In this video a donkey gets t-boned and a motorcyclist gets seriously hurt as he head butts a very large truck hauling scrap metal.

Inattentional blindness, also known as perceptual blindness, is the phenomenon of not being able to perceive things that are in plain sight. This can be a result of having no internal frame of reference to perceive the unseen objects, or it can be the result of the mental focus or attention which cause mental distractions. The phenomenon is due to how our minds see and process information. Wikipedia

Motorcyclists are very in tuned to other drivers, because when anyone makes a mistake often the motorcyclists, whether right or wrong, pays the price with a trip to the hospital or the morgue. This leads riders, naturally, to curse the inattention of drivers. When the stakes for bodily harm are higher, people pay more attention. This is also true for bicyclists and pedestrians.

Others have noticed the apparent problem of of drivers not noticing motorcyclists.

…automobile accident reports frequently report driver claims that they “looked but failed to see” the other vehicle. Many collisions between cars and motorcycles involve cars turning in front of an oncoming motorcycle, with the car driver not seeing the motorcyclist. Given that in many contexts, motorcycles are less common that cars, inattentional blindness is more likely. Critically, the difficulty of the primary task in an inattentional blindness task increases the probability that people will miss the unexpected object. In practical terms, the more people focus on aspects of their visual world other than the detection of unexpected objects, the less likely they are to detect such objects. Recent evidence suggests that talking on a cell phone, for example, dramatically increases the probability of missing an unexpected object (Scholl et al, 2003).

Driving is an example. “Many accident reports include claims like, ‘I looked right there and never saw them,’” Simons notes. “Motorcyclists and bicyclists are often the victims in such cases. One explanation is that car drivers expect other cars but not bikes, so even if they look right at the bike, they sometimes might not see it.” Simons recounts a study by NASA research scientist Richard F. Haines of pilots who were attempting to land a plane in a simulator with the critical flight information superimposed on the windshield. “Under these conditions, some pilots failed to notice that a plane on the ground was blocking their path.” source

Magicians have exploited the principal of inattentional blindness in order to perform illusions. Clearly this is not a new phenomenon. The magician distracts the audience in some way so that they do not see what he is doing in another part of the stage, even if in plain view. This deception is then exposed, to the amazement of the audience. Other perplexing examples of innatentional blindness include lifeguards that fail to see a body at the bottom of a clear water pool.

The general theory is that if a person is distracted and concentrating on doing one task, he will not see other unexpected objects, even if blatant and in plain view. The use of cell phones while driving is given as a common distraction. Such studies have been used as evidence in favour of banning cell phone use while driving in Ontario and most other Canadian provinces, as well as many US states. Car drivers drive on “auto pilot” and do not see extraordinary objects on the roadway.

While it is clear that inattentional blindness does happen to all humans, why this happens is not well understood. In understanding this phenonemonon, riders might develop strategies that might break through a driver’s “auto pilot” and save themselves the pain of a crash.

One theory is that the brain is distracted from its main purpose and, due to inattentional blindness, does not see objects that are within plain view. The distraction could be a personal crisis at work or home, technological (cell phone, radio, GPS), or some other. Drivers then go into “auto pilot” and somehow get to their destinations without incident. It is certainly not a safe method of travel.

If a driver is too tired, sleepy, not awake, is inebriated or has a hangover, could this add to or further impair the brain, taking extra processing power or reducing the brain’s processing capacity?

Another theory is that the brain is exposed to an excess of stimulus from senses, which includes our eyes, ears, nose and skin. This stimulus, if individually processed, would indeed be overwhelming, hiding the most important information amongst the information that is benign. It would be like scanning a large yard of grass and processing the poisonous snake the same as each and every rock and blade of grass. A simple coping mechanism is to filter all stimulus, concentrating on only stimulus that is potentially dangerous or unusual. A simple scan of the large yard would filter out the grass, but find the snake and large rocks (danger to the lawn mower). If this theory is true, a car driver may filter out a motorcycle, bicyclists and pedestrians, and not notice them until they get run over.

Further theories postulate that as cars and other equipment become more automated, operators do not need to concentrate as hard, get bored and increasingly are inattentionally blinded. Repetition of an event (a daily event such as commuting) breeds experience, expectation and therefore inattentional blindness. Rare events (motorcycles, bicyclists, pedestrians) are rare because they are uncommonly experienced and are thus not built into our expectation, leading to inattentional blindness and therefore running them over. As well, while an inexperienced operator is forced to pay attention, the experienced operator has done the task so often that he is more prone to inattentional blindness. The experienced operator is more prone to a “violated expectation”, an event that is outside the norm. This is when bad events occur, such as the “right turner” into a motorcycle, or running over a pedestrian. It seems the more experienced and capable an operator the increased prevalence of inattentional blindness.

Striking is the conclusion of this Human Factors researcher:

It is difficult to reduce errors due to inattentional blindness. One reason is that people are unaware of the blindness. Training mainly affects conscious, voluntary behavior, so it helps little. You can tell a driver to be sure to check the oncoming lane before turning, but the advice will do little good if the driver is looking for a specific address, is in a hurry and in an unfamiliar part of town.

So let’s get some of the theory straight. Inattentional blindness results when your brain adapts and filters out routine events. The more you do a routine the more your brain adapts to the routine. The more experienced and skilled the operator, the more prevalence for inattentional blindness. The less experienced the operator the less possibility of inattentional blindness. This human filter does its job before your conscious mind gets the information, so extra training and other logical conditioning does not help reduce inattentional blindness. Is there something proactive one can do to reduce inattentional blindness? Someone help me out here? If we cannot prevent inattentional blindness through a change of skill set, which relies on the conscious mind, a solution may point to a systemic change of environment. Change the routine enough and on a regular basis so as to retard inattentional blindness.

Yet another theory that does not specifically relate to inattention blindness, but still may be of importance to motorcyclists, is called motion camouflage.

Motion camouflage is a dynamic type of camouflage by which an object can approach a target while appearing to remain stationary from the perspective of the target. The attacking object simply remains on the line between the target and some landmark point, so it seems to stay near the landmark point from the target’s perspective. The only visible evidence that the attacker is moving would be its angle and its looming, the change in size as the attacker approaches.

The theory goes that a car at an intersection wants to turn left. A motorcyclist is riding in the opposite direction of the car. The motorcyclist’s headlight, approaching the car, does not seem to grow larger, giving the perception that the motorcycle is stationary. The car makes the left hand turn and hits the motorcyclist. Riders in Britain have written about the “Sorry Mate I didn’t See You” (Bike Magazine 2005) or SMIDSY phenomenon.

Motion is difficult to perceive when it is directly along the line of sight. Because the object is stationary relative to the background, an observer doesn’t see a change in the overall image and thus isn’t cued to the presence of a moving object. Though the object increases in apparent size as it nears, the change goes unnoticed at first–moving from 1000ft distant to 900ft may not affect the image enough trigger a response. A motorcycle is particularly susceptible to motion camouflage because its cross-section area as seen by an observer is much less than that of a larger vehicle.

But as the object gets closer, apparent size increases more rapidly. At constant speed, an approaching object takes the same time to move from 200ft to 100ft as it did from 1000ft to 900ft, but the apparent size increase is greater. Eventually the object seems to grow suddenly in size, and the motion camouflage is broken. This is called the looming effect. According to the Bike article, when an observer is startled by the looming effect, he may freeze in his tracks. If the observer is an oncoming left-turner, he may stop in the middle of the intersection, making a bad situation even worse.

Indeed either of these theories point to a visual impairment that all humans possess. It is not an impairment of physicality but one of brain processing. How to overcome these visual impairments has not been well studied. The answers to these questions could lead to a marked reduction in traffic crashes and fatalities. Motorcyclists can only hope for advances in the understanding of human brain function.

Other reading: Inattention Blindness, conspicuous safety professional, Stop Signs are Dangerous
-Visual and Stereoscopic Acuity

Swagman 3 bike rack installs 11.5 inches from my bumper, not a good fit

I have been meaning to get a bike rack for quite a number of years. When the kids were small this was not an issue because they could not ride far anyway, but they are growing. We don’t have a large car, so a bike rack is now a necessity. The Swagman 3 bike hitch bike rack seemed to be the strongest and lightest but well made bike rack I could find. It works very well but the experience of installing it provided some interesting surprises.

Before looking for a rack I asked various people what type of bike rack best suited our needs. Friends had a trunk mounted bike rack, which scratched their car up quite badly, which steered me away. They have since abandoned their trunk mounted racks. Since my car has no roof rack and no option to add a roof rack, this type of bike rack was not possible. The last option was the hitch mounted bike rack. Since I am not a trailer type guy and have no friends that are, I also had to research, purchase and install a trailer hitch, already documented in my blog. It’s all still good.

I am an avid internet researcher, so before looking for a rack brand name I scoured the internet. Mountain Equipment Co-op sold a couple types of bike racks. For a couple of decades now I have been using MEC as a trusted source of outdoor gear and they have not let me down. Now in the internet age I use them as a gold stamp of quality for potential purchases. They sold Swagman, so here is where I started my research.

It is clear that Swagman has a good reputation on the internet, with many happy customers. Robust design, strength of materials, good fit and finish and solid racks were all common remarks. Certain rack styles have issues with certain types of vehicles. You need to match your vehicle and needs to the many available rack on the market.

Hitch pin hole too far out, and the S shape does not allow rack to seat deeply enough

My requirements were pretty simple. I have a type I hitch, 1.25″ receiver, capable of holding dead weight of 100-200 lb, depending on who you talk to. Nissan says 100 lb. The U-haul hitch says 200 lbs, but then says 100 lbs for carrying bikes. The dead weight maximum also includes the bike rack, so if the rack weighted 30 lbs, this means there is less available weight for your bicycles. A lightweight but strong bike rack was in order. I settled on the Swagman single arm Original 3 bike rack, model 64121. It’s design is simple and therefore there is less to fail. It does not fold down because I have no need for this feature. Even with the bike rack installed I can still get to my trunk with ease. I would rather have a stronger rack with fewer possible points of failure. It does not have fancy locking mechanisms. Many people who purchase bike racks have said in hindsight that all the fancy locking mechanisms on their racks are ineffective against bike theft, so the upgrade is unnecessary. Why lock your bike to the bike rack, only to have the thief take both your bikes and bike rack? No, we would be using our rack to transport bikes to a park, then disconnect the rack and put it in the trunk. A simple but robust locking mechanism was best. Unfortunately MEC did not sell this type of rack, and the folding version that they did sell was out of stock in Toronto. I decided to order locally and picked up the rack.

S shaped bend creates a kink, does not allow the rack to seat deeply into the hitch receiver

Firstly, the Swagman bike rack came well packaged and finished in the box. Instructions were not too clear and seemed written for an older design version. Since there are few parts, it was not difficult to put it together. The rack materials are thick and seem extremely strong. Bolts, nuts and washers were all provided, and were heavy and strong. One issue that became evident was that the enclosed square stock that attaches to the hitch receiver was way too long, putting the bike rack upright a full 11.5″ away from the bumper. This stock also did not push all the way into my hitch receiver, resulting in a weaker connection. When the rack and bikes are so far from the hitch receiver, this provides a much longer lever arm, which greatly increases forces and vibration to the hitch receiver and therefore the car. Swagman had also designed in an “S” shaped curve in an attempt to raise the rack 2″, but these curves slightly kinked and fattened the square stock where it went into my hitch receiver. I was not too impressed.

Straight bar stock makes Swagman bike rack fit closer to bumber and deeper into hitch receiver

No matter, I had the Swagman web site, so I sent off an email from their “contact us” page, and got a confirmation email that stated an email was sent. I received no reply from the Vernon, BC company. I took some pictures, put up a web page outlining the issue, and sent this off to Swagman. Again no reply. Upon reading the instructions I could not find any warranty information. The store that sold me the rack suggested I email Swagman and ask. Again, for the third email sent, I received no reply. To this date, Swagman has not replied to any of my emails.

My solution was to not use the Swagman provided square stock and to find my own. I settled on a 10.5″ length piece of 1.25″ diameter square stock. I drilled the hole for the hitch pin and the holes to attach to the rest of the bike rack. Overall the rack is now 5.5″ away from my bumper, resulting in a much smaller lever arm and therefore force on the hitch receiver. There is now only 2″ between the bike rack and the hitch receiver. Though I could have reduced this residual 2″ I felt it was more than adequate.

Once installed I found the innermost bike would clang against the bike rack upright. My solution was to sew a long sleeve and attach to the bike rack, preventing metal on metal contact. It also covered up the Swagman logo.

Overall I am happy with the Swagman bike rack, but I had to do some work to make it fit properly. If you do not have the tools to cut heavy metal square stock and drill 3 holes, then maybe consider another type of bike rack. I almost returned this Swagman rack because of the very poor fit to my car and poor customer service.

Here are some pros and cons to the Swagman bike rack:

Pros:

• Strong construction, great fit and finish of bike rack
• Lighter in weight than other racks, but still heavy duty
• Came with all necessary components
• Does not excessively shake when carrying bikes (after I replaced the square stock with a shorter one)
• Inexpensive ($130CAD)
• Simple and relatively light (Original 3 bike version, model 64121)
• Comes with a hitch pin (does not say on the box)

Cons:

• No email or other support for their product
• No warranty. Not stated on box or instructions. No email reply about warranty. No warranty info on their web site. Other manufacturers offer at least a 1 year warranty on their products. Thule, Yakima and Saris all offer a limited lifetime warranty on their products. Even Canadian Tire bike racks (SportRack) have a 1 year warranty.
• Rack did not fit well into my hitch receiver and would have bounced a lot more and with a lot more force (due to 2 times longer lever arm) if I did not fabricate up a shorter piece of square stock.
• Instructions were for an earlier version of the rack
• Innermost bike will clang against the bike rack upright. I sewed up a cloth sleeve to protect my bike and the bike rack.

Question: Hi Don, I was trying to find a contact us link on your blog, but I was unsuccessful.

Anyway, I was searching Google Images for a specific Hot Wheels car. I stumbled across your photo on your old blog and saw that you had it. I am really interested in trying to find the name of the car. I am looking to purchase it for a friend.

That’s the image, from the left it is 8th car down, 4th column over. Futuristic orange/red/chrome one. Any help would be greatly greatly appreciated! :-)

Justin

Answer: Well, Justin, It’s a strange request but I’m always interested in extending a friendly hand out to the Internet world.

I took that photo a long time ago, so had to dig in my son’s large set for the car you’re looking for. It’s a “Wild Thing” Hot Wheels, 2002, Malaysia, in flake orange, designed by Larry Wood. It has 3 wheels, 2 on the front and 1 on the back, so here in Canada it would be licensed as a motorcycle.

The first photo shows what looks like grey scratches on the front left quarter panel. These are actually reflections from the road surface. The photo is 2 times the car’s actual size.

Almost his complete collection of Hotwheels

A bicycle rack that uses a trailer hitch keeps the bikes off your car's paint

I have been wanting to add a bicycle carrier to my 1997 Nissan Altima car for the longest time. A bike carrier that goes into a trailer hitch receiver allows the bikes to not contact the car, reducing fears of scratched paint and dents. While shopping around for hitch receivers I found the U-Haul hitch receiver (#24999) for $130CAD, cheaper by $40-$50CAD than other brand names. U-Haul wanted an extra $40 for installation, which I could save if I did it myself. There would be unforeseen trade-offs which I will explain.

The Nissan Altima is a small midsize car and not really designed to easily carry multiple bicycles. It has no roof rack capability and has no grooves built into the sides of the roof to add a roof rack, precluding a roof rack-based bicycle carrier. A trunk mounted bicycle rack is possible but from past experience with friends who use one, they seemed unstable and could not be tightened down sufficiently. Trunk-based bicycle carriers, from my experience, are also prone to scratching up the car’s paint and creating small dents in the bodywork.

At first a trailer hitch-based bicycle rack seemed huge overkill, but it keeps the bicycles away from the car enough to not scratch the paint nor dent the bodywork. There would be, however, more work to do. One needs to first mount a trailer hitch receiver to the bottom of the car, then add the hitch-based bicycle rack.

As a small midsize car the Nissan Altima is not really designed to pull a trailer. The owner’s manual recommends that you not exceed a tongue weight (direct weight on the hitch receiver) of 100 lbs and pull no more than a 1,000 lb load (combined trailer and contents). This is probably extremely conservative. The recommended hitch receiver for the Altima and most smaller cars is a Class 1 hitch, capable of a tongue weight of 200 lbs and a pull weight of no more than 2,000 lbs, using a square 1.25″ receiver opening. Therefore the hitch receiver would be rated stronger and more capable than the vehicle.

Researching U-Haul’s trailer hitch on the internet was educational. Who knew that U-Haul is the largest retailer of trailer hitches in North America? Less of a secret was U-Haul’s terrible reputation for botched installation of trailer hitches as well as the lack or maintenance and breakdown of their rental fleet. Yikes. Numerous calls to my local U-Haul led to continuous busy signals, employees that would not look up the necessary hitch for my vehicle, or flat out would refuse to help me, requesting I leave my name and number and they’d call back “whenever”. I had serious doubts about dealing with U-Haul.

Eventually and accidentally, the trailer hitch specialist answered the phone. “Ali” said he could not get me an operator but could look up my vehicle and order me a hitch, which he did. He also said it would be in for pickup in 3 business days. Three business days later I received a call from U-Haul, not Ali, stating my hitch was back ordered and I would need to wait an additional 10-15 business days, when it will arrive from its voyage from Florida. They did not know and did not want to guess any more accurately. Since I did not put any money down yet and could cancel my order at any time, I agreed. Surprisingly after 10 business days I called the office and my hitch had arrived. I paid for it and picked it up.

One may ask why I did not order my hitch online from U-Haul. The U-Haul site is based in the U.S., while I live in Canada. When I looked up my hitch by vehicle manufacturer, model and year, I found my hitch. The issue was that I was unsure if the hitch price was $US or $CAD, as nowhere on the site states the currency. Their call centre stated that products were priced in Canadian dollars but I did not want the hassle if they were in error. Would I also have to pay shipping charges to Canada as well as possibly duty, or could I pick up the hitch at the U-Haul store? Because the web site did not address any of my concerns I opted for local ordering and purchase instead. Here again is a clear example of lots of money spent on their web presence and functionality, only to be undone by poor web usability. Almost Ok is not enough.

U-Haul’s web site makes a statement about their lifetime guarantee on all their hitches. The condition, not clearly stated, is that this warranty applies only if U-Haul installs it and you pay an extra $5CAD. If you opt to install it yourself there is no guarantee whatsoever. Bummer. So much for faith in your U-Haul product. They also did not tell me this at the store nor on their website. All other hitch competitors offer a 1 year manufacturer’s guarantee.

U-Haul’s low price also does not include a hitch nor hitch bolt. The hitch is the piece of metal that is inserted into the hitch receiver. The chrome ball is then bolted to the hitch, and the trailer goes on top of the chrome ball. Because I only want to use my hitch receiver for a bicycle rack, I did not want a hitch nor ball, but if you really wanted to pull a trailer, competing hitch packages that include a hitch and hitch bolt (Reese and Curt) may be a better deal, and they do come with a warranty.

Brand new U-Haul receiver hitch came with peeling paint. Not good.

Interestingly the U-Haul hitch receiver mounts using 7 bolts, 4 bolts on the left and 3 bolts on the right, where as the Curt (#288907), Reese (#7712) and other competing hitch receivers mount with only 4 bolts, 2 on each side. I had read that U-Haul’s hitches were made by someone else, like Curt, but the Curt design seemed inferior to the U-Haul. The extra bolts was a benefit for the 7 bolt, made in USA U-Haul hitch. Hitch bolts are 10mm x 1.25 thread x 30mm hex bolt CL8.8.

Overall the hitch looks to have good quality. All welds look strong and are clean, sanded down and smooth. Instructions were pretty clear. All pieces stated in the instructions were present in the box. The cross member on either side of the hitch receiver part came padded with cardboard. Too bad the hitch receiver came with peeling paint. The hitch receiver portion is 5″ long, uses a square 1.25″ receiver opening. The receiver hitch pin hole is 0.5″ in diameter and is 3 3/8″ away from the base of the receiver portion (measured from the car to the centre of the hole). The wall of the hitch receiver is 3/16″ thick.

Installation was pretty easy. Seven nuts were already welded to the Altima’s frame rails. The fit of the hitch was great. It is better to loosely tighten the hitch with a couple of bolts, get all the other bolts to thread before you tighten everything up. I put a piece of plywood down on the ground, layed down on the plywood, supported one side of the hitch with my leg and the other side with my arms. One note about the finish of the hitch is that my hitch came with peeling paint on the outside of the hitch receiver. There is no powder coating or anything fancy, but at least the hitch should not come with peeling paint. The hitch extends 0.25 inches/0.5 cm longer than my bumper.

Overall I would say that I did save about $35 with the U-Haul hitch receiver over its competitors. The package did not come with the receiver ($20) nor hitch pin ($10), but I did not need the receiver. The hitch, DIY install, comes with no warranty. I will have to repaint the peeling paint ($5) of the receiver portion of the hitch. The hitch is regulated by the government so I hope the quality is high. Even though I was only ordering and paying for the product, dealing with U-Haul was a hassle. What should have been a simple transaction turned out to be troublesome. I’d hate to get into a really troublesome situation. At least I saved some money.

Cross Post: Nissan Club

I’m a newby to cars, so I’m going to attempt to summarize the many forum threads on how and where to use jack stands on a 2 gen Nissan Altima 1993-2001. Though it seems simple, the many people that have started forum threads points to some confusion, so I thought I’d try to clear the air.

Your scissors jack is for changing tires. You put them on the frame rail between the two notches, as it says on the scissors jack instructions. If you use your scissors jack to raise your car, you cannot put your jack stands in the same frame rail place between the two notches. Using jack stands on another part of the frame rail near the notches might bend your frame rail (see pics), unless you have special jack stand adapters (see below diagram) specifically made for the contour of the frame rail.

Unless you use a special jack stand adapter you might bend your frame rails

You need a floor jack, which you can put on the garage jack points or on the red coloured locations in the above diagrams, on the midline of the car. Once jacked up you can put your jack stands on the 4 frame rail areas between the two notches.

Altima lift points: garage jack points and safety stand points

I was east of Birchmount Road driving westbound on Sheppard Avenue, in the curb lane, after shopping at Walmart and No-Frills. The weather was cloudy but visibility was at least 1 km clear. Temperature was around 15 degrees Celsius. The roads were wet but water was not pooling. I was driving at below the speed limit with no cars in front of me for 20 metres. . As I approached the intersection of Birchmount and Sheppard, thirty metres ahead of me I see a black car in my lane, the curb lane, traveling westbound on Sheppard, enter the intersection. This car was then hit by another black car going northbound on Birchmount but turning left or westbound on to Sheppard.

The debris cloud that shot up in the air was quite high, over 4 car height’s high. The first black car’s left side bumper corner was the largest piece of the debris. There were no squealing of brakes nor honking of horns from either vehicle. The first car left the road and went onto the pedestrian sidewalk, about equidistant between Birchmount Northbound and Sheppard Westbound.

Traffic immediately started to flow northbound on Birchmount, blocking my car. No cars stopped to help. Traffic southbound was blocked by the crash and could not move.

After about 5-8 seconds, a white cloud of some vapour started pouring out of the first black car. After a further 5 seconds the male driver exited the vehicle from his front driver’s door. The door’s movement seemed stiff or jerky. He had an awkward position in his left arm, hand straight, elbow bent and forearm pointing downward. He was wearing dark clothes.

A couple of seconds after the second car’s right rear passenger car door opened to reveal passengers, but they did not exit the vehicle. I recall the passenger had beige or khaki coloured pants.

I continued to have a red light and came to a complete stop at the intersection. I turned right on Birchmount north and immediately into the fire station, which is just north of the traffic light. Note that there were many people waiting at the bus stop and intersection that were looking at the crash site and I was extra cautious in my turn because I knew that they were not watching traffic. I hit the fire station buzzer and a white guy in a blue shirt answered the door. I recall he had yellow lettering on his shirt but cannot recall what it said. I told him there had been an accident at the intersection no less than 30 seconds ago and he said that he would go over to take a look. As I entered my car to leave the fire station I saw him in front of the rightmost truck (facing the station) of the two trucks in the garage. I then entered Birchmount north and drove home.

GM-Segway concept electric vehicle

Here’s a really cool concept vehicle that could go a long way in reducing our dependence on oil. The GM-Segway concept vehicle is small, light and efficient. It’s electric powered. The absence of a sunroof would make it an interesting cross between a car and a motorcycle.

___It will probably be illegal on Ontario roads. Look, no huge front bumper, so will not withstand crash tests. The front bumper looks like a piece of bent sheet metal.

___We from Ontario are over regulated and not a little. As the world moves forward we are denied new electric vehicles due to our over-cautious safety laws. It is not that all our vehicles are as safe as your full size Buick or Town car. We also have motorcycles, scooters, mopeds and bicycles that ply our streets. We even have electric bicycles. None of them have front bumpers that need to pass a safety crash test. They all take the same risks car drivers do when driving on our streets. Why is it that two wheeled vehicles are Ok on Ontario roads but not small electric vehicles?

The ZENN (zero emissions, no noise) electric car is roughly the size of a Mini-Cooper, ~ $14,000.

___What happened to the personal choice of Canadians? Europe and Asia are very used to high gas prices and have changed accordingly to embrace smaller vehicles. They have so many more small cars than in North America, but also have a strong 2 wheeled tradition as well. I cannot say that most Canadians would embrace the small electric car market, but we now do not even have the choice.

___There is no question that small electric vehicles are not powerful enough to safely drive on a highway, but then again this is true for mopeds, small scooters and small motorcycles. These vehicles are therefore licensed differently. A small electric car can be similarly licensed.

___Interestingly, Canada already has two electric vehicle manufacturers, yet neither can legally sell cars in Ontario. It is sad in a way, when your home country is not broad minded enough to accept your own vehicle. Zenn and Dynasty have a rough road ahead in Ontario, and I wish them well. Maybe the Ontario government would rather wait for the offerings comping out of China?

Almost his complete collection of Hotwheels

Hotwheels. So many cars, picked up from here and there. Does he really play with them all? Not. Nevertheless there are all sorts of cars, trucks, emergency vehicles and a couple of motorcycles. We needed 2 cases to put house all his cars, and we keep finding more in the house. They’re like weeds. It’s all for fun.

Hotwheels ramps down stairs, blurry

Guess who took the blurry photo, that’s close in height to the handrail?