Re: MoT

["David R Johnson" <johnsnd@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Feb 24,  6:46am, Tim Weston wrote:

> Would someone please tell this 'Murican what a MoT is ? Is it as hideous
> as a California Smog Test ?

Depends on your point of view!  MoT stands for, I think, Ministry of Transport,
and it is a roadworthiness test administered by said government dept.  Your car
had to be tested annually at an approved test station after it is 3 years old.
 The problem is the approved test stations are frequently also repair shops,
with a vested interest in finding things to fail you for.

When I last went through this test about 10 years ago, it included structural
integrity (looking for corroded load-bearing sections of the
chassis/monocoque), rolling-road brake efficiency tests, including parking
brake, functionality check of all lights including turnsignals and acceptable
headlight aim, check tires for illegal tread depth/wear (and type I think -
i.e. no crossply and radial ply on same axle and similar rules), shock
absorbers, steering gear check for play and wear, integrity of exhaust system,
brake line corrosion, and no doubt a few other minor items I have forgotten.

Examples of things I failed for: cracked headlight lens, cracked exhaust
muffler weld, bald tires, corrosion in rocker panel (or sill), loose steering
coupling UJ.  The latter I fixed by tightening the pinch bolt, but the shop
refused to pass it without a new UJ.  I took it to another shop, where the
steering received no mention but I failed for corrosion (a welding shop).  The
tires and exhaust were found at - what else - a tire and exhaust shop!

The idea behind the test is a good one, since it prevents the preponderance of
poorly maintained and dangerous cars seen on the roads in some parts of the US.
 However, as you can see, the execution is flawed due to the opportunity for
corruption.  For every shop that fails you to get work, there is probably
another one which will look the other way for a few bucks and pass a dangerous
car.  Of course, they can get in trouble for this, but don't forget the UK does
not have the litigious legal system we enjoy here in the US.  I once looked at
a Triumph Spitfire (before I discovered Alfas - forgive me!) which was full of
rust, but the ink was still wet on the MoT.

BTW, if you don't get an MoT certificate, you are not allowed to pay your road
tax, which requires proof of MoT and insurance.  Without paying this outrageous
fee ($150 10 years ago), you don't get your tax disc, which you must display in
your windshield.  Without that, you will be pulled over by a police officer
approximately every 5 minutes.  These requirements can be hard on those trying
to run a car with little income, but the reasoning behind them is sound.  That
is why I was amazed to discover on moving to the US that there was nothing
preventing me from legally driving a rusted out POS with no brakes and no
insurance cover (until a few years ago in Illinois) until it killed someone, at
which point I would be liable for all damages but presumable would have no
means to pay them. <Off soapbax>.

> Every month when I receive my Classic (and Thouroughly Bred) Cars mag I
> wonder about this as I drool over the ads.For example: a Mk. I Sprite is
> offered with a "long MoT" as part of it's allure. Why is this
> commendable ?

It means no test required for many months, therefore no immediate costly
repairs needed to pass.

This is how things stood when I left the UK.  I would be interested to hear
updates from current UK residents, such as whether the rumoured smog check was
ever added.  Regards,

Dave J.
1982 GTV6

- -- 

------------------------------