NI MOT centers, anyone had any problems with their car after visiting one?

Thriftylady

almillar wrote:

I remember around the time of people complaining about their diesel engines being damaged how stupid this was. If your car isn't able to rev, yes, several times, yes up to full revs, then it isn't roadworthy and it shouldn't pass. Don't complain if your belt snaps or your engine blows

But I thought that the point people were making about the diesel engines was that in driving conditions, on the road, it just would never happen that you would rev it up to full revs because the nature of a diesel engine was that it tootles along on lower revs than a petrol. I thought the argument was that this meant that this part of the test wasn't a valid safety point for a diesel engine ? I heard of a few people complaining about this, and all of them were in 'relatively' new, low mileage cars going through their first MOT, so its not like it was some 20 year old thing which was just being held together by rust.

I think its right that the MOT test should have high standards, and agree with your point about test centres being better than the system where any old garage can certify the car, but I don't think most people on this board want to drive round in an unsafe car - they want their car to come back to them after the test in the same condition that it went in. If you live outside a Metro bus route a car is pretty much essential, so it makes sense that we all want to preserve them as best we can at the least expense....

almillar

That's OK talksalot81, no-one says you have to be a car expert, you (and I) are just a driver. Nor do I expect you to buy a brand new car, my car is 9 yrs old and has just passed the MOT by the way. In my opinion, you need to change your garage, these are the people I would blame, not you or the MOT people. If you're paying them for a full service, which I would certainly expect would keep the car roadworthy, and pass the MOT, and if the wheels get knocked out of alignment, someone hasn't done their job in the garage.
As for the diesels Thriftylady, I'm not 100% on this so forgive me if I'm wrong, but I think the 'full revs' test was brought in to copy tests that are already going on in Europe. And tootling about is OK if you're just talking about town driving etc, but a diesel, like a petrol, should be at 'full tilt' when overtaking. The way I understand it, diesel doesn't burn as well as petrol, and therefore has to be sprayed into the chamber at high pressure in a fine mist in order for it to burn. Also, unlike petrols, they don't have rev limiters - this is because they naturally run out of puff at around 5-6,000 RPM, whereas most petrols are limited at about 7,000 rpm. This lower revving is part of why diesels last longer - everything is under less strain. Sorry for all the details, but I guess the point I'm trying to make is that really a diesel at full revs isn't that big a deal. Again, would you rather your engine siezed or your belt snapped off whilst overtaking or joining a motorway, or whilst revving in a test centre?
I take your point about getting your car back the same as it went in, if the guy had something sharp in his pocket and rips your seat, that's not on - but if your exhaust falls off, should you blame the test?
It certainly does make sense, especially if you are a high miler, to get a good deal on your servicing, I have no argument on that, in fact I think it may be a lack of shopping around that is the problem. If I had my car serviced with someone and the car failed, I wouldn't use their services again - they can't be very good. There are plenty of garages out there, main dealers and independents, good and bad, cheap and expensive. If your car fails, or goes wonkey after your MOT, I think the blame is squarely at the door of your garage. Hope that all makes sense, I think I'm starting to confuse myself with my rambling!
Alan

blackadder1b

Me thinks mr millar might work for the police or the mot centers!?

Thriftylady

I don't usually drive a diesel car but I was driving my fathers last week on the motorway and even overtaking at (naughty me) about 80 mph the engine wasn't revving at anywhere near the maximum, it wasn't even half way up the rev counter. (sorry, I'm not very technical, can't quote exact figures) It got me thinking about the discussion on this board because it did intrigue me all the more as to what the circumstances would be where it would need to be capable of prolonged maximum revs as a safety issue. Does a car need to be safe even when being driven in a way which is illegal in this country? And since theoretically at least, the reason its illegal to drive in a particular way (e.g. excessive speed) is because its by definition unsafe, then why would it matter if the car wasn't up to it?

elliemoo

My car wasn't permanently damaged at the MOT centre. The car had an engine immobiliser where you had to put in a 4 digit pin, I set the pin to service pin and went for the MOT. After you are asked to leave your car and stand behind the barrier the tester proceeded with the rest of the test, he neither asked for the pin nor paid any attention when I told him there was a pin. Anyway at the end of the test he came over and said the car wouldn't start as he had put in the wrong pin (3 times). I'm standing there in the test centre with a car that can't start, he and 2 other testers came over pushed the car outside, told me I would have to sort it out and closed the shutter after me. Well you can't beat customer service! I had to sit in the car and wait 40 minutes for the memeory to clear before I could enter a vaild pin and drive off.

almillar

Haha, well firstly blackadder1b, no I don't work for police or MOT, or anything to do with cars.
Thriftylady, when I said overtaking I suppose I should have said on a single carriageway, where you have to go onto the wrong side of the road. I don't mean speed, I mean hard acceleration, this is when an engine is stressed most and revved most, yes, diesels too. The other obvious example of where hard acceleration would be required would be slip roads onto a motorway - you'll probably come off a roundabout, up the slip road (often up a hill, making it harder) and have to match the speed of the traffic there, usually 70mph. Again, I for one certainly wouldn't want my engine to seize whilst performing either of these manouvres. Maybe you'll say you don't overtake, or that you don't use the motorway, but what if you sell your car to someone that does? The MOT says that your car can drive on any road.
I'll reinforce that speed is irrelevant, the timing belt could snap on a bad engine when pulling away from the lights in first gear at 10mph, so actually the unsafe car is fully capable of doing 80mph, as long as you get there slowly.
You're right, on the road you would never have a petrol or diesel car sitting at top revs for a prolonged period, but then, it is a stress test, and you can't do a stress test without some stress, so I don't see what's wrong with it honestly.
Ellimoo, in the case of your car (I'll guess Peugeot/Citroen) well this is just bad. I can't believe that someone who tests cars for a living doesn't know about this, never mind can't just follow your simple instructions. As you say, he caused the problem through his own ignorance, and did sod all to rectify it through rudeness. I hope you complained about him/your experience.

Alan