Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[MVetter]

There's been some recent drama regarding the company. A Facebook user decided to delve into the legal/registered side of things to see how many Lightning branded motorcycles have been issued proper VINs. As it turned out there was a lot of interesting data to be gleaned:

https://vpic.nhtsa.dot.gov/mid/manufacturer/details/14773?fbclid=IwAR1x_aR8dCOoxdmL-nYV674s17PRZVzSN4fkQ1KP4RdA9lPbp04i6POj4XU  NHTSA documentation submitted 2016.

By comparison, Zero has been operating by the books and submitting regular NHTSA listings: https://scontent-sjc3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/81113452_10218805504506186_4782161435138457600_n.jpg?_nc_cat=109&_nc_ohc=1kUGhvVjuRwAQm-3dLd1NOUoSV7pWxMrGa4SoBUb2Ueg_uzTL7xeg2CKg&_nc_ht=scontent-sjc3-1.xx&oh=506f7fe4d76b35b4d3923344d780b5dc&oe=5E9E4866

The bottom line is this: Lightning has claimed the title of Fastest Production Motorcycle for several years now. They made their claim after a 2012 SCTA run (not FIM or AMA), but it looks like they were not legally allowed to issue VINs until 2016. I don't know how you're able to be production without issuing VINs.

[Crissa]

The term 'production' just means 'standard item you can buy from manufacturer'.

There's no legal (that I know of) requiring the line to be more than a handful made.

And for them to have been issued VIN space, they have to have 'produced' vehicles already.  Patents pend, non-profits languish, and this sort of certification is usually very slow.  Zero wasn't on the list until 2008 and it didn't get address space until later, and they had their first before that.  https://vpic.nhtsa.dot.gov/mid/home/displayfile/31701ab4-f8a2-461b-bb7e-62bd44305378

It does show that Zero has always been on the up and up, doing the homework.

-Crissa

[NEW2elec]

Back in the 90s I remember car companies had to have a run of 250 units to call it a production car.  The Jaguar XJ220 billed itself as the fastest product car in the world.  Then the F1 came out so that was short lived.

I agree it's far from 100% honest but I guess the "intention" wasn't to just do 3 or 4 custom bikes.  I feel they very much wanted to sell hundreds of them.

Again I would love to know what a real street LS218 could do on a track but I doubt I'll ever know. 
Now "IF" the bike could have hit 218 MPH on the street (not saying you should but you know) I think they would have sold to the people with deep pockets even at $45k since you could blow past most hyper cars with that thing.

I'm willing to give him a pass on all of it if they ever make the Carbon Strikes with all the specs they claimed and for $20k.
So far that "pass" is still sitting on my desk though, unclaimed.

[Doug S]

Back in the 90s I remember car companies had to have a run of 250 units to call it a production car.  The Jaguar XJ220 billed itself as the fastest product car in the world.  Then the F1 came out so that was short lived.

You're talking about homologation requirements for various racing bodies. They do have certain minimums the manufacturers have to meet to enter into the "production-based" divisions.

I think Lightning is just claiming that their bike is available for purchase to anybody who has the money...whether they've even met that informal definition is up for interpretation.

[NEW2elec]

No not with racing.  Like the Hennessy Venom is very fast but it's a modified Lotus so it's not "production".

This is copied from our friends at Wikipedia:
 Guinness were also reported in some sources as saying that at least 50 identical vehicles were needed to be made to constitute a production car but several models which were built less than 15 times got certified for production car records.[9][10] In February 2014, Road & Track wrote that Guinness required 30 identical vehicles.[11]
For what that's worth.

So there is still some grey area as to "production".  For bikes, well who knows, but the clear intention is to not be a boutique Curtiss or KillaCycle type bike.

[BrianTRice@gmail.com]

I would prefer rhetoric on this forum regarding manufacturers to stick to constructive commentary. Critique of this manufacturer’s handling of customer moneys for the Strike is warranted, but I don’t see the OP as providing a solid grounding for discussion.

Low volume production is often slightly questionable and I put up with Zero, say, because they’re scrupulous to a fault.

Basically, encourage them to fix their PR problem and correct how they’ve handled customer interest. Don’t try to present document filings as some kind of clear statement on matters that are clearly supportable just from the company’s lacking interactions with customers and the public.