Discussion
I'm not sure what you are complaining about? Noisy exhaust, too be expected.
Parts missing that are designed to be on the bike, that sounds like an advisory to me. You have to expect a bit of ass covering. The next tester might not care.
If this was a failure, I could understand why you would be a bit miffed.
Parts missing that are designed to be on the bike, that sounds like an advisory to me. You have to expect a bit of ass covering. The next tester might not care.
If this was a failure, I could understand why you would be a bit miffed.
Yeah they are tightening up on stuff. I had a fail for lack of red reflector this year....WOW......An E marked end can could be fine, but then you could be running headers without a cat generating more noise than standard. Thankfully at this time no noise tests for bikes, its just at discretion of tester. Im sure noise tests will come.
bogie said:
Yeah they are tightening up on stuff. I had a fail for lack of red reflector this year....WOW......An E marked end can could be fine, but then you could be running headers without a cat generating more noise than standard. Thankfully at this time no noise tests for bikes, its just at discretion of tester. Im sure noise tests will come.
They haven't put them on for cars yet, so I'd be surprised 
xstian said:
I'm not sure what you are complaining about? Noisy exhaust, too be expected.
Parts missing that are designed to be on the bike, that sounds like an advisory to me. You have to expect a bit of ass covering. The next tester might not care.
If this was a failure, I could understand why you would be a bit miffed.
Not complaining, just a bit perplexed. I'm not bothered about the exhaust, it's all legit. But the belly pan thing just seemed oddParts missing that are designed to be on the bike, that sounds like an advisory to me. You have to expect a bit of ass covering. The next tester might not care.
If this was a failure, I could understand why you would be a bit miffed.
I'd just take it as a qualified mechanic who's been tasked with assessing the roadworthiness of a vehicle passing a professional comment.
He's advising you your exhaust is loud and some bodywork is missing. He's covered by mentioning it and hasn't caused you any problems by doing so.
He's advising you your exhaust is loud and some bodywork is missing. He's covered by mentioning it and hasn't caused you any problems by doing so.
bogie said:
Yeah they are tightening up on stuff. I had a fail for lack of red reflector this year....WOW......An E marked end can could be fine, but then you could be running headers without a cat generating more noise than standard. Thankfully at this time no noise tests for bikes, its just at discretion of tester. Im sure noise tests will come.
No cats, I got it, new, 19 years ago! (where did that time go?)Just wait 'til I bung on the full Titanuium Akrapovic system I've got hold of
bogie said:
Yeah they are tightening up on stuff. I had a fail for lack of red reflector this year....WOW......An E marked end can could be fine, but then you could be running headers without a cat generating more noise than standard. Thankfully at this time no noise tests for bikes, its just at discretion of tester. Im sure noise tests will come.
I've been getting pulled for missing red reflector since around 2012. Always had a little stick on one handy for for MOT time ever since. You've been lucky! Zarco said:
bogie said:
Yeah they are tightening up on stuff. I had a fail for lack of red reflector this year....WOW......An E marked end can could be fine, but then you could be running headers without a cat generating more noise than standard. Thankfully at this time no noise tests for bikes, its just at discretion of tester. Im sure noise tests will come.
I've been getting pulled for missing red reflector since around 2012. Always had a little stick on one handy for for MOT time ever since. You've been lucky! jr6yam said:
bogie said:
Yeah they are tightening up on stuff. I had a fail for lack of red reflector this year....WOW......An E marked end can could be fine, but then you could be running headers without a cat generating more noise than standard. Thankfully at this time no noise tests for bikes, its just at discretion of tester. Im sure noise tests will come.
No cats, I got it, new, 19 years ago! (where did that time go?)Just wait 'til I bung on the full Titanuium Akrapovic system I've got hold of
Which begs the question of "discretionary" noise limits judged by MOT tester. Just how loud is too loud ? when you can hear a bike coming 2 miles away on full chat at midnight when you are trying to get to sleep, do you think "ooohhh that sounds nice" or something else ?
ar-em-en said:
He's covered by mentioning it and hasn't caused you any problems by doing so.
Thing is with the MOT history all online now a potential buyer will see that and maybe think hold on why is bodywork missing, was it crashed or tracked etc?Fair enough OP could have saved himself the bother by just fitting it for the test but I still think its a dick move by the tester to take the time to write an advisory for it.
bogie said:
jr6yam said:
bogie said:
Yeah they are tightening up on stuff. I had a fail for lack of red reflector this year....WOW......An E marked end can could be fine, but then you could be running headers without a cat generating more noise than standard. Thankfully at this time no noise tests for bikes, its just at discretion of tester. Im sure noise tests will come.
No cats, I got it, new, 19 years ago! (where did that time go?)Just wait 'til I bung on the full Titanuium Akrapovic system I've got hold of
trickywoo said:
Thing is with the MOT history all online now a potential buyer will see that and maybe think hold on why is bodywork missing, was it crashed or tracked etc?
Fair enough OP could have saved himself the bother by just fitting it for the test but I still think its a dick move by the tester to take the time to write an advisory for it.
I'd been having a 'tinker' before I took it for the MOT, never crossed my mind it would be an issueFair enough OP could have saved himself the bother by just fitting it for the test but I still think its a dick move by the tester to take the time to write an advisory for it.
It won't happen again...
Probably best to leave it off, last time I took my bike for a service and MOT I was half way to Ireland before I realised they hadn’t tightened the belly pan bolts properly.
One had already fallen out with the other half way there.
Lesson learned, make sure you still give it a check after someone else has done some work.
One had already fallen out with the other half way there.
Lesson learned, make sure you still give it a check after someone else has done some work.
trickywoo said:
ar-em-en said:
He's covered by mentioning it and hasn't caused you any problems by doing so.
Thing is with the MOT history all online now a potential buyer will see that and maybe think hold on why is bodywork missing, was it crashed or tracked etc?Fair enough OP could have saved himself the bother by just fitting it for the test but I still think its a dick move by the tester to take the time to write an advisory for it.
Not blaming the op at all. That sort of advisory wouldn't bother me in the slightest in terms of inspecting a bike with the intention of purchasing it I just don't think the tester did anything wrong by being entirely factually correct by noting something was missing when they inspected it.
I'd have a word with the MoT tester. Unattached bodywork that is not structural is not part of the MoT.
https://www.mot-testing.service.gov.uk/documents/m...
https://www.mot-testing.service.gov.uk/documents/m...
Gassing Station | Biker Banter | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff