Other interesting…or not…EPA facts.

Baja Phoenix 250, FY250, Qlink LD250, XTREME Montana 250 were all manufactured by Guangzhou Panyu Huanan Motors Group Co., Ltd.

That the Baja 250 sold through some Pet Boys is the same as the once offered Qlink Legend 250 and Xtreme Montana 250 are all the same motorcycles.

These were EPA complaint as of 2008 and through FYM-USA Group LLC. The WMI for these would be LE8 (initial three characters of their VIN).

Guangzhou Panyu Huanan Motors Group Co., Ltd is the OEM manufacturer of the SACH Mad Ass.

QLINK
http://i784.photobucket.com/albums/y...FYM/Legend.jpg
BAJA
http://i784.photobucket.com/albums/y...S/FYM/Baja.jpg
XTREME
http://i784.photobucket.com/albums/y...a_250-2006.jpg

234cc, 12kw @8500rpm

HI-BIRD, SENDA, KOAYENG are all Chinese marketing brands in the same “group”
Chongqing Hi-Bird Motorcycle Industry Co., Ltd was actively importing in 2008 to the USA.

One of the brand names Senda has these interesting models, they are not EPA approved, to the best of my knowledge.
http://i784.photobucket.com/albums/y...1232831179.jpg
http://i784.photobucket.com/albums/y...9132935491.jpg
http://i784.photobucket.com/albums/y...2395219711.jpg

Senda obviously have a designer I like. Has done things right on all three types of motorcycles. I could buy anyone of those - even the cruiser.

I think Senda has an affection for Harley, the cruiser they are offering is based on the Honda Rebel cruiser as above and adds design elements of the HD Iron.

http://i784.photobucket.com/albums/y.../09iron883.jpg

I been looking over EPA regulations and see that applications for a certificate of conformity must be submitted for each model every year. So what is listed each year represent the models for that year, however there are late submission and they get added after the year has already begun.

From 2008-2011 I can see that certain models are still being offered for sale but the "manufacturer" are no longer importing any new models.

Also “manufacturers” submit application for a certificates, the EPA does not test unless they suspect fraud in the application, then they can and if they find falsifications or fraudulent activity they can fine the “manufacturer” as much as $32,000.00 per motorcycle.

If a OEM produces a model that is configured to conform to EPA regulations and has a certificate of conformity under its name anyone can import it, if its not under their name it can be resubmitted under another “manufacturers” name.

Any name that appears under “manufacturer” or OEM manufacturer both assume liability for that compliance and related regulations.

Very few if any “manufacturers” configure their models to meet EPA conformity in the United States. That configuration is most often done by the OEM, that being the actual manufacturer. The term “manufacturer” in the context of the EPA/DOT can represent an OEM, a marketing brand name, distributor or a contracted agent that tested and confirms the actual compliance. Both names assume shared liability of meeting compliance.

If both names are the same then it is only the actual manufacturer as the OEM that carries total liability to the models conformity.

The VIN or Vehicle Identification Number defines the OEM or Original Equipment Manufacturer and that being who actually makes the model. The first three characters of any VIN are the WMI or World Manufacturer Identification. The OEM declared to the EPA/DOT must be registered with the NHSTA or National Highway Safety Administration and within that a decoding document on file. That decoding document breaks out the 17 character code as it defines each model and were it is actually manufactured.

The system is related but not managed relationally, the left hand cannot see what the right hand does. The data is related but not linked relationally. That means that there is not a system that can see it all in one set at once. That being the case I can see violations in the separated data sets. I can see breaches in regulations in particular when models do not have the OEM listed and or that OEM is not registered with the NHSTA.

Sometimes in any industry the worst practices displace the best practices. That’s about “everyone doing it that way” and more or less about monkey see and monkey do. It also has to do with those that think gaming it or buying it off is smarter? However what goes around comes around, to assume public information is private is not correct. The Sunshine Legislation has not yet taken full affect, it needs to and then the best practices become the dominant force and consumers benefit in that.

There is crazy number of products listed with the EPA for 2008; this one manufacturer applied for certificates in 2008 for all of these models.

YY50QT, YY50QT-10, YY50QT-11, YY50QT-12, YY50QT-13, YY50QT-14, YY50QT-15, YY50QT-2, YY50QT-20, YY50QT-21, YY50QT-22, YY50QT-25, YY50QT-26, YY50QT-3, YY50QT-4, YY50QT-5, YY50QT-6, YY50QT-7, YY50QT-8, YY50QT-9

YY50QT-9
http://i784.photobucket.com/albums/y...2211323768.jpg


YY125T-10, YY125T-12, YY125T-19, YY125T-25, YY125T-26, YY125T-4, YY125T-5, YY125T-6, YY125T-7, YY125T-8, YY150T-10, YY150T-11, YY150T-12, YY150T-26, YY150T-4, YY150T-5, YY150T-6, YY150T-7, YY150T-8, YY150T-9

YY150T-11
http://i784.photobucket.com/albums/y...1220169055.jpg


The 125cc and 150cc are all listed on the same certificate? I can only assume that the 150cc is a bored out version of the 125cc? That it is exactly the same and configured exactly the same for emissions. That would make an engine family and the larger being compliant would make the smaller as well?

These can be, theoretically, some of the scooters being sold today they would all would be 2008 models since Benzhou has no certificates after that year. Applications have to be filed for each model year.

Then importing these again would be nothing more then resubmitting the same application as done in 2008. That being if nothing changed and the models were in fact conforming in the first place?

Actually Benzhou has a certificate for 2010....they had or have partners selling for them today. They submitted no new applications for 2011.

This manufacturer applied for all of these models in 2008.

WY125T-10, WY125T-11, WY125T-16, WY125T-17, WY125T-20, WY125T-21, WY125T-23, WY125T-41, WY125T-50, WY125T-52, WY125T-55, WY125T-56, WY125T-57, WY125T-58, WY125T-9, WY150-5, WY150T, WY150T-12, WY150T-15, WY150T-16, WY150T-17, WY150T-18, WY150T-2, WY150T-20

GP1-R 170, Matrix II 170, Powermax 170

GP1-R 150, Matrix II 150, Powermax 150

WY50QT, WY50QT-10, WY50QT-11, WY50QT-16, WY50QT-20, WY50QT-28, WY50QT-30, WY50QT-36, WY50QT-37, WY50QT-4, WY50QT-40, WY50QT-41, WY50QT-42, WY50QT-43, WY50QT-44, WY50QT-45, WY50QT-5, WY50QT-6, WY50QT-7, WY50QT-8

WY50QT, WY50QT-10, WY50QT-11, WY50QT-16, WY50QT-20, WY50QT-28, WY50QT-30, WY50QT-36, WY50QT-37, WY50QT-4, WY50QT-40, WY50QT-41, WY50QT-42, WY50QT-43, WY50QT-44, WY50QT-45, WY50QT-5, WY50QT-6, WY50QT-7, WY50QT-8

The first set are all covered under one certificate and for the Engine type:157QMJ the engine offered on this model they call the Zoomer 150.



http://i784.photobucket.com/albums/y...150-main41.jpg

For 2011 they certified these models: DLX 150, PILOT 150, RETRO 150, VX 150, WY125-11, WY125T-21, WY125T-23, WY125T-30, WY125T-65, WY125T-74, WY125T-75, WY125T-9, WY150-5, WY150T-16, WY150T-20, WY150T-3, WY150T-33, WY150T-37, WY150T-41, WY150T-44

There is also this model YY150T-B
http://www.benzhougroup.com/YY150T-B.html

http://i784.photobucket.com/albums/y...295378375d.jpg

Distributed T’NG which stand for Twist and Go? Formal name is CMSI INC.
http://i784.photobucket.com/albums/y...ou/Baja_07.jpg

Here is a dealer http://www.zootscoots.com/tng.html

Benzhou Vehicle Industry Group Co., Ltd. also goes by YiYing then also North American Imports and CMSI are “manufacturers” the former out a Alpharetta Georgia marketed as Crossrunner…. that is out of business.


Why they failed?


The identical models being sold online for $1,200.00 delivered and then did the markup for team spirit hurt the sales? NO, according to Crossrunner “it was unprecedented government regulations”
So why market them as a “a green urban vehicle” and then cry damn the EPA and US customs. jeez...How can anyone save the Planet with all these damn regulations?

Save the Planet… Go Team…did not work better then sell them online for less? The models got auctioned and came back to who... the online vendor?….its quite a system.

For 2010 triplicate certificates existed for Benzhou for YY150QT-10 engine code BZ157QMJ1100078 under YiYing, North American and CMSI.
Then duplicate for models with the 49cc engine BZ139QMB1100004
under Yiying and North America.

Products being imported under so many names and with so little difference from others....its not surprising the EPA would want to verify them.

It’s not a question of “who makes that one model” It’s a matter of how many different manufactures make that one model. In that is competition not on the different models its solely on cost. The cost being the total cost to manufacture, distribute and support, referred to as TC.

Then within that there are the same models from different manufactures, which can have varying quality across those and even within the production runs out of each. Without separated identification you have varying quality across all the models.

That scenario is not lacking competition it is actually hyper competitive. In that it is a non-profit model overall and the default being a break-even and in that drives cost cutting. The result of that is less and less quality and less and less support. Because those cost money and it's all driven by the lowest cost.

Multiple manufacturers offering identical models only compete on costs and in that sacrifice quality and customer service and support. Unless you as consumers can see a physical difference you cannot see any real difference.

That is why identifying the manufacturer can help build a reputation, but not without good quality and related support. It's why it would be best to not make the same models but better to make different models. It would also be better to only have a single distribution system. To only sell through one distributer and in that keep track of what is selling and it's related reliability after the sale.

This is who makes them…
This is how many are in the market…
This is how many are on the road….
This is how many have been scrapped….

I would say that government does track all the above, but just not relationally and that is in as linked sets of information the consumer can view. If you could then you may not chose the cheapest you may actually choose the model that last longest with the least recorded troubles?

I like break-even business models, in that is not a matter of nobody getting paid, it's about nobody making a profit. Everyone that contributes something gets compensated, its just that nobody gets rich off it.