New MOT Test From May 20th.......

[kc]

It seems ludicrous to fail a car because it's headlight washers don't work when most cars don't have them!

All this extra requirements for MOT only affects law abiding citizens the crooks will still run untaxed, no MOT, no insurance cars. When you see on TV the police catch people without insurance they always seem to get fined less than my maximum no-claims insurance cost anyway!

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Posted by onetenor on 11/04/2018 11:53:33:

One trick I have heard of was brought to mind reading about the Brooklands running on Methanol. I was told to put an equal amount of Methanol (or Meths ) in with my petrol to ensure cleaner emissions or just use Methanol only I know if you have water in your petrol adding Meths ( about a pint ) wil clear it .I suppose Methanol would do the same. Illegal technically to run on Alcohols as they are not taxed but how often are we likely to be stopped for a fuel check?

But will it mix?

Many years ago, I had a 175 Honda which I fondly imagined would run better with a bottle of meths added to a tank of petrol - I tried it and for most of the tank, I convinced myself that I'd boosted the power by 20% and had discovered a cheap route to additional performance...of paramount importance to a 16 year old, of course...

...until the tank ran low and I switched to reserve when the engine faltered - the engine didn't pick up at all but I managed to struggle to my destination by running on full choke - the meths had simply floated on top of the petrol and of course, needed a far richer mixture to burn properly.

I did read somewhere that a small amount of nitromethane would assist in mixing meths and petrol but never put the theory to the test. Maybe water does the same job?

Simply using 50 or 100% methanol as suggested would be asking to kill your engine - I don't know how modern sensors and fuel injection equipment will react but the mixture will be ridiculously lean unless it can cope with the unexpected fuel and the injection pump may miss the lubricating effect of petrol. How will the seals and rubber components react? I would be wary of effects on the catalyst too...things have changed since a change of jets could modify an engine to run on methanol fuels.

Edited By Martin Harris on 11/04/2018 12:29:23

[Peter Christy]

I know that the French (and probably other continental countries) have been adding up to 10% ethanol to basic unleaded for some time. If you run a pre-2001 car over there, they advise using "super", as it has no ethanol content. Apparently ethanol can attack the rubber in the fuel system on pre-2001 cars. I would assume the same to be true of methanol.

Whether this was done to reduce emissions or to reduce the import bill for fuel, I have no idea. Probably a bit of both. And certainly, back in the days when I used to race karts, there were two kinds of Castol castor oil available - R for petrol and M for methanol, and woe betide you if you got he wrong one!

Unfortunately, the MOT on my 47 year old car is due on the 8th of May, just missing the deadline for not needing an MOT! Mind you, I will probably continue to get it MOT'd anyway as its the only time a professional mechanic gets anywhere near it! I do my own servicing on it.

Garages ask embarrassing questions like "Where do you plug the computer in?" (Answer: You don't! You have to diagnose it properly!) and "Where's the gear-shift?"! (Answer: On the steering column.....!)

--

Pete

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Don Fry]

Peter, regulations are the same in the U.K. as the rest of the continent. Most of the fuel pumped in the U.K. Has 5% ethanol. Suppliers in the U.K. are allowed to put 10 % in and still comply with British Standards, but don't at present.

Premium fuel is enanol free.

Ethanol petrol does not store well. My outboard manufacturer recommends use of ethanol petrol within a month.

Stated purpose of ethanol addition is reduction of greenhouse gases.

[Peter Christy]

Hm! Interesting! I thought they had to indicate if it contained ethanol, for the reasons stated above. Certainly, the last time I was in France, fuel containing ethanol was clearly marked E5 or E10 as appropriate. I've never seen that in the UK....

--

Pete

[Chris Walby]

We used methanol with the motorcycles for one reason, more power! You don't get something for nothing as you use more of it and if you buy the stuff that is taxed its more expensive than petrol.

Apparently some people would buy 45 gallon drums of technical grade (less water content) that didn't get taxed and thus cheaper plus runs better.

A bit out of interest I once calculated what a 500cc methanol burning grass bike did to the gallon in race conditions...about 6 MPG. The 0 to 85 mph in 2 gears with a full power gear change took a bit of hanging on though!

[Don Fry]

Peter, they do E10 in France, and mark it. Never seen E5 marked. But these are EU common standards. I suspect a consequence is you see some of our brethren using Premium in their aircraft. I always think it is a storage issue, rather than a performance issue.

[Peter Christy]

Don, I must admit I always buy super for the jerry cans - and for my only gasser (a helicopter). But that's because my "family" car is meant to run on super, so the jerry can can fuel any of the family cars as required.

My old antique was meant to run on 4-star, which has a higher octane rating than almost any current fuel. I get round that by using a lead substitute additive that contains an octane booster as well. The car runs fine on it. But even my "new" car is 23 years old now, so it well pre-dates ethanol fuel. The current wisdom that 5% does no harm, but steer clear of 10%!

I've just found a website that says that fuel suppliers only have to notify ethanol content if its 10% for the above reason. It also indicates that the "cleanliness" comes from the fact that the ethanol is "sustainable" - ie: grown from crops - not because it reduces emissions per se.

And in case you are wondering why I'm running a 23 year old car, its because I have yet to find anything suitable to replace it.....!

--

Pete

[Don Fry]

Peter, I totally agree, having got a suitable car, why waste life looking for something, at best, marginally better. I run newer cars than you, but still hangs on to then for 10 to 15 years.

[Denis Watkins]

Recent article attached, explaining that you don't have to have any work done at the test station

That, you can remove your car if you have a better work cost quote elsewhere

**LINK**

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Having fallen foul of the new regulations with my wife's car (the tester stated that he would have passed it the week before!) by failing with worn front discs (no argument, they needed changing) it was failed as dangerous.

I renewed them the same day but had an interesting conversation when I rang to book the retest. The MOT station was unsure of the legality of using it before retesting (they were inundated with work and it had 3 weeks or so on its MOT) but a logical interpretation of "not using it on the road until the fault was repaired" was agreed and the test booked for a few days after.

What was particularly interesting was their attitude to the new regulations and the problems they anticipated with having failed cars littering their premises as although they do repairs, they would not be able to commence them immediately in most cases. I wonder if this may result in many dangerous faults being classified as "majors" in future? Of course, most wear faults are not quantifiable - the tester's opinion being the deciding factor.

[Keith Lomax]

Posted by John Privett on 10/04/2018 18:46:11:

Posted by Martin Harris on 10/04/2018 00:21:57:

I'm not sure about that, John. The spare wheel has never been tested - so how could a car be failed for having one in it?

OK, thanks for the correction Martin, seems like it's just another Urban Legend. I'm sure it was stated as "fact" in various places when I started needing to worry about MOT tests back in the late 70s - it certainly convinced me!

My first ever MoT on a car - about 1982 - failed on tread depth on one tyre. The tester told me that if I put the spare on he could pass it, but only if I didn't put the displaced wheel in the car until after he had done so. I changed it on his forecourt and left the wheel leaning against his wall, he gave me a pass ticket, I picked up the wheel and happily drove off.

[Cuban8]

Chatting to my MOT tester a few weeks ago, I mentioned about the old days and having to drive cars on the road to test the brakes, rather than as now, on a rolling road. He told me that for some 4X4s the old method was still used! They were busy at the time and couldn't find out the reason.

[bert baker]

You sometimes need to jack the axle not being brake tested of the ground on some four wheel drives

[ASH.]

I have my car booked in for service and MOT tomorrow. It's quite a few years old and a TDi. It does smoke if revved hard. My mechanic told me there are companies that will de-coke the system, it costs about £80. I think I saw Ed China do the same on Wheeler Dealers. It gives the engine/exhaust(?) system a through clean out of all carbon deposits.

My car probably needs a new EGR. Percy mentioned getting a hybrid/electric car in future. Please no! I don't know why I have such a dislike (understatement) for battery operated cars. They are silent so dangerous and when ever I'm stuck behind a Prius I know I'm not going anywhere fast - max speed 20mph.. grrrr!

[J D 8]

Take it in,it may still pass.Get some injector cleaner in the tank [best done a month before] And if safe to do so drive it to the station like it's stolen This will clear the motor out. To many engines spend their time poodling about.They need to be worked.

[ASH.]

It will pass.. It always does but I do want to get the engine/exhaust throughly cleaned out professionally. Like my model engines I want everything clean and operating at it's optimum.

Off topic slightly.. What's the easiest way to remove carbon from exhaust chamber on 4st engine without dismantling. Any magic solutions.

[bert baker]

From experience with 7 litre diesels converted to gas that coaked up to extent of causing pre ignition,,

Good old Redex, dribbled in after the Air mass sensor..

Engine bogs down and muck comes out,,, overnights soaking is no longer required

[onetenor]

The spare in the boot if worn could be an MOT fail as it was thought that you could intend using it on the car in the event of a puncture. But if the spare was absent this could not be the case. However I can't ever having a spare even looked at let alone tested so which is right under new regs ?

[onetenor]

The spare in the boot if worn could be an MOT fail as it was thought that you could intend using it on the car in the event of a puncture. But if the spare was absent this could not be the case. However I can't ever having a spare even looked at let alone tested so which is right under new regs ?

[Gary Manuel]

Posted by Cuban8 on 07/06/2018 17:26:19:

Chatting to my MOT tester a few weeks ago, I mentioned about the old days and having to drive cars on the road to test the brakes, rather than as now, on a rolling road. He told me that for some 4X4s the old method was still used! They were busy at the time and couldn't find out the reason.

Could limited slip differentials give a false pass of the brake test by transferring some braking torque from one (well braked) axle to another (poorly braked) axle?

[bert baker]

Prob show as excessive bind

[J D 8]

Some 4x4's are always in four wheel drive [ Land rover Defender for one ] and have an extra differential in the gearbox to allow for different wheel speeds front and back [ axle diffs do the same side to side]

This type should be tested on a four wheel rolling road but as most are only two wheels at a time then the old method is sometimes used. An accelerometer is placed in the vehicle and readings taken as it is driven.

[Gary Manuel]

Posted by J D 8 on 07/06/2018 23:13:25:

Some 4x4's are always in four wheel drive [ Land rover Defender for one ] and have an extra differential in the gearbox to allow for different wheel speeds front and back [ axle diffs do the same side to side]

This type should be tested on a four wheel rolling road but as most are only two wheels at a time then the old method is sometimes used. An accelerometer is placed in the vehicle and readings taken as it is driven.

Good answer.