do you MOT? Why?

[Bill_qaz]

As I recall from when the original MOT exemption was expanded, circa 2011.. As part or removing Red Tape by the Coalition Government, a key factor was an increasing number of MOT Fails that were due to a lack of Testers who could MOT without a Computer plugged in.
There were an increasing number, year on year, of successful appeals by owners for 'incorrect' failure certificates and DVLA were looking to stop the rising number of such appeals.

Essentially things that were common and legal on cars back when they were made, therefore still legal, but completely out of the experience of anyone under 60. For example failures for...
Excessive wear in a bearing which had just been replaced with NOS, similarly with Track Rod Ends.
Not understanding how old style Dampers operated.
Tester breaking an Indicator Stalk off while trying to dip the headlights.
A classic Jag Owner actually paid out for laboratory testing to get a report that the wheel bearings which had been failed were NOS to original 1960s standards.
Even an early 1990s TVR model being failed for having a back lit rear number plate -- that's how TVR made them!
I've no idea what other makes/models may have used them but I'd bet some other top end fancy cars had them.

Part of the problem is DVLA, they don't readily publish annual data about MOT appeals.

Some MOT places try it on anyway; I had one about 4 or 5 years ago give my wife's Corsa an Advisory for 'Misting' of both rear shocks and immediately try to get me to book it in for replacements. I told them I didn't agree with that diagnosis and have never used them since.
The same Shockers are still on the car and have passed every subsequent MOT.
The manual actually says "Slight seepage causing a film of fluid on a shock absorber is not a reason for rejection"
It's just how some shocker designs operate.

But back to the original question, I don't have my Minor MOT''d because the system is geared to a modern car and being plugged into the equipment.
I would be in favour of a basic test done 'old style' but not the way it is done at the moment.
I wouldn't trust anyone other than my local garage and I don't think he really wants the hassle of doing it.

When I worked for Leyland and we started using spring loaded ball joints, the testers were failing vehicles because they thought they had play when they levered them. As a result we had a tool made like a G clamp which compressed the joint against the spring. It then had two machined pads where you measured the gap with feeler guages, this gave an accurate measure of wear.
A lot of hassle because testers didn’t understand the principal of shock absorbing joints. That was them not understanding new design, just like many modern testers not understanding older vehicles.

[Nickol]

Only that amount?

With our Mafia type organisation, I have to pay minimum €110, albeit every other year. Always my biggest fear is "new" ideas a tester has. I have had for example, failures due to

- The standard tilting seats not secured at the back allowing foreward movement in the case of an accident.
- insufficient support for brake lines underneath - the standard clips apparantly not enough.
- Tyres need an innertube as the rims not suitable for tubeless tyres
- Blinker frequency incorrect (it uses a standard relay)

As in most things in life, being pragmatic, it is easier and quicker just to do what the tester wants.

[geoberni]

Only that amount?

With our Mafia type organisation, I have to pay minimum €110, albeit every other year. Always my biggest fear is "new" ideas a tester has. I have had for example, failures due to

- The standard tilting seats not secured at the back allowing foreward movement in the case of an accident.
- insufficient support for brake lines underneath - the standard clips apparantly not enough.
- Tyres need an innertube as the rims not suitable for tubeless tyres
- Blinker frequency incorrect (it uses a standard relay)

As in most things in life, being pragmatic, it is easier and quicker just to do what the tester wants.

So that fallacy has made it into German folklore too....
I see you're not showing as a MMOC Member, so won't have seen the article I wrote for the last magazine exposing the false narrative about the connection between 'safety rims' and tubeless tyres.

So I'll share the summary of the article:

Tube-type tyres are designed with a smooth inner surface to prevent friction, heat build up, and premature failure of the inner tube. They are specifically constructed to house a tube, ensuring that the rubber surfaces do not rub against each other.

While in comparison, Tubeless tyres generally have a rougher, more textured, and less refined inner surface. This is because they are not intended to protect an inner tube from friction; the inner carcass is designed primarily for airtight-ness rather than texture.

None of this takes into account any other issues of tubed tyres that have now been reintroduced to the tubed tubeless tyre. So next time you're told that a wheel without a safety bead must have a tube fitted, remember the timeline of what came when. Ask them to explain why it needs a tube.

Remember that the safety bead originated in 1941 for tubed Bias tyres in the USA.
The Safety Rim concept predates both Radial and Tubeless tyres. Fitting a tube to a tubeless tyre immediately negates the significant safety benefit of the tubeless design, it's resistance to dramatic blow-outs. Irrespective of a 'safety bead' on the wheel, how does fitting a tube to the tubeless tyre increase your safety?

One final thing to consider; fitting tubes to tyres marked tubeless is clearly a modification, so what does your insurance company think? After all, you will have ignored the tyre manufacturer's fitment criteria.

There is no connection between Tubeless Tyres and the Safety Rim.

The 'Safety Rim' that many in the tyre fitting industry claim is essential for tubeless tyres, was actually a manufacturer's new model feature in the USA when cars were were still fitted with tubed Crossply (aka Bias Tyres in the USA) in 1941, several years before tubeless tyres were invented post WWII.

Dodge and DeSoto were both Chrysler brands.

Fig 2 - 1941 Dodge advert.jpg (1.37 MiB) Viewed 5638 times

Dodge Safety Rim - A.jpg (243.45 KiB) Viewed 5638 times

DeSoto Rim -A.jpg (699.77 KiB) Viewed 5638 times

[myoldjalopy]

Tyre fitting places will often claim the same thing

[geoberni]

Tyre fitting places will often claim the same thing

Which is why I wrote the article, so that owners can be informed and not have to accept the complete and utter BS spoken by many tyre fitters.
It's just sheer folklore spread from person to person, as proven by the timeline of what came when.
Bottom line is that the driver is responsible for the vehicle safety; not the tyre fitter, who heard it from some other tyre fitter, who heard it from, etc etc starting with some bloke down the pub in the 1970s.
The simple fact is that a tubeless tyre correctly fitted is a massive safety increase over a tubed tyre. Tubeless don't generally have a blowout, tubed on the other hand invariable do.
By fitting a tube to a tubeless tyre just because someone thinks it 'has to have one', immediately negates that inherent increase in safety, by making it a tubed tyre and thus prone to a blowout if the tube is punctured.

I agree that a 'safety rim' does have the benefit of helping a deflated tyre remain on the wheel/rim, that's why Chrysler introduced them in 1941.
BUT, I'd much rather have a significantly better chance of not having an immediate explosive blowout, than knowing that carelessly driving on a deflated tyre might result in it detaching from the rim.
I'll hopefully notice the change in the handling of driving with a deflated tyre, but I've no chance of doing anything about a traditional blowout.

[mike1864]

They can do them cheaper if they want to. A couple of years ago my local garage did both my Minors for £50

[bobtail4x4]

I have had 4 cars tested this year,
£40 £30, free all at same place (free was a return for a favour,)
and £45 at another garage,

each time I get a chance to get under the car on a pit,

[mrs.smith2012]

I plan to MOT Nellie as I use her… that said my mileage will be extremely low so I have debated whether to have her tested every other year, and just take her for an inspection in between.. I know many owners do this… her MOT isn’t due until the end of the year so I’m undecided right now

It will probably cost you as much if not more for an inspection as it does for an mot which has a fixed maximum cost.
Therefore you may as well get it mot'd if you wish to have her checked. Unless you can find a classic car experienced friendly local garage who will inspect for at a reasonable charge.

My local garage do a classic car inspection at a very reasonable cost!

[mrs.smith2012]

I plan to MOT Nellie as I use her… that said my mileage will be extremely low so I have debated whether to have her tested every other year, and just take her for an inspection in between.. I know many owners do this… her MOT isn’t due until the end of the year so I’m undecided right now

If it were me, with a new car, I would get it MOT'd when next due, and then decide how often from therein on.

She was MOTd just before I brought her home, and she passed with no advisories! So she’s all good, and I’ll be doing less than 3000 miles this year because that’s all I’m insured for
So I’ll see how she goes but considering the low millage I wasn’t sure if it was worth forking out for an MOT which will be more costly than an inspection… I’ll see!

[Bill_qaz]

I plan to MOT Nellie as I use her… that said my mileage will be extremely low so I have debated whether to have her tested every other year, and just take her for an inspection in between.. I know many owners do this… her MOT isn’t due until the end of the year so I’m undecided right now

It will probably cost you as much if not more for an inspection as it does for an mot which has a fixed maximum cost.
Therefore you may as well get it mot'd if you wish to have her checked. Unless you can find a classic car experienced friendly local garage who will inspect for at a reasonable charge.

My local garage do a classic car inspection at a very reasonable cost!

Then thats the way to go, they will probably be more sympathetic than a modern mot check and in my opinion more thorough, not just working through a tick list on a computer screen
Also if you don't have facilities its always good to have a local garage who you trust and help to keep them in business.

[mrs.smith2012]

It will probably cost you as much if not more for an inspection as it does for an mot which has a fixed maximum cost.
Therefore you may as well get it mot'd if you wish to have her checked. Unless you can find a classic car experienced friendly local garage who will inspect for at a reasonable charge.

My local garage do a classic car inspection at a very reasonable cost!

Then thats the way to go, they will probably be more sympathetic than a modern mot check and in my opinion more thorough, not just working through a tick list on a computer screen
Also if you don't have facilities its always good to have a local garage who you trust and help to keep them in business.

100% agree! We had a service plan on our modern car and had to take it to the dealer, every time it had an MOT or service they would either miss something, or there would be a new problem… I tell you I couldn’t wait for that plan to run out so I could start taking it to these local guys, I trust them much more! They mainly service modern vehicles but are both classic enthusiasts and own classics themselves, couldn’t ask for better really!

[ndevans]

As I recall from when the original MOT exemption was expanded, circa 2011.. As part or removing Red Tape by the Coalition Government, a key factor was an increasing number of MOT Fails that were due to a lack of Testers who could MOT without a Computer plugged in.
There were an increasing number, year on year, of successful appeals by owners for 'incorrect' failure certificates and DVLA were looking to stop the rising number of such appeals.

Essentially things that were common and legal on cars back when they were made, therefore still legal, but completely out of the experience of anyone under 60. For example failures for...
Excessive wear in a bearing which had just been replaced with NOS, similarly with Track Rod Ends.
Not understanding how old style Dampers operated.
Tester breaking an Indicator Stalk off while trying to dip the headlights.
A classic Jag Owner actually paid out for laboratory testing to get a report that the wheel bearings which had been failed were NOS to original 1960s standards.
Even an early 1990s TVR model being failed for having a back lit rear number plate -- that's how TVR made them!
I've no idea what other makes/models may have used them but I'd bet some other top end fancy cars had them.

Part of the problem is DVLA, they don't readily publish annual data about MOT appeals.

Some MOT places try it on anyway; I had one about 4 or 5 years ago give my wife's Corsa an Advisory for 'Misting' of both rear shocks and immediately try to get me to book it in for replacements. I told them I didn't agree with that diagnosis and have never used them since.
The same Shockers are still on the car and have passed every subsequent MOT.
The manual actually says "Slight seepage causing a film of fluid on a shock absorber is not a reason for rejection"
It's just how some shocker designs operate.

But back to the original question, I don't have my Minor MOT''d because the system is geared to a modern car and being plugged into the equipment.
I would be in favour of a basic test done 'old style' but not the way it is done at the moment.
I wouldn't trust anyone other than my local garage and I don't think he really wants the hassle of doing it.

What is needed is a basic test for cars made pre-1980, something that aligns with, and is relevant to, cars not built to modern standards.

I would also respectfully suggest a little understanding on our part, collectively, for MOT testers and garages that may only see a couple of classics a year. It's not difficult to point out some of the more obscure vagaries of a Minor, such as the foot operated dip switch, it may save a fail, a broken indicator stalk and a lot of time. I make a point of such things, it just smoothes the way.

Cars like ours are not common currency any more, we just have to accept that the world around us is no longer geared up for us.

[geoberni]

What is needed is a basic test for cars made pre-1980, something that aligns with, and is relevant to, cars not built to modern standards.

I would also respectfully suggest a little understanding on our part, collectively, for MOT testers and garages that may only see a couple of classics a year. It's not difficult to point out some of the more obscure vagaries of a Minor, such as the foot operated dip switch, it may save a fail, a broken indicator stalk and a lot of time. I make a point of such things, it just smoothes the way.

Cars like ours are not common currency any more, we just have to accept that the world around us is no longer geared up for us.

Very true, to a certain extent, however the other side of the coin is that the Tester who doesn't know the vehicle type/model, could equally be expected as a 'professional', to ask questions. Some of them have 'attitude' and won't be told anything.

it's not just the stereotypical macho man who talks down to women who bring vehicles in; I've had garage staff try to BS me about basic engineering practices and principles and be most put out when I have challenged them and pointed out that I have a lifelong engineering background.

Just a few years ago, I went into a local Tyre Fitting place, a branch of a national business but with not a great number of outlets, to have the rear tyres changed on my Kuga.
Long story short, because the car was around 13 years old, the locking wheel nut key had a little wear. If used carelessly with a windy wrench, it apparently slipped, something I'd never experienced using traditional manual methods.
I caught them using a lump hammer to try and "make the key fit" .... in their words.
They then offered to sell me a set of locking nuts.
I told them what they could do with their offer, to leave the locking nuts un-tightened when they had put the wheels back on, and I tightened them myself outside in the car park.
I initially dressed the damage to the key with a dremel typre tool, but did eventually have to buy a new set of locking nuts, solely due to their inept working practices and the damage they had done to the key.

There are owners out there who know little of their cars; I brought Basil from a professional bus driver; however he literally had all manitenace done by a local garage.
People expect that an MOT Tester knows their stuff, or speaks up.

[les]

You have to be very selective when listening to some folk. There is a saying,—- BS baffles brains.

[Blaketon]

I took part in the consultation when the present system was being planned. I don't feel that a car needs a new MOT simply because a year has passed since the last one and that it really needs to be based on usage. However, I think there is a case for getting an MOT if three years has passed since one was last obtained. I tend to get one every 1000 miles and sometimes that means I go beyond three years on some of the cars but for the sake of getting to a multiple of 1000, I hang on. At present, I have a lot going on in life, so one of my MG Midgets hasn't been out in a while and it needs only another 200 to bring it up to 70000 miles from new.

I tend to regard it as a second pair of eyes having a look and I trust the (Classic owning) people, who do the MOTs for me - https://www.sgarage.co.uk/ (At present there is an MGA in the front of the showroom). My concern is that if anyone takes chances and causes an accident, a knee jerk reaction will follow, making it bad for the rest of us. Lot's of modern motorists (I suspect like civil servants) have little understanding of cars and you could say they have two left hands. I think some of them struggle to differentiate between old cars and old bangers. One somewhat bimbolike TV journalist once tried to compare old cars with old people. Aside from the $6000 000 Man, I don't know of any other person who has been rebuilt, as an old car can be.

[Nickol]

I have not been online for a few days so missed the recent posts.

Thankyou Geoberni for the informative info on fitting tubeless tyres.

In Germany the testing is not made by garages but through 3 maybe 4 government authorised testing organisations . The TÜV being the main one. They have a purpose built testing station about 25km from me but my local garage also has Wednesdays when the visiting tester comes in. The trouble with the testing station, as I have found out, is that they employ at least 20 people and if you get a young bloke who has no experience of old cars and even less on British ones, it can lead to problems. The old boys seem to cherish looking at old cars and it is often as not a pleasure to be able to discuss things with them. On the other hand one young tester made the comment to me that he would never have allowed my Triumph Herald to be granted the hallowed "H" registration as given to classic cars over 40 years old. This was because the doors did not align properly - a common age factor for these cars.

Through my local British car club - it is perhaps surprising how popular British classic cars are here - I now have contact to a father and son team TüV inspector who know what to look for and I am now very grateful for their knowledge when the inspections are due rather than dreading the occaisons.

[svenedin]

I have not been online for a few days so missed the recent posts.

Thankyou Geoberni for the informative info on fitting tubeless tyres.

In Germany the testing is not made by garages but through 3 maybe 4 government authorised testing organisations . The TÜV being the main one. They have a purpose built testing station about 25km from me but my local garage also has Wednesdays when the visiting tester comes in. The trouble with the testing station, as I have found out, is that they employ at least 20 people and if you get a young bloke who has no experience of old cars and even less on British ones, it can lead to problems. The old boys seem to cherish looking at old cars and it is often as not a pleasure to be able to discuss things with them. On the other hand one young tester made the comment to me that he would never have allowed my Triumph Herald to be granted the hallowed "H" registration as given to classic cars over 40 years old. This was because the doors did not align properly - a common age factor for these cars.

Through my local British car club - it is perhaps surprising how popular British classic cars are here - I now have contact to a father and son team TüV inspector who know what to look for and I am now very grateful for their knowledge when the inspections are due rather than dreading the occaisons.

Interesting. My experience of a rural MoT testing station in the UK is that my car is a bit of a celebrity. The young, female MoT tester seems to enjoy getting to play with the car!

Stephen

[Bill_qaz]

I have not been online for a few days so missed the recent posts.

Thankyou Geoberni for the informative info on fitting tubeless tyres.

In Germany the testing is not made by garages but through 3 maybe 4 government authorised testing organisations . The TÜV being the main one. They have a purpose built testing station about 25km from me but my local garage also has Wednesdays when the visiting tester comes in. The trouble with the testing station, as I have found out, is that they employ at least 20 people and if you get a young bloke who has no experience of old cars and even less on British ones, it can lead to problems. The old boys seem to cherish looking at old cars and it is often as not a pleasure to be able to discuss things with them. On the other hand one young tester made the comment to me that he would never have allowed my Triumph Herald to be granted the hallowed "H" registration as given to classic cars over 40 years old. This was because the doors did not align properly - a common age factor for these cars.

Through my local British car club - it is perhaps surprising how popular British classic cars are here - I now have contact to a father and son team TüV inspector who know what to look for and I am now very grateful for their knowledge when the inspections are due rather than dreading the occaisons.

Your system is very similar to LGV testing in UK.
You either take it to a government VOSA test station.
Or some truck dealerships have a dedicated test bay, with strictly specified facilities, where the VOSA tester visits to carry out the tests.

[mike1864]

On MOT26, our neighbour had a problem with the head on his sidevalve; manifesting only when hot.
It needed trailering back to the UK.
But the breakdown company said that its final authorisation had to wait till their local agent had "performed the diagnostics" on it.
They are probably still searching for the 1952 USB socket!

[svenedin]

On MOT26, our neighbour had a problem with the head on his sidevalve; manifesting only when hot.
It needed trailering back to the UK.
But the breakdown company said that its final authorisation had to wait till their local agent had "performed the diagnostics" on it.
They are probably still searching for the 1952 USB socket!

Ah yes. I saw the owner at a barbecue yesterday. His car is at a depot in Coventry now and he will soon get the car back. He said the carburettor gets extremely hot and it seems that the car has not got a plastic spacer between the manifold and the carburettor. He is going to fit one.

Stephen