Jaguar Forum banner
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Administrator
Joined
·
10,053 Posts
Looks like some good changes are happening to how the customer is shown the MoT results. Finally removing that silly undertray cover obscuring parts advisory.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,060 Posts
Yes also changing the phrasing from Advisory to Minor.
Will see what they come up with but anything to help the customer look after his car has to be a good thing.
I would like to see how they cope with the DPF ruling as not having one does come under the Major defect but not a Dangerous one.

Roger
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,331 Posts
Good changes.

We must remember people are becoming simpler.

So we have to go simple.

It will have to be signalled in colours soon. Green = OK, Amber = almost OK, Red = Stop!

Driverless cars can understand that. ;)

.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
10,053 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,903 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
There probably all hoping they will catch fire so they get the insurance pay out :mrgreen:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,712 Posts
just an opinion but, an MOT that doesn't take into account maintenance records is pretty near worthless. Yes it will catch gross errors but, for example, if the brakes work to the standard the car will pass, that they may be worn to limits is unimportant. In my opinion brakes worn to limits should be an MOT failure but what do I know?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,042 Posts
I'm un-certain about these proposals to remove the requirement for 40 year old vehicles to be subject to MoT. I can accept the reasoning that these vehicles,according to statistics,are rarely involved in collisions...but...an independant set of eyes looking over the underside of anyone's old pride and joy can only be a 'good idea'?

Afterall,just how many classic owners have ready access to a car lift to properly examine their vehicles?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,060 Posts
Good changes.

We must remember people are becoming simpler.

So we have to go simple.

It will have to be signalled in colours soon. Green = OK, Amber = almost OK, Red = Stop!

Driverless cars can understand that. ;)

.
Who are you calling Simple. We are not all Meercats:-D

Roger
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,903 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
just an opinion but, an MOT that doesn't take into account maintenance records is pretty near worthless. Yes it will catch gross errors but, for example, if the brakes work to the standard the car will pass, that they may be worn to limits is unimportant. In my opinion brakes worn to limits should be an MOT failure but what do I know?
I had an advisory a few years a go that said parking brake pads are low so I think they must look at the brake pads if they can see them
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
10,053 Posts
I'm un-certain about these proposals to remove the requirement for 40 year old vehicles to be subject to MoT. I can accept the reasoning that these vehicles,according to statistics,are rarely involved in collisions...but...an independant set of eyes looking over the underside of anyone's old pride and joy can only be a 'good idea'?

Afterall,just how many classic owners have ready access to a car lift to properly examine their vehicles?
To qualify for the 40 year rolling MoT exemption the car must not be modified, I wonder how far that goes?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,060 Posts
I'm un-certain about these proposals to remove the requirement for 40 year old vehicles to be subject to MoT. I can accept the reasoning that these vehicles,according to statistics,are rarely involved in collisions...but...an independant set of eyes looking over the underside of anyone's old pride and joy can only be a 'good idea'?

Afterall,just how many classic owners have ready access to a car lift to properly examine their vehicles?
Anyone who has a car of that age will be of the type to keep it pristine as it will be an enthusiast
and not just the run of the mill owner. They will also be on limited mile insurance so will not be on the road that much.

Roger
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,060 Posts
To qualify for the 40 year rolling MoT exemption the car must not be modified, I wonder how far that goes?
I am with you on that one Ian. A vehicle built in the mid 70's may well have modified brakes, Valves etc for unleaded fuel etc. I wonder if that counts.
I still have an old Esso booklet showing all vehicles that can and cannot use unleaded without Modification. Haha

Roger
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,042 Posts
To qualify for the 40 year rolling MoT exemption the car must not be modified, I wonder how far that goes?
The proposal was that the power to wieght ratio could not be changed by more than 15%...totally un-workable!
Modifications carried out pre 1988 are also to be exempt....and it all comes down to a tick box online when you apply for exempt status so will be up to owner's 'honesty'..... :-D

It looks like my proposed Lenham converted Midget with a K series engine is do-able as a 'historic vehicle' with only moderate lies!

The point Roger makes in post 12 is flawed on the basis that although old cars see little regular use,there are some things that a second pair of eyes with the thing on a lift will see,making a subjective opinion about structure safety or brake flexi's,for example. Brake flexi can function perfectly on the way to the MoT,then be seen to swell under pressure....
There are also a suprising amount of 'classic' owners out there who do not get their mitts oily as well.
 
G

·
If the Government makes the MoT test harder to pass with lower emission limits for diesels etc more cars will fail and therefore won't qualify for any future scrappage scheme.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,060 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,060 Posts
The point Roger makes in post 12 is flawed on the basis that although old cars see little regular use,there are some things that a second pair of eyes with the thing on a lift will see,making a subjective opinion about structure safety or brake flexi's,for example. Brake flexi can function perfectly on the way to the MoT,then be seen to swell under pressure....
There are also a suprising amount of 'classic' owners out there who do not get their mitts oily as well.
The point I was making is that a true enthusiast will look after his car, either he will do it himself or get someone else to do it, and will keep it in pristine condition to maintain its value.

Roger
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,042 Posts
The point I was making is that a true enthusiast will look after his car, either he will do it himself or get someone else to do it, and will keep it in pristine condition to maintain its value.

Roger
Exactly!

Which makes complete bollocks of DfT's claim that removing the requirement to MoT old vehicles will 'save their owners money'!
The problems will start when a pedalist gets taken out by a classic with no brakes.....
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top