Ive been to beverly sva today for info and was told that front cycle wings have to be infront of a vertical line from the front dege of the rim o shit
jacko

how bizzare... what the hell has the rim got to do with it anyway? Try getting some 12 inch wheels with 90 profile tyres! Maybe not.

i hope they dont go bent at beverley cos that my eventual destination...

Don't like to say anything - but we've been saying this on this site for quite a few months...
...I guess it's just some reference point to ensure that the mudguard does actually cover a fair bit of the tyre.

rgds,

David

It actually states is quite clearly in the Bible - sorry SVA Manualé.

We're experiencing some bother merely mounting the b*gg**s!

Still, it's gotta be done right eh? Well - at least for SVA

I'm not doubting you, but where abouts does it say about the cycle wing positioning? I've had a quick scan and don't see it....

I also have a nasty feeling I might need a new set of cycle wings.....

tis in there somewhere

Alister
Make a feature of them put lots of holes in them.
just kidding.
I may need new ones too
Jacko

With the limited search facility it took a while but I think I've located the thread, 2 posts

Linky

Thanks for that, but I wanted to know where abouts in the SVA Inspection Manual it mentioned it, I looked in the 'Exterior' section (of this years edition) and didn't see it.

It just occurred to me what if I completely remove the cycle wings and the wing stays? Does it state all wheels have to be covered?
Just wondering.

So is it correct that the cycle wing position is not mentioned in the SVA manual?
I can't find it.
Where did you folks pull this info from?
If you look at the pics of Matt Claydon's car (in the pic archive) it seems to 'fail' this test too. I've seen quite a few other SVA passed cars with this too.
Maybe this is another 'depends which test station you go to' rules.
Any ideas?

IIRC the front muguard has to cover to the front (just!) of the wheel rim (ie forward of a vertical line from furthest forward part of rim), and below a horizontal line from wheel centre to the rear!

HTH

ATB

Simon

I dont remember anything being mentioned about it in the manual.

Simon, you say RIM, do you mean RIM or TYRE?

Pretty pointless making it extend to the rim line i would have thought?

Colin,

Yep - meant rim - not tyre.

I know there is nothing in the manual (just had another quick look) - I think I saw it on one of Mark Evans progs.

So it may well be poo.

ATB

Simon

I think it comes under the catch-all aspect of "general safety issues" - no, it isn't written down, but the inspector has the right to reject anything that he considers unsafe. Unfair, but they can't cover everything in the manual. You always have the right to appeal though... but it's hard work.
There are other factors that come under "construction and use" regulations that most people don't get to see outside of the motor manufacturing business, and this may be covered there. Also unfair, but you don't really want to have to deal with them either!

I think that if we must have regulations, then the SVA is pretty good and quite flexible, all things considered.

rgds,

David

Its 100% correct, Thsi was one of my fail on my SVA. The wing has to cover the rim, problem with my rims are that they're 17's much more rim to cover. I had to get my cycle wings off the other night to reset them about 1" further forward. For anyone thinking about sticking they're wings on with sikaflex then do it as I have and the get those bloody wings off was a massive effort, so through normal use they're going nowhere :-)

With regards to the section of the SVA manual then I believe it is exterior projections where it states that the wheels rim must fall within the body plan form of the vehicle.

Basically the rim at the back and front, measured half way up the wheel, must be within the body plan form (which in this case is the cycle wing).

I misinterpreted the rule for my SVA, thinking it meant body plan (i.e. the max width and length of the vehicle). After 'consultation' with the examiner, it definatley states body plan form....bu**er
Regards
Chris

[Edited on 27/2/04 by ChrisBradley04]

This is really covered the old construction & use regs which said something like "wheels must be covered bye adequate mudguards" it was up to the traffic cop/SVA/Mot tester to judge what was adequate.