Lotus Elan

MOT exemption - recent UK Gov Consultation

PostPost by: Spyder fan » Fri Sep 15, 2017 11:14 am

miked wrote:In general I agree with the MOT as it can catch persons who don't do checks. I personally would not take my car for one unless it was an insurance condition..
I am on my 5th DAY of my father's camper that he should not have bought. Private, SOLD as seen. Holes in chassis, crap brakes, strut tube 30mm out of clamp. FULL MOT.
Whilst this may be an exception, I watch these guys like a hawk and only go to one i trust and lets me supervise jacking and going on the ramp. I have stories of damage when I was asked to sit in the office. Again maybe exceptions.
Damage to A frames. Jacking the driver floor. Balancing an Elise in the middle on wrong points. A guy that was doing an MOT on my plus two for the 4th time telling me that the computer says it should not be a fixed heat but drop head. Had to phone VOSA to tell him how to work the computer.
It is stressful beyond belief for me. I have my own lift and will happily be the judge of my car. Only thing I like is the brake testing which I would pay for if I doubted my brake efficiency.
Maybe controversial statement but that's my opinion. Pre 1960 stuff is exempt anyway.
Mike :(


Mike,
It looks as though you and I and quite a few other Zetec owners will not be able to claim exemption from MOT. I don't have a problem with this, the annual MOT focuses me to maintain the cars correctly and ensure they are safe, I would urge everyone even the best mechanics amongst us to let a fresh pair of eyes inspect their cars for safety once a year.

Extract from the Government consultation paper https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... idance.pdf

The criteria for substantial change
A vehicle will be considered to have been substantially changed (and hence not to
have been historically preserved or maintained in its original state and to have
undergone substantial changes in the technical characteristics of its main
components) if it meets one of the following criteria. Such vehicles will not be
considered of historical interest and will be continue to be subject to vehicle testing.
Criterion 1
If a vehicle has a power to weight ratio of more than 15% in excess of its original
design, unless such a modification took place before 1988.
Kindest regards

Alan Thomas
User avatar
Spyder fan
Coveted Fifth Gear
Coveted Fifth Gear
 
Posts: 2245
Joined: 11 Jun 2009
Location: Kent country & Sussex seaside UK

PostPost by: Elanintheforest » Fri Sep 15, 2017 12:34 pm

There may be other problems for Spyder boys, where power to weight ration has been increased by more than 15%, unless the modification was completed before 1988.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/substant ... uart-brown
Last edited by Elanintheforest on Fri Sep 15, 2017 12:58 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Elanintheforest
Coveted Fifth Gear
Coveted Fifth Gear
 
Posts: 2686
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
Location: Forest Of Dean, Gloucestershire

PostPost by: JimE » Fri Sep 15, 2017 12:39 pm

Rotted +2 sill members would be an instant fail but how many MoT testers know they exist! I always do a thorough pre-MoT test myself so I'm confident my cars are safe. I did respond to the consultation and suggested an MoT test every 2 years. If you look at the standard of 40 year + cars on the road you will probably find that fewer fail MoTs than more modern cars. The numbers on the road are insignificant. What may be more of a worry is some of the old coggers who are driving them :lol: Jim
JimE
Second Gear
Second Gear
 
Posts: 161
Joined: 22 Jan 2017
Location: London

PostPost by: Elanintheforest » Fri Sep 15, 2017 12:56 pm

You may joke Jim but 97% of accidents are down to driver error, and just 3% down to mechanical failure. My bet it would be 10 to 15 year old cars and trucks having the failures, with classics generally being over-maintained and in very good health.

For me, there are currently two weaknesses with the current MOT. Our brakes are meant to have the fluid changed every 2 years and a complete hydraulic overhaul every 5 years. No MOT can check that this has been done, and not doing it must increase the likelihood of brake failure.

Most of our cars are used very little, and have tyres fitted that are well over 10 years old. Even with no obvious signs of ageing, and having been kept out of the sun, the rubber does change and deteriorates to potentially dangerous levels much past 10 years. The MOT doesn't look at the age of tyres.

What are the safety related failures we a most likely to have in our cars? My guess would be something to do with brakes and tyres.
User avatar
Elanintheforest
Coveted Fifth Gear
Coveted Fifth Gear
 
Posts: 2686
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
Location: Forest Of Dean, Gloucestershire

PostPost by: el-saturn » Fri Sep 15, 2017 1:19 pm

the swiss offer the so-called veteran status which makes you go thru MOT every 6 years (usually 7). the car must be in original and almost perfect condition: no modern parts (even a new radio), no TTR stuff etc.. : they swallowed my carbon dash - it takes me 2 days to rebuild the car for MOT and 2 to get back!!
el-saturn
Fourth Gear
Fourth Gear
 
Posts: 936
Joined: 27 Jun 2012
Location: switzerland

PostPost by: billwill » Fri Sep 15, 2017 2:46 pm

>The MOT doesn't look at the age of tyres.

My MOT tester told me that that test is coming in.
Bill Williams

36/6725 S3 Coupe OGU108E Yellow over Black.
billwill
Coveted Fifth Gear
Coveted Fifth Gear
 
Posts: 4128
Joined: 19 Apr 2008
Location: London UK

PostPost by: Spyder fan » Fri Sep 15, 2017 2:55 pm

Elanintheforest wrote:There may be other problems for Spyder boys, where power to weight ration has been increased by more than 15%, unless the modification was completed before 1988.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/substant ... uart-brown

I'll swap Kermit for Bumpy then! Be quick, I can be fickle
Kindest regards

Alan Thomas
User avatar
Spyder fan
Coveted Fifth Gear
Coveted Fifth Gear
 
Posts: 2245
Joined: 11 Jun 2009
Location: Kent country & Sussex seaside UK

PostPost by: William2 » Fri Sep 15, 2017 3:37 pm

I am afraid to say I am a bit of a cynic and I can't help thinking the government has an ulterior motive in that this will be part of a longer term strategy to keep classic cars off the road!
William2
Fourth Gear
Fourth Gear
 
Posts: 762
Joined: 20 Jan 2013
Location: West Sussex

PostPost by: Elanintheforest » Fri Sep 15, 2017 4:38 pm

Spyder fan wrote:
Elanintheforest wrote:There may be other problems for Spyder boys, where power to weight ration has been increased by more than 15%, unless the modification was completed before 1988.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/substant ... uart-brown

I'll swap Kermit for Bumpy then! Be quick, I can be fickle


Nah, bumpy's BDA was installed in 1971, so his mod can stay!Can a Zetec be de-tuned to 109bhp plus 15%?!
User avatar
Elanintheforest
Coveted Fifth Gear
Coveted Fifth Gear
 
Posts: 2686
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
Location: Forest Of Dean, Gloucestershire

PostPost by: Spyder fan » Fri Sep 15, 2017 5:15 pm

Elanintheforest wrote:
Spyder fan wrote:
Elanintheforest wrote:There may be other problems for Spyder boys, where power to weight ration has been increased by more than 15%, unless the modification was completed before 1988.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/substant ... uart-brown

I'll swap Kermit for Bumpy then! Be quick, I can be fickle


Nah, bumpy's BDA was installed in 1971, so his mod can stay!Can a Zetec be de-tuned to 109bhp plus 15%?!


Ooh you scaremongerer! the proposal is that modified cars producing more than 15% extra p/w ratio over standard will still be subject to an MOT, that is all.
Nothing wrong with that, stop spreading anti Zetec propaganda or I will get really cross.
Kindest regards

Alan Thomas
User avatar
Spyder fan
Coveted Fifth Gear
Coveted Fifth Gear
 
Posts: 2245
Joined: 11 Jun 2009
Location: Kent country & Sussex seaside UK

PostPost by: Elanintheforest » Fri Sep 15, 2017 5:57 pm

Presumably though it also means that VED is levied on the 'substantially modified' cars as they would now not be classified as historic vehicles, and VED is based on emissions? Hence the additional question when taxing the car? A chum with a YB in his Escort is talking about a tax rate of £640 or £840 a year as his emissions are right on the change point between the 2 (high) levels. He's had a few chats with DVLA, who don't seem to be able to supply a consistent story, but he's not happy!
User avatar
Elanintheforest
Coveted Fifth Gear
Coveted Fifth Gear
 
Posts: 2686
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
Location: Forest Of Dean, Gloucestershire

PostPost by: Spyder fan » Fri Sep 15, 2017 6:47 pm

Mark,
I can't see any reference to VED in the proposals, it's just whether a vehicle requires an MOT or not. Interestingly vehicles produced before 1960 which are already exempt will become subject to the new rules.Therefore a "substantially altered" Pre 1960 car which under the current rules doesn't require an MOT will actually require an MOT after 2018, even if it didn't previously require one.

I can't see a problem
Kindest regards

Alan Thomas
User avatar
Spyder fan
Coveted Fifth Gear
Coveted Fifth Gear
 
Posts: 2245
Joined: 11 Jun 2009
Location: Kent country & Sussex seaside UK

PostPost by: nigelrbfurness » Fri Sep 15, 2017 10:05 pm

There are already Mot-exempt vehicles on our roads. So whilst it may be controversial, it's not a new issue, just an extension of existing legislation
As regards insurance, my mot-exempt vehicle is insured by the same well-known insurer who covers my classic cars and probably those of quite a few members of this group so that seems unlikely to pose a problem. I think the insurance requirement is usually that if the vehicle is to be used on the road then must meet all the legal requirements thereof. Personally I'm not bothered either way. If you are a competent mechanic and have been maintaining your car yourself then you probably regularly look at the items that are checked during the mot test and have a good awareness of the general safety critical issues for your car. My mother-in-law, in comparison, only knows that her car is "roadworthy" on one day of each year. The rest of the time she just assumes it is. I suspect that is part of the government's justification for this change.
1970 S4SE/1760cc big valve/SA-AX block, L2s, 45DCOEs, 1978 Jensen GT, 1962 AH Sprite, Alfa-Romeo 159, 1966 Bristol Bus, 1947 AEC Regal bus.
nigelrbfurness
Third Gear
Third Gear
 
Posts: 245
Joined: 04 Apr 2008
Location: Dunmow, Essex, UK

PostPost by: john.p.clegg » Sat Sep 16, 2017 4:27 am

Basically,it doesn't matter what we think,it will be done.....
Some will see it as a cheap form of motoring but the more responsible will take steps to safeguard themselves and others....
John :wink:
( on a beach in Corfu )
User avatar
john.p.clegg
Coveted Fifth Gear
Coveted Fifth Gear
 
Posts: 5228
Joined: 21 Sep 2003
Location: Manchester

PostPost by: mikealdren » Sat Sep 16, 2017 8:24 am

Is the 15% increase based on actual BHP or Lotus' claimed power!
mikealdren
Fourth Gear
Fourth Gear
 
Posts: 797
Joined: 26 Aug 2006
Location: Surrey England
PreviousNext

Total Online:

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests