really cant see this coming into force. The police make to much revenue from fixed penalty notices. All the tax the government will lose. plus its not enforceable. if its bikes its cars to ....... cutting nose off to spite face comes tome mind
Not quite sure what you mean by 'all the tax the government will lose'. It's the government who are proposing these changes. I know this government is dim but they must feel advantages outweigh any disadvantages as far as they're concerned. I would think it's totally enforceable. A bike has to stay exactly as it left the showroom. Your annual MOT test will be one way of checking as will every time you put it in for a service. Would you go to the trouble of switching everything back to standard? Doubt it. Will after-market manufacturers go to the trouble or cost of getting type-approval? If they don't the market will dwindle. Yes, it applies to cars but how many changes have you made to your car? In recent years I don't think I have ever altered my car in the same way I have changed every bike I've owned.
There are more modified cars out there than bikes trust me, we all know to swap parts for mot time pop the old cat exhuast back on if you have a jobsworth tester. the government dont know an important decision if it beats them up
I have downloaded and read the report. From what I have read the focus is on ‘tampering products’ and the advertising and sale of these products. It covers all vehicles or non-road mobile machinery (NRMM), like construction equipment. From what I can glean the focus is on emissions and it looks like they are trying to close the loophole the diesel scandal created, where false claims were made by many car manufacturers. In addition specific powers to cover automated vehicles which current legislation does not cover. Ok there are a lot more clever people out there than me, but I cannot see that the current paper opens the door for the removal of the ability to fit after market products unless they quote “bypass, defeat, reduce the effectiveness of or render inoperative a system, part or component (the product may be a physical part or component, hardware and/or software)” So changing out indicators or replacing an exhaust that meet noise levels etc does not seem to be to be included. So it is good that MAG are monitoring the progress of the consultation and hopefully in the final analysis it will not have the impact that is feared it will have.
My knowledge of the world of modified cars is rather limited so I will take your word for it. So are you suggesting there will be an outcry from these hordes of car owners against type-approval, so we can sit back and rely on them to do the job for us? Maybe you're right. That's if they know about it. Governments have a way of sneaking this type of proposal into law by doing the bare minimum when it comes to informing the public. Look at it logically, if the vast majority of car owners don't give a because they have no intention of modifying their vehicles, and the DfT can convince them it's all in a good cause, then they're going to ignore the issue and those that enjoy tinkering (or 'tampering') with their cars will be hugely outnumbered. Game over. My point is that if we don't speak out, or preferably shout out loud, then this could well happen and it's no good waiting for modified-car enthusiasts or anyone else to get vocal. If we don't say something then the government isn't going to know that we care. So say something. And as far as 'popping the old cat exhaust back on' at MOT time, are you having a laugh? It would take several days for me to return my bike to standard, in fact I couldn't. My local MOT man ignores slightly dodgy number plates (because he can claim that wasn't the one on the bike when he tested it) and as there is no requirement to actually measure exhaust noise, he's happy to use 'his judgement'. But present him with a bike with a dozen or more changes and he'd be hard pressed to turn a blind eye.
Hope you're right Wessa. Maybe I'm wrong about this issue and I agree that some of what's in the report can be interpreted in different ways, but isn't that always the way..and the intention? We shall see.
Agreed. I also completed the survey and the questions provide a better insight to the proposals.. it is well worth the effort to go through
Agreed. I also completed the survey and the questions provide a better insight to the proposals.. it is well worth the effort to go through
No doubt, the accessories manufacturers will stump up some money to help MAG, or represent themselves, if it comes to a fight. Ken.
Unfortunately much as I disagree with government interference I think the minority have f**ked it up for the rest of us. I live in a supposedly idyllic village and regularly have to listen to the Harley owners with their look at me straight out pipes reverberating for miles, and the 125 brigade with lots of noise and no go. I don't mind the noise but can appreciate that non-bikers get very pissed off. I was in the local bikers cafe bike night that has several signs saying 'we don't mind your exhaust but our neighbors do so please be respectful when leaving' needless to say there was a lot of guys that thought a 125 sounded great with no silencer and the neighbors would like a BMW SS1000R with race pipe on full throttle leaving and returning.
Wessa gives a very good account of what is being discussed at present by Government, it is all linked to meeting the climate programme i.e. emissions. There is already current legislation in place that allows for the prosecution for having an exhaust on any vehicle that exceeds the prescribed legal limit, the Motor Cycle Noise Act 1987 is up to date with all changes known to be in force on or before 18 October 2021. Look this up and it will become apparent that the majority of forum members are breaking the law (me included). The framework looked at covers "all road going vehicles" not just motorcycles, rally cars are heavily modified and cover public road sections, agricultural vehicles, the list goes on. It is certainly not a case of "a minority spoil it for others, with excessively loud exhausts", the reality is the Government have committed to climate change implementation. It is not about banning and the fitting of aftermarket parts, if that was the case you would not be able to fit anything that became faulty on any vehicle, other than OEM parts fitted by the makers dealer, could you imagine your car failing the MOT on say a track rod end, ball joint or wheel bearing etc, go along to your nearest motor factor spares shop, and are told "sorry sir we no longer sell aftermarket parts, Oh and you could not fit them if we did. This would affect tens of thousands of manufacturers, suppliers, retail outlets and much much more. Flipping heck we would have a shortage of HGVs on the roads, a lack of enough trained mechanics in dealerships. This is about "climate control" and proposed target dates for implementation. The Police are unable to cope with current pressures let alone any additional ones related to exhausts etc etc. You only have to look at the push for electric vehicles, the future banning of new gas boilers, LED bulbs have been brought in, you will be lucky to find any old stock domestic tungsten bulbs. E10 petrol imposed with further Ethanol added in the near future. I for one will carry on enjoying riding my bike with it's lovely Yoshimura exhaust sound. Ride safe all.
The biggest issue I see with this bill, is that if it goes ahead, and you can't fit aftermarket parts, then that's pretty much an attack on the lower income folks who can't afford the riduculous prices for OEM parts. I've got a 2003 yamaha FJR1300 at the moment, and there's a hole in the exhaust near the headers, which my 'repairs' are not helping now, so it's needing replaced. the choice is either a £250 aftermarket option, or an £800+ OEM system, as it's one piece (great idea there guys!). That's over half the value of the bike! A lot of people don't buy after market parts because they want the power or sound, it's because they honestly can't afford to replace them with OEM parts!
I would urge all forum members in the UK to respond urgently and directly to these proposals, if you go to www.smartsurvey.co.uk/s/ETVHG5 you can fill out the form outlining any objections and comments you may have, (it is fairly lengthy) deliberate I suspect, please be aware there is only a timeframe of "eight weeks" to do so, remember this will and does "affect us all". There is no information regarding if the proposed legislation will be retrospective, this is a very real threat to our freedom to choose. It may be that the intention is to remove as many current vehicles of the road by STEALTH, this will surly affect those that live on a tighter budget the most, remember it is aimed at all vehicles. What really frustrates me is the IAM and other motoring organisations are not onto this and campaigning on behalf of the membership. I have e mailed the IAM but given the short time frame for the survey response I don't hold out much hope from those organisations.
I think you'll find that MAG (yes, here I go again ) are aware of this and have already approached the DfT with serious concerns. So you either ignore it and assume it will go away (which is of course what most people will do), complete the survey form and hope that's good enough (which it probably won't be..do you think they actually take any notice of individual opinions, especially from a minority group like motorcyclists?) or join an organisation that is actively getting involved and trying to work with (not just complain to) the DfT on behalf of us lot. We've just been told that the IAM are 'not onto this'..so who you gonna call? Ghostbusters! Although MAG might be a more sensible option .
Hi Beerkat, I have written to the following organisations, RAC - AA - IAM - NABD - and the TOMCC requesting they respond to these DFT proposals with a matter of urgency. I have also filled in the survey, I was also aware that MAG are involved (purely by chance), indeed it was MAG that alerted the motorcycling community, however as you say it takes a lot of clout to make Government enter into any constructive dialogue, however that said if people do nothing then a large proportion of riders will demonised and criminalised, and this is a reality, just look up the survey to see what these proposals really hold. At this stage as I mentioned in a previous post there is no information if the proposal's will become retrospective, now that is a very scary thought.
Hi , in Australia , there is a little known regulation/law in the vehicles side , it applies to All Vehicles. The wording implies , there can be no variation in parts fitted other than Standard !! So if your Volvo,Ducati,Hino came fitted with 55/60w headlight bulbs , you have to replace them with the same ! You aren't allowed to go up 55/70 or 55/100 ! It is seldom used in any way as much of the thing's that are modified require an inspection by an Engineer/Examiner !!
