Across the European Union, the push to expand mandatory Periodical Technical Inspections (PTI) to all motorcycles is often justified with the claim that ‘testing improves safety’. But FEMA’s Wim Taal says the evidence simply doesn’t support that claim.

Road safety for motorcyclists will not meaningfully improve through mandatory Periodical Technical Inspections (PTI) because the data across the EU shows that technical defects almost never cause motorcycle crashes. Road users’ behaviour and infrastructure are the real issues, and PTI does nothing to address them.

EU‑wide studies consistently find that technical defects are the primary cause in less than 1-2% of motorcycle accidents. The overwhelming majority of crashes are linked to rider behaviour, road design, and infrastructure issues, not mechanical failure. Despite repeated recommendations, no proof of safety gains has been presented by organisations calling for mandatory PTI for all motorcycles.

Lights, brakes, and tires are the most common issues found during inspections. These matter for safety, of course but the presence of a defect during a check does not mean it was a factor in real‑world crashes. Field statistics across EU Member States confirm that mechanical failure is almost never the root cause.

‘Policies should be based on real accident causation data, not on assumptions’

The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) wants motorcycles over 50cc included in the PTI regime. As a justification for this, the EESC states: “Roadside inspections carried out in Austria and Sweden have found that more than 20 % of these vehicles had serious defects”. Reality check from SMC Sweden: “Roadside technical checks are extremely rare. When the police do carry out a roadside technical check, it is based on a prior, concrete suspicion of non-compliance – for example, the presence of a non-approved exhaust system. In practice, roadside checks specifically targeting the technical condition of motorcycles are therefore almost non-existent.” Defects found during roadside inspections should not be an excuse to harmonize periodic inspections; the rejection rates during such inspections are logically higher because (for example) the police take targeted action against observed defects.

The European Parliament and safety councils continue to push for expanding PTI to all motorcycles, even though no measurable reduction in motorcycle fatalities has been linked to PTI in countries that already test all bikes. Riders’ organisations across Europe have submitted technical briefs showing that PTI does not address the real causes of crashes. If the EU truly wants to reduce motorcycle fatalities, the focus should shift to areas that actually save lives, such as better rider training (improving hazard perception, braking skills, and defensive riding has a proven impact), safer infrastructure (road surfaces, guardrails, and intersection design play a major role in motorcycle crashes), and awareness campaigns for all road users (most multi‑vehicle motorcycle crashes involve another driver failing to notice the rider). And let’s not forget that policies should be based on real accident causation data, not on assumptions.

PTI may sound like a simple fix, but it doesn’t target the real causes of motorcycle accidents. The EU’s own data shows that mechanical defects are almost never to blame. If Europe wants safer roads for motorcyclists, it needs smarter, evidence‑based measures, not more bureaucracy.

Written by Wim Taal

This article is subject to FEMA’s copyright