CB72 Update

That's RTA as in Road Traffic Act, not a crash...

 

Yes. I. Know.

--
Krusty

'03 Tiger 955i
'02 MV Senna (for sale) '96 Tiger (for sale)
'79 Fantic Hiro 250 (for sale) '81 Corvette (for sale)

 

But the MOT still has to test that lights, if fitted, conform to the
rules, and is not in the least bit concerned as to what rules there
were when and where they were originally fitted.

 

^^^^^^^^^

Very important caveat that, & one which wasn't included originally.

--
Krusty

'03 Tiger 955i
'02 MV Senna (for sale) '96 Tiger (for sale)
'79 Fantic Hiro 250 (for sale) '81 Corvette (for sale)

 

I think the emergency services call crashes RTCs (Road Traffic Collisions)
nowadays, given that not many are truly "accidents".

 

not all traffic accidents are collisions. vehicle fires, for instance, or
inundations.

 

Yeah, I had to fit rear foglights to the Corvette & Eunos for precisely
that reason. I still don't see which point you say I was missing up
there ^^^ though. In fact it sounds like you're just agreeing with me -
if a bike had a right dipping headlight originally fitted, it won't
pass an MoT until it's replaced/modified.

--
Krusty

'03 Tiger 955i
'02 MV Senna (for sale) '96 Tiger (for sale)
'79 Fantic Hiro 250 (for sale) '81 Corvette (for sale)

 

Furry muff. In that case, it was a bit of a stupid comment. I was giving
you the benefit of the doubt.

 

Well, no, not really. It's basically exactly the same point, just with a
slight expansion which is mostly irrelevant, since imports are a separate
kettle of fish. UK regs are the ONLY ones that've ever mattered.

 

You mean like number plates now and Tony's cronies?

 

Why? The RTAs are a whole different ball game, & cover *way* more stuff
than an MoT. Saying I'm 'missing the point' because an RTA states
something, when the discussion is about MoTs, is a bit... strange.
Hence my comment.

--
Krusty

'03 Tiger 955i
'02 MV Senna (for sale) '96 Tiger (for sale)
'79 Fantic Hiro 250 (for sale) '81 Corvette (for sale)

 

OK, in that case, give me some examples of things that would normally
be required for an MoT, but aren't as they weren't originally fitted to
a vehicle that meets UK C&U regs (I presume that's what you mean by 'UK
regs).

--
Krusty

'03 Tiger 955i
'02 MV Senna (for sale) '96 Tiger (for sale)
'79 Fantic Hiro 250 (for sale) '81 Corvette (for sale)

 

ITYM "met at the time the vehicle was new".

Lots of little things like indicators, brake lights, fog lights, mirrors.

 

Oh sure, there's loads of specific age related stuff, it's the general
comment "you can't fail a bike for not having something that wasn't
originally fitted" that I disagree with.

E.g. I could go & build a new bike around a new frame, give it 14"
ground clearance so it doesn't need SVA, fit a rear light but *no*
headlight, take it down for an MoT, & it would pass according to you &
Naqerj.

--
Krusty

'03 Tiger 955i
'02 MV Senna (for sale) '96 Tiger (for sale)
'79 Fantic Hiro 250 (for sale) '81 Corvette (for sale)

 

Hmmm, maybe they could call them RTEs (Road Traffic Events) or RTIs (RT
Incidents), but then that would annoy Scots and Cockneys who will still
think it's RTA

 

Not really - there was an implicit assumption that it "originally" met
the then-current UK regulations. In other words, that no reg changes were
retrospective.

In the instance you give there, it wouldn't have met UK C&U/RTA regs at
the time it was first registered.

 

Not sure how you can make that assumption when Naqerj's original
example explicitly stated it would pass an MoT but 'be illegal on the
road'.

Neither would this mythical autocycle presumably, hence the reason it's
not road legal.

--
Krusty

'03 Tiger 955i
'02 MV Senna (for sale) '96 Tiger (for sale)
'79 Fantic Hiro 250 (for sale) '81 Corvette (for sale)

 

IIRC it was April 1st 1980

 

can you still have a "daylight" MOT for things with no lights?

 

Indeed, but AS did quote the word "daylight" which I'm sure just means
that he meant it as superfluous.

Probably.