Hitchcocks Forum

Today, once again, I checked over a Norton 600 Dominator which I have been servicing and taking for MOT for a few years and took it for the annual test. This machine hardly racks up 100 miles in a year, but the owner likes to keep it ready for action 'just in case'. So, I did all the usual - charged the battery, checked the lights, pumped up the tyres, checked the brakes and so on and loaded it into the van with another machine needing MOT. All was well until the tester pointed out cracking in the sidewalls of the rear tyre, from where it had stood for some time with little or no air in the tyre and so it had to fail, pending a new tyre being fitted. This was all a bit disappointing and it was not until later that it dawned on me - this machine is from 1957, so presumably it does not require an MOT and could in fact be put on the road by an unwitting owner with an apparently 'good' tyre, as far as tread goes, but be a potential danger to both rider and others? Bear in mind less than 100 miles lapsed since it passed last time and what looked to be a 'good' and 'newish' tyre was just pumped up in the assumption all was well. Could this be the sort of case for having to MOT machines, whatever their age? I will continue to MOT my pre 1960 machines, for extra peace of mind, what does anyone else think? Regards to all, Paul.

You won`t like this reply, if a bike/vehicle has been serviced properly it should pass a m.o.t. Also it`s up to the rider/driver to make sure the bike/vehicle is in a roadworthy condition at all times. A M.O.T. means nothing really only on the day.

That reply is fine, jaffa90, I like to think I keep on top of things, with only two 'fails' ever out of probably well over 100 MOT's I have presented bikes for. I put my hands up - I didn't spot it and got caught out by assuming that less than 100 miles since passing MOT last year and very good tyre tread meant the tyres were not a worry - but if this machine had been put on the road without an MOT, as it presumably could be, it might not be too safe, or as safe as it could, or should be? An MOT test at least means someone else with suitable experience gets the chance to spot things which may have gone unnoticed by the owner or person servicing it, after all, nobody is perfect, or at least I am not, for one. Regards, Paul.

I wish I was perfect, people who don`t make mistakes don`t do owt. Example, I noticed a bald/illegal tyre on a car and when telling the lady driver she replied (it`s ok it`s going for a m.o.t next week. Also if a tyre has a blow out and causes an accident because of the rotten side walls the ins com will try not to pay out.

I am far from perfect so for the very reasons mentioned above the 1952 Flash & a Box goes for annual MOT. Not failed yet but there may be a day when I miss something

While it is true that an MOT only holds good for the day it is issued, it does also mean in your case that I suspect you will be changing the tyre and not letting the owner ride around on a dodgy one.



The whole point of a pre 1960 MOT is not that the world ends if the bike fails, As I suppose you can still ride it, guys use it to basically have an experienced guy check your bike over for potential or actual faults.



If I was looking after the same bike, I would have the electric and most of the mechanical stuff up to scratch as my level of experience allows, but would I spot a dodgy tyre sidewall? Possibly not, so look at it this way.


It's optional on pre 1960's bikes and you have the opportunity for to have your bike checked by an experienced guy for what is a reasonable amount of money, for what they do, HOWEVER, don't be complacent as they don't check everything. You want a safe bike, then service it or have it serviced regularly. Nobody wants to see their back wheel going past them at speed!



Of course, if your pre 1960 bike is well maintained and serviced correctly, then you may not want to get it MOT'd.



Keep your bike happy and ride safe!

I got complacent last weekend when i took the bike in to the usual place for its MOT, Knowing of course that it was in fine fettle and would pass as usual...

Heres your MOT gwilly and an advisory to get that rear tyre sorted.. The AM26 Roadrider centre tread, that wiggly groove down the centre had worn to less than 2mm..

I didn't look carefully enough but thankfully the second pair of eyes, my friend the MOT mechanic picked it up...

Tyre manufacturers don`t recommend using tyres over 5 or 6-years-old.

Leon is absolutly right.

As the tyre ages the rubber becomes stiffer and more brittle. Anyone who has chenged an old tyre will have noticed how much harder it is to get the old tyre off than the new one on! In addition the aging process can affect the bond between the carcass and the rubber

If anyone is unsure how to date a tyre this may help.

All tyres are produced with a serial Tyre Identification Number that shows the date of manufacture of a tyre. The last three digits for tyres made pre 2000 or four digits for post 2000 tyres of the serial TIN indicate the week and year that the tyre was made.

The lesson is that the less miles you do the more we need to keep an eye on our tyres.

I personally would certainly change any tyre that is over 104 years old, earlier if it was a performance bike

Spot the error it should read 10 years old otherwise I would be gone long before the change was due!!