Is DOT legality of tyres an urban myth in NZ?

[Tony W]

Has anyone got documented proof that motorcycle tyres have to have the U.S.A. Department of Transport (DOT) on them, to be able to get a W.O.F. in N.Z. ?

I reckon it's a crock, but that's only my opinion. I have always been under the impression (rightly or wrongly) that tyres only have to have 1.5mm of tread depth over 75% of tread area to be road legal.

I have got WOFs from VTNZ for MX tyres with " NOT FOR HIGHWAY USE " embossed on their carcasses.

My car's tyres have not got DOT on them. They are WOF'd.

[Kickaha]

They will fail imported cars when they bring them into the country if they don't have the right markings on them when they do the compliance on them (not sure if dot is one of them)

Once that is done you can refit the same tyre and pass a WOF:facepalm:

[Taz]

I've had no problems getting a wof with knobbys. Never had them check the markings.

[Tony W]

Mate, do you get bikers come up to you and tell you how dangerous knobblies are to ride on !!. . . We get it all the time !! . . . we just agree with them now...it's far easier.:bash:

[Ocean1]

I've had no problems getting a wof with knobbys. Never had them check the markings.

I've had full comp knobs passed more often than not. Lately I'm getting them bounced, DOT seems to be req'd.

[Tony W]

Yeah, it's the "seems to be" that I have an issue with. I would like the tester to show me the rule in his (or her...PC,LOL) WOF manual...then we would all know for sure.

[p.dath]

Has anyone got documented proof that motorcycle tyres have to have the U.S.A. Department of Transport (DOT) on them, to be able to get a W.O.F. in N.Z. ?

I reckon it's a crock, but that's only my opinion. I have always been under the impression (rightly or wrongly) that tyres only have to have 1.5mm of tread depth over 75% of tread area to be road legal.
...

I don't know about DOT, but that 1.5mm across 75% of the tyre rule went out long ago. Can't remember the new definition.

[Katman]

I don't know about DOT, but that 1.5mm across 75% of the tyre rule went out long ago. Can't remember the new definition.

1.5 mm in any principal tread groove.

[pete376403]

DOT may be just a catch-all term for tyres that do not have "for off-road use only" or similar on the sidewall.

Even the thickest VTNZ employee should be able to understand what this means (assuming they can, in fact, read)

[Tony W]

I'm sure the instructions only relate to the USA, particularly California.

[warewolf]

Go to the LTSA website, it is there for all and sundry to read.

Motorcycle tyres must meet any of the three major road standards: USA (DoT marking from their FMVSS), Japan (JIS) or Europe (E-75)... off the top of my head. It also must not say "not for highway use". And then it must be in safe usable condition.

At last WOF my LBS looked at my Pirelli Scorpion MX Mid-Soft 32 front and thought "no way" but then they checked the sidewall and found the DOT/E75 markings. So some WOF testers do check.

"DOT" and "DOT approved" are colloquialisms for "road legal" tyres, in the same way that "Biro" means pen. Some of the Euro brands don't have DOT markings but do have E75, particularly eastern-Euro road/trail tyres.

Edit: Ok, that was hard:
http://www.nzta.govt.nz/vehicle/classes-standards/list.html#tyres
(http://www.nzta.govt.nz/vehicle/classes-standards/list.html#tyres)

UN/ECE Regulation No. 75, Uniform provisions concerning the approval of pneumatic tyres for motor cycles and mopeds (E/ECE324-E/ECE/TRANS/505/Rev.1/Add.74);
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 119, New Pneumatic Tires for Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars;
Japanese Industrial Standard D 4203, Tires for motorcycles and scooters;

FMVSS we know and love as DOT.

[Tony W]

Thanks Colin.
Damn!

[Taz]

Mate, do you get bikers come up to you and tell you how dangerous knobblies are to ride on !!. . . We get it all the time !! . . . we just agree with them now...it's far easier.:bash:

Yep quite often. They also hate being overtaken by a knobby shod adv bike in the wet....

[Tony W]

Yep quite often. They also hate being overtaken by a knobby shod adv bike in the wet....

Nothing more needs to be said, mate. We are from the same planet !

[Tony W]

Go to the LTSA website, it is there for all and sundry to read.

Motorcycle tyres must meet any of the three major road standards: USA (DoT marking from their FMVSS), Japan (JIS) or Europe (E-75)... off the top of my head. It also must not say "not for highway use". And then it must be in safe usable condition.

At last WOF my LBS looked at my Pirelli Scorpion MX Mid-Soft 32 front and thought "no way" but then they checked the sidewall and found the DOT/E75 markings. So some WOF testers do check.

"DOT" and "DOT approved" are colloquialisms for "road legal" tyres, in the same way that "Biro" means pen. Some of the Euro brands don't have DOT markings but do have E75, particularly eastern-Euro road/trail tyres.

Edit: Ok, that was hard:
http://www.nzta.govt.nz/vehicle/classes-standards/list.html#tyres
(http://www.nzta.govt.nz/vehicle/classes-standards/list.html#tyres)

FMVSS we know and love as DOT.

Yes, it now seems that the marking "DOT", which is found on many tyres, is in fact ILLEGAL, as it is not mentioned in the Regulations!!!

[warewolf]

Yes, it now seems that the marking "DOT", which is found on many tyres, is in fact ILLEGAL, as it is not mentioned in the Regulations!!!Not true at all.

"DOT" is the marking that signifies a tyre (tire) complies with FMVSS No. 119.