Master cylinder viewing windows?!?
Thread Starter
Racer
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
From: London
Thanks-
I went through the joy of getting an older N. Am spec motorcycle through the German TUeV system, they tried the mandatory retrofit stuff too. I eventually demonstrated that they were not following their own rules about a vehicle needing only to comply with the regs in force at the time of manufacture and not today's regs. I pointed out another motorcycle that was already registered and approved that did not comply with one of the specs they were pushing. Turns out it belonged to the examiners boss
I went through the joy of getting an older N. Am spec motorcycle through the German TUeV system, they tried the mandatory retrofit stuff too. I eventually demonstrated that they were not following their own rules about a vehicle needing only to comply with the regs in force at the time of manufacture and not today's regs. I pointed out another motorcycle that was already registered and approved that did not comply with one of the specs they were pushing. Turns out it belonged to the examiners boss
What would you do in my position?
Whats your view on glass windows? Safe or not?
Race Director
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 18,740
Likes: 2,583
Race Director
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 15,892
Likes: 42
Sounds like you're wasting your time by fighting the issue as you are 'alone'. The present M/C with the bubba windows is a disaster waiting to happen IMHO and demonstrates how bureaucracy can overwhelm common sense. The modification that they've forced you to do has now induced a dangerous leak where one could have not existed before. If people are too ignorant to inspect brake fluid levels 'the old fashioned way' why would they be more attentive with a see-through M/C especially on yours where it's not even see-through? I'd like to see some study that demonstrates an improvement in safety. Canada got saddled with DLRs based on some faulty half-assed study done in Sweden. There has been NO measurable decrease in day-time safety but a measurable decrease in after-dark safety because people forget to turn their main beams on at dusk and are driving with no tail lights.............
if it were me, I'd install the windowed version just for inspection day and put a much safer unmodified version for the remainder of the year.
Maybe glue some phony windows on an unmodified M/C showing a 'fluid line' halfway up? Plead ignorance of you get caught
if it were me, I'd install the windowed version just for inspection day and put a much safer unmodified version for the remainder of the year.
Maybe glue some phony windows on an unmodified M/C showing a 'fluid line' halfway up? Plead ignorance of you get caught
Melting Slicks
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 15
From: Confusion
Nothing looks more homemade than those "windows" now, anything other would be a step up!!!!!!
Burning Brakes
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,022
Likes: 33
From: Lokeren, Belgium
Carlos, I missed this thread.
I must say I’ve never seen a +25 year old Corvette registered with ‘normal’ plates on which the master cylinder was altered .
There’s also a contradiction as you are not allowed to alter ‘stock’ parts and there’s no alternative. So drive the car without a master cylinder then?
I also think a car has to conform to legislation that was valid at the time of your build year.
The only stories I have heard are non folding mirrors (like the sport mirrors) and no E mark on the seat belts as a reason not to homologate the car.
Did you inform in a different inspection station? Did you check in to the ‘eenmalige type goedkeuring’?
Or did you get it resolved?
@ Mike, it's the same reaon why stainless steel brake lines (from frame to caliper) are not allowed here, the inspectors can't 'see' if the hose is failing with the SS jacket, although the SS ones MIGHT be better then the rubber ones.
Nick
I must say I’ve never seen a +25 year old Corvette registered with ‘normal’ plates on which the master cylinder was altered .
There’s also a contradiction as you are not allowed to alter ‘stock’ parts and there’s no alternative. So drive the car without a master cylinder then?
I also think a car has to conform to legislation that was valid at the time of your build year.
The only stories I have heard are non folding mirrors (like the sport mirrors) and no E mark on the seat belts as a reason not to homologate the car.
Did you inform in a different inspection station? Did you check in to the ‘eenmalige type goedkeuring’?
Or did you get it resolved?
@ Mike, it's the same reaon why stainless steel brake lines (from frame to caliper) are not allowed here, the inspectors can't 'see' if the hose is failing with the SS jacket, although the SS ones MIGHT be better then the rubber ones.
Nick
Last edited by dembo; Nov 4, 2011 at 11:37 AM.
Thread Starter
Racer
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
From: London
Carlos, I missed this thread.
I must say I’ve never seen a +25 year old Corvette registered with ‘normal’ plates on which the master cylinder was altered .
There’s also a contradiction as you are not allowed to alter ‘stock’ parts and there’s no alternative. So drive the car without a master cylinder then?
I also think a car has to conform to legislation that was valid at the time of your build year.
The only stories I have heard are non folding mirrors (like the sport mirrors) and no E mark on the seat belts as a reason not to homologate the car.
Did you inform in a different inspection station? Did you check in to the ‘eenmalige type goedkeuring’?
Or did you get it resolved?
@ Mike, it's the same reaon why stainless steel brake lines (from frame to caliper) are not allowed here, the inspectors can't 'see' if the hose is failing with the SS jacket, although the SS ones MIGHT be better then the rubber ones.
Nick
I must say I’ve never seen a +25 year old Corvette registered with ‘normal’ plates on which the master cylinder was altered .
There’s also a contradiction as you are not allowed to alter ‘stock’ parts and there’s no alternative. So drive the car without a master cylinder then?
I also think a car has to conform to legislation that was valid at the time of your build year.
The only stories I have heard are non folding mirrors (like the sport mirrors) and no E mark on the seat belts as a reason not to homologate the car.
Did you inform in a different inspection station? Did you check in to the ‘eenmalige type goedkeuring’?
Or did you get it resolved?
@ Mike, it's the same reaon why stainless steel brake lines (from frame to caliper) are not allowed here, the inspectors can't 'see' if the hose is failing with the SS jacket, although the SS ones MIGHT be better then the rubber ones.
Nick
