The UK government is asking for your opinion on making vehicles older than 40 years exempt from an MOT and maybe even 30 years old. That will make all my bikes MOT exempt even my "modern" Harley which is now 30 years old.

We have until November to voice our opinions.

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/roadworthiness-testing-for-vehicles-of-historic-interest

email (option): horror@blueyonder.co.uk

Interesting...
Personally I think total MOT exemption for any particular vehicle is a bad thing...

If a vehicle has been off the road for more than say, 2-3 years, it should at least have an initial test before it is returned to use...That would ensure everything is OK before it is used again (or after a rebuild) and would put a stop to all these bikes that bear no relationship to their stated description in the logbook other than the frame number!...

Further, human nature and/or a lack of the necessary skills will ensure there are many unsafe vehicles on the road without it...

I think the reasoning behind the original introduction of the MOT, namely, to prevent unsafe/poorly maintained vehicles being on the road, is as valid now as it was then...Ian

email (option): ian@wright52.plus.com

Most vehicles are scrapped after 15 years, so the ones that are older than 30-40 years are enthusiasts vehicles. The MOT test is getting more stringent and it's getting harder to get a 40 year old vehicle through a modern test as they weren't that good from the factory. I've just struggled to get a bike with drum brakes though an MOT when the brakes were as good as they were ever going to be.

Out of the bikes I've got, 6 bikes are road worthy, 3 of them are post 1960 so need an MOT but are still 30 years or older. I do a few long runs on my Harley and do about 600 miles a year and every year the MOT tester laughs and says how many miles you done this year It still costs me £30 on each bike. So for me it will be a good thing. I check my bikes over regularly and find cleaning a bike is a good way of finding loose nuts etc.

Most of us here would call themselves enthusiasts or collectors and it's not often we get given something from the government to help our passion. When the no MOT for pre 1960 was introduced it was viewed with scepticism on this forum, as people thought there was a hidden agenda and it is was somehow going to result in vintage vehicles being limited on mileage or something, it wasn't..! In fact the modern MOT wasn't allowing for the mechanics of girder forks and people were having trouble getting bikes tested. We've also been given the rolling 40 year Historic free tax, which I'm sure we love Again, lets not look a gift horse in the mouth, there aren't that many vintage vehicles on the road and it's not like everyone is going to be riding a death trap. Vehicles still need to be road worthy and can still be stopped by the police. It's us lot this is going to affect so lets take advantage of it.

email (option): horror@blueyonder.co.uk

Got to consider the potential to injure the rider and innocent public out there.
Vintage bikes do not have the power that those around 40 old years have.
Generally bike riders will favour those 40 year old bikes than ride vintage bikes.
It comes down to what is the potential numbers we will have on the road without any form of checks.

I would say maybe reduce the stringent checks but have a certificated process for those 40 years old.

Paul Crisp

I totally agree with Horror!

On the subject of MOTing a bike that has been rebuilt or laid up for years....How would the authorities know this? I've had some bikes on SORN for 10 years or more which are now all taxed. Ron

email (option): ronpier@talk21.com

Again, agree with Horror.

But Ian has a point, human nature, etc. so there will be a few 'death traps' out there.

Thinking of recent girder-fork excitement, even the best MOT will not pick on structural problems caused by internal corrosion/filler.

In general though, most older bikes will be ridden by older owners, with a bit of mechanical understanding, at modest speeds and due allowance for lousy brakes - and poor driving by modern vehicle owners.

Something positive from the Govt. i suppose, but always worried there's something else negative, around the corner ?

Further;

Reading the impact statesmen, one thing becomes apparent - the number of accidents caused by Pre1988 vehicles is insignificant compared to the post 1988 vehicle.

Also, why are we doing this now, to conform to EU requirements, when we will be leaving in the near future ?

I can see this proposal from both sides. Owners of vintage military vehicles of both 2 and 4 wheels, generally tend to be fairly mechanically minded and have an understanding of how to keep their vehicles reliable and safe.

But we are not the only owners of vintage vehicles. With bank interest rates being so low, for so long, many people have purchased "classic" vehicles as investments. Not all of these people use their vehicles or maintain them. My local MOT tester has told me stories of vintage cars bursting brake hoses when brake tested on the brake rollers. (During an optional MOT as Pre 1960).

Vehicles polished to within an inch of their lives and which looked to be in perfect condition. If the vehicle has a single line brake system, such a failure on the road under emergency braking could have serious results.

The big four safety items, are I believe Brakes, Steering, Lights and Wipers. When vehicles are laid up for months, brakes can often seize up or leak from seals. Not faults some owners would necessarily notice.

Whatever the outcome, it may be the insurance companies who end up dictating what proof of roadworthiness is needed.

I can see this proposal from both sides. Owners of vintage military vehicles of both 2 and 4 wheels, generally tend to be fairly mechanically minded and have an understanding of how to keep their vehicles reliable and safe.

But we are not the only owners of vintage vehicles. With bank interest rates being so low, for so long, many people have purchased "classic" vehicles as investments. Not all of these people use their vehicles or maintain them. My local MOT tester has told me stories of vintage cars bursting brake hoses when brake tested on the brake rollers. (During an optional MOT as Pre 1960).

Vehicles polished to within an inch of their lives and which looked to be in perfect condition. If the vehicle has a single line brake system, such a failure on the road under emergency braking could have serious results.

The big four safety items, are I believe Brakes, Steering, Lights and Wipers. When vehicles are laid up for months, brakes can often seize up or leak from seals. Not faults some owners would necessarily notice.

Whatever the outcome, it may be the insurance companies who end up dictating what proof of roadworthiness is needed.

I can see this proposal from both sides. Owners of vintage military vehicles of both 2 and 4 wheels, generally tend to be fairly mechanically minded and have an understanding of how to keep their vehicles reliable and safe.

But we are not the only owners of vintage vehicles. With bank interest rates being so low, for so long, many people have purchased "classic" vehicles as investments. Not all of these people use their vehicles or maintain them. My local MOT tester has told me stories of vintage cars bursting brake hoses when brake tested on the brake rollers. (During an optional MOT as Pre 1960).

Vehicles polished to within an inch of their lives and which looked to be in perfect condition. If the vehicle has a single line brake system, such a failure on the road under emergency braking could have serious results.

The big four safety items, are I believe Brakes, Steering, Lights and Wipers. When vehicles are laid up for months, brakes can often seize up or leak from seals. Not faults some owners would necessarily notice.

Whatever the outcome, it may be the insurance companies who end up dictating what proof of roadworthiness is needed.

Ian's point on human nature is key.

I see many old bikes at rallies which would not have passed an MOT in the 60's never mind today.

Ditto, old tractors or "Agricultural Vehicles". An old tractor with dodgy steering or loose wheels nuts can do a lot of damage even driven slowly.

email (option): sacombsashtrees@hotmail.com

I know from experience working in a British Bike shop and from running my own business that the concept of the majority of enthusiasts being either knowledgeable or competent is a myth...Peoples skill and knowledge levels cover a wide range encompassing both ends of the scale and everything in between...

In fact I would say the majority are not fully competent...They are enthusiastic amateurs with no formal engineering or motorcycle related training and as such are likely to (and do) make mistakes...

That is not to denigrate anyone who is not yet very far up the learning curve as all these skills can be acquired with time and effort, or to diminish the efforts of the large number of very good restorers out there.

It is just a simple statement of fact...

You only have to work in a bike shop and see the number of bikes that fail MOTs through poor maintenance to realise that fact, let alone to consider the wider possibilities for errors when a machine is 'restored'...

I feel confident in stating with certainty that the number of machines on the road that are not roadworthy WILL rise if the MOT test is removed from the equation...
Can that be considered a good outcome?...Ian

email (option): ian@wright52.plus.com

I've read many a quote from you Ian about the nanny state and being wrapped up in cotton wool, how you should have the freedom to make your own decisions etc. Here's the government doing that and letting us decide for once and now you want regulations and inspections

If the government is proposing this it usually means they have made up their minds and our opinion is a formality. They work on percentages and the number of historic vehicles on the road is very little, we might see them all the time but most people don't. I hope the people replying to this survey are more positive and have more faith in the owners of these vehicles. It would be great to be given something from the government instead of them taking from us and having to pay out all the time. The last thing we want is more tests for vintage vehicles.

email (option): horror@blueyonder.co.uk

In fact I haven't suggested in my posts on this subject what the Government should or shouldn't do...

I have challenged the erroneous (IMO) idea that motorcycle enthusiast/owners can be regarded as generally competent...My experience clearly shows that not to be the case for a measurably large percentage of the group..

If that is so, then there is no more reason to remove the MOT test for this sector of vehicle owners than there is for the rest of the population..ie. all other vehicle owners...
However, the assumption for that group, I assume, is that they are not competent to maintain their own vehicles and the MOT test remains in place..

It seems to me it has little to do with 'the nanny state', what people would like or the fact the government is 'giving' us something..

Surely it is more to do with whether vehicles on the road are more safe or less safe....and more safe has to be the better option...

If you agree that not everyone affected by this change is fully competent then the result must be an increase in poorly maintained vehicles...and that comes right back to the reasons why the MOT was introduced originally...

Of course if you believe everyone is fully competent then my observations don't apply...Everything indicates however that the logic is sound...

Finally, I'm not arguing for more tests for vintage vehicles, only that removing this particular one may not actually improve things...Ian

email (option): ian@wright52.plus.com

We live in an age where everything is controlled by law at some level, and I agree its nice when some of these laws are relaxed and humans are allowed to use their common sense again.

There will obviously be consequences, if there are too many then the government will do its typical knee jerk reaction and bring in another misdirected law.

I don't think they are asking our opinion, its unlikely they ever will again after Brexit, I think they are trying to save money, which is something I'm also in favour of.

Rob

email (option): robmiller11(a)yahoo.co.uk

Of course...it's all about saving money...and there was me thinking there might be some logic involved in a government proposal... ..A basic error on my part...Ian

email (option): ian@wright52.plus.com

I'm rather with Ian on this, not that it directly affects me as I've been out of the UK for twenty years and living in a country with no motorcycle MOTs at all...and the standard of motorcycle maintenance on anything more than five or six years old is absolutely bloody atrocious.

Even in gatherings with UK motorcycles, I reckon that about two thirds appear to be 'hanging' and show loose or leaking suspension, unadjusted chains and badly angled brake arms. I can't believe that they are any better maintained or assembled than appearances suggest. I wouldn't ride home on most of the bikes that dealers advertise for sale.

Motorcycles are probably the least of the problem though as structural corrosion is not usually a significant factor and defects are often on view...extend the situation to 1970s superbikes and things are going to go wrong. Commandos with badly set-up isolastics are killers. Z900s shouldn't be out there on cracked old tyres....

As things stand, despite all the frayed cables and 50% efficient brakes, the fact is that accidents with pre-1960 vehicles just don't seem to be significant and the old MOT was a pretty haphazard once a year test anyway...it didn't seem to prevent a lot of rough bikes even when it was compulsory.

There is a world of difference between a properly garaged collection like Ron's and something like a VW Combi that spends the summer being driven around with half a dozen junkies crammed into it and the winter parked on the front garden of a Brighton squat. One system is never going to be right for those two extremes.

email (option): 79x100@gmail.com

You only have to work in a bike shop and see the number of bikes that fail MOTs through poor maintenance to realise that fact, let alone to consider the wider possibilities for errors when a machine is 'restored'..

I too have trade experience & used to MOT bikes most fails were small jap bikes mainly ones on there first MOT.Larger bikes were better maintained not many fails it seems the commuter bikes have a hard time. Most of the people I know that have exempt bikes have good access to workshop tools, mates with tools & experience most are decent mechanics brit bikes tend to make you a good mechanic, cant really see a problem with proposed law apart from rot boxes being dragged out of barns/sheds and got running for the road. I think a basic MOT would be a good idea as said just brakes/lights/steering/ suspension at a reduced rate but mainly aimed at cars/vans/trucks.... Dave

Is it not true that these proposals to extend MoT exemption reflect the numbers game in that the best bang for the MoT buck is to concentrate on the higher risk vehicles.......which are not, I am led to believe, older vehicles maintained and driven by enthusiasts. Statistically, the safety of old bikes and cars is a non-issue. Does Government go any further than that? Should it?

Down here we have "histeric registration" for vehicles over 30 years old.
It came into being in the 60's originally for vintage vehicles that could not pass modern roadworthy testing.
We have brake testers that my 1975 Silver Shadow failed and when I went for a license test on my bantam I failed that because it could not get to 60kph in the space allocated to do the emergency brake testing.

Modern vehicles are not allowed to drip oil as all.
And very few mechanics could tell the difference between aceptiable "period" oil leaking and a dribbleing mess.

So down here the club the bike owner has his bike registered through does the roadworthy testing.
The caveat on that should a club plated bike be found unroadworthy then the club looses it's accreditation so every members bike is deemed no longer registered.

It works reasonably well and clubs tend to be self policing as a historic plate is $ 58/ pa and full registration is $ 600 / pa

So it might just work.
We knock back a lot of bikes, particularly for old hard tyres with cracked side walls. I fact we are stricter than a normal rego inspection with the exception of brake function , oil leaks & emissions.

email (option): bsansw1@tpg.com.au