So how good is the WOF on your bike?

[Dave C]

Had an interesting experience yesterday - I remembered the SV's warrant was overdue, so to get it done quickly just went along to the local VTNZ testing station. What followed reminded me why I stopped going to testing stations years ago, in favour of going to bike shops.

The 'inspection' the VTNZ guy gave the bike was cursory to say the least. A check of the lights and indicators, a bit of a prod at the front brake lever, a general look around. What I am 100% sure he did not adequately check included the swing arm and steering head bearings, the rear brake, the horn, the front wheel bearings. Maybe the guy saw a late-ish model well maintained bike (which it is) and so wasn't bothered, but my worry would be that if a 'newbie' on a typical learner bike (something that has done a few k's and taken the odd knock) got the same level of 'safety' check and was issued a warrant, that person might be fooled into thinking their bike was o.k. even if it had some pretty major flaws.

The moral of the story is - go to a good bike shop for your warrant. They might be more likely to fail it, and we all hate paying out the $$ to put something right, but better that than to have something go pear shaped when you are on the road!

[Indiana_Jones]

i'm with you Dave. Back alley wreckers and testing stations might give you an easy WOF, but any biker with abit of know how, knows what needs fixing and what doesn't etc. I don't take WOFs as a bill of health, but only as a formality for insurance etc.

-Indy

[Steam]

I went to a VTNZ last time, and as soon as they saw my bike they had THREE guys swarming all over it. Perhaps they were taking the time to do some teaching of the new guys, but I was very impressed.
It failed on a few points, easily fixed by me and a spanner, I will definitely go there again.
I have heard terrible things about OnRoad testing stations though, but I guess it changes from place to place depending on who is testing.

[vifferman]

I go to "a good bike shop", but even so, the checking is a a little arbitrary, possibly because he knows my bike well, and checks only things he isn't intimately familiar with from having worked on it.
It doesn't worry me - I am confident that between the two of us we make sure the bike is safe.

And the important thing is my non-OEM zorst passes. I've been told if it was unreasonably loud it wouldn't, but I'm glad to do without the total arbitrariness and bureaucracy I used to endure at the testing station.

[avgas]

i dunno man - i go to bike shops for wof, cos vtnz have fucked me round too much. You must have got a good guy on a good day.

[j_redley]

I'd say it totally depends on the tester, and the day. Some of em are pricks who know next to nothing about cars, let alone bikes. Some of em are good guys who give you a thorough check. Chances are when my bikes first due, I'l take it to a VTNZ same as the car, and see what happens.

[bistard]

I totally agree,avoid testing stations,they dont even ride the bloody thing
I doubt very much whether half of them have ever rideen abike,let alone know whats what,go to BIKE SHOP everytime
Help keep the Motorcycle Industry alive

[slinky]

i needed to set my full.
got out the old 250, make sure it ran (cleaned carbs multiple times)
- it has no 3rd gear.
- it feels unstable at high speed.
the tester pointed out the front brake pads are almost non existent, i said i was getting wof to sit full, so he writes in the needs assistance, front brake pads and said to get some. which was good of him.
both tyres are balled in the centre, so he checks the edge which has planty of tread.
he checked the lights. grabbed a couple of things nad made sure they weren't loose.
didn't check anything else, didn't even check to see if the brakes actually stopped me.
he either had no idea what he was doing. Or he just figured if i could get this bike to a wof station it must be ok to ride.

[bikemike]

I had mine done a couple of weeks ago, also at a VTNZ station.

In the time it took for me to hand over the keys, walk down the hall, pour a coffee, sit down and open a goss mag, the chief came in and said it's all done. I was gobsmacked.

I resent paying for that given that it would be impossible to check for road worthiness in that time. Also, there's no road test, WTF.

So I went home and checked it over again myself. Yes, what about newbies, or anyone not mechanically minded? I assumed my experience was a one off, but seems it's endemic. More easy choices to make it seem like something is being done...

[dhunt]

Well I've had both good and bad experiences at both Bike shops and testing stations. Where they've failed on things that shouldn't have failed and passed on things that maybe shouldn't have passed. A lot of it comes down to the person doing the test and what sort of frame of mind he is in at the time. Personally I expect my bikes to pass where ever I get a WOF because I like to have a safe bike and keep it up to WOF standards.

If they don't pass it's generally on something that the tester has decided isn't up to their standard for the day or some other stupid reason and it gets me annoyed and generally I don't go back again. If they honestly find a problem that I haven't spotted then good on them.

[Motu]

Sounds like there should be an owner inpection option for W'soF - the owner obviously knows much more about the testing criteria than the AVIC....there would be a substantial discount with this option too.

[scumdog]

Shee-it I'm sure there's a certain sector of KB that WANT a tester as per the first post on the thread.!!!

[WRT]

I've had mixed experiences with cars/bikes at both VTNZ/repairers. At the end of the day, I treat a WOF as a formality of the "rubber stamp" variety. AT NO POINT do I rely on THEM to tell ME something is wrong with my vehicle. I take personal responsiblity for the safety of my vehicles, however when getting one serviced I make sure to request that the mechanic gives the whole car a look-see just as an extra set of eyes.

I certainly dont rely on the fulla at VTNZ to tell me my car or bike is unsafe, and I definitely dont complain when his quick check gets me out the door and back on the road in record time. In fact, I'm more inclined to thank the bugger!

[Ixion]

Shee-it I'm sure there's a certain sector of KB that WANT a tester as per the first post on the thread.!!!


Well, I certainly do.

I know my bikes. I know the regulations, as per the VIR manual.

And over 40 years I've learned what's safe and what's not. For me. Most of my bikes are old. Some things are not bright and shiney anymore. You learn what you can ride around and what needs to be up to scratch.

So when I take a bike for a WoF it's not to find out whether it's safe or not. I already know that. And I don't want to spend half an hour arguing with an 18 year old who thinks that the headlamp is dim, and flickers . It was like that the day after it left the factory. It's 40 years old, they had a different standard for such things then. I just want them to apply the rubber stamp and let me be on my way.

Cages, is a bit different, because I can't be shagged to grovel underenath to check things out.

[onearmedbandit]

Sounds like there should be an owner inpection option for W'soF - the owner obviously knows much more about the testing criteria than the AVIC....there would be a substantial discount with this option too.

Sounds like a damn good idea Motu, I second it.

[Flyingpony]

I avoid bike shops for my WOF, they're ridiculously priced at $35.
I also avoid VTNZ, they too charge a ridiculous amount. VTNZ are also really picky and therefore fail you on stuff which isn't a problem.

I therefore go to this dedicated WOF shop and they charge $20 (car = $25, trailer/bike = $20).

Last time there, the bike's head light was checked using a clip board, not that fancy light meter thing. Time before they lined it up against a those lines painted on the wall, but forgot to this time. They also missed checking a couple other minor things which I knew were okay and they must've assumed given it's tidy appearance. Would I go back there: Yes.

[scumdog]

Well, I certainly do.

I know my bikes. I know the regulations, as per the VIR manual.

And over 40 years I've learned what's safe and what's not. For me. Most of my bikes are old. Some things are not bright and shiney anymore. You learn what you can ride around and what needs to be up to scratch.

So when I take a bike for a WoF it's not to find out whether it's safe or not. I already know that. And I don't want to spend half an hour arguing with an 18 year old who thinks that the headlamp is dim, and flickers . It was like that the day after it left the factory. It's 40 years old, they had a different standard for such things then. I just want them to apply the rubber stamp and let me be on my way.

Cages, is a bit different, because I can't be shagged to grovel underenath to check things out.

So do you provide the tester with a pre-written list of what is up to WOF standard??
Otherwise how does the poor clod know your bike is o.k.??
And how does he know you've checked your bike but NOT your cage?
It may come across as a bit sarcastic but I'm sure you can see where I'm coming from.

(See Mr Motus post re this)

[j_redley]

I avoid bike shops for my WOF, they're ridiculously priced at $35.
I also avoid VTNZ, they too charge a ridiculous amount. VTNZ are also really picky and therefore fail you on stuff which isn't a problem.

I therefore go to this dedicated WOF shop and they charge $20 (car = $25, trailer/bike = $20).

Last time there, the bike's head light was checked using a clip board, not that fancy light meter thing. Time before they lined it up against a those lines painted on the wall, but forgot to this time. They also missed checking a couple other minor things which I knew were okay and they must've assumed given it's tidy appearance. Would I go back there: Yes.

Where is this secret place? I just payed $42 for the car at VTNZ.

[Ixion]

So do you provide the tester with a pre-written list of what is up to WOF standard??
Otherwise how does the poor clod know your bike is o.k.??
And how does he know you've checked your bike but NOT your cage?
It may come across as a bit sarcastic but I'm sure you can see where I'm coming from.

(See Mr Motus post re this)

The original post was deprecating cursory WoF checks because the vehicle owner does not then know his vehicle is safe. My point was (in response to your post) that I am not concerned about the tester telling me my bike is safe, because I know it is. So cursory is fine with me on the bike. Whereas the cage, I do want them to check a bit more carefully, because I don't (on account of it's hard to get under a car nowdays) , and therefore with the cage I do rely on the tester to tell me stuff .

[scumdog]

The original post was deprecating cursory WoF checks because the vehicle owner does not then know his vehicle is safe. My point was (in response to your post) that I am not concerned about the tester telling me my bike is safe, because I know it is. So cursory is fine with me on the bike. Whereas the cage, I do want them to check a bit more carefully, because I don't (on account of it's hard to get under a car nowdays) , and therefore with the cage I do rely on the tester to tell me stuff .

The point I was trying to make was: how does the tester differentiate between the two - i.e. how does he know you've pre-checked you bike but NOT your car??

[Ixion]

They don't. You miss the point. The tester in the original post did not perform his cursory examination because he was advised that everything had been checked. He was just slack .The OP point was that he was unhappy with such a check and would prefer to go the a more thorough place. My point is that I would be happy to go to a place that is quick and slack on the bike. Slack is good, I just want the rubber stamp. But not for the cage. So I take them to different places.

[Dave C]

They don't. You miss the point. The tester in the original post did not perform his cursory examination because he was advised that everything had been checked. He was just slack .The OP point was that he was unhappy with such a check and would prefer to go the a more thorough place. My point is that I would be happy to go to a place that is quick and slack on the bike. Slack is good, I just want the rubber stamp. But not for the cage. So I take them to different places.

Not quite - personally I too would be very happy to ride in, pay the $30 bucks, and just get the sticker to make me legal, 'cos I know the bike is 'safe'. But the reason I posted this thread on the 'newbie' domain is because in the same way you want a real check on your cage because you don't want to be involved with all the rolling around on the ground to make sure it's good, a newbie might not have the know-how or experience to know if her / his bike is safe or not. And if they ride away thinking they are on a safe machine 'cos they have been issued a warrant, it could all end badly...

[Roj]

It really does depend on the tester, I had been taking my trailer to a VTNZ site, but then took it to my local garage as he is clsoer, he failed it on something very basic that should have been failed every single time, I now know he is thorough so i take my bike there as well.

I check my bike myself and do as much as I can but I still want a warrant check that is up to standard, I believe what I do is up to standard but paying for a more quailified opinion I expect to be able to rely on it.

[Indiana_Jones]

I check my bike myself and do as much as I can...

I try to do that, I'm not that mechanically minded, so I went to see Frosty to take a look, but I forgot he is racing atm.

-Indy

[Skunk Control]

[QUOTE=Steam;936139]I went to a VTNZ last time, and as soon as they saw my bike they had THREE guys swarming all over it. Perhaps they were taking the time to do some teaching of the new guys, but I was very impressed.

Depends on the person but I know that there is a motorcyclists who works for VTNZ in Wellington

[more_fasterer]

Not quite - personally I too would be very happy to ride in, pay the $30 bucks, and just get the sticker to make me legal, 'cos I know the bike is 'safe'. But the reason I posted this thread on the 'newbie' domain is because in the same way you want a real check on your cage because you don't want to be involved with all the rolling around on the ground to make sure it's good, a newbie might not have the know-how or experience to know if her / his bike is safe or not. And if they ride away thinking they are on a safe machine 'cos they have been issued a warrant, it could all end badly...
I think that you've done the right thing by posting this in the newbie section, it all comes down to safety really.

Even though I'm confident in my abilities to identify and fix problems with both my car and my bike, I still prefer to take them somewhere strict so that there is a strong chance that the tester will pick up something that I've missed.

[Busy]

Last year a friend of mine took his old commodore to the testing station, he knew it would fail but he wanted to know all the faults to make it safe for his daughter ...

They didn't fail:
The two broken outside door handles (both passenger side)
Wipers not working
Rusty headlight (is dimmer than a candle)
Weak handbrake (wouldn't hold on a slight incline)
mismatched tyres (sizes and types)
broken side mirror
ball joint (looser than a loose thing)
garden hose as section of fuel line

What they did fail it on:
Cracked power steering belt
Fuel cap

[SPman]

WOF? What WOF?

Don't have those things over here....

[bistard]

[QUOTE=Steam;936139]I went to a VTNZ last time, and as soon as they saw my bike they had THREE guys swarming all over it. Perhaps they were taking the time to do some teaching of the new guys, but I was very impressed.

Depends on the person but I know that there is a motorcyclists who works for VTNZ in Wellington

You arnt refering to the one & only Billy Bunter are we???