Page 1 of 3
MOT Question
Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 12:49 pm
Author: Ginger Bear
Been trying to find some definitive answers on line, but so far I haven't found what I need to know.
Two questions;
My indicators have been completely removed, I know this wasn't a problem 'back in the day', but all I can find now is
"Indicators must be fitted & flash at a constant rate".
Next question;
I currently don't have a chainguard fitted. I do plan to fit one, but is it an MOT requirement?
Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 12:58 pm
Author: sanderz
Pre '86 and your exempt as far as im aware on indicators.
Think the chaingaurd isn't a requirement but could depend on the inspector to put down as 'advisory'
This isn't gospel but may help -
http://www.ukmot.com/bike/1-5.asp
Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 1:03 pm
Author: zed1015
A chainguard must be fitted if you have passenger footrests and must be a minimum of 6 inches long.
If no passenger footrests then no guard required.
Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 1:08 pm
Author: andyb1962
I had a TDM 850 in the late 90's with flat bars no indicators, no mirrors and as loud exhaust. It went through every time, i suppose it depends on how well you know your local MOT tester!
Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 1:18 pm
Author: z1bman
Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 1:29 pm
Author: Ginger Bear
Sanderz, it seems 1st August 1986 is the all important cut off date looking at the info in the link you posted, so I'm happy with that.
Rob?/Zed1015, the
"required with pillion footrests" thing was in the back of my mind, thanks for clarifying that.
Question now is, do I remove the rear pegs (which ain't completely fitted yet, just the brackets) & convince the tester my Two-Four seat is only a single seat fo my big arse, or go out and make meself a chainguard & leave the pegs alone?
Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 1:40 pm
Author: Mark Tiller
Mine passed with no chainguard and had rear footpegs fitted?
Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 2:00 pm
Author: Ginger Bear
Paul/Z1bman, Thats a really good link, some really interesting stuff there. But I can find no mention of chainguards, not that it really matters as I will fit one.
Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 2:26 pm
Author: Pigford
Ginger Bear wrote:Paul/Z1bman, Thats a really good link, some really interesting stuff there. But I can find no mention of chainguards, not that it really matters as I will fit one.
The MOT tester will take one look at your fat arse and realise there's no way you'd get a pillion on the back with a standard seat - let alone a 2:4
Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 2:32 pm
Author: z1bman
section 6.2
c. a drive chain/belt guard, insecure or fouling another component
Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 2:41 pm
Author: Ginger Bear
It doesn't say the machine would be rejected for having it missing in the way it says it would if a seat or footrest was missing.
Reason for Rejection
a. (i) A missing riders seat or any seat insecure
(ii) a missing or insecure footrest
b. a defect which is likely to impede the rotation of the rear wheel
c. a drive chain/belt guard, insecure or fouling another component
Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 5:39 pm
Author: big green bus
Steve I got pulled about still having the switch on the bars but no indicators fitted, just a thought.
Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 6:01 pm
Author: steve.w
big green bus wrote:Steve I got pulled about still having the switch on the bars but no indicators fitted, just a thought.
and one of mine failed for no rear pegs .. if the seats big enough for 2 its gotta have pegs
Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 6:28 pm
Author: Taffus
I butchered a sr650 guard to fit the gpz, doesn't have to up to your high stndards to get through the mot
Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 6:38 pm
Author: steve.w
Taffus wrote:I butchered a sr650 guard to fit the gpz, doesn't have to up to your high stndards to get through the mot
agreed mate im sure i saw on blue peter how to make one outta a fairy liquid bottle