New MOT Rules Coming....Possibly.

[Texas]

Got this from another forum I use

http://www.talkford.com/community/topic/372370-changes-to-mot/#entry2980490

Food for thought on a few points ( if they get implemented) like on the retro fit HID's, advisories being more 'official', EML and Brake Pad wear Indicator     Lights.

one that shouldn't be a worry for Lexus owners is the major oil leak fail....

Proposed changes are indicated by a Black Vertical Bar to the Left side.

,  

paul m.

Edited January 21, 2018 by Texas
Source added

[rayaans]

1 minute ago, Texas said:

Got this from another forum I use

http://www.talkford.com/community/topic/372370-changes-to-mot/#entry2980490

Food for thought on a few points ( if they get implemented) like on the retro fit HID's,

The HID thing is good. Too many vehicles with excessively bright HID lights which are obviously not factory fitted. 

Reverse lights make sense and it is a safety issue if cars dont have this IMO, same with brake fluid checks which I presume will allow testers to open up the cap

I welcome these changes. There's nothing there which would make me think - why is that there?

 

[james250]

27 minutes ago, rayaans said:

The HID thing is good. Too many vehicles with excessively bright HID lights which are obviously not factory fitted. 

Reverse lights make sense and it is a safety issue if cars dont have this IMO, same with brake fluid checks which I presume will allow testers to open up the cap

I welcome these changes. There's nothing there which would make me think - why is that there?

 

Agreed. All the points are good. Too many dodgy hid installations. If someone really wants hid they should get the correct headlight housing for it. 

Brake fluid testing I think is way over due and is a very good thing. 

[Texas]

21 minutes ago, james250 said:

Brake fluid testing I think is way over due and is a very good thing.

Yes, but according to Section Brakes 1.8 it is only a visual through clear resivour and cap is not to be removed!

paul m.

[rayaans]

1 hour ago, Texas said:

Yes, but according to Section Brakes 1.8 it is only a visual through clear resivour and cap is not to be removed!

paul m.

Even so, probably better than nothing at all

Old brake fluid is pretty obvious 

[colin79666]

Still appear to be excluding hybrids from the emission test. Not sure what to think about that as if you can force the car to run on the petrol engine then surely that component should meet certain rules for emissions/smoke?

[Linas.P]

@colin79666 I think emissions thing needs completely separate approach... at first it was CO2 which hunt, got everyone into diesels, now it is NOx which hunt. What they need is comprehensive pollution tests, which takes certain volume of exhaust gas from "real life reflecting test conditions", check exactly what pollutants are in it and charge accordingly not for single type, but for total amount + vehicle life-time CO2 footprint (e.g. Electric vehicles makes no tailpipe gas, but by far they are not carbon/pollution neutral).

That is long way to say I agree with your point, a lot of talk about pollution, but very little to improve testing. 

[Texas]

On 21 January 2018 at 6:11 PM, rayaans said:

Even so, probably better than nothing at all

Old brake fluid is pretty obvious 

Agree wholeheartedly on the impotrance of the condition of the fluid, but if your car fails on fluid then instead of getting a full system flush from master cylinder resivour to slave cylinder bleed nipple I guess some of the unscrupulous might just syphon out the master and refill!

paul m.

[rayaans]

41 minutes ago, Texas said:

Agree wholeheartedly on the impotrance of the condition of the fluid, but if your car fails on fluid then instead of getting a full system flush from master cylinder resivour to slave cylinder bleed nipple I guess some of the unscrupulous might just syphon out the master and refill!

paul m.

Thats probably true but atleast it'll take some cars off the road which havent had brake fluid changed in 3-4 years! Or force them to have a change atleast

[Texas]

Yes, but we all know that it is the fluid at the other end of the system that takes the brunt of the work, exposed to high and low temperature cycles and the fluid in the resivour does not actually move much, so like I said the unscrupulous can give the impression that All the fluid is new.

paul m.

[james250]

I also read that under the new rules, vehicles that emit ‘visible smoke of any colour’ during Mots will be assessed as a major fault and issued with an automatic fail. Doesn't the is250 pretty much always have smoke in cold weathers?

[Texas]

Yes it would appear to emit 'smoke' but we know that this is condensate/steam or water vapour and any MOT tester worth his/her ( gotta be one out there) salt will know the difference ( hopefully).

 

paul m.

[rayaans]

13 hours ago, james250 said:

I also read that under the new rules, vehicles that emit ‘visible smoke of any colour’ during Mots will be assessed as a major fault and issued with an automatic fail. Doesn't the is250 pretty much always have smoke in cold weathers?

I think they mean smoke as in actual smoke, not water vapour / steam.

I'd presume its stuff like Black smoke from those old diesels you sometimes see running down the motorway or blue smoke.

[Guest]

you know it's not steam if you can see it with your human eyes.

[Texas]

I know Steam is a colourless gas and cannot be seen but what you are 'seeing' is steam at the condensing into water vapour stage known as 'Wet Steam'. But to the layman water boils and what you 'see' eminating from the surface is Steam. The real ( invisible) steam in in the area between the surface of the boiling water and the wet steam you can see.

paul m.