What's the correct changes to MOT test for classics, can anyone clarify the situation
What's the correct changes to MOT test for classics, can anyone clarify the situation
Its a stupid idea
40 year old cars need to be checked over as they rot like bean cans , and parts wear out
I took mine this year and there is play in both front and rear wheel bearings,
For the sake of £30 mine will be checked over
https://classics.honestjohn.co.uk/ne...m-mot-testing/
It's alright for me and the likes that just know your car inside out, but what about the thousands that don't and riley on a third party just to have a look once a year, I would have thought a more sensible approach would have been to have a very basic check over, however personally I'm pleased because when my Escort goes for it's MOT and because it has a LSD it can't be brake roller tested which means it has to be road tested and that's my problem but not anymore.
road testing isnt really an issue though, i do it outside our workshop, car never even makes it onto a road, 20 yards and 20mph is enough!
So a young enthusiastic mot tester, a hot Escort comes in for the test one day and it requires a road test for brakes, so you think he will just take it out side the workshop and not go above 20mph, what plant do you live on then I have to ask, I know what I would do
my answer to that is choose an mot station carefully and dont take your car down to a fast fit place! i presume your not going to leave your pride and joy at the mot station? in which case you can be there when its tested brakes included, they are hardly likely to cane it up the road and do burnouts with you in the passenger seat are they?
We test a lot of cars here, some very very fast ones, do i thrash them round the industrial estate? the answers no, why not? it out of respect for my customers cars and even though im not going to damage one of them, you never know who is watching. our reputation is more important than thrashing something up the road. My youngest member of staff is not on the insurance or allowed to drive customers cars, why because he is young so i dont take the risk. at some point i will put him on the insurance, but if he wants to keep his job he will drive customers cars with respect.
yes i was young and stupid once, but because of that i know what to look out for.
the reverse logic also applies, the change in testing means some young hot shot can now be behind the wheel of badly modified downright dangerous rust bucket of a car putting other road users at risk because that car doesnt require any sort of inspection any more.
given the choice of maybe risking someone "test drive" my car or help insure all cars on the road are safe i know what i would prefer
the reverse logic also applies, the change in testing means some young hot shot can now be behind the wheel of badly modified downright dangerous rust bucket of a car putting other road users at risk because that car doesnt require any sort of inspection any more.
given the choice of maybe risking someone "test drive" my car or help insure all cars on the road are safe i know what i would prefer
Thought lots of cars Turbosport members have will still need an mot.Did I not read that if the car has power increasing mods it will still need an mot?
There are no changes until May 2018. The final process still has not been decided until later this month.
I went to a VOSA refresher course just after the last MOT exemption. The lecturer, a one David Calvert, told tale of a recent event at the MIRA test centre. Other folk were there as well as the VOSA chaps, including some senior insurance bods, representing the motor industry’s finest insurance bodies. Any way the story goes that into a conversation betwixt the two relevant parties the VOSA chaps quizzed the insurance team of their view of them insuring old motors that had not even the minimum of mechanical check (for that is an MOT test). It dawned on them that they were wide open to all kinds of problems, litigation, uninsured losses etc etc.
It may be that there are stipulations in your insurance policy that requires an MOT, or similar engineers report, that allows you to be legally insured. If I were running an insurance company I would be damn sure not to leave myself wide open to such a huge risk.
Be careful out there.
Good point - who reads that small print anyway cos you just know 'those fish do wriggle when they're hooked'!
Update:
Info just arrived from VOSA via ‘Matters of Testing’ -
your classic car will need an MOT if it has been modified from standard spec.
https://mattersoftesting.blog.gov.uk...ess-directive/ Still doesn't give a us clue on the official benchmark for modified though. It doesn't say from standard spec either. You could have different wheels seats etc on that definition of modified, we know that isn't the case.
Who the hell thought it was a good idea for classic cars not to have an MOT anyway? Everything should be subject to even the most basic checks like brake efficiency and tyre condition.
The MOT thing doesn't bother me too much - it's the points system for historic vehicle status that worries me. It's only one step away for them to apply the "you don't have enough points to classify as historic" to "you don't have enough points to retain the original registration".
I definitely don't want to lose the number plate on a car I've owned for nearly 20 years, nor on the car that has been in the family since the late 70's/early 80's.
That's just so ludicrous. Those of us who cherish these cars can often have difficulty working out what the original spec of a car was. How the hell is VOSA supposed to know?Originally Posted by Frenchenstein
We all know there are umpteen variations of RS, GT, Sport, Mexico, XL, and other trims and specifications. There is no possible way that they can say for definite what a car from the 60's or 70's was supposed to have as original specification.
... also what is 'modified'? Is it if any original parts have been changed? What about if someone has changed original struts to Capri Bilsteins, what about if someone has fitted new modern pattern part legs, hubs and inserts? Is that a mod? It's no longer got original parts. Yes, I'm being somewhat facetious, but it's on a scored part according to the system.
It's going to be a total and utter mess.
Last edited by MegatronUK; 05-11-2017 at 22:23.
Changing a Ford strut for another Ford strut or a replica strut isn't a 'radical' alteration! Changing a leaf spring for a turreted coil over shock is 'radical'. And I think even VOSA will notice if the car ain't a Twin Cam then dual Webers are a 'radical' mod. Its not rocket science to google std. car specs and even the dumbest inspector can tell the difference between a x-flow and a OHC pinto..................my zetec's an even easier spot - the fuel injection gives it away LOL!
Okay, how about changing a strut to adjustable coilover? What if someone fitted period manufacturers options (say xpack wings or spoilers, or even twin IDF's as per RS2000)?
Yes, if someone has swapped in a modern engine or changed a leaf spring to coilovers it's relatively straight forward, but there's a massive amount of grey area between fitting like-for-like replacement parts and plainly obvious radical mods such as those.
How many current inspectors will know a mk1 Mexico has a 1600 pushrod and a mk2 has a 1600 ohc? The logbook just says 1600.
My point is just how many cars fulfil enough of the following points criteria:
Yes, it's the same old 'radically altered vehicle' blurb, but my understanding is that they are using the same metrics to catch vehicles that are no longer going to fall in to the 'historic' category. I'm willing to bet that they'll also be enforcing the same Q reg outcome that the scoring system is used for elsewhere. There are potentially huge numbers of us that are going to fall in to this trap, whether we've had work done professionally or done it ourselves in our shed.Chassis, monocoque bodyshell (body and chassis as one unit) or frame - original or new and unmodified (direct from manufacturer) 5
Suspension (front and back) - original 2
Axles (both) - original 2
Transmission - original 2
Steering assembly - original 2
Engine - original 1
You won’t be able to keep your vehicle’s original registration number if one of the following applies:
it has fewer than 8 points
it has a second-hand or altered chassis, monocoque bodyshell or frame
there’s evidence that 2 vehicles have been welded together to form one (ie ‘cut and shut’)
https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-registration/old-vehicles
Put in bigger tunnel? That would be a modified chassis, lose 5 points straight away. Fitted a 5 speed box? Modified transmission. No points there.
There's much more at stake here than simply having to continue to get an MOT every year for a 40+ year old car.
The rules have been around a lot longer than the past few months - 10 years I believe, they just were never enforced on older cars (never had a reason to). All this crap is Euro led and why we are following it is, i'm sure, a politico exercise! Whether you like it or not, if the car doesn't meet the numbers you get what you get. Personally my RS2 has std body / chassis + unavoidable panels through the years, Bilstein struts, quick rack, RS axle, single leaf springs 5 speed and a zetec which totals 11 - different yes, but not a radical design change!
They would throw the book at mine
I agree to a greater or lesser extent to all you write. These people/authorities don’t live in the real world. Utterly stupid to suggest any motor of advancing years should be exempt from a basic engineers examination. Madness.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks