hell would want a bike rack without a mounting bracket? But stranger things have been nicked.)

   I suspect that the rule about driving with an empty bike rack is covered under the same law that covers carrying an object that’s longer than the vehicle. Under ARR 292 (Insecure or overhanging load):

   A driver must not drive or tow a vehicle if the vehicle is carrying a load that…projects from the vehicle in a way that is likely to injure a person, obstruct the path of other drivers or pedestrians, or damage a vehicle or anything else (for example, the road surface).

   Sounds about right, doesn’t it?

   By they way, I’m glad someone knew something about the towbar thing because I didn’t have a clue…

   Posted by Treadly and Me | 3 December 2007, 10:05 pm
4. The real question is, do we, as a nation, need legislation to protect people from injuring themselves by walking into a bike rack (or towbar for that matter) attached to a stationary car?

   Posted by hielke | 4 December 2007, 8:34 pm
5. No, I don’t suppose we do. Although I think the law against driving with an empty bike rack is reasonable, at least in part because out on the road the people most likely to be injured by running into an empty bike rack are cyclists and motorcyclists.

   Posted by Treadly and Me | 4 December 2007, 10:02 pm
6. Another thought – imagine getting an empty bike rack rammed into you at speed.

   Sayyyy a van driver rear ends you while your empty bike rack is on the back of your car. Not really much bonnet to protect the poor van driver and I’m pretty sure some of those welded box-section bike racks won’t crumple very well.

   Ummm… that’ll leave a decent hole in someone’s chest…. shudders

   Posted by HG. | 5 December 2007, 8:07 am
7. yeah, its less about accidentally cracking your shins on it, and more about the danger during rear-ending someone…. but also to ensure that angry drivers can’t reverse into another car with a large steel prong on the back of their car.

   Posted by eccles | 5 December 2007, 10:06 am
8. Hmm, that’s just made me think: I don’t fancy having a bullbar rammed into me at speed either, yet they remain legal…

   Posted by Treadly and Me | 5 December 2007, 9:29 pm
9. Technically, that’s what a bullbar is for :)

   Posted by eccles | 7 December 2007, 8:58 am
10. Oh, well that’s alright then.

    Posted by Treadly and Me | 7 December 2007, 9:30 am
11. This is ridiculous. When will the government learn to but out of our lives?

    Posted by bike racks for cars | 17 January 2011, 10:19 am

Post a comment