|
|
Sept 5, 2014 17:19:33 GMT
|
You could argue our system is deficient in other respects: For instance, many countries register and tax trailers, which seems like a pretty big oversight on our part in the UK. Attaching one to the back of a tested car does not automagically extend the roadworthiness bubble over the trailer mechanicals. I do agree that towed things should be tested too, for structural rigidity, tyre condition and braking systems (where fitted) to ensure they're suitable for use on the road. That highlights yet another reason getting a car tested is a good idea, can you imagine how much of a mess we could get with untested cars towing stuff? Badly maintained classic car towing an equally badly maintained trailer with a car on it, or towing an oversized caravan... the possibilities for calamity are staggering really. I'd far rather we have some sort of test in place to keep cars in roadworthy condition at least once a year than nothing at all, regardless of the vehicles age. Seeing the sort of tyres some people drive around on is scary enough and that's on cars that are tested annually, imagine what else people will neglect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 5, 2014 18:11:48 GMT
|
I can't see this being a good idea. It's like when a couple of years ago they wanted to change to 2 year testing - your average car driver will ONLY take their car to a garage when a MoT is due, or something has fallen off/stopped working (and they can't bodge it with WD40 and gaffa tape). Also, 30 year old cars need a lot of looking at! It is rare that I see an older car that doesn't need something rectifying.
|
|
To get a standard A40 this low, you'd have to dig a hole to put it in
|
|
Rob M
Posted a lot
Posts: 1,915
Club RR Member Number: 41
|
|
Sept 5, 2014 22:28:36 GMT
|
I can't see this being a good idea. It's like when a couple of years ago they wanted to change to 2 year testing - your average car driver will ONLY take their car to a garage when a MoT is due, or something has fallen off/stopped working (and they can't bodge it with WD40 and gaffa tape). Also, 30 year old cars need a lot of looking at! It is rare that I see an older car that doesn't need something rectifying. That's a fair set of points, and on the face of it, its a stupid idea. However,I suppose, one way of looking at it is the possibility that any car thirty years or older that is still on the road and being used is going to be looked after anyway and, probably, will have more care and attention from its owner than the average ten year old Mondeo. I cant honestly say that ive seen many 1984 Sierras that have ben gaffa taped the life out of any more than you are going to see many 35 year old Capris massively bodged and used daily. I'm not saying that it wouldn't or doesn't happen I just think such legislation pre supposes that any car thirty years old or more is likely to be in the hands of an enthusiast and/or a long term owner who has been and will be prepared to spend time and money keeping their car roadworthy. In reality, to reject the proposal because some people MAY be likely to run an old car on the cheap, would be unfair to the vast majority that wouldn't. It would be like banning all modifying to cars because some people might carry out mods that are unsafe if not dangerous.
|
|
|
|
MrSpeedy
East Midlands
www.vintagediesels.co.uk
Posts: 4,786
|
|
Sept 5, 2014 22:34:48 GMT
|
But really, a couple of hours a year spent taking your beloved motor to be appraised for it's technical and mechanical prowess really isn't that inconvenient is it ?!?!
I know that I wouldn't drive a dangerous car, and I know most (not all) others on here wouldn't either, BUT, that doesn't cover my ass when someone else's car crashes into mine (or a bus stop full of kitteh carrying nuns) because that 'notchy' steering turned out to be a failing ball joint that let go at the wrong time.
An absence of independent inspection is the top of a slippery slope imho
|
|
|
|
Rob M
Posted a lot
Posts: 1,915
Club RR Member Number: 41
|
|
Sept 5, 2014 23:02:29 GMT
|
But really, a couple of hours a year spent taking your beloved motor to be appraised for it's technical and mechanical prowess really isn't that inconvenient is it ?!?! I know that I wouldn't drive a dangerous car, and I know most (not all) others on here wouldn't either, BUT, that doesn't cover my ass when someone else's car crashes into mine (or a bus stop full of kitteh carrying nuns) because that 'notchy' steering turned out to be a failing ball joint that let go at the wrong time. An absence of independent inspection is the top of a slippery slope imho Ive no problems taking my beloved cars for a yearly MOT, if the 30 year rule doesn't come into force I wont mind and I certainly am not campaigning in favour of it either. I just feel that the legislation would only favour a minority, people who are enthusiasts blah de blah. The MOT will no doubt spot defects but it is neither Mystic Meg nor Derek Accorah and could not possibly pre empt all defects that could occour afterwards. A once a year MOT test will not rubber stamp a cars roadworthiness for 12 months, it never has and it never will. What about the modified car that passes an MOT and three months later the owner decides to cut the coils...badly? Decides to get his mate to band some steels....badly? To be honest, some of the stuff I see on here that people trumpet as being totally safe leaves me cold. Would I feel happier mixing it in traffic with somebody driving a well kept 30 year old Chevette than someone hooning around in a 14 year old Micra with its coils wired into their cups so they don't slip out? That's a no brainer, right? There are rights and wrongs and dos and donts in all scenarios, I just don't think you can make blanket assumptions about what COULD happen when there will almost certainly be thousands of cars younger than 30 years old out there that will have MOTs but will still be defective and they, without question, will form the majority of the traffic on our roads.
|
|
Last Edit: Sept 5, 2014 23:03:52 GMT by Rob M
|
|
|
|
Sept 5, 2014 23:20:27 GMT
|
Being an enthusiast doesn't make you qualified. That's the problem here - Your hypothetical 1984 sierra could be cared for, serviced and loved but when are you going to see that rotten brake pipe that's hiding between the axle and the tank?
Another point worth making - I sometimes have to turn away freshly restored cars because of substandard welded repairs. Tacked on chassis sections, sills full of bodge, that sort of thing. I once saw a Morris Oxford for test where the owner had cunningly removed the entire length of the floor chassis rails because they were rotten. Remove the oversight of an annual test and who knows what bodges people will perform. This was one of the reasons the MoT was introduced in the first place.
|
|
To get a standard A40 this low, you'd have to dig a hole to put it in
|
|
Rob M
Posted a lot
Posts: 1,915
Club RR Member Number: 41
|
|
Sept 5, 2014 23:42:03 GMT
|
Being an enthusiast doesn't make you qualified. That's the problem here - Your hypothetical 1984 sierra could be cared for, serviced and loved but when are you going to see that rotten brake pipe that's hiding between the axle and the tank? Another point worth making - I sometimes have to turn away freshly restored cars because of substandard welded repairs. Tacked on chassis sections, sills full of bodge, that sort of thing. I once saw a Morris Oxford for test where the owner had cunningly removed the entire length of the floor chassis rails because they were rotten. Remove the oversight of an annual test and who knows what bodges people will perform. This was one of the reasons the MoT was introduced in the first place. Blimey!! I see where you are coming from. Points taken, no MOT exemption!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
that 'notchy' steering turned out to be a failing ball joint that let go at the wrong time. Funny you should say that, because last week I failed someone's beloved Rover (so loved it has a name!) for a notchy balljoint, put DANGEROUS on the fail and explained why. They chose to drive home and fix it later, it got about a mile before the driver's side front wheel fell off. Luckily it was in a supermarket carpark and not on a trunk road, but it proved my point. I also know that to most of the general population taxed=roadworthy, so if you create a situation where you can dig grandad's old viva out of the garage and do no more than apply for a tax disk and pump the tyres up someone will do it.
|
|
To get a standard A40 this low, you'd have to dig a hole to put it in
|
|
stefan
Posted a lot
If it isn't broken fix it till it is
Posts: 1,598
|
|
Sept 7, 2014 19:08:16 GMT
|
Very very bad idea for more reasons than I could type up here but most have been covered
|
|
POWER IS EVERYTHING WITHOUT CONTROL
1985 Honda jazz 1997 Saab 93 convertible 2010 transit 280
|
|
|
|
Sept 20, 2014 16:46:50 GMT
|
I could live without MOT.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 20, 2014 20:36:48 GMT
|
that 'notchy' steering turned out to be a failing ball joint that let go at the wrong time. Funny you should say that, because last week I failed someone's beloved Rover (so loved it has a name!) for a notchy balljoint, put DANGEROUS on the fail and explained why. They chose to drive home and fix it later, it got about a mile before the driver's side front wheel fell off. Luckily it was in a supermarket carpark and not on a trunk road, but it proved my point. I also know that to most of the general population taxed=roadworthy, so if you create a situation where you can dig grandad's old viva out of the garage and do no more than apply for a tax disk and pump the tyres up someone will do it. Many yrs ago i did all the brakes on my old Primera. New discs pads as i knew they were getting on a bit,so did them before mot. Failed the mot,because when i refitted the front brake caliper,i had managed to twist the flexi pipe and kink it, i never even realised,and i've done more brakes than i care to remember. So i think we all need our motors checking, no mot is not s good idea.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 20, 2014 22:35:08 GMT
|
In North America and Australia there are many jurisdictions that don't require annual roadworthiness tests. Others do. There are plenty of studies that have compared different jurisdictions to see if there is any benefit to annual roadworthiness tests. The results have been inconclusive.
If MOTs are done away with, will there be some old bodged up bangers driving around? Yes. Are there already bodged up old bangers driving around? Why yes there are - and many of the bodges have been done to get them through the MOT. Which is safer? The beat up Plymouth Duster driving around Detroit with gaping holes in its sills? Or the beat up Ford Cortina driving around Manchester with its sills full of newspaper and fibreglass resin (but it passed it's MOT guv)? Is the BMW E30 driving around Vancouver with the ABS light on more dangerous than the same car driving around Bristol but with all the ABS wheel sensors disconnected so that the light won't illuminate?
|
|
Last Edit: Sept 20, 2014 22:44:49 GMT by mrabody
1995 Range Rover 4.0 1995 BMW 320i Saloon 1989 BMW 325i Touring 1991 Mercedes 300TE-24 1991 Mercedes 190e 1970 Sunbeam Imp Sport
1966 Valiant 200 Custom 1964 Ford Fairlane 500 Station Wagon
|
|
THE_Liam
Yorkshire and The Humber
If at first you don't succeed... HAMMERS.
Posts: 1,363
|
|
Sept 22, 2014 7:08:23 GMT
|
In North America and Australia there are many jurisdictions that don't require annual roadworthiness tests. Others do. There are plenty of studies that have compared different jurisdictions to see if there is any benefit to annual roadworthiness tests. The results have been inconclusive. If MOTs are done away with, will there be some old bodged up bangers driving around? Yes. Are there already bodged up old bangers driving around? Why yes there are - and many of the bodges have been done to get them through the MOT. Which is safer? The beat up Plymouth Duster driving around Detroit with gaping holes in its sills? Or the beat up Ford Cortina driving around Manchester with its sills full of newspaper and fibreglass resin (but it passed it's MOT guv)? Is the BMW E30 driving around Vancouver with the ABS light on more dangerous than the same car driving around Bristol but with all the ABS wheel sensors disconnected so that the light won't illuminate? Good point mate, but in that case maybe we should go the other way and be more stringent? Surely an MOT tester should be allowed to check if the ABS sensors have been disconnected? I mean, how daft is it that you can get through an MOT by covering jagged, rusty arches in gaffer tape?!?!
|
|
|
|
mexicansteve
South West
Posts: 683
Club RR Member Number: 31
|
|
Sept 23, 2014 8:57:57 GMT
|
I struggle to find any legitimate reason why a car owner would want their vehicle to be exempt from MOT ?! I agree. I like being checked for road worthiness. Despite the cost I'm no mechanic!
|
|
BeQuietandDrive
1989 Bedford Astra Van
|
|
jonw
Part of things
Can open a Mouse with a File
Posts: 768
|
|
Sept 24, 2014 10:20:56 GMT
|
My worry is that the MoT exemption is the thin end of a wedge, ending in restricted use.
Personally I'd like to see a system where the MoT is kept but perhaps standardized for older vehicles, or maybe as Craig1010 alludes to a German style two tier system.
I will also say that under the current system you can MoT a pre 1960 vehicle, but it is optional. I know people who do for the reasons outlined above.
|
|
Suzuki SV650R The good Triumph T20 The Bad BMW G650GS The Ugly Matchless G12CSR The Smokey Toyota Hybrid One pint or Two?
Ingredients of this post Spam Drunken Rambling of author Bad spelling Drunken ramblings of inner voices Occasional pointless comments Vile beef trimming they won't even use in stock cubes
|
|
|
|
Sept 27, 2014 11:49:49 GMT
|
The MOT cost money, time, etc. Scrap it for classics. Anyone, who is crying for the MOT, because of "safety reasons" still got the oppurtunity to take their car to a workshop for a check up.
|
|
|
|
bortaf
Posted a lot
Posts: 4,549
|
|
Sept 27, 2014 13:52:16 GMT
|
The MOT cost money, time, etc. Scrap it for classics. Anyone, who is crying for the MOT, because of "safety reasons" still got the oppurtunity to take their car to a workshop for a check up. Yes but the people who don't give a toss and drive a dangerous car on the road are a liability and they are exactly the people who are not "crying" for an MOT, do you really value money over safety ? do you really think the hour it takes to get an MOT is a waist of time compaired to a life, lets not beat around the bush cars are deadly weapons that any old Ahole can tootle about in at speeds in built up area and fast flowing roads where the failier of an unchecked compoinant can be costly in lives and property.
|
|
R.I.P photobucket
|
|
|
|
Sept 27, 2014 16:11:06 GMT
|
I think restricted use of MOT exempt vehicle is inevitable. If you want unrestricted use then the answer will be simple - get a MOT ! IMO the abolition of the paper VED disc is the first part of a planned shake of current rules. I hope VED will be abolished all together and extra duty added to fuel. For us that run a number of vehicles yet don't do a massive mileage in any the current system is unfair when you can have a rep doing 50,000 miles a year in a £30pa VED and a enthusiast paying £230 pa VED on a cherished car that just does 3000 miles a year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 27, 2014 20:16:14 GMT
|
I think restricted use of MOT exempt vehicle is inevitable. If you want unrestricted use then the answer will be simple - get a MOT ! IMO the abolition of the paper VED disc is the first part of a planned shake of current rules. I hope VED will be abolished all together and extra duty added to fuel. For us that run a number of vehicles yet don't do a massive mileage in any the current system is unfair when you can have a rep doing 50,000 miles a year in a £30pa VED and a enthusiast paying £230 pa VED on a cherished car that just does 3000 miles a year. Completely agree with this ^^ .... and keep the MOT
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 28, 2014 12:22:05 GMT
|
The mot WON'T be scrapped, it will never happen, nanny state & all that.
|
|
|
|
|