Hampshire Police on Nigh****ch

The issue of of the "markings" was sent into question when the OFFICER stated that his daughter could have made a better job of engraving the marks?
They measured the Reg plate numbers SO many times I think they could not decide whether they were measuring in Imperial or Metric, the riders had already owned up to the fact that the plates could be of incorrect format.

It just came across that a prosecution was forthcoming IRRELEVENT of the cooperation of the riders.

JOHN

[Supervox]

Originally Posted by Amplimator

Im sorry thats ********. If the owner had accidently half polished out a 'not for road use' then id agree totally. But a half polished out e-mark? In what way would that be perverting the course of justice? The can was legal anyways.

Before you type ******** you might want to check around !! See HERE for advice on the subject by MAG. Now, whatever you think of them as an organisation they tend to pretty good with facts !

Originally Posted by Amplimator

I always thought that 'not for road use' cans didnt come with baffles/DB killers and road use cans did (remove baffles at your own risk on legal cans tho)
Is this not the case?

I had a pair of Micron race cans that were stamped not for road use on the end but had baffles in them - even with baffles they were still above the legal limit but the baffles brought them within most track noise limits - or so I was told !!

Originally Posted by Amplimator

I agree with this totally. But Lozzo's point still stands. Legal or not if they are in a bad mood an wanna nick ya for summit they will. Its your word against theirs. Right or wrong.
They didnt like the guys on their bikes so they wanted to do 'em.

And by having illegal bits of kit it only makes things easier for them.

Originally Posted by Amplimator

And due to no proof of speeding (else they would have issued a ticket), and the undertaking (not breaking the law unless dangerous) they started nit-picking.

I have been told by police officers several times that the only time it's legal to undertake if you're riding in the inside lane & the traffic is moving more quickly than that in the outside lane (within the speed limit of course) - any other manoeuvre can be construed as Dangerous Driving

Originally Posted by Amplimator

Face it they were bored and had nothing better to do.

Quite probably but people still make it easier for them. Now, I've been guilty of all of these at one time or another - my only point is that if you choose to break or fracture the law be prepared to take the consequences !

[yorkie_chris]

Originally Posted by Supervox

If you ride with an illegal can / small plate / non-standard visor then just accept that if you get stopped by the police they can nick you; if that bothers you, then keep the bike & yourself legal - we all have that choice don't we ?

An aftermarket can with the baffle in?
That's a case of the cops being a pair of c***s getting the figures up, like lozzo says, not conducive to making friends with the public.

When you buy a slip on I bet you they say it's legal with the baffle in.

Originally Posted by Icanopit

The issue of of the "markings" was sent into question when the OFFICER stated that his daughter could have made a better job of engraving the marks?
They measured the Reg plate numbers SO many times I think they could not decide whether they were measuring in Imperial or Metric, the riders had already owned up to the fact that the plates could be of incorrect format.

It just came across that a prosecution was forthcoming IRRELEVENT of the cooperation of the riders.

JOHN

Reagrdless of whether the exhaust baffle was marked with a badly engraved BS mark or whatever, it wasn't loud enough to warrant a conviction - it was a baffle fitted to the race can to bring the noise down to an acceptable level, so any decent copper would have realised the guy wasn't an anti-social hooligan and ignored it.

Irrespective of this, you do not have to have an E mark or BS mark on an aftermarket can anyway, as long as the noise level is no more than a similar model bike of similar age fitted with a good condition standard exhaust. That's how the law defines loudness for aftermarket silencers.

As Specialone stated, the coppers were out for whatever convictions they could get, no matter how tenuous. Playing up to the cameras in my opinion.

[yorkie_chris]

Originally Posted by Lozzo

Irrespective of this, you do not have to have an E mark or BS mark on an aftermarket can anyway,

For the MOT I know this is true, but does the same apply for construction and use law that they give you ticket for breaching?

Any copper that has to resort to bringing up Construction and Use regs to secure a conviction for something like a quiet exhaust not having an E mark doesn't deserve to wear the uniform.

[jonny.boyd]

Originally Posted by simesb

(d) Exhausts - on motorcycles first used on or after 1 January 1985 the silencer which forms part of the exhaust system must be either:
(i) that with which the machine was first fitted; or
(ii) clearly and indelibly marked with :-
-the relevant BS marking BS AU 193/T2, BS AU 193a, 1990/T2, BS AU 193a, 1990/T3; or
-the relevant "e" marking to show compliance with EC Directive 89/235; or the relevant "e" marking to show compliance with Chapter 9 of EC Directive 97/24; or
-the name or trade mark of the manufacturer or marked with that manufacturer's part number - relating to it..

So according to the above so long as my exhaust has the manufacturers name or trademark on it and isn't above a certain dB then i'm fine?

Irrespective of this, you do not have to have an E mark or BS mark on an aftermarket can anyway, as long as the noise level is no more than a similar model bike of similar age fitted with a good condition standard exhaust. That's how the law defines loudness for aftermarket silencers.

Not quite how I translate the construction and use regs

If it is original manufacturer equipment as fitted when new and less than 82dB no stamp necessary

Any road legal aftermarket can from 1991 must have E-EU or BS markings and be within the 82dB limit.

I would presume that the police are working from these regulations to obtain any prosecutions

[yorkie_chris]

Originally Posted by Lozzo

Any copper that has to resort to bringing up Construction and Use regs to secure a conviction for something like a quiet exhaust not having an E mark doesn't deserve to wear the uniform.

Indeed.

What were they doing, 42mph? If they were able to actually catch the guys then they can't have been doing much wrong worth stopping them for

Originally Posted by jonny.boyd

So according to the above so long as my exhaust has the manufacturers name or trademark on it and isn't above a certain dB then i'm fine?

Correct - you don't need a BS or E mark as long as the manufacturer has his name or trademark on the exhaust. So theoretically, both lads on last night's programme were within the law because both silencers showed the manufacturer's name clearly. The copper mentioned the words Yoshimura and Wolf after quickly looking at the pipes, so it's obvious that both were marked.

It never ceases to amaze me just how ill-informed some traffic coppers are when it comes to things like this. This is their job, they are meant to know the law regarding such things. In any other profession they'd be disciplined or sacked for getting it wrong repeatedly and not learning how to do their job correctly.