Automotive Myths

[oldford]

 

Considering that the MOT is only valid for the date of testing, which leaves at least 364 days in the year where it isn't actually applicable (yeah I know the "certificate" is valid for a year but that's essentially worthless if there is a problem with the vehicle) - I'd say the above isn't relevant.

 

You are only foregoing "one" day after 3 years of driving which really wouldn't make any difference at all in most cases.

 

FWIW - my old '95 Nissan 240SX (Florida registered) has never had a single official inspection or MOT in its life - I can gaurantee you the car is completely roadworthy.

 

Same goes for my '86 Suzuki GSX-R750 - however, it will be subject to this bullshit at some point in the future when I register it in the UK...

 

I see your point and I, like you have a similar attitude towards the road worthiness of my car. Unfortunately we are very much in the minority. I have seen first hand, 3 year old cars fail the test on all too often easily checked items. Tyres are an all too common fail, some on obvious lack of tread, others I have seen due to long deep cuts on the inner sidewalls, not obvious but potentially dangerous to the driver and other road users, especially on the type of car that I have seen it on, at nearly £300 a corner, not a cheap fail.

 

So the certificate states that the car met the requirements at the time of test, more often than not there will be an advisory issued which will detail problems with non testable items or degradation of testable items which may require attention in the future.

 

When you get your car UK registered and tested feel free to post up the results.

[fiatdaft]

fiat 130's have ferrari engines

[254575]

 

Considering that the MOT is only valid for the date of testing, which leaves at least 364 days in the year where it isn't actually applicable (yeah I know the "certificate" is valid for a year but that's essentially worthless if there is a problem with the vehicle) - I'd say the above isn't relevant.

 

You are only foregoing "one" day after 3 years of driving which really wouldn't make any difference at all in most cases.

 

FWIW - my old '95 Nissan 240SX (Florida registered) has never had a single official inspection or MOT in its life - I can gaurantee you the car is completely roadworthy.

 

Same goes for my '86 Suzuki GSX-R750 - however, it will be subject to this bullshit at some point in the future when I register it in the UK...

 

I see your point and I, like you have a similar attitude towards the road worthiness of my car. Unfortunately we are very much in the minority. I have seen first hand, 3 year old cars fail the test on all too often easily checked items. Tyres are an all too common fail, some on obvious lack of tread, others I have seen due to long deep cuts on the inner sidewalls, not obvious but potentially dangerous to the driver and other road users, especially on the type of car that I have seen it on, at nearly £300 a corner, not a cheap fail.

 

So the certificate states that the car met the requirements at the time of test, more often than not there will be an advisory issued which will detail problems with non testable items or degradation of testable items which may require attention in the future.

 

When you get your car UK registered and tested feel free to post up the results.

 

i always thought asking MOT testers whether they support 2 year MOT's is like turkeys voting for christmas. they are never going to support halving their workload, no matter what evidence is put in front of them.

[fiatdaft]

the test will prob end up being twice aslong with all the items that they want to add to the test.

[Negative Creep]

I'm sure our resident MOT testers can tell us some absolute horror stories about cars brought in for the test that were simply too dangerous to be allowed on the road again. Imagine if the owner drove round in it for another 12 months!

[CreepingJesus]

Surely the point of the MOT, is as a 'line in the sand'. It has to be acceptable on that day, so most people, most of the time will at least attempt to keep up the maintenance. If they don't, they get some useful pointers as to the error of their ways. Says he with the non-functional speedo, and musical wheel bearing...

 

Anyway. A 'myth' that's been bugging me since about '91, was that the original prototype Calibra Turbo had about 250 horse in it, as GM were keen to beat Ford. Sadly, it suffered from horrendous torque steer, so bad that one of the testers had a bad accident at Millbrook/Bruntingthorpe. As a result, the production versions were softer, and altogether tamer.

Confirm/deny?

[fiatdaft]

torque steer on a 4 wheel drive?,maybe the the power was reduced to give the 4wd bits a life expectancy of 15 mins instead of 10?

[Station]

Anyway. A 'myth' that's been bugging me since about '91, was that the original prototype Calibra Turbo had about 250 horse in it, as GM were keen to beat Ford. Sadly, it suffered from horrendous torque steer, so bad that one of the testers had a bad accident at Millbrook/Bruntingthorpe. As a result, the production versions were softer, and altogether tamer.

Confirm/deny?

 

Possibly untrue as all Turbo's had 4x4. The Corsa GSi had a rumour that the Lotus tuned C16XE engine was producing 150bhp, but tuned down due to the 150bhp Astra GSi. Mantzel produce an inlet manifold that 'releases' 150bhp on the Corsa engine. Sorry, Vauxhall bore ramble there.

[cobblers]

YOUR SPARE TYRE IS BALD THE CAR WILL FAIL ITS MOT.

 

 

also, bad camber causes tyre wear. It does, but bad tracking does it 10 times faster.

[Des]

Vehicles cause global warming.

[gtd2000]

When you get your car UK registered and tested feel free to post up the results.

 

Oh the 240SX is staying in Florida - no plans to ship it over

 

The GSX-R750 is still Hong Kong registered - there are a couple of jobs I need to do on it - brakes need servicing and there is a slight weep in one of the USD forks stanchions.

 

Other than that, it's good to go - or to put it another way - it won't be going in for a test until I know everything is up to scratch...then again I'm in Washington state so it's not going to be for a while yet

[gtd2000]

Surely the point of the MOT, is as a 'line in the sand'. It has to be acceptable on that day, so most people, most of the time will at least attempt to keep up the maintenance. If they don't, they get some useful pointers as to the error of their ways. Says he with the non-functional speedo, and musical wheel bearing...

 

Funnily enough, it used to be the case that the speedo did not need to work to pass the MOT test....

 

At the end of the day I'm more concerned with people driving like idiots (and there are too many of those nowadays) rather than people driving around in cars which would fail an MOT because there is a perforation in a sill, split CV joint gaitor, or a slight chip in a windscreen making it "un-roadworthy"...

 

I wonder how people survive in 3rd world countries? It beggars belief!

[gtd2000]

I just had a thought - perhaps if we all drove around in "dangerous" old shit heaps, there might be less accidents as you'd HAVE to drive more carefully?

[gtd2000]

Yeah, we all should be aware it's just another tax at the end of the day - and an opportunity for the less than honest test centres to hold the punters hostage for repairs.

 

The great thing is how they can make people believe it actually makes the world a safer place to live in....LMFAO

[Luxobarges_Are_Us]

you have to remember that, despite all the courts saying that they apply the "man-on-the-street" reasonableness principles, lawmaking actually caters to the lowest common denominator (gosh, I sound like a lawyer ). You don't need anyone to tell you not to set fire to your neighbour's house because you're annoyed by the angle they park in, but I BET there are people who would've done it had there been no law prohibiting it. In that way, MOT and various other bits of elf-n-SAFTY make sense as they don't cost that much and they prevent a large number of people from being their usual, idiotic selves.

[Des]

Top Gear provides informed enlightenment of matters automotive in an entertaining manner.

 

The MOT is V. important BTW, although it may seem to cover all manner of petty crap these days think of life without it. Backyard mechanics fixing brake lines with screenwasher hose, brake pads cut out of chipboard, misaligned headlamps that dazzle you will remain so forever.

[Father Ted]

Top Gear provides informed enlightenment of matters automotive in an entertaining manner..

 

and Jezza is a sex god

[Rod/b]

All well and good, but look at the amount of cars around with lights out or bald tyres. Seeing as the school of thought amongst a lot of people is that the MOT is the service, I think a bi-annual test would be an absolute disaster.

I have a very good friend who, despite knowing me for decades and spending many miles in cars with me (a few thou anyway) believed the MOT was the same as servicing...one ruined car later, they now get it serviced by the book...

 

I know too many people who think the same. One bloke who worked with my wife had a 4 year old Seat Leon Cupra with about 45k on it that he'd had from new that was running "a bit funny". She asked him the last time it had been serviced, and he said "NEVER". When told what a twat he was and to check the book in his glovebox, his reply was that he "thought these VW cars were supposed to be reliable and that he wouldn't be buying their shit again if they need servicing all the time".

[Gompo]

A Rover V8 is lighter than a 2.0 Pinto.

[dollywobbler]

The only cars that blow head gaskets are Rovers and MGs. Oh and any 1.6-litre Rover has a Honda engine (nope - only the R8 or later 416 auto).

[kinkersaab]

One that has never been answered for me is, Renault fuego and 25's shouldnt be taken into carwashes as the force from the brushes can pop out the rear screens, it was the owner of a 25 who told me this when i was about 10.

[Guest Leonard Hatred]

The only cars that blow head gaskets are Rovers and MGs. Oh and any 1.6-litre Rover has a Honda engine (nope - only the R8 or later 416 auto).

 

Even L-series diesels are labelled as the 'reliable Honda engine' (Honda's in-house diesel came almost a decade later) sometimes on eBay, the 75s built by BMW, and the KV6 and TD5 as BMW units in spite of BMW never building V6 or straight 5 engines...

 

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/LANDROVER-DISCOVE ... 0543228464

2. 5 LITRE DIESEL REGISTERED 20 DECEMBER 1999 WITH THE BULLIT PROOF BMW ENGINE.

 

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/1996-ROVER-220-SD ... 0586538468

 

Starts easily and runs very well. Don't get this confused with the petrol versions - which I would never buy!! No head gasket problems with the diesels (Honda engine).

 

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/2001-ROVER-45-IMP ... 0549570238

 

I know its done 131000 but it has the Honda diesel engine in which is NOT prone to the head gasket going.

 

It annoys me a lot, but Rover did use a confusing array of engines to be fair.

[cms206]

Funnily enough, it used to be the case that the speedo did not need to work to pass the MOT test....

 

 

Theres a Merc 811D at my current employer which, in the entire time I've worked there (getting on for three years), has never had a working speedo. Still doesn't.

 

One of the 709Ds has gone similarly, and we've just put a Dennis Dart through a test with no speedo either. It's an annoyance as a driver, but not ZOMGTEHFAILZ. Yet.

[mattblack]

If your car has a current MOT, and you take it and it fails that somehow 'cancels' the valid MOT.

 

RONG!

[wuvvum]

we've just put a Dennis Dart through a test with no speedo either. It's an annoyance as a driver, but not ZOMGTEHFAILZ. Yet.

I can't imagine a Dennis Dart ever going fast enough for the lack of a speedo to be a major problem.

[triang1]

Old one ... may be true???

 

Bloke starts job at FW Perry - truck dealers.

 

Opens bogus bank account for 'Fredrick William Perry'

 

Gets customers to make out cheques to 'FW Perry' for truck sales and cashes into this private account.

 

After dodging the accounts department questions for 6 months he suddenly doesn't show up at work by which time his bank account has been drained of all the money from several big rig sales...

 

...first heard this in the 1970's

[richardthestag]

Vehicles cause global warming.

 

But taxing the public for going about their daily business and forcing them to pay up because there are no alternatives totally fixes global warming (sic) climate change

 

 

fuckers all of em

[richardthestag]

Outside Bristol Zoo, there is a car park for 150 cars and 8 coaches.

 

It was manned by a very pleasant attendant with a ticket machine charging cars £1 and coaches £5.

 

This parking attendant worked there solid for all of 25 years. Then one day, he just didn't turn up for work.

 

"Oh well", said Bristol Zoo Management "we'd better phone up the City Council and get them to send a new parking attendant..."

 

"Err no", said the Council, "That car park is your responsibility"...

 

"Err no", said Bristol Zoo Management, "the attendant was employed by the City Council, wasn't he?"...

 

"Err NO!"

 

Sitting in his villa in Spain , is a bloke who had been taking the car park fees, estimated at £400 per day at Bristol Zoo for the last 25 years...

 

Assuming 7 days week, this amounts to just over £3.6 million...

 

RONG http://www.hoax-slayer.com/bristol-zoo- ... oax.shtml#

[triang1]

and I so wanted the Bristol Zoo story to be true.

 

The swindling salesman was first attributed to a Ford Dealers in Edgware in the 70's - but I've forgotten the name.

In those days a lot of dealers bore the name and initials of the founder rather than 'Perrys Ford' or 'Dixons of XXX' so it made the possibility of a swindle easier I suppose.

 

Trouble is proving to a bank that that's your name too...

[oman5]

austin allegros pop the windscreen out if you jack them up in the wrong place

 

confirm/deny?