From the 1st of July people taking their test (mod 1 & 2) will be required to wear.
boots, no trainers
motorcycle trousesrs, heavy denim,
no ripped jeans, tracksuit bottoms or lightweight trousers.
motorcycle jacket or heavy duty jacket
motorcycle gloves, no ski gloves, woolly gloves or any lightweight gloves.
If the candidate does not meet the clothing requirements will not be allowed to take their tests and will lose their money.
So anyone about to take their test, don't let them get your money for nothing.
Shell and WB....totally agree with you. I read somewhere that at 30mph it only takes 10 feet to get the skin off to your bone if you fall off and put your hands down.
I totally agree with above posts. Look on my profile at the pictures of my partners leg after a 20 mph accident with full leathers and sidi boots on (graphic pictures). She is now registered disabled.
MG.... that's shocking at 20mph?? Poor lass.
I think it's a good idea to make them wear the proper gear on the test, hopefully if they've had to go out and buy it (and not borrowed it) then at least they will have to gear, and might actually choose to wear it.
It makes my blood boil to see people on sports bikes with shorts and tshirts on.. let alone the kiddiwinks on scooters with their tracky bottoms and hoodies.. trying to do wheelies down the high street!!
how things change my mate passed his bike test with his right arm in plaster kept his coat and glove on so they didnt see it
but I cant see how they can insist on these things if its not a legal requirement it makes perfect sence we all know that but its a personal choice !!!
I remember coming across a bike accident where this young lad had lost control on a roundabout, come off and landed on his hands and knees.
He was wearing jeans. Apart from his knees "feeling really sore" he was luckily ok. When I looked at his knees the reason for the "soreness" was obvious. Not only were his knee caps both visible to the tune of the size of a ten pence piece, but both areas of nice white bone were actually scored!
He said he was doing less than 30mph.
Vicious photos MGB, can't help thinking that leathers should have protected her more at that speed. If you don't mind me asking, what make were they?
They can insist on these things WN because when the examiner takes you out, he or she legally accepts some responsibility for your safety.
When I was instructing we wouldn't take a student out unless they were dressed sensibly. Yes, it's personal choice and if a student turned up without gloves, strong jacket, heavy jeans or leathers and sturdy boots, then I'd make the choice to refuse to teach them!
geoff, The leathers were Frank Thomas,but she took my foot peg off with her leg,as she hit me,and thats what did the damage,it would have probaly took her leg off otherwize
MG, scarey, so many memories from those pics of Drob's accident
The only thing that worries me is the number of schools that will lend people safety gear, although I had my own things the school I did my lessons with had helmets, gloves, jackets & boots you could borrow if you did not have them.
I hope this does not make more schools have 'loan equipment' to keep up the number of people having lessons because their pupils 'cannot afford' good clothing
I'd guess that the legal small print says somewhere that the instructor has an absolute discretion over the suitability of the trainee for going out on the road, but no liability is accepted for injuries caused or exacerbated by inadequate clothing blah blah blah.
I agree that the chances are if they have to wear it for their test, and have had to spend out to get it rather than borrow it, they are more likely to wear it on a daily basis.
I have had the accidents (see other thread lol) and know the consequences can be severe, but I must admit I do not always go out fully kitted out. I have leather jeans but don't like riding in them. Saving up for some draggin jeans instead which at least afford some protection. I do always wear gloves!
As Wills says lol! It's not so much a case of accepting responsibility for a candidate's actions JP, more of a case that if something happens, the instructor has to be able to demonstrate that he ensured the candidates under his supervision were satisfactorily protected.
"The leathers were Frank Thomas,but she took my foot peg off with her leg,as she hit me,and thats what did the damage,"
Jesus! She was extremely unlucky mate to catch the peg and indeed lucky to keep the leg. As you say, a pair of jeans or similar and she would have been in a wheelchair.
I'm a believer in personal choice. Educate and inform riders but at the end of the day it is personal choice in exactly the same way as a free rock climber is aware of the accepted safety measures for a 100 foot rock climb but chooses to accept the risks and before anyone thinks I'm unaware of exactly what the consequences of throwing a bike down the road are or the extent of the injuries that can be sustained are let me state that I am and I still support personal choice unless it is a legal requirement and I don't believe that the laws should be changed to protect me from myself. Setting requirements above that mandated in law in order to take a bike test is IMHO wrong.
![Clothing on motorcycle test - Forums [Biker Match]](/images/backgrounds/strips/8mobileLQ.jpg)
![Clothing on motorcycle test - Forums [Biker Match]](/images/backgrounds/strips/8desktopLQ.jpg)
