NCT test for bikes

Hotblack Desiato

murphaph wrote: »

Yes you do, you said above that cars and trucks should be tested!

You asked me if they should retain the NCT, I said yes, but it doesn't really bother me that much one way or the other. OK?

What if the number of bikes on the road increased? Much of your argument centres around the relatively small number of PTWs on the road, but that can change especially as traffic deteriorates.

If the number of bikes increased significantly, then the economics of running a test for bikes would improve correspondingly.

Shane_C

galwaytt wrote: »

Well if it is, they can start at home first - Belgium, home of the EU. There's no test for bikes there.......

Here, it's unlikely to happen as it is uneconomic - remember the NCT system is run by a private company, for a profit. If they NCT'd a 100,000 bikes they'd never even pay for the equipment.

Thank God for Capitalism

The most important point here.

Also there are no European guidelines governing motorcycles at the moment.
A quick search found this: europa.eu

murphaph

ninja900 wrote: »

it doesn't really bother me that much [if cars and trucks are tested or not]

I'm surprised by that. I don't think it would be wise to allow HGVs to go untested and it would be counter to most every civilised country in the world. You'd end up with all sorts if death traps failing to stop at the bottom of a hill.

ninja900 wrote: »

If the number of bikes increased significantly, then the economics of running a test for bikes would improve correspondingly.

But earlier you said your objection to testing had nothing whatsoever to do with the cost as I asked you if it was €5 for a test would you mind and you said yes.

Your reasons for objecting to compulsory testing have shifted and I get the feeling you just don't want someone touching your bike. Would that be fair enough to say?

Hotblack Desiato

murphaph wrote: »

I'm surprised by that. I don't think it would be wise to allow HGVs to go untested and it would be counter to most every civilised country in the world. You'd end up with all sorts if death traps failing to stop at the bottom of a hill.

Where did I say they should go untested?
When you asked me, I said earlier that there is a good reason to retain the DoE because of commercial pressures etc. coming before safety.
I also said that there's no reason to do away with the NCT, it's there, it's working well enough and has got some (but by no means all) of the death traps off the road.
Yes, I did say I wasn't that bothered about the regulations affecting other vehicles though, I ride a bike every day, drive a car once a week if that (wife's car, I've never owned one) and don't have a truck licence. I don't see mechanical problems with other vehicles as a big threat to my safety on the bike, it's the drivers that worry me.

But earlier you said your objection to testing had nothing whatsoever to do with the cost as I asked you if it was €5 for a test would you mind and you said yes.

In the real world it will NOT cost €5. But if it did, I'd still think it an unnecessary inconvenience with no benefit to me.

Your reasons for objecting to compulsory testing have shifted

No, they haven't. It's possible to object to something for more than one reason :rolleyes:

and I get the feeling you just don't want someone touching your bike. Would that be fair enough to say?

ONE of the reasons I don't want it is that I don't want some half trained grease monkey touching my bike, yes. I wouldn't let 95% of the so-called "qualified bike mechanics" in this country touch my bike.

GS.ie

An nct for bikes (speaking as a biker) would be good as it might make some of the brain dead couriers replace the rear tyre before it gets to shiney.

Hotblack Desiato

GS.ie wrote: »

An nct for bikes (speaking as a biker) would be good as it might make some of the brain dead couriers replace the rear tyre before it gets to shiney.

That's a Garda enforcement issue, checking tyres every two years isn't nearly good enough.

Oldskoolrod

murphaph wrote: »

Why will you have to swap your exhaust? If it's not road legal you shouldn't use it on the road.

I have just moved from the UK, and ride a Harley Davidson. Now in the UK my exhaust system is deemed illegal because of the noise level, but have you heard a Harley with a stock exhaust, sounds ****e, I mean how many times have you heard " sorry mate I didn't see you" after they have just knocked you off. At least with a loud exhaust they can't say "sorry mate I didn't hear you". I am a great believer in loud exhausts and have been for the last 26 years of riding, they get you noticed, unlike these Japanese sports bikes that you can't hear. Comments like you are making are just the start of legislation against bikers in general, and once they start they won't stop. So get a life , get on your bike and stop whingeing !!!!!! :cool:
You should be greatful you don't live in a country full of stupid legislation, if you like it that much move to the UK!!!

murphaph

Oldskoolrod wrote: »

murphaph wrote: »

Why will you have to swap your exhaust? If it's not road legal you shouldn't use it on the road.

I have just moved from the UK, and ride a Harley Davidson. Now in the UK my exhaust system is deemed illegal because of the noise level, but have you heard a Harley with a stock exhaust, sounds ****e, I mean how many times have you heard " sorry mate I didn't see you" after they have just knocked you off. At least with a loud exhaust they can't say "sorry mate I didn't hear you". I am a great believer in loud exhausts and have been for the last 26 years of riding, they get you noticed, unlike these Japanese sports bikes that you can't hear. Comments like you are making are just the start of legislation against bikers in general, and once they start they won't stop. So get a life , get on your bike and stop whingeing !!!!!! :cool:
You should be greatful you don't live in a country full of stupid legislation, if you like it that much move to the UK!!!

Twice the roads deaths per capita as the UK tells its own story my friend. Sometimes the odd rule or two is good.

Run_to_da_hills

ninja900 wrote: »

Total bollix! NCT for bikes would be a total waste of time and money.

Most riders know about the need for maintenance, our life depends much more on the condition of our machine than a car driver's does. Few of them seem to bother checking air or oil never mind anything else.

Not so, I think some form of bringing to attention the safety and maintenance of motorcycles in the form of a MOT would be a great idea as long as it doesn’t turn into a scam like the current DOE/NCT. If it was run in partnership with MAG Ireland. I also think bike maintenance should be made a cumpulsory part of the theory / practical test. There are plenty of idiots out there that dont bother adjusting their chains simply because they dont know how to do it.

I have seen couriers riding around the city on some heaps, bald tyres, brake leavers 1/2 missing, chains almost touching the ground. oil spilling from damaged fork seals on to the front brake disks, indicators missing, the list could go on, Those like your self that maintain your bike need not worry, but there are idiots out there that couldn't tell the difference between the front wheel from the back wheel.

Oldskoolrod

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Not so, I think some form of bringing to attention the safety and maintenance of motorcycles in the form of a MOT would be a great idea as long as it doesn’t turn into a scam like the current DOE/NCT. If it was run in partnership with MAG Ireland. I also think bike maintenance should be made a cumpulsory part of the theory / practical test. There are plenty of idiots out there that dont bother adjusting their chains simply because they dont know how to do it.

I have seen couriers riding around the city on some heaps, bald tyres, brake leavers 1/2 missing, chains almost touching the ground. oil spilling from damaged fork seals on to the front brake disks, indicators missing, the list could go on, Those like your self that maintain your bike need not worry, but there are idiots out there that couldn't tell the difference between the front wheel from the back wheel.

These are things the guarda should clamp down on, an MOT/NCT test would only be every 1 to 2 years, for one day, they have no bearing or control over the rest of the time, unless you are going to MOT a bike every five minutes it doesn't work. The guarda should be more vigilant and pull anyone riding an unroad worthy bike, and tell them to put things in order. You have to pay to keep your bike road worthy in the first place, so you don't want to be paying anyone else to tell you the same.
As for more accidents and deaths than the UK, take a look at the idiots in cars and vans that don't give a toss about bike riders, they are the reasons for most of the accidents, not the state of the bike they have just ploughed into, in most cases!!!!!!:cool:

Run_to_da_hills

Oldskoolrod wrote: »

These are things the guarda should clamp down on, an MOT/NCT test would only be every 1 to 2 years, for one day, they have no bearing or control over the rest of the time, unless you are going to MOT a bike every five minutes it doesn't work. The guarda should be more vigilant and pull anyone riding an unroad worthy bike, and tell them to put things in order. You have to pay to keep your bike road worthy in the first place, so you don't want to be paying anyone else to tell you the same.
As for more accidents and deaths than the UK, take a look at the idiots in cars and vans that don't give a toss about bike riders, they are the reasons for most of the accidents, not the state of the bike they have just ploughed into, in most cases!!!!!!:cool:

The Bike NCT would set a standard. It would get lazy / cheap scate bikers that dont bother their h*le to even check their bikes to do something about it every two years. A worn chain / sprocket, damaged fork seals, bald tyres can prove deadly. A good NCT mechanic can pick out all these faults out and make the owner get them sorted. The NCT can also set a standard that the cops can work off and can be enforced throughout the two year pieriod, ie, if a cop sees some idiot with a chain touching the ground he can give the owner 10 days to sort it out.

Steffano2002

Biking is expensive enough as it is. I'm against a NCT for bikes. I'm against ANYTHING that costs more money. (Have to pay over a grand just to get Irish plates so they can fook off now!)

Run_to_da_hills

Steffano2002 wrote: »

Biking is expensive enough as it is. I'm against a NCT for bikes. I'm against ANYTHING that costs more money. (Have to pay over a grand just to get Irish plates so they can fook off now!)

Some common sense statutory check ups once every two years shouldn’t cost too much, If it could save a few lives it would be worth it. It would also mean that people would look after and respect their bikes more.


One thing about the UK MOT is that its a good guide on EBay when you are looking for a scoot. An MOT failure is an instant put off. One knows in advance before taking the boat over that the bike should be in good order with a fresh MOT

Hotblack Desiato

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Some common sense statutory check ups once every two years shouldn’t cost too much

Depends on how it's done. If it's done through dealers like in the UK, it will be cheap but not worth a f**k, dealers doing their own tests on bikes they are selling... scams are common. If it's done like the NCT, it will be expensive unless the government subsidises it (fat chance). A testing infrastructure (and trained testers) will have to be created from scratch for a very small group of road users, it will cost a fortune and riders will be the ones paying.

If it could save a few lives it would be worth it.

Banning bikes would save more than a few lives - that's where this sort of 'logic' leads.
The number of accidents caused by mechanical failures is about 1%, even if it was a good bit more, let's say 3% you'd still only save one life a year, if you're lucky.

Why not just put a bit of effort into better driver and rider education, it would be FAR more effective.

One knows in advance before taking the boat over that the bike should be in good order with a fresh MOT

You serious??? The favourite trick of a dodgy dealer is to get a fresh MOT, it lulls the buyer into a false sense of security.

Run_to_da_hills

ninja900 wrote: »

Depends on how it's done. If it's done through dealers like in the UK, it will be cheap but not worth a f**k, dealers doing their own tests on bikes they are selling... scams are common. If it's done like the NCT, it will be expensive unless the government subsidises it (fat chance). A testing infrastructure (and trained testers) will have to be created from scratch for a very small group of road users, it will cost a fortune and riders will be the ones paying..

This is why i mentioned of a third party like MAG to have some involvement. The Government on their own are useless on this matter. Having roadworthy test "should" technically lower insurance costs which should weigh off the costs of these check ups.

ninja900 wrote: »

The number of accidents caused by mechanical failures is about 1%, even if it was a good bit more, let's say 3% you'd still only save one life a year, if you're lucky..

I would being that figure a lot higher when one would consider it a contributing factor, ie as i mentioned oil on the front calliper, oil on tyres, faulty lights, bald tyres and indicators.

ninja900 wrote: »

Why not just put a bit of effort into better driver and rider education, it would be FAR more effective...

I already suggested making a basic mechanical knowledge of the bike and servicing it incorporated into the driving test both A1 and A.

ninja900 wrote: »

You serious??? The favourite trick of a dodgy dealer is to get a fresh MOT, it lulls the buyer into a false sense of security.

The first thing I would ask is the MOT genuine, and let the guy know that I am travelling over from Ireland. If he is attempting to pull the wool over my eyes I would tell him up front that he is wasting his and my time. It dose not take much to spot something that is passed off. Fortunately any of the imported bikes that I bought in the past were good. (Except for German import Blade i that I knew had crash damage)

Hotblack Desiato

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

This is why i mentioned of a third party like MAG to have some involvement. The Government on their own are useless on this matter.

I can categorically assure you that MAG wouldn't touch something like this with a fifty metre bargepole, because it is not in riders' interests, it's just more unneeded bureaucracy and a further expense on riders.

The government have a strong record on just doing whatever the hell they want anyway, for an example just read the reports yesterday about bus lanes. They would love it if all bikers just went away, bikes are a "problem" that needs to be "dealt with" (compare and contrast to the official platitudes about cycling, whose safety record is worse per km travelled)

Having roadworthy test "should" technically lower insurance costs which should weigh off the costs of these check ups.

Nope, because it is only a factor in a very small percentage of accidents, even if you could eliminate ALL mechanical failures you would make eff all difference.

How many feckin' times do I have to say it:

The problem here ISN'T the roads.
The problem here ISN'T the vehicles.
The problem is the drivers (and riders.)
Anything else is just making excuses.


Over 90% of accidents are caused by driver/rider error, FACT. It would make far more sense to be testing the bloody drivers and riders every two years rather than their vehicles.

I would being that figure a lot higher when one would consider it a contributing factor, ie as i mentioned oil on the front calliper, oil on tyres, faulty lights, bald tyres and indicators.

Nope. Mechanical failures are only a contributing factor to a very small percentage of accidents.

Steffano2002

I agree with Ninja. No point in having an MOT. And if motorcyclists in Ireland aren't doing their daily/weekly/monthly checks, let them find out the hard way why they are vital to safe riding.

If you're stupid enough to ride a bike with bold tyres, slack chain, poor brakes, no lights, etc you shouldn't be on a bike.

Pigeon Reaper

Personally I couldn't give a sh*t if they kill themselves. Unfortunately they often crash into others with faulty bikes. Does anyone remember the biker who killed two people in Clonsilla on the bridge around two years ago? The bike had faulty brakes and the forks where already fubar when he hit a mother and child. If someone rides a dangerous bike they're probably more likely to ride dangerously too as they're willing to take risks. The same arguments where made about cars before the NCT but there is no doubt that it removes the worst of the deathtraps from the roads. It's the same with bikes some are simply too dangerous to be on the roads and if they crash they may take someone else with them.

Run_to_da_hills

Steffano2002 wrote: »

I agree with Ninja. No point in having an MOT. And if motorcyclists in Ireland aren't doing their daily/weekly/monthly checks, let them find out the hard way why they are vital to safe riding.

If you're stupid enough to ride a bike with bold tyres, slack chain, poor brakes, no lights, etc you shouldn't be on a bike.

Some people just don't have brains and have to be told what to do, I can remember not too long ago having to refuse a junior member of our club to travell with us because of the appaling condition of his bike. The same person would not think twice to take this bike to work the following day.

Steffano2002

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Some people just don't have brains and have to be told what to do, I can remember not too long ago having to refuse a junior member of our club to travell with us because of the appaling condition of his bike. The same person would not think twice to take this bike to work the following day.

And it is sad that we must share the roads with such idiots! :mad:

Hotblack Desiato

Pigeon Reaper wrote: »

Personally I couldn't give a sh*t if they kill themselves. Unfortunately they often crash into others with faulty bikes.

Often? How often?

Does anyone remember the biker who killed two people in Clonsilla on the bridge around two years ago?

Motorcycle - pedestrian collisions are thankfully very rare, no matter what the cause. Go look at the NRA/RSA Road Accident Facts. I think you'll also find that the main cause of that incident was almost certainly dangerously irresponsible riding. That's a matter for the Gardai not a bike test.

Run_to_da_hills wrote:

Some people just don't have brains and have to be told what to do

If they're that thick, you'd have to test the bike every two weeks not every two years... Fixing a bike up for a test and then neglecting it totally for two years (as many car owners do, even after the NCT) just isn't good enough for a bike. Tyres etc. deteriorate too fast, even on a low mileage. The real problem is that the roadworthiness laws we already have are not enforced. Visibly defective bikes should not be on the roads, but this requires constant Garda enforcement to achieve. A lot of these heaps are brought out for the summer on the back roads and not taxed or insured, a test has no relevance to these guys.