The Triumph Dolomite Club - Discussion Forum

The government has just issued a consultation document that I believe we all need to consider.

If you have not seen it go to www.gov.uk/government and then type in roadworthiness testing.

I have suggested a cheaper biennial safety test for VHI's.

Its ridiculous to pay the same test for for a dolly 1300 as a S class merc.

A zero testing regime would be frightening! We all know owners who would drive round in completely unsafe sheds just to save a few quid.

I also suggested moving the category to model rather than age, so all dolomites and stags and spits would be VHI's but not yet mk4 cortinas for example....unless they move the date for VHI to 30 years.

Jonners

Interesting reading, I had seen this on twitter earlier this week following an article about "70's bangers" in some rag or other.

Personally, I think not having an MOT test requirement is a terrible idea, just because there are less classics on the road doesn't mean that a badly maintained one with a dangerous steering defect that suddenly snaps will not still plough into another lane and potentially kill someone. Yes that's a bit dramatic, but that was the point of the original MOT test, so why not go down that road, let's have a classic car MOT with a hugely reduced criteria that was more in keeping with an MOT of the 70's; brakes, structural integrity, steering.

Jonners, see you just posted as I pressed submit, so I'm glad I'm not the only one that thinks no MOT at all would be a bad idea!

I haven't read the article but aren't pre 60s vehicles already exempt from an MoT?

Given how few miles most of these cars do I would remove the need for emissions testing (my car in early 75, no emissions needed, same car made a year later, needs emissions testing) and that's it.
The structure/brakes should still be tested for safety.

I'm still for a yearly test, but only for the essentials, chargeable or not.

I also think its a bad idea to have no test. I said ages ago when the 50 year old rule came in if my cars are exempt I will still take it to a station for a test but not recorded. It pays to have a second opinion sometimes and if ramp access is not available to most its a good time to look under it properly once a year.

Tony

Would the proposed VHI certification for vehicles over 40 years old impact on Sprints that have been reshelled using a smaller-engined Dolomite bodyshell as a donor? Under the proposals it would appear that if a vehicle has been reshelled using a second hand or repaired bodyshell it cannot accrue the eight points required to classify as a VHI, even if all the other key components are original.
This would not affect me personally but might be a concern for some Sprint owners/ buyers.

And how would an MOT station know that a car had been reshelled? They would have to have a personal anorakish interest in Sprints to know the difference.

Its good that this has been recognised. I would personally go for the Reduced Fee option.
"We like testing these; its the only time we get to sit down for a cup of tea!"
-Quote from an unnamed MOT place.
Tony.

The rules are already clear about reshelling, but it seems nobody worries.
MoT testers are not too interested in getting to police all that stuff, as already mentined how are they supposed to know about all models of car etc.

Testing is vital in this country. Not much could be cut out of classic car tests without the possibility of affecting safety. And I have said elsewhere, I would like to see tyre age included in mot tests. Far too many classics have tyres that are over 10 years old, and that is plain dangerous.

I like the idea of a simple safety check for 40 year old vehicles.
My TR3 is MOT exempt, but I still take it for a test each year. How else can I check that the brake pipes aren't ballooning or check for play in the steering on my own? As mentioned above the examiner usually finishes the test pretty quickly. He asks me to sit in the car and operate the controls as he can't cope with them!! Then he asks me to wait 10 minutes before he can enter the results in the computer.

It's a stupid idea that should be shelved.

There's cars on here which I would prefer weren't on the road under the current system. Can you imagine a situation where those cars didn't need inspecting at all?

Old cars need testing just as much as newer ones. Just cos some 'enthusiast' owns it does not mean it is prepared and maintained well enough to be exempt from inspection.

A pointless way to save the motorist a tiny amount of money and deprive the MOT testers from a decent amount of work.

Even though we are leaving the EU, the government agencies are still trying to bring us in line with EU regs. The proposals are no more than an attempt to bring us nearer to them. At least they are not in favour of extending the exemption to cars that are only 30 years old, which is the norm in most of continental Europe.
I was not in favour of exempting pre 60 cars and I am doubly doubtful of releasing another umpteen thousand untested vehicles on the road. Human nature dictates that the bulk of drivers would not take their car and pay for an MOT if it were not a legal requirement - even responsible, mature, sensible people will not pay for something they don't have to!
And as for some of the other suggestions, self certification of originality and mileage limitations, that's really gonna get some honest responses!

Steve

By the way, I have been on the site and filled in the blanks with some scathing opinions of my own!