Idaho Moped Law

Don't tell him that Goat! I honestly want to see him trying to get this bike put together according to the "requirements" he says we need to have.

Of course I will still be riding my bike legally, without all of that. Once I get it fixed that is Grrrrr.


I'm also torn with you on that one Goat. Some of those requirements are listed in Idaho code, but they refer to motor vehicles. Since I still believe they do not fall under the motor vehicle definition, that is why I am torn.

Codes are under 49- 905 through 908, 933, 940, 956.

As an after thought Goat. Can you find the Idaho legal definition of self-propelled? I can't find it in the Idaho codes.
 
Last edited:
DuctTapedGoat said:
Wow, that's some Naziism right there. They require it to be decked out like a motorcycle then. Seriously, you can pass State Issued VIN inspection if you get your brakes up to code on top of all that.

The thing is - that makes sense if it's a VIN'd moped, but it doesn't really apply to bicycle mopeds. You can't insure a vehicle that doesn't have a VIN!
Click to expand...

I told the cop I was concerned about the insurance requirement because insurers won't insure a moped without a VIN. I will try to get a VIN from the DMV next month. As for the other requirements those won't be an issue. I'm currently installing the lights while I wait for the proper spokes to come for the rear wheel.

That lady got all those tickets on her e-bike for not having lights, mirrors, and a horn.

As far as the brakes go both front and rear brake handles will activate the brake light. And I'm using heavy duty drum brakes. That shouldn't be a problem. The front wheel is built with the thick tire, tube, and double walled rim and the sturmey archer 90mm drum brake hub with sealed ball bearings and it looks solid and awesome but heavy.
 
As I said, send a picture and insurance company when you get done.

Most of those requirements are under statutes 49- 905 through 908, 933, 940, 956, in that area.
 
GreedyRogue said:
Don't tell him that Goat! I honestly want to see him trying to get this bike put together according to the "requirements" he says we need to have.

Of course I will still be riding my bike legally, without all of that. Once I get it fixed that is Grrrrr.


I'm also torn with you on that one Goat. Some of those requirements are listed in Idaho code, but they refer to motor vehicles. Since I still believe they do not fall under the motor vehicle definition, that is why I am torn.

Codes are under 49- 905 through 908, 933, 940, 956.

As an after thought Goat. Can you find the Idaho legal definition of self-propelled? I can't find it in the Idaho codes.
Click to expand...

The only requirement I may have a issue with is the insurance. We have 2 gals that work at our local DMV and I'm certain I can get my bike VIN'd. We're in good with them since we do lot of business there through the detective agency.

If you are curious about how I have the mirrors, lights and horn set up on my bike I can take a pic of it but it's a work in progress. I sort of got sidetracked on my bike project because Wells Fargo pre-approved me for a home loan so I've been making offers on some houses. In fact I was just leaving the bank when I saw the cop and asked him.
 
GreedyRogue said:
As I said, send a picture and insurance company when you get done.

Most of those requirements are under statutes 49- 905 through 908, 933, 940, 956, in that area.
Click to expand...

Greedy, I think you, the cops, and everyone else will be pleasantly surprised to see how much effort I put into my bike when I am done with it.
 
I suppose I should takes some pics now though. It's starting t come together. The reason I'm picky about the laws here is because personally I don't need any issues with the cops. This is a small town and they are hungry for revenue and I can't afford to give them any right now. I'm trying to buy a house.
 
As I have stated before, I have multiple people in multiple areas of law enforcement say I am legal, without having a license or all the requirements you are striving for that is.

Twin Falls City Attorney said if it fits the moped definition it is legal
Twin Falls Sheriff's office says I'm legal.
3 different police officers have said I'm legal.

I have been re-examining the definitions and am curious about the motor vehicle definition. It states;
Motor vehicle. Every vehicle which is self-propelled

I'm not sure these bikes even fit under the self-propelled definition. Can't find any self-propelled definition in the statutes.

merriam-webster defines self-propelled as;
containing within itself the means for its own propulsion.

Last I checked you still have to pedal to get it started. Doesn't sound self-propelled to me.
 
Last edited:
Not if it's pull started like mine. But I reiterate where I'm coming from. It doesn't matter how I interpret the statutes. It's how the law enforcement and the courts interpret them that really matters and unless I'm willing to put up the time, effort and money to create case law I have to abide by their interpretation. I understand where you are coming from and if your jurisdiction says you're ok then I'm good with that.
 
So let me get this straight. you pull start it. Engine starts I assume. Then you ride off without EVER pedaling, is that what you are saying?

Let me clarify. By getting "started", I meant moving. Forget I have to spell everything out.

I would also like to add that you get the answer to the question you ask.
If I ask an officer "Do I need a license to drive a moped" he's going to say yes.
If I ask an officer "Do I need a license to drive a converted motorized bicycle that is exempt for titling requirements" the answer is not always going to be yes.

You are getting all the requirements because you don't bother to try clarifying anything. Police are always going to err on the side of caution and tell you you need to be regulated up the wazoo, unless you can prove you don't need it by law.

I had the same experience with the dmv telling me I needed everything under the stars until I had the supervisor read the code. She finally agreed with me but that just goes to prove my point.

You have never stated that you tried showing the code to any officer you have spoken with. All you say is " well this officer said I had to. . . . ."
 
Last edited:
I want to say a few things.

Jburr : You'll have a legal motorcycle when you're done, and you won't be limited by engine size - remember that. Props on getting one legalled up, I haven't seen anyone pull that off yet, and it's as well on my own to do list.

GR : You're right - we're innocent until proven guilty. I'll excercise my rights to the fullest, and I refuse to be pushed around by the legal system when I am in the right and they are out of line.
 
GreedyRogue said:
So let me get this straight. you pull start it. Engine starts I assume. Then you ride off without EVER pedaling, is that what you are saying?

Yes. The Lowest gear I have on my rear sprocket is 24 tooth and the sprocket on the crank is 25 tooth. The new hub has 8 gears but with the lowest I can start from a dead stopped position. It has a lot of torque with that low of a gear ratio.

Let me clarify. By getting "started", I meant moving. Forget I have to spell everything out.

I would also like to add that you get the answer to the question you ask.
If I ask an officer "Do I need a license to drive a moped" he's going to say yes.
If I ask an officer "Do I need a license to drive a converted motorized bicycle that is exempt for titling requirements" the answer is not always going to be yes.

Maybe But I specifically mentioned that I have a beach cruiser that I mounted a 49cc engine on and asked what his agency's guidelines are on that. He specifically stated that I converted my bicycle into a moped because I added the engine. It's no longer a bicycle with it. Idaho has no definition of a self propelled motorized bicycle so the cop classified it as a moped.

You are getting all the requirements because you don't bother to try clarifying anything. Police are always going to err on the side of caution and tell you you need to be regulated up the wazoo, unless you can prove you don't need it by law.

Well sort of. I decided to add the lights, horn, mirrors, and get a helmet for my own personal safety long before I talked to the police about it. That was a personal decision. The fact that it's also a requirement according to the Emmett PD was a coincidence.


I had the same experience with the dmv telling me I needed everything under the stars until I had the supervisor read the code. She finally agreed with me but that just goes to prove my point.

You have never stated that you tried showing the code to any officer you have spoken with. All you say is " well this officer said I had to. . . . ."

I won't make any attempts to 'educate' law enforcement like that unless they ask me for any clarification. Both the sheriff that stopped me a month or so ago and that seargent for the Emmett PD seemed really confident of their interpretation of the statutes. The Emmett PD specifically since he had a sheet with the guidelines of vehicle classes printed on it. Any attempt I would have made to educate them would have seemed argumentative to them. I was walking down the road when I asked him about the motorized bike too. I didn't have the statutes with me. Besides I wouldn't argue with the police anyway. I would do so with my day in court and if the judge ruled in my favor I would carry a copy of that court opinion with me to present to the officer the next time I am stopped.
Click to expand...

As I mentioned before Each jurisdiction can interpret the statutes differently especially since there is a grey area in the statutes. The police are going to create guidelines to fill in those grey areas. It would be hard for them to enforce laws otherwise. If you recall when the sheriff stopped me he stated that all I needed was a valid driver's license which I presented while the Emmett PD required that and a whole lot of other stuff.
 
DuctTapedGoat said:
I want to say a few things.

Jburr : You'll have a legal motorcycle when you're done, and you won't be limited by engine size - remember that. Props on getting one legalled up, I haven't seen anyone pull that off yet, and it's as well on my own to do list.
Click to expand...

Yeah, lol. I'd be limited by my wits and fear of excessive speed on a bicycle.
 
So how are you using the lowest gear there Jburr? Unless your using a shift kit, which is illegal, you should only have the sprocket in the rear on the left hand side of the bike. I think a 25 tooth rear sprocket would have you going well over 30 MPH.

You also kinda contradict your self there Jburr. You wont carry the codes because that would be argumentative but your willing to carry a court opinion so you can prove you're right.

Either fight for your right or roll over and do as you're told. Sounds like you have pretty much decided which way you roll.
 
If your brakes pass code, you won't have a speed limit. Personally, I want to do a 5 stage motor setup. Friction roller and brushless hub on the front, in frame 2 cycle, rackmount and rear brushless hub driving the back. I'd be looking at great gas mileage and a top speed of 70 mph or so, so I could take the freeway.

Once you get the plates, you're free to do what you want to it, shift kit or anything you desire to do. It won't fall under moped though, it'll be a motorcycle.
 
You're no longer talking about mopeds Goat. If that is what Jburr is attempting to make, he should find a more appropriate forum. This is a motorized bicycle / moped forum. Not a motorcycle forum.
 
A motorcycle can still retain it's pedals, and if it's on a bicycle frame the state may view it as a motorcycle, but it'd still be a motorized bicycle. Just a BA motorized bike.
 
GreedyRogue said:
So how are you using the lowest gear there Jburr? Unless your using a shift kit, which is illegal, you should only have the sprocket in the rear on the left hand side of the bike. I think a 25 tooth rear sprocket would have you going well over 30 MPH.

You also kinda contradict your self there Jburr. You wont carry the codes because that would be argumentative but your willing to carry a court opinion so you can prove you're right.

Either fight for your right or roll over and do as you're told. Sounds like you have pretty much decided which way you roll.
Click to expand...

Arguing with a cop on the side of a road is not the place to make my case especially when the cop already has his mind made on how he will interpret the law as the Emmett cop did. I'm not going to gain anything with them. The place to make my case is in front of the judge.

About the shift kit, there was absolutely nothing about that on the sheet with the guidelines the cop had and the sheriff didn't say anything about it when he stopped me either. My max speed at safe engine RPM's with the lowest gear I have is 18 MPH but I can climb a 7% grade hill at 12 MPH. The highest gear I have that the engine can handle maxed out is 30.2 mph. However that was with resistance from the brakes and chain tension. Don't know how fast it will go with the new 8 speed internal geared hub and my 20 pounds of lost weight.
 
So you admit to using a shift kit when the Moped definition clearly forbids one. Some piece of work you are. You have been trying to claim you are getting completely legal yet are in direct violation of the very Idaho definition of a moped.

You have completely lost any respect I may have ever held for you. You're just a hypocrite.

Reread the moped definition.
"Moped" means a limited-speed motor-driven cycle having:
(a) Both motorized and pedal propulsion that is not capable of propelling the vehicle at a speed in excess of thirty (30) miles per hour on level ground, whether two (2) or three (3) wheels are in contact with the ground during operation. If an internal combustion engine is used, the displacement shall not exceed fifty (50) cubic centimeters and the moped shall have a power drive system that functions directly or automatically without clutching or shifting by the operator after the drive system is engaged;
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top