MOT exemption for cars over 40 years old

angrycrow

As an owner of a car over 50 years old I am against the MOT exemption. Once the current restoration is complete I for one will be taking up the option of the voluntary MOT test each year for peace of mind.

Gloomendoom

I have car that is currently MoT exempt. I have absolutely no doubt that it would pass an MoT test. If I did, I wouldn't drive it.

There is still a legal obligation to ensure the vehicle is in a roadworthy condition, MoT or no MoT.

The problem with the current MoT test is that is has to last an hour. My car takes about 15 minutes to test as not a lot of the current test applies. That leaves me with 45 minutes of small talk with the examiner before the computer will spue out my pass cert.

oldagetraveller

That's good to hear. I have a 55 year old Morris Minor 1000 that is probably better maintained and safer than a lot of younger cars out there.
I doubt there will be a rise in "retro deathtraps" because the majority of classic car owners tend to look after them well.
Although mine has passed without problems, except for one advisory, for the past 20 years I've owned it I possibly will take it for a bi-annual test to my usual tester who is very classic car savvy and sympathetic.
Like Gloomendoom, the test takes about 15 minutes and afterwards a further 30 minutes is spent chatting to the tester in the office during and after the pass is notified.

ilikewatch

Gloomendoom wrote: »

The problem with the current MoT test is that is has to last an hour. My car takes about 15 minutes to test as not a lot of the current test applies. That leaves me with 45 minutes of small talk with the examiner before the computer will spue out my pass cert.

Really? The place I use completes the test and prints the certificate in 40 minutes - I've never been there for an hour. They have 2 bays and 2 testers (no other staff on site) and you book into 40 minute slots which are scheduled back to back through the day (other than a staggered lunch break).

Gloomendoom

ilikewatch wrote: »

Really? The place I use completes the test and prints the certificate in 40 minutes - I've never been there for an hour. They have 2 bays and 2 testers (no other staff on site) and you book into 40 minute slots which are scheduled back to back through the day (other than a staggered lunch break).

It may be 40 minutes for the test cert to print. The whole process takes an hour at the place I go. It's a small village garage, not an urban MoT factory.

onomatopoeia99

Joe_Horner wrote: »

Ad for emissions, the pre-cat levels really aren't hard to meet unless your engine is either clapped out, badly mis-tuned, or some cobbled together Franken-mill with wrong carb or ignition settings.

The majority of classics only have to comply with the "visiible smoke" test, and even that is very lenient.

Joe_Horner

onomatopoeia99 wrote: »

The majority of classics only have to comply with the "visiible smoke" test, and even that is very lenient.

Yep, rev it and an (unmetered) assessment of does it smoke too much

Although, the further after 1974 the rolling date goes more and more would be testable for basic CO / HC levels.

As for the "it only takes 15 minutes", no it doesn't for a proper test even on a classic. They still have as many wheels, tyres, structural areas, suspension joints and bushes, lights, (usually) seat belts, horns, brakes and steering bits to test. In fact, about all that's missing is an emissions test and a look at the christmas lights on the dashboard.

System

marlot wrote: »

Given that its harder and harder to find MOT testers who know what's what with older cars

Why do you think they need to? They're not repairing them, they're doing an examination of a set number of testable points on them which involves no removal of parts. The vehicles have to pass set criteria so all that "it's a Vauxhall Victor, they all have 3 inches of play in the steering" is irrelevant and would still be a fail if that were the case.

Gloomendoom

Joe_Horner wrote: »

As for the "it only takes 15 minutes", no it doesn't for a proper test even on a classic. They still have as many wheels, tyres, structural areas, suspension joints and bushes, lights, (usually) seat belts, horns, brakes and steering bits to test. In fact, about all that's missing is an emissions test and a look at the christmas lights on the dashboard.

Just lights, horn, shake the suspension, wiggle the steering wheel and test the brakes. Pop underneath and have a poke. How long does that take?

AdrianC

Tarambor wrote: »

Why do you think they need to? They're not repairing them, they're doing an examination of a set number of testable points on them which involves no removal of parts. The vehicles have to pass set criteria so all that "it's a Vauxhall Victor, they all have 3 inches of play in the steering" is irrelevant and would still be a fail if that were the case.

No... It really doesn't work like that...

A lot of the Reasons for Rejection do not have strict finite "x mm"-type lines drawn. Much is couched in "excessive"-type wording. If you've never had a look through the manual, it's very well worthwhile doing so. Remember, if it's not explicitly foul of something in the "Reasons for Rejection" column, it's a pass.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/mot-inspection-manual-for-class-3-4-5-and-7-vehicles

What is excessive for a normal, modern car may be absolutely optimal for an older design. 75mm (3") of play at the rim of a nominal 380mm diameter rim is the upper limit of acceptable for a non-rack and pinion steering system, but would be massively over the 13mm (1/2") for rack and pinion - but even then up to 48mm may be acceptable, depending on the number of joints. And, of course, if the wheel is bigger, the allowable play is bigger. And that's before you see the note that says...
"Note: Play due to wear or maladjustment must not be confused with apparent play due to the construction of the mechanism"

And that's before you get into the tester actually being capable of moving it on and off the ramp and rollers safely - let's say there's a centre throttle, or an external gear lever, or a fly-off handbrake. And when should a Tapley meter be used for braking performance, rather than the rolling road?