Classic cars forum & vehicle restoration.
|
|
| Author |
Message |
MikeEdwards
Joined: 25 May 2011
Posts: 2467
Location: South Cheshire
|
 Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2017 6:43 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Phil - Nottingham wrote: | | The huge vocal majority against 1960 exemption has not followed through to voluntary tests as only 2% have had them albeit a much smaller number of vehicles |
Could it be that some of them are having the test done, but not put through the MOT test station computer system? If a test station runs it through the MOT computer, then presumably they will have to pay the cost of the test to the DVSA, whereas they could run through the same steps of their own accord, without any payment to DVSA. Or is that not the case? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Phil - Nottingham
Joined: 01 Jan 2008
Posts: 1252
Location: Nottingham
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2017 7:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quite possible - it's not a real MOT therefore and the tester is liable to VOSA or even has to be licenced.
I think its better done off the system anyway and I am likely to have an independent inspection of the brakes, suspension and steering on all of ours every 18 months or 2 years by the person who has been MOTing all ours for some years as I trust his judgement and these are the area where a 2nd opinion is better
_________________
Rover P2
Rover P4
Rover P5 & P5B
Land Rover S2 & S3
Morris Mini Traveller Mk2 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Keith D
Joined: 16 Oct 2008
Posts: 1129
Location: Upper Swan, Western Australia
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2017 8:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Most contributors on this forum are based in the U.K. and you are in an environment that has not placed any restrictions on the use of your cars. Instead of worrying and whining about things that may very well not happen, why not get out there and start up your classic engines and enjoy your motoring.
Your government has given you a great boon in the removal of the useless MOT test. It may have been needed back in 1960 to remove clapped out and badly maintained cars from the road, but not any more. Cars of today do not allow the average home handyman to do much in the way of repairs or diagnosis to their vehicles.
You, the owners of these classic cars are the experts, not a young computer operator at your local testing station. Be grateful that this has finally been recognised.
Happy motoring!
Keith
_________________
1926 Chrysler 60 tourer
1932 Austin Seven RN long wheelbase box sedan
1950 Austin A40 tourer
1999 BMW Z3
Its weird being the same age as old people.
You are either part of the problem or part of the solution |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
colwyn500
Joined: 21 Oct 2012
Posts: 1745
Location: Nairn, Scotland
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2017 9:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Keith D wrote: | Most contributors on this forum are based in the U.K. and you are in an environment that has not placed any restrictions on the use of your cars. Instead of worrying and whining about things that may very well not happen, why not get out there and start up your classic engines and enjoy your motoring.
Your government has given you a great boon in the removal of the useless MOT test. It may have been needed back in 1960 to remove clapped out and badly maintained cars from the road, but not any more. Cars of today do not allow the average home handyman to do much in the way of repairs or diagnosis to their vehicles.
You, the owners of these classic cars are the experts, not a young computer operator at your local testing station. Be grateful that this has finally been recognised.
Happy motoring!
Keith |
Fabulously well said Keith....especially about (following your example) starting up the engine and motoring; there are not enough historic cars being used regularly in my experience.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rick
Site Admin
Joined: 27 Apr 2005
Posts: 22439
Location: UK
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peter_L
Joined: 10 Apr 2008
Posts: 2680
Location: New Brunswick. Canada.
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2017 10:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Here in New Brunswick, we have an annual "Safety Inspection" it is done by one or more "approved and trained" mechanics. (Depends on size of garage). The test is very much "fit for the purpose" and covers, things that move on suspension and steering, tyres, lights, wipers and body structure. It takes about 1/2 hour and costs $25, that is about £12 -15. We get a sticker that goes on the windscreen. Our 2016 Dodge had her first in 2017 and the wipers blades were replaced. Ice kills blades.
We don't have emission testing just here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rootes75
Joined: 30 Apr 2013
Posts: 3805
Location: The Somerset Levels
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2017 7:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
Totally agree, use it or loose it. We maintain our cars to a high level, in most cases more than most people daily drivers.
_________________
Various Rootes Vehicles. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MikeEdwards
Joined: 25 May 2011
Posts: 2467
Location: South Cheshire
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2017 10:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Rootes75 wrote: | | We maintain our cars to a high level, in most cases more than most people daily drivers. |
We do, but the general outcry I am hearing is not really aimed at us, the classic car enthusiast, it's aimed at the general ne'er-do-well that might resurrect a mid-70s car and put it on the road whether it's roadworthy or not - these people see the removal of the MOT requirement as opening the floodgates to a load of these things suddenly coming back from the scrapyards and mowing down kittens.
They're not considering a lot of things, including the thought that most of the "high-performance" cars they're worrying about have reached such a value that they won't be coming back as a cheap means of motoring - while I was writing the above I was struggling to think of an example car I could put in that hasn't gone toward silly money and therefore worth looking after properly. Capri 3.0? V6 Granada? Avenger Tiger? Lotus Sunbeam?
The fact that the MOT only checks the cars condition on a single day, and the requirement to maintain it as roadworthy doesn't change, doesn't seem to matter to anyone.
One question that does pop up is that of insurance, so a question for any of you who are running a pre-60 car at the moment: Does your insurance company have any view on whether you should get your car tested, even though there is no legal requirement any more? Or do they (as some have suggested) just re-iterate that it has to be roadworthy at all times, and in particular at the time of the accident that involves them? My view would be the latter - that even with a valid MOT, if it isn't roadworthy in a way that is relevant to an accident, they'd take a dim view - but I wondered if anyone had some actual knowledge on the subject. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rick
Site Admin
Joined: 27 Apr 2005
Posts: 22439
Location: UK
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mikeC
Joined: 31 Jul 2009
Posts: 1773
Location: Market Warsop, Nottinghamshire
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2017 1:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MikeEdwards wrote: | | ... while I was writing the above I was struggling to think of an example car I could put in that hasn't gone toward silly money and therefore worth looking after properly... |
One that springs to mind is the Reilant GTE; there seem to be quite a number of run-down examples which go for pennies.
Whilst I agree that owners generally look after their classics, it does concern me that there will no longer be a regular check on a car's condition. I am half looking for another classic, and have used the DVLA MOT site to check on several cars recent history. Most of them show a clean bill of health regarding MOT passes, but practically every one has shown significant advisories - rusting brake pipes, slight play in steering and suspension, even creeping corrosion - which have presumably been dealt with before the next MOT, indicating that a lot of owners rely on the MOT to flag up impending problems.
_________________
in the garage: 1938 Talbot Ten Airline
Recently departed: 1953 Lancia Appia, 1931 Austin Seven, 1967 Singer Chamois, 1914 Saxon, 1930 Morris Cowley, 1936 BSA Scout, 1958 Lancia Appia coupe, 1922 Star 11.9 ... the list goes on! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ukdave2002
Joined: 23 Nov 2007
Posts: 4104
Location: South Cheshire
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2017 3:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MikeEdwards wrote: | | Rootes75 wrote: | | We maintain our cars to a high level, in most cases more than most people daily drivers. |
We do, but the general outcry I am hearing is not really aimed at us, the classic car enthusiast, it's aimed at the general ne'er-do-well that might resurrect a mid-70s car and put it on the road whether it's roadworthy or not - these people see the removal of the MOT requirement as opening the floodgates to a load of these things suddenly coming back from the scrapyards and mowing down kittens.
They're not considering a lot of things, including the thought that most of the "high-performance" cars they're worrying about have reached such a value that they won't be coming back as a cheap means of motoring - while I was writing the above I was struggling to think of an example car I could put in that hasn't gone toward silly money and therefore worth looking after properly. Capri 3.0? V6 Granada? Avenger Tiger? Lotus Sunbeam?
The fact that the MOT only checks the cars condition on a single day, and the requirement to maintain it as roadworthy doesn't change, doesn't seem to matter to anyone.
One question that does pop up is that of insurance, so a question for any of you who are running a pre-60 car at the moment: Does your insurance company have any view on whether you should get your car tested, even though there is no legal requirement any more? Or do they (as some have suggested) just re-iterate that it has to be roadworthy at all times, and in particular at the time of the accident that involves them? My view would be the latter - that even with a valid MOT, if it isn't roadworthy in a way that is relevant to an accident, they'd take a dim view - but I wondered if anyone had some actual knowledge on the subject. |
I think I'm less concerned for a couple of reasons:
1) a roadworthy 10 year old car, that will be good for 200k miles, returns a decent MPG, requires minimal maintenance and can be picked up for a weeks wages, would be a more attractive proposition to someone wanting motoring on the cheap.
2) Even humble 70's cars will attract collectors; whilst in Corfu earlier this year we ate in a bar where the owners daughter flew around in a looked after but unrestored 1976 Fiesta, it turns out the car was bought new by the owners mother, the owner had learned to drive in it as had his daughter. He told me he frequently gets offered silly money for it, but refuses as the car has sentimental value...its a very basic Fiesta!
Dave |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paul fairall
Joined: 17 Nov 2016
Posts: 429
Location: North west Kent
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 15, 2017 1:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Having read about the proposals on various sites including Facebook and hot rod forums and trawled through the actual government proposal, if it goes through as is then I should be able to make some improvements to my ford popular to make it safer without labelling it radically altered.
With the engine kept as is and no power to weight ratio increase of more than 15% it will not automatically have to be mot tested. Radically altered means having less than 8 points and with the brakes not being on the list I'll not lose any points. Improving the suspension is only a loss of 2 points and will leave it with 12 points. So I can improve the brakes and suspension without it becoming radically altered and losing the historic plate and needing an mot, not that an mot is bad in any way.
_________________
1957 ford popular |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alastairq
Joined: 14 Oct 2016
Posts: 1950
Location: East Yorkshire
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 15, 2017 1:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Improving the suspension is only a loss of 2 points and will leave it with 12 points. So I can improve the brakes and suspension without it becoming radically altered and losing the historic plate and needing an mot, not that an mot is bad in any way. |
'Improving' the suspension? Adding tele shocks and panhard rods means the original suspension is retained....points-wise.
Even fitting a split front axle could be the same..since often it uses parts of the original suspension.
But fitting the suspension from an HA Vauxhall Viva loses the points.
It's more about identifying which vehicle the parts come from, rather than whether existing parts have been modified in some way.
However, fitting a steering rack, in place of a steering box, might be construed differently?
All the above applies if applying for a registration really.
The whole idea of 'modified' is also still to be decided upon. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paul fairall
Joined: 17 Nov 2016
Posts: 429
Location: North west Kent
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 15, 2017 3:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| alastairq wrote: | | Quote: | | Improving the suspension is only a loss of 2 points and will leave it with 12 points. So I can improve the brakes and suspension without it becoming radically altered and losing the historic plate and needing an mot, not that an mot is bad in any way. |
'Improving' the suspension? Adding tele shocks and panhard rods means the original suspension is retained....points-wise.
Even fitting a split front axle could be the same..since often it uses parts of the original suspension.
But fitting the suspension from an HA Vauxhall Viva loses the points.
It's more about identifying which vehicle the parts come from, rather than whether existing parts have been modified in some way.
However, fitting a steering rack, in place of a steering box, might be construed differently?
All the above applies if applying for a registration really.
The whole idea of 'modified' is also still to be decided upon. |
i am waiting a while to see how it pans out. The proposed legislation says 15% increase in power to weight means an mot. 8 point rule means keeping historic plate and brakes are not listed. Upright shocks are on my list. I was going to fit a steering rack but think I might lose some of the cars character
_________________
1957 ford popular |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rootes75
Joined: 30 Apr 2013
Posts: 3805
Location: The Somerset Levels
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2017 10:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
I had an interesting conversation with my Father last night, contrary to the report that I have read, the Classis and Vintage Commercial Magazine are apparently stating that all Commercials over 40 years will be included in the MOT exemption?
_________________
Various Rootes Vehicles. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
php BB powered © php BB Grp.
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
