Can they tell it's not restricted?
 

my bike is getting its restrictor fitted this friday (fingers crossed) at which point noone will have a problem with me riding it, at he moment though i want to ride it, been out once or twice with my dad on his bike, but mum says she doesn't want me riding it until its restricted :(

ok so technically its illigal, but what is the chance of you getting pulled? as long as im not doing stupid speeds and making lots of noise (<<can't help that one :p)

also would you/did you ride your bike before it got its restrictor fitted?

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

I did mine before i passed my test. And theres no way they can tell at the side of the road if your bike is restricted any ways and a certificate isnt a legal requirement. I take it your insured on it?

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

yep im insured/texed everything except restrictor. just trying to convince mum to let me take it into college tomorrow... because i've had about all i can take from buses

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

Its not a case of them telling if its restricted, they wont be able to tell unless youre doing over 100mph.
BUT if you do have a crash, they can check if its restricted. Your insurance wont pay out, and you were not riding in accordance with your licence.
Its your call, but it is always a risk. If you take it out now, when you put the restrictor in it may feel dissapointing in comparison.

Edit - also think about the sheer power difference. You done your training and test on a 10bhp 125cc bike, and now you will be jumping onto something with seven times the power. People that do the DAS have the experience on a 46bhp+ before riding anything else. Its a big jump.

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

i've already got that fear i've done 80 on the motorway on it already out with my dad i just hope it copes just as well when restricted :eek:

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

IMO you're being stupid if you ride without restricting it. You're risking your license and your money, not to mention you're fu(ked if you're insurance get hold of you. If you're planning on restricting it soon then I would wait, if your not going to bother restricting it at all then you deserve what you get becuase its acts like that which push up everyone elses premiums.

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

I say if you want to ride it then do it, if your worried about getting caught don't. When i get my next bike i don't think it will be staying restricted for long any ways. The one i have now does over a ton and i've heard that the restricted SV's only do a ton so :-(

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

Ello GB,

One major problem would be if you were involved in an accident, be it your fault or not, the insurance companys will go to extreme lengths to not have to pay out a claim.

Since you have a resticted license i would imagine a major concern, for an insurer, when considering a claim would be that you were using your bike, legally, in accordance with your resticted license.

Wait for the bike to be resricted and then you are legit,and when you first go out n about you'll be smiling twice as much.

The time, effort and cost of obtaining your license should tell you to do it the legal way.;)

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

thanks for the advice guys but im going to totally ignore you....:shock:


only joking guess i will have to put up with the bus for another 4 days... :smt092

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

You'll have loads of people coming on here soon and having a go at you for considering it...it's a very touchy subject

You will not be insured as you're not riding within the requirements of your license; however the police would be none the wiser and they will have no reason to pull you over unless you're being a plonker. So if you insist on taking it out, make sure everything (I mean everything) is ok with the bike and you have all of your papers present + don't show off and draw attention to yourself.

I personally know several bikers who either removed their restriction kit early or didn't bother at all, and they didn't have any trouble. Doesn't mean it won't happen though!! If you get caught it'll be 6 points (so a ban for you) and a hefty fine.


Why would it push up premiums since he wouldn't be insured?

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

Because someone has to pay for it when uninsured w*nkers have an accident, and as usual its those of us who actually have some consideration that get hit in the pocket.

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

Im sure if he could have done a DAS test he would have done then he wouldnt even need to consider it

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

I would have thought the driver would be fully liable for any damages caused not the insurance company as the policy is void

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

<stereotpe mode on>
okay kokey. I'm presuming you've just passed your test, and are very much younger than me, male and lots of bravado, and like to partake in the art of willy waving, like most men of a certain age (forgive me if I'm wrong to assume)
<sterotype mode off>

In the unfortunate event of you getting found out you didn't have restriction on your bike, would you then like to feel an absolute prat for spending loads of dosh on a bike and loads of dosh on insurance, loads of dosh on getting your license etc etc because you got 6 points for being found out, and thus rendering you very very open to losing your license full stop.

nah didn't thiink so,
Restricted licenses are there for a reason. Get over it.

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

If sure if he could have he would. Unfortunately he cant.

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

does anyone know why the DAS age is 21? i would of done it if (like banditpat said) if i could of done but unfortunatly to young.

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

In reality the restricted license is ageist and i don't agree with it therefore i think that until EVERY one is restricted to 33bhp then the people that have no choice shouldn't be whined at by people that weren't unfortunate enough to be stuck with no choice

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

Im sure if he could have done a DAS

Well he couldn't

he would have done then he wouldnt even need to consider it


So he does

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

Low chances of them checking, convictions seem to be rare, but the chance is there. If you get caught doing warp 9 then you're pretty boned anyway. Your money, your license.

Also it's a pretty stupid idea to consider illegal acts on a public forum, the questions have been asked enough times. You will probably also find that this forum is rather conservative about the 33bhp license.

Really? Explain.

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

DSA/DVLA/DFT/'the man' = bunch of c##ts who don't know what they're on about but need to be seen to "do something."

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

It's all about maturity!

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

Yah b0llocks.

The only people who think it's a good idea are people who had a choice in the matter.

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

Not as I understand it. If I, on my fully insured and legal bike, get written off by captain d1ckhead without insurance I would be forced to claim on my insurance as the chances of retreiving any costs from the aforementioned captain would be far from certain through a civil court case, especially if he has no money.

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

because people start to get older and wiser:rolleyes:

therefore you my dear are a very silly immature person.

disclaimer...I don't know you personally take no offense, but saying daft things like that on a public forum, makes you look very daft indeed

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

yea the majority seem to be coming down on me like a ton of bricks for even considering the idea,

but im sure at my age or back when you had your bike needing restricted you all considered it to.

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

I don't mind looking daft, i went through my life so far looking daft and chances are I'll go through the rest. I will ride what I want because I think its degrading to be stuck on a 20 year old bike when some one 4 years older can do the same test on a different bike and go out and buy a brand new R1 or a busa

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

don't start or no biscuits and brews for you:D
I stand by what I say, its there for a reason, you already know my personal thoughts over it. So we shall leave that there between you and I;)

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

I do however fully agree that considering or admitting to any illegal act would be rather silly.

Like I say, the people who shout the loudest were never affected by the rule.

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

well there are a lot of older bikes out there that can rip your head off.
I've got someone sat next to me that could put you straight on that one.
Nowt degrading about old bikes.

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

Theres something degrading about it when you have no choice in the matter but to have a 20 year old tiny capacity bike which most of the time are physically tiny and designed for any one under 5'6" as soon as your taller your the most uncomfortable person on the road

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

Play with feathers, get your @rse tickled.

Its down to you at the end of the day.

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

Hmm I still don't think the licenses are justified. I mean a gentleman who used to ride 125s in the 60s, could jump on a Superbike tomorrow. Sure he may be old and 'wise' but will he have the experience and technique to handle such a monster? Then if we were to have a young rider who's 20, been riding since 17 and is a member of the advanced motorcyclists institute or equivalent, never had a conviction or accident etc and was put on the same machine. Who would be more likely to have an accident?


Also I know some very immature 21yr olds...

Just out of curiorsity does the restricted license scheme exist anywhere else other than the UK?

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

Surely a younger person with a good job could have a nice shiny new bike and someone older with a lesser paid job could only afford a 20 year old bike.

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

To be honest before my bike was restricted I thought "once round the block won't hurt" but I thought better of it and chose not to. I would like to see what a police officer has to say about the 33bhp rule being ageist. Its there for a reason...to stop inexperienced riders, like us, going out and buying the most powerful sports bike that we can afford. Because thats what used to happen according to my dad who had bikes back in the day when you could ride a 250 or what ever on L-plates, People used to pass their test buy the most powerful bike they could afford and kill themselves on it.
And someone had to do something about the deaths hence the 33bhp restrictored licences. You don't even notice them when there fitted. My dad road my 400sv to the garage where i had it restricted and has since riden it after restriction and he can barely tell. It'll still do a ton no probs.
I don't think IMO that 4days worth of bus fare is worth loosing your licence no matter how slim the chances are.

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

I couldn't care less about whether the restricted licence is fair or ageist or whatever. The point is that a licence is a privilege you earn by respecting the traffic laws while demonstrating machine control, AKA the bike test. You knew when you entered into this what the rules were, so moaning it's not fair now seems pretty pointless.

What I do have a major problem with is folks driving / riding without insurance. By not riding in accordance with your licence this is EXACTLY what you are doing. Whether you were being an idiot or not, if you cause an accident you just ruin someone's day, week, year or even their life and you won't have the means to try to put things right.

So don't ride without insurance. Ever.

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

Put me in the conservative camp too.

If you've been pootling around with 10 bhp, a half power SV will be plenty fast enough. I passed my DAS recently and probably don't use more than 33 horsepower very often.

The problem with removing the restrictor is that it invalidates your insurance. So if you do get caught you'll be done for driving with no licence and no insurance. That's a year on the buses, another bloody driving test, then stupidly high insurance premiums for the next three years.

So the risk of getting caught is small, but if you do it's bloody expensive. Not worth it for three or four days, IMO.

Keith.

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

if only everyones advice was as nicely put as that you should all be ashamed ;) but point taken everyone i will do my time on the bus and then vow revenge on all buses after 4 days

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

20 Year old bikes are FUN, suspension that's seized, dodgy handling and CHEAP insurance. I personally have a 1986 yamaha SRX 600 that cost me £400. I can have more fun on that than the raptor in certain situations. Don't get me wrong the Raptor's fast as f*** but if i wanna take the pi$$ i'm not gonna do it on a bike with 110bhp. Havin' a restricted SV or not if you take the pi$$ on it and get caught ur still gonna get 3 points.

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

I say the reason it's there is some deskbound warriors needed to be seen to be "doing something", so they picked on the easiest target ... young riders.

You cannot expect to be given any credit in a discussion by simply calling the other party immature. Disobeying a law because you believe it's b0llocks seems to me to be making a decision of risk vs reward vs your own morality. Blindly obeying with no thought is just retarded. St Augustine: "an unjust law is no law at all."

I seem to recall a statistic which shows the 'average' KSI being 35 years old and fairly affluent.

Re: can they tell its not restricted?
 

If it was about inexperience then why would being 21 make any difference? surely if its a case of experience then the 33bhp should be applied to every one that passes a test? Why not restrict people till they have done so many miles instead of 2 years?