MOT changes

[sixdogsisback]

Does anyone know how the proposed MOT changes in 2012 will affect our cars. I heard it was going to include things like wiring harnesses and dust covers missing or perished on trunnions and things. One thing seems to be certain, it is going to get harder to keep a classic car on the road,

Clive.

[bmcecosse]

Your 'dust covers' should be in good order anyway - and the wiring harness...... Where do you source this information??

[sixdogsisback]

It was on one of the classic car magazine websites, I'm not sure which one now. I had been looking at the FBHBC website but I could not find anything relevant. Most of the changes seem to relate to modern cars with electronic systems which seem to be open to modification.

Clive

[dunketh]

Dust covers?
I heard they were checking wiring for condition and that they are now including track rod boots (and similar smaller oil-seal boots) in the test.

They're also failing anything that has an aftermarket HID headlamp kit fitted - so numerous tw@s in saxos and the like will be done for - and they're trying to introduce rules that ban 'chipping' or modifying a standard cars ecu.

The latter is something for consideration (apparently) as there's no real way it could be workable. Seems unfair to fail someone with Mondeo and a £100 plug-in 'superchip' but not something with a custom made Zetec running home brew management, JLH style.

[sixdogsisback]

Does this mean that the Wipac Quad Optics halogen headlights I have fitted will be illegal? Seems odd to make it illegal to see where I am going in the dark!!

Clive

[autolycus]

Where do you source this information??

http://www.dft.gov.uk/vosa/publications ... guides.htm

Go down the page to "Proposed MoT....2012" and download it in all its glory.

Europe has said "Jump!" so our compliant politicians have, of course, jumped.

Kevin

[chrisd87]

Does this mean that the Wipac Quad Optics halogen headlights I have fitted will be illegal? Seems odd to make it illegal to see where I am going in the dark!!

Predictably these changes are the result of an EU directive. Logic doesn't tend to feature very highly in these!

There's a short piece in Practical Classics that suggests the changes are partly behind possible plans to introduce a rolling MOT exemption, initially at 1965. So the result of a 'stricter' MOT test appears to be more vehicles exempt from it! Having a look through some of the new requirements has rather softened my natural opposition to exempting old vehicles from the test. This link has some (admittedly unsourced) information. A lot of the changes seem irrelevant to classics, but there's some new stuff to catch us out, like less handbrake imbalance allowed, engine mounts being checked, plus a new vague catch-all of 'inappropriate modification or repair'.

[simmitc]

Wipac Quad Optics Halogens are NOT the same as HID units, completely different technology, so you should be OK with those.

[LouiseM]

Here are links to the FHBVC August newsletter and a classic car buyer article outlining the changes, which have been brought in to take account of technical advances in modern vehicle design and ensure a consistent approach to testing. The current concessions for older vehicles remain unchanged:

http://fbhvc.co.uk/2011/08/10/newslette ... gust-2011/

http://www.classic-car-buyer.co.uk/news ... oming.html

[bmcecosse]

Track rod boots have 'always' been MOTable....and no need to panic re Quad Optics (what's 'quad' about them??). I have had cause to use my Traveller a few times recently at 5am - and the sealed beam lights work very well - easily good enough for the performance of the vehicle. I was pleasantly surprised! Certainly looking forward to an MOT exemption..........if that is really on the cards!?

[LouiseM]

Certainly looking forward to an MOT exemption..........if that is really on the cards!?

Although MOT exemption has been discussed between ministers and car groups this is in relation to pre-1920 vehicles, with a possible extension in 5 or 6 years time to pre-1935 vehicles. All still under discussion.

[kennatt]

+not too sure about mot exemptions, whilst most classic car owners like to keep their cars in good order,will all classics be kept like this,its ok if the owner is competant at car maintenance and repair but i'm sure there are thousands out there who wouldn't know what a trunnion or ball joint is let alone make a judgement as to when it need replacement,you just have to look through this forum. For me , so long as some of the new legislation has a cut off date so that classics don't fall into the regs,like emissions etc.then I'm happy to pay the fee once a year,a better way would be to set a date and any car reg before would need a two year test based on lower milage that classics do.For instance the new handbrake balance test due in Jan will probably fail a lot of classics,a lot of makes had very limited handbrake function from new.

[dunketh]

MOT exemption = very bad idea.
Can you imagine all the shonky old crap that would dominate the roads in a matter of no time.
Young lads would be positively fighting over an old classic just to avoid the MOT inspectors dreaded fibregalss-sill-destroying screwdriver.

[chrisryder]

i read an article that posed the question 'if there is no mot for classics, will insurers still want some proof of roadworthiness?'

it suggested that there would end up being private 'mot's that insurers would demand you have to prove that they're not covering a death-trap. private mot's would be undoubtedly poorly regulated, or not at all, so they could end up charging whatever they like and being more ruthless with what's a pass and what's a fail.

the alternative to that would be you taking on the responsibility yourself, to say that you maintain it and vouch for its roadworthiness. but then if an accident happens due to something you did, you'd be very much un-insured.

i'm happy paying £40 a year for an mot. afterall i'm paying f-all for tax

[Neil MG]

Don't confuse MOT exemption with any test exemption! As I understand the insurance companies would then pick up the reins and demand a vehicle roadworthiness certificate or whatever you might call it. No company would want to cover the risks of an unsafe car and I expect they will want the examination done by a qualified person such as an MOT tester! So I would imagine some MOT stations becoming MOT and classic car test stations.

The advantage for the test stations is that they do not need to offer a service for older cars!

The advantage for the government is that they move the responsibility for something that is complex (needing all kinds of exemptions and specialist knowledge) into the private sector.

I too believe the current test is not stringent enough (although it is much more strictly controlled and performed than it used to be 20 or more years ago!)

Ooops cross posted with Chris...

[Neil MG]

Looks like we were thinking pretty much the same thing there Chris...

[chrisryder]

great minds think alike!

[chrisd87]

I severely doubt insurance companies would start organising their own MOT-like tests. After all, they don't do this for cars less than 3 years old (over 20% of which fail their first test), nor to my knowledge for other MOT exempt vehicles (old lorries, ex-military stuff, agricultural vehicles, etc). A far simpler (and I'd have thought more likely) solution is that if they percieve any increased risk, they'll just put up premiums to compensate.

Personally I think the MOT system at present is just about right, and I wish we could stop the endless tinkering! There's certainly no need for it to be any stricter, as few accidents are caused by mechanical failures. The idea of exemptions for older cars (apart from the real antiques) makes me somewhat uneasy, mainly for fear of it being used as a pretext for restricting the free use of such vehicles. It could also prompt the police to start pulling over exempted vehicles to see if they can find anything wrong. Far better just to leave well alone a system that seems to strike a pretty reasonable balance between keeping egregiously dangerous vehicles off the roads, without being too onerous for cars kept in a basically acceptable condition.

[chickenjohn]

My understanding on the MOT exemption is that for REALLY old behicles, such as pre 1904 Edwardian London - Brighton cars, there is very little they can actually test that applies to the current MOT test, hence the proposals for exemption.

I don't see the benefit in exempting the post war Morris Minor from the MOT which compared to the Edwardian era cars is virtually a modern vehicle!

[drivewasher]

Track rod boots have 'always' been MOTable....and no need to panic re Quad Optics (what's 'quad' about them??). I have had cause to use my Traveller a few times recently at 5am - and the sealed beam lights work very well - easily good enough for the performance of the vehicle. I was pleasantly surprised! Certainly looking forward to an MOT exemption..........if that is really on the cards!?

Split track rod end boots aren't a fail at the moment as long as there is no exessive play in the socket. However split steering rack gaiters are a fail.