exposed gearbox and MOT

[ferny]

So I downloaded and read through the MOT documentation and can't see why it'd fail based on that, but this seems like an obvious fail.

Would my RWD Herald fail an MOT if it has no gearbox tunnel covering the gearbox? Like I said, I can't see anything specifically stating it would, but the tester could fail it on "common sense" and risk of injuring occupants? It's to my advantage to keep back from making one right now as I'm suspect on the life of the speedo cable and want to keep an eye on it for a little while to prove its reliability. But if I have to make one now, I guess I'd have to!

[v8jim]

I can't really think of any other reason then if it is dangerous in some way like if you car see the prop turning or something apart from that just sounds like a pass and advise

[ferny]

Cheers for that.

This is how it looks right now standing from the passenger side. Ignore the wires as they'll be living behind the dashboard. As you can see, the UJ is well out of the way and the exhaust runs underneath so can't be touched.

[Darkspeed]

No MOT man who valued his license and liberty would pass a car without a complete fire wall / transmission tunnel.

[93fxdl]

What is and is not needed for mot is a complete disaster area, ie if wipers not working, take out the windscreen, then they're not needed, also faulty lights is a fail, all lights removed, a pass, a couple of centuries ago a friend was testing a metro, front suspension seized solid, no movement what so ever, official Vosa decree, no play, no leaks it passes.
Personally I cannot see how the tunnel is anything to do with mot, might possibly come under construction and use regs
Ttfn Glenn

[Curtis]

There is the statement about sharp protrusions, though I have a feeling that that only applies to the vehicle exterior. Might be worth covering up the sharp bits though

[chairchild]

I'm not familiar with the body, but it looks like you've physically cut a section of the tunnel out? In which case, they can argue it's missing a structural member, and fail it.


Make a quick cover from an old car bonnet and pop-rivets. Fit for the MOT, and remove once you're done

[BenzBoy]

All that's missing from the car is the pressed cardboard transmission cover. The bulkhead and floor is complete as far as metalwork goes, and all the structure is in the separate chassis.

I don't know if it's a pass or fail, but I just wanted to clarify all that for the MOT testers who might be unfamiliar with the car and may be able to give an informed answer

[Dez]

I can't see any specific point it would fail on, which would mean it would have to be a pass. No tester can fail something unless there's a specific testing point it contravenes.

I know of a number of 'rods that run similar setups with no issues. Not massively relevant but In the states it quite commonplace for them to only have a prop tunnel and no trans tunnel.

[froggy]

Sharp edges only fail if caused by damage or corrosion , no cover over gearbox might get an advisory but not a fail

[MrSpeedy]

The only possible fail I can think of is fumes entering the cabin space. The said, if your exhaust is completely leak free, then you should be able to argue that.

[BigDaftAl]

Unless there is a specific reason for rejection that applies, and I'm pretty sure there isn't, then it's an advisory only. That's what I'd do, I'm a tester myself.

[mk2cossie]

I'm with froggy and BatFastard on this one. As a tester myself, there's no RfR for transmission tunnel missing. Pass and advise maybe, but from that pic alone looks ok to me.

May get a WTF comment from the tester, but only a refusal to test if they are a complete jobs worth

[marinacoupe]

The safety aspect isn't a question of structure as the Herald has a separate chassis, I understand that you want to keep your costs down, but I think the tailshaft / propshaft area is the most likely to produce a fail as something (say a loose jacket or scarf) could get caught in it, from yourself or a passenger.

Rimmer Bros do a fibreglass replacement tunnel here- www.rimmerbros.co.uk/Item--i-709862FG

They are not that dear so if you are planning to do the interior at some point, you could buy now to avoid a potential fail point, it will also be quieter to drive and save water spray coming up in the wet.

MarinaCoupe (Ex Herald owner).

[doobie]

Just make a cover from an old carboard box as the original is only cardboard anyway... job done

[MrSpeedy]

I had to make an extension to the tunnel when I fitted my Ford gearbox.

I had already fitted the fibreglass one some time ago, and just made up the extension from some 18swg aluminium sheet.




Judging by how much heat still comes through mine, you're gonna be driving around in a sauna and needing hearing aids before long, so if you've got the chance, fit a tunnel

[ferny]

That's for the replies everyone!

The reason it hasn't got one is that I'll have to fabricate one and I was wanting to test the speedo cable I'd made before I tucked it away. Call me lazy, but the appeal of spending time making a cover only to have to remove it to check in cable was broken and the fear of the gearbox maybe ejecting oil everywhere was hard to find. As it turns out, the cable snapped within a few miles of, erm, test drives! I posted before for advice so if you missed it, a standard cover won't fit and I have to fully fabricate a new one. The original is oil soaked fibreboard, so nice and safe...

I've got a good honest tester so don't want to upset him or make him think I'm taking the Mickey.

[compass]

Aug 27, 2014 7:19:52 GMT ferny said:

That's for the replies everyone!

The reason it hasn't got one is that I'll have to fabricate one and I was wanting to test the speedo cable I'd made before I tucked it away. Call me lazy, but the appeal of spending time making a cover only to have to remove it to check in cable was broken and the fear of the gearbox maybe ejecting oil everywhere was hard to find. As it turns out, the cable snapped within a few miles of, erm, test drives! I posted before for advice so if you missed it, a standard cover won't fit and I have to fully fabricate a new one. The original is oil soaked fibreboard, so nice and safe...

I've got a good honest tester so don't want to upset him or make him think I'm taking the Mickey.

If you know the tester, why not just pop down and ask him before it goes in for the test? At least then you`ll know fot sure either way. It saves all this guess work.

Personally, that`s what I`d do. There`s nothing wrong with asking for advice off people more in the know.

Good luck.

[Deleted]

Aug 22, 2014 12:27:14 GMT 93fxdl said:

also faulty lights is a fail, all lights removed, a pass,Ttfn Glenn

Not true, you would also need to remove all wiring and switches related to the lighting circuit.

[Deleted]

A very jobsworth tester could refuse to test stating that his clothing might get caught on the prop shaft but as already been said by two testers on here advisory only.
I have just had similar issues with a Spitfire, I made (bodged) a tunnel using one off another car as you will be surprised just how much heat and fumes comes through that gap.