M.O.T's..or lack of 'em..

[FergieinFranc...]

We don't have MOT's here in France on bikes...


What do you all recon.... would you like to get rid of them, or keep them ? ........... ..
____________________
Prendre garde au temps entre le chien et le loup

You don't scare me....I've got a daughter...

[Lord Percy]

Well I now know to never buy a motorbike in France.

[Matt B]

[MarJay]

You will soon. the EU are bringing in a europewide MOT.
____________________
British beauty: Triumph Street Triple R; Loony stroker: KR1S; Track fun: GSXR750 L1; Commuter Missile: GSX-S1000F; Cheap project: CBR900RR FireBlade
Remember kids, bikes aren't like lego. You can't easily take a part from one bike and then fit it to another.

[J.M.]

I don't think that it's an inherently necessary thing here for bikes as the majority of bikers keep their bikes in a safe condition because their lives literally depend on it.

Although it helps to diagnose things such as worn bearings and shocks, that inexperienced owners (like myself) may not notice.
____________________
2004 R1 & 2018 XSR900

[Robby]

I like the MOT. For £30 someone spends 40 minutes giving my bike a good check over. Something that has been gradually wearing out (so I haven't noticed) is plain to them as something that has worn past "a little knackered" into "dangerous".

I like that is still mostly a test to check if a vehicle is safe. I'm concerned about any proposals to investigate emissions, non-standard (but safe) parts, or anything which removes the tester's discretion.

That said, my bike did pass the last MOT with head bearings so worn they didn't just click or clunk, but had 5 degrees of movement inside the knackered spot on the races.

[JP7]

I know the annual MOT is a load of grief, but to be honest I wouldn't want to do without it. I don't think I'd want to see it go to every two years either, as they were considering not so long ago.

I am not technically minded, and it is reassuring for me to have it checked over every year.

[DrSnoosnoo]

When buying a vehicle from a stranger, with a recent mot you know its considered safe by a professional. And not just been totally shagged by dick head owner
____________________
I'm Sam; Northern, Ginger, Lover
Did have: '95 ZZR600 '83 CG125 '97 ZZR1100 '15 Hypermotard 821 SP Do Have: '10 ZX10R

[Wafer_Thin_Ham]

On this forum the majority of us would probably still ride bikes in good condition, but you're forgetting about general population here. They can't be trusted to keep their cars in a roadworthy condition. To many they are just tool to be abused.
____________________
My Flickr

[kestrel]

[Listerfiend]

There's no MOT or any kind of roadworthy certificate in Western Australia (though there is in the other states) and on the face of it it seemed good.

However, what happens here is that cops can stop you and look over your bike / car and if they feel like it they can 'defect' you and you then have to take your bike / car 'over the pits'. Doesn't have to be much, brake light out, tyre that's perfectly legal but 'we'll just check it out', dirty car engine! Also seeing you drive like a goose seems to be a good enough reason.

It's a royal pain in the arse when it happens

[Irn-Bru]

MOTs are definitely a good thing, the state some people let their vehicles get in is shocking. Even if you are good with upkeep they might pick up on things you missed. My local bike MOT place is great, comfy sofa, TV and free coffee plus they don't care if you have a loud pipe fitted.
____________________
KTM 990 SMT & Suzuki DR-Z 400 SM

[stonesie]

[Dave70]

[yampug]

dealer mot...total pain in the arse, local friendly bike garage bike...marvelous happy to go there have a chat about bike stuff he gives my bike a quick once over and gives the mot certificate.

only made the mistake of going to a dealer for mot once, sir your bike has failed on ...... really can you show me which part it is that's broken so i can repair it "no sorry sir we can't do that" it's written on the print out fail sheet wankers.

[James83]

I like the MOT. I know plenty of people who get exactly as much work done as the MOT tells them they need and no more, clearly not capable of maintaining a vehicle of their own accord. People who would have pistons grinding against discs if there wasn't a legally required inspection.

[P.addy]

I'm all up for the MOT as Robby says, gradual wear probably feels normal so you won't really notice. I'm not fantastic with spanners but am yet to have a bike fail its MOT which much say something

Cars however. Fail every time

[martyn107]

I agree, I like the idea of the MOT. Granted at my last one everyone stood about for 15 minutes waiting for the clock to tick past a viable time for a test.

[Matt B]

[totalllama82]

I'm all in favour of the MOT as It (tries) to ensure a basic level of safety in vehicles.
____________________
Gone: Haotian HT125-8 / Yamaha YZF 600R Thundercat / Kawasaki ZX9R C2
Current: Kawasaki ZZR 1400 A7F

[Pol Anorl]

another vote for having the mot, little piece of mind when buying a bike as it shows it shouldn't be utterly shagged, also does help to show you which parts are wearing out.
____________________
GOOD GAME BODYGUARD: https://i.imgur.com/8WePGgf.jpg
20:30:37 Pyro.: I don't sort of like men, I take every advantage to choke on dick.
Jewlio Iglesias: You live in Liverpool - Chances are, the front door has already been kicked off the hinges

[Teflon-Mike]

Just checked when the UK MOT was introduced and it was 1960, I thought it was a bit later, TBH; but surveys and reports of how many defective vehicles it took of the road, and how it impacted road safety stats, reducing accidents, I recall was quite dramatic.

It's cropped up a few times since then in debate; with suggestions of whether the 3-year new vehicle exemption from MOT ought to be removed, or extended to five years; among host of other suggestions, like approved modification inspections and the latest Euro-Wide 2-year vehicle test scheme.

Quite remarkeable, really that the UK MOT Test, has lasted over half the history of motor-vehicles, and pretty much the entire era of 'popular' motoring, with remarkably little 'change', and has consistantly come out of reviews and proposals, as a 'good' system, doing a 'good' job.

Just had a look to see if I could find proper stats on the test failures.; only one of relevence was that 1 in five cars fails its first MOT (at 3-years old).

What I wondered was how many cars and bikes, presented for test, passed 'first Time'. Taking a guess, I'd estimate its probably less than half, and a lot will be run right up to test date before things needed get fixed and done in a oner for the test.

Also recall a suggested stat or estimate that something like a third of all vehicles that have an MOT wouldn't actually pass an MOT, due to damage or wear and tear after test.

Couple of threads here recently about cars with only one head-lamp and the like... gives suggestion that the MOT doesn't eliminate ALL unroadworthy vehicles from UK roads... and far from; but it DOES reduce the number that are defective, and reduce HOW defective they may be.

Relying on owners discretion to maintain vehicles to a 'safe' standard? Nope. Yeah, a lot of bikers may be more enthusiastic about their maintenance, but its also incredible how selective they are about it. Many are more concerned to maintain the shinyness; and there are a lot of bikes out there with polished fairings, and hidden behind, rusty exhausts; others, where owners are very diligent maintaining 'performance' and making sure that they do regular oil changes... or who will shell out silly money for a fancy rear shcok-absorber or rear-shock set-up... and fit it to a linkage with knackered bushes. Standards, even on bikes that get a lot of attention are VERY patchy.

The MOT... as designed, sets a comprehensive all-round standard. It checks all the key areas for safety, and makes sure that not too much gets missed.

Some moan that some stuff is petty, and point out that there may be seriouse defects that the test cant pick up.

BUT time and time again, over over half a century; the MOT has endured, and been applauded for being a useful, practical and beneficial bit of beurocracy... and there ENT a heck of that about!

So yup! Definitely support it!
____________________
My Webby'Tef's-tQ, loads of stuff about my bikes, my Land-Rovers, and the stuff I do with them!
Current Bikes:'Honda VF1000F' ;'CB750F2N' ;'CB125TD ( 6 3 of em!)'; 'Montesa Cota 248'. Learner FAQ's:= 'U want to Ride a Motorbike! Where Do U start?'

[27cows]

MOT is worthwhile for most of us. Always nice to know that things are in at least acceptable condition (though I think the vast majority of us know full well if everything is OK without needing a bit of paper to confirm it).

Problem is, it doesn't really do much to make sure bikes/vehicles out there are safe. I've known people who basically put something MOT worthy on a bike - say a tyre, or set of brake pads - then put the old one back on once it's passed. Often to sell the bike, keeping the decent nick bits they have to make a bit more money on.

Also know people (myself included, once or twice) who have their bike a fairly appalling state of disrepair for 11 months of the year and just tart things up to get the ticket.
____________________
The RXS100: vehicle of choice for Chuck Norris

[Nb]

Im all for mots, as it keeps me in a job. What i did not realise is that to mot bikes you only need to have a bike licence apparently no formal qualifications are needed, just go on the 2 day course which a monkey could pass, demo test and thats it.
Almost fell off my chair when i was told that by our refresher trainer.
Our failure rate for cars at my place is almost 34%, if i took photos of all the dangerous shit ive seen on cars i could fill a book.
____________________
Cbr1100xx blackbird gone, mk4 golf gt tdi chav now
Colin1 wrote 'Im grateful for what i can get, which isnt all that much.'
Columbus travel insurance are crap!! Do not use!

[Clutchy]