In its latest bulletin the ACCC, which enforces national consumer safety standards for bikes, says retailers could be selling selling fixed gear bikes that do not comply with mandated safety standards, and that could put riders at risk of death or serious injury.
Fixies were being sold without front and rear brakes, according to the ACCC.
“Having no brakes or only a front brake can cause the rider to lose control and be propelled over the handlebars to the ground,” the ACCC said. “Whether this occurs in mixed road traffic or elsewhere, the rider can suffer serious head injuries, broken bones and/or lacerations and bruises. “Pedestrians and other bike riders are also at risk of serious injury or death if someone riding a fixed-gear bike loses control and collides with them,” the statement said.
To stamp out the illegal sales the ACCC has asked the public to report any supply of bikes without safety fixtures, such as brakes, reflectors and bells.
The Australian / New Zealand Standard AS/NZS 1927:1988 Pedal bicycles – requires:.
- At least two brakes are fitted, one on the front wheel and the other on the back..
- Hand brakes are accessible to a rider in the normal riding position..
- The right lever connects to the front brake and the left lever to the rear brake.. Brake friction pads are securely attached to the backing plate or holder and, when applied, touch only the wheel rim..
- For bicycles with cantilever brakes-a safety device is fitted to prevent the stirrup cable from touching the tyre..
- For children’s bicycles (with a wheel base of 640-765 mm)-a back-pedal brake is fitted.
Any supplier whom is aware that a product does not meet the standard must withdraw it from the market immediately. Fines range up to $1.1 million for companies up to $220 000 for individuals.
The link is here http://www.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/937554
Shades of compulsory bike helmets!
The addition of a rear brake will not do anything to prevent users from applying too much force to the front brake and causing them to endo (go over the bars).
While I appreciate the need for braking devices, such reasoning as ascribed to the ACCC statement above makes them look like fools.
Perhaps they are?
I’d venture to guess that several skinny-jeaned hipsters with funny hats and big scarves have no clue how to ride their brakeless fixies and will take themselves out of the equation. There will of course be a minority who do know what they’re doing and who can stop just as effectively as their braked brethren (I seen ‘em!). That said, I’d agree that because the majority of people would be ill-prepared to stop effectively, brakes should be mandatory, but requiring front AND rear brakes is just dumb. Anyone who actually bikes will know that a front brake is quite sufficient. Plus, what does one do with those bikes with rear-wheel only coaster brakes? Lastly, requiring that the brakes be left-hand-rear right-hand-front has no bearing on safety whatsoever (unless a thief tries to steal your bike and pulls the wrong brake). I’m from Canada and I’ll keep riding the other way around, thank you very much.
Here in California we have many brakeless dingbats riding into each other and other retarded behavior.
My personal belief is live and let live but make sure they sign their organ donor card.
MC
Yikes, this set of rules looks like it was designed by a control freak who doesn’t ride a bicycle. Sheldon Brown gave an excellent explanation of why the back brake shouldn’t be used at all when attempting to make the quickest stop on dry pavement. http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brakturn.html Requiring front brake on the right lever seems to acknowledge the greater stopping power of the front brake, but why force riders to have their bikes setup this way? It can only be to protect some non-experienced rider who might get on the bike, but most adult bicycles are never ridden by anyone but their owners, unless the ruling is designed to protect the health and safety of bike thieves. If there is any biodynamic reason to setup the brake levers this way, what about left handed riders? The brake pad rulings seem to make bikes with disk brakes illegal and it seems that all children in Australia are incapable of using anything but a coaster brake.
Personally, I wouldn’t recommend anyone ride a fixed gear without a front brake, but requiring a rear brake on a fixed gear is going way too far.
“Brake friction pads are securely attached to the backing plate or holder and, when applied, touch only the wheel rim..”
So, disc brakes illegal down under are they?
Bad news for your track team.
I suppose requirement #3 could be difficult for people being used to have right brake-lever used for the rear brake. But if you want to ride a bike here I assume you just have to comply ;). Just don’t forget to enforce this for next Tour Down Under ;)
Isla Bikes children bikes will also be outlawed – lucky my daughters never had to comply with this stupid rule since the handbrakes on their bikes work much better than back pedal brakes.
Above rules do not reflect kindly to the competence of the person(s) responsible of the content … you just have to assume that person do not ride bikes
“The right lever connects to the front brake and the left lever to the rear brake”
In australia (driving/riding on the left), indicating when turning right is much more important than left, so it makes sense that the left lever would be connected to the front (more powerful) brake. Seems like a matter of personal preference at the very least.
Could you link to the ACCC news release or bulletin where they said this? I see no sources linked here.
Good to see the ACCC spending their time time on the big issues…
Incidently, how do disc brakes stack up according to item 3 of that standard? There is no interface with the rim.
“Having no brakes or only a front brake can cause the rider to lose control and be propelled over the handlebars to the ground,” the ACCC said.”
This sounds like yet another piece of misleading information about cycling and cycling safety. I frequently only brake with my front brake (I do have a rear installed) and never have I been propelled over the handlebars. I’m not saying it’s impossible, but it seems they don’t understand that front brakes provide the better stopping power. (see http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brakturn.html). I think brakeless fixie riding is a bit dangerous in emergency situations, but surely fixed gear bikes sold with front brake only are ok?
Oh yeah, threatening bike shops with fines of more than $1M.?
Really? That’s extremely severe for what are usually small businesses. Sure fire way to hurt an industry and culture that severely needs support and encouragement right about now.
So according to 3.”…only touch the wheel rim…” then disc brakes are illegal as well.
Oh yeah, and #5 says “a back-pedal brake” is allowed “for children’s bicycles…” It doesn’t say “coaster brake”, so fixies are ok if you are under 18? And also beach cruisers aren’t allowed if you’re an adult? Haha, the gaping holes in these regulations are ridiculous, and enforcing only part(s) of them appear asinine.
Someone should look into whether the ACCC has governing members that own stock in companies that sell brakes or distribute brakes or something! :D
Seriously, lets just forget about all this nonsense. Safty issues should be ones own responsibilty. The ACCC are corrupt!
Rear brake levers on the left has been a traffic regulation since regulations began early last century. It was because riders used their right hands to signal that they were stopping (this signal doubled for a left turn signal)or turning right. Roads had only two lanes. Hand signals also applied to horse-drawn carts, cars, trucks, buses and motor bikes in NSW until the late 1960s or early 1970s. The law was changed in NSW because hand signals could not be seen at night or by some drivers on multi-lane roads. Owners of motor bikes not originally fitted with brake lights and blinkers — i.e. built before about 1962 — had to fit them. Owners of cars and trucks built without blinkers — before about the mid-1950s — some up to the mid-1950s — had to fit blinkers to get them re-registered each year. The FJ Holden was the last Holden not to have blinkers, the FE (1957) was the first. Look forward to when thousand more people take to riding bikes to beat the vehicle traffic jams and jam-packed buses and trains and the pressure will be on for multi-lane cycle routes plus compulsory brake lights, blinkers and daytime lights on bicycles as there are for motor cycles. me and blinkers on bikes. And there will be the same screams as the motorcyclists made when their regulations came in.
Personally I welcome the actions of the ACCC. Perhaps eventually we will get regulations as good as those in Germany and finally see an end to some of the total junk that sells as a ‘bicycle’ and see some real safety and construction standards.
(I wonder how many of the previous posters are actually in WA???)
Hi, I am now 71 yoa and when I started Cycling in Birmingham UK when I was 15 yoa we all used to ride bicycles with a fixed B/ W and a Front Brake , it was always considered to be SAFE even when we rode in Snow and Icee conditions .
The skill we learnt riding a fixed wheel stayed with us forever.
Some DESK unfocussed idiot needs to get out into the real world,
Cheers Ian
I missed the initial flurry of emails, but I never stop wondering about our regulations.
In WA, the Road Traffic (Bicycles) Regulations 2002 have the folowing gems to offer.
Reg 6 All you need is a back pedalling brake or a hand operated rear
brake, no mention of fixed wheel bikes.
Reg 8 Maximum handlebar width of 660mm and a height not greater than
300mm above the top of the saddle. I wonder how recumbents
comply with that.
Reg 10 Width of load or equipment not to exceed 660mm. Fat people
need not apply and I think that a lot of trailers are illegal.
I suggested to Bikewest many years ago that these regulations needed
reviewing, to come in line with standard practice, I suspect the backpedalling brake comes from the 1950 era.
Now I wonder if the ACCC regulations over ride the WA Road Regulations.
Phil.
isn’t “transmission braking” an effective rear brake so that one front brake is all your fixie needs?
I ride a Greenspeed recumbent and according to these rules it is totally illegal. There is no rear brake at all the front wheels provide all the braking but do so via hydraulically activated disk brakes. Also I have the “narrower” of the width options Greenspeed offer they being 750mm, 800mm, 830mm & the tandem @ 900mm.
Hang on. After writing all the above I have downloaded the pdf & it states. Bicycles not required to comply with the mandatory standard. In that list are Bicycles that are designed to be hinged or folded So your Brompton can have just 1 brake no dramas there. Tandem bicycles. I guess they don’t need to mandate for 2 brakes on a bicycle carrying twice the weight of a single machine, no safety concern there & recumbent bicycles. So my Greenspeed is allowed to be whatever it wants as I’m exempt from the standard.
What a joke!
Interesting debate, all I can say is my recnt saturday morning experience of a group of fixies cycling southwards on the narrows bridge – out of control wrong side of the path – led me to take evasive action. They are not doing them selves or cyclist any favours. Whether legal or not it not what the debate shoud be about- it how they ride tryhwm and my personal experience has been negative. Do yourselves favout guys don’t become the bioke mpathe version of jet skis and ride safely and we (as the cycling community) will let you exist.
How will they enforce this on the individual, it is basically impossible! However, disappointingly, this is yet another instance of the over-protective, nanny-state attitude of the Australian government. Thank goodness I am leaving soon, they arrest all attempts at entrepreneurship and individuality, thanks Nan!