Jump to content


Photo

MOT Exemption


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 cj79

cj79
  • TR Register Members
  • 105 posts
  • Location:Leeds, West Yorkshire

Posted 17 May 2018 - 05:52 PM

Hi All,

 

I have a 1974 TR6 and just called my local garage to book an MOT. The owner informed me of the change in law which had completely passed me by. I've read up on it and i'm not sure I qualify. I fitted the telescopic shock absorber brackets in place of the lever arm version, this was to improve stability and in the exceptions on the .gov page it seems to be a bit of a grey area (in the exceptions to the exceptions bit). 

 

The rule is you don't qualify if you have made substantial changes to the vehicle namely in this case:

 

• Axles and running gear – alteration of the type and or method of suspension or steering constitutes a substantial change;

 

however there are exeptions:

 

• in respect of axles and running gear changes made to improve efficiency, safety or environmental performance; 

 

- not strictly applicable I know..

 

• changes of a type, that can be demonstrated to have been made when vehicles of the type were in production or in general use (within ten years of the end of production);

 

- possible? I think it's fairly likely that the telescopic modification was in use within ten years of the end of production.. but can't be sure.

 

What does everybody think?

 

I have the original lever arm dampers in storage and could refit if need be, i'd rather not though i'll probably just keep MOTing it.

 

Cheers,
Chris


  • 0

#2 Rem18

Rem18
  • Registered User
  • 620 posts

Posted 17 May 2018 - 06:01 PM

I dont think telescopic shocks qualify as substantial change??


Edited by Rem18, 17 May 2018 - 06:29 PM.

  • 0

#3 Rod1883

Rod1883
  • TR Register Members
  • 805 posts
  • Location:West Sussex

Posted 17 May 2018 - 06:04 PM

There are a number of threads on this topic - do a search (box, top right).

Rear telescopics wouldn't, alone, be cause for concern I would have thought.

My view is get the car MOT'd anyway for all the reasons you will see in other threads.


  • 0

#4 cj79

cj79
  • TR Register Members
  • 105 posts
  • Location:Leeds, West Yorkshire

Posted 17 May 2018 - 06:24 PM

OK thanks for the feedback, (I did try and search initially but MOT was not allowed as a search term and MOT exemption came up with nothing). I'll get it MOT'd anyway as I would feel better to have done so.

Thanks again,
Chris


  • 0

#5 Rod1883

Rod1883
  • TR Register Members
  • 805 posts
  • Location:West Sussex

Posted 17 May 2018 - 06:26 PM

Chris

I don't think the search function allows just three letter words/terms.

Try searching "exemption" - that brings up quite a few related threads for me.

Rod


  • 0

#6 Mk2 Chopper

Mk2 Chopper
  • Registered User
  • 45 posts

Posted 18 May 2018 - 03:49 PM

I think they are targeting heavily modified from original cars. In the end it will just come down to opinion what a substantial change is, but I don't see your telescopic shocks as being one myself.


  • 1

#7 Rem18

Rem18
  • Registered User
  • 620 posts

Posted 18 May 2018 - 05:59 PM

Raleigh Chopper 3 speed, I had an Orange one. We need to start a special section here :ph34r:


  • 2

#8 Richard Crawley

Richard Crawley
  • TR Register Members
  • 3,631 posts

Posted 19 June 2018 - 12:48 PM

Production TR6 never had telescopic rear suspension fitted to my knowledge so that's not a get out. 

 

"in respect of axles and running gear changes made to improve efficiency, safety or environmental performance;" may be a get out but that's a very wide definition; has anyone got any more definitive info on this particular mod? 

 

I assume fitting gas shocks doesn't count as a "substantial change" ?

What about wider wheels & lower profile tyres?

Engine tuning that increases performance?

 

The Forum web site has changed considerably since I was last here & all my searches have came back with nothing meaningful. it would be great if someone with specialist knowledge of the MOT changes could produce an article noting all the popular modifications on all TR's & weather or not they would be considered a "substantial change" or not.

 

I notice the .GOV website includes a link to "talk to a historic vehicle expert" which leads you to the "Federation of British Historic Vehicle Clubs Ltd" - has anyone used this to get a definitive answer to anything?


  • 0
Richard C
1971 TR6 owned since 1975

#9 stuart

stuart
  • TR Register Members
  • 18,764 posts
  • Location:Grampound Road Cornwall
  • Cars Owned::TR Restoration,. Owner of Watermill Carriage Co Ltd restorers of 50s and 60s British sports cars, especially TRs.

Posted 19 June 2018 - 01:05 PM

Production TR6 never had telescopic rear suspension fitted to my knowledge so that's not a get out. 

 

"in respect of axles and running gear changes made to improve efficiency, safety or environmental performance;" may be a get out but that's a very wide definition; has anyone got any more definitive info on this particular mod? 

 

I assume fitting gas shocks doesn't count as a "substantial change" ?

What about wider wheels & lower profile tyres?

Engine tuning that increases performance?

 

The Forum web site has changed considerably since I was last here & all my searches have came back with nothing meaningful. it would be great if someone with specialist knowledge of the MOT changes could produce an article noting all the popular modifications on all TR's & weather or not they would be considered a "substantial change" or not.

 

I notice the .GOV website includes a link to "talk to a historic vehicle expert" which leads you to the "Federation of British Historic Vehicle Clubs Ltd" - has anyone used this to get a definitive answer to anything?

Welcome back Richard, good to see you on here again.

Stuart.


  • 0

TR4A Royal blue TR5 White  Volvo V70 D5 twin turbo
Plus whatever TR is in workshop for restoration.
 


#10 DRD

DRD
  • TR Register Members
  • 244 posts
  • Location:Hampshire, UK
  • Cars Owned::1973 TR6

Posted 19 June 2018 - 01:05 PM

Chris,

 

It was my understanding that a substantial change is something like transplanting in a different engine. Anything in keeping with the original vehicle or improvements intended to improve the original spec aren't a substantial change. But it is a very grey area and will subject to different opinions until its been properly tested for real. I suspect tuning up the engine won't matter but doubling the output with a turbo and nitrous might.

 

Daz


  • 0

#11 TR NIALL

TR NIALL

    Niall Callery

  • TR Register Members
  • 4,493 posts
  • Location:Dublin,Ireland.

Posted 19 June 2018 - 05:47 PM

Welcome back Richard, good to see you on here again.
Stuart.

Welcome from me also,tis been a long time.
  • 0

#12 michaeldavis39

michaeldavis39
  • Registered User
  • 31 posts

Posted 19 June 2018 - 06:17 PM

Why wouldn't anyone want to mot their TR6? Surely for peace of mind it's good to have your car checked over? I think this is one of the stupidest ideas this government has come up with- dangerous cars can kill so the safer they are on the road in terms of roadworthiness the better!

Edited by michaeldavis39, 19 June 2018 - 06:19 PM.

  • 0

#13 mike3739

mike3739
  • TR Register Members
  • 2,730 posts
  • Location:Birmingham
  • Cars Owned::Volvo C70 2008, Jaguar X Type 2005 2.5 AWD, MGTF 2005 1.8
    MGTF Spark 2004 1.8

Posted 19 June 2018 - 07:42 PM

Welcome back Richard, good to see you on here again.

Stuart.

Again welcome back Richard sadly missed.

 

Cheers

 

Mike


  • 0
Mike

Posted Image

#14 Keith66

Keith66
  • TR Register Members
  • 210 posts
  • Location:West Mids
  • Cars Owned::1972 TR6 Pi
    2003 MG TF

Posted 19 June 2018 - 09:21 PM

Hi All

 

And partially in reply to michaeldavis39, couple of things, don’t forget pre 1960 cars are already exempt and that doesn’t seem to have caused a huge problem and owners of an age exempt cars can still submit the car to a voluntary MOT test. They will still, like all vehicle owners, need to ensure that they meet the legal requirement of keeping their vehicle in a roadworthy condition at all times.

 

So I think the thought from the Govt point of view is that the classic cars which will be MOT exempt will be at least 40 years old and be a cherished possession kept on the road by an enthusiast who maintains the car properly anyway. It’s also true the Govt knows the MOT failure rate for the cars newly classified is much lower than the average anyway.

 

Also a problem is the wide range of tech MOT most testers might have to deal with, so at the local test station the last car tested was a 2015 Tesla model S then a 1961 TR3 rolls up and does that tester have the knowledge and experience to impartially test a very new hi tech wonder machine and a vehicle older than they are and the only one they have ever seen of that age. And does the test which has to keep pace with new car tech become less applicable over time to those older cars.

 

In terms of danger cars it’s the cars that are 10 to 15 years old that can be bought for less than the cost of the road tax (that’s now a lot of cars) but that people cannot or will not afford to maintain they seriously need a legally mandated test.

 

If someone can be bothered to run a 40 plus years old car I’d be amazed if they can’t be bothered to maintain it, after all is not the cheap option.

 

But there will people who are not hands-on but on a budget and I’m sure there will be many workshops with classic car experience will do an MOT style safety check if anyone wants.

 

I’ll bet Stuart would if anyone wanted and probably for a similar price of an MOT with better feedback.

 

I think much more controversial is extending the first MOT to 4 years. Think about that Ex-company hsck with 120k on the clock bought cheap at an auction at the end of its 3 year company car life.

 

Cheers

 

Keith


  • 0

#15 Ragtag

Ragtag

    Member 42034

  • TR Register Members
  • 2,095 posts
  • Location:Gosport, Hampshire
  • Cars Owned::Vintage Sports Car racing, Offroading,Proper SAABs and of course, the TR6

Posted 19 June 2018 - 11:25 PM

Production TR6 never had telescopic rear suspension fitted to my knowledge so that's not a get out. 

 

 

Notwithstanding the argument about whether it is wise to not have the annual MOT, one could argue that the suspension (coil springs) has not been changed.  It is the method of damping that has been changed.

 

Welcome back Richard.  Your wise words on here were a great help to me when I first started my TR journey.


  • 0

Cheers

Chris

1972 (K) TR6 CP75573
1977 Bobtail Range Rover
1984 SAAB 900 T16 2 Door
1991 SAAB 900 T16 Convertible
1993 Mercedes 500 SL
2002 0.75 HP Pony (Daughter's)
2003 TD4 Freelander (Wife's) Actully not that bad (the car not the wife!)


#16 Richard Crawley

Richard Crawley
  • TR Register Members
  • 3,631 posts

Posted 20 June 2018 - 04:56 PM

Hi all, thanks for the responses & many thanks to old comrades who remember me for your kind comments. Those of you who knew me as a daily contributor back then will possibly remember why I decided to discontinue posting but I occasionally look in; you never know I might start posting more often again! 


  • 0
Richard C
1971 TR6 owned since 1975

#17 Phil Kirk

Phil Kirk
  • TR Register Members
  • 636 posts
  • Location:Derbyshire
  • Cars Owned::Real Ale DIY Using my TR6 as much as possible

Posted 20 June 2018 - 07:36 PM

Hi, Richard 

Good to hear from you again. You were of so much help to me in 2003/4 when if was restoring my car which I still have.Your knowledge and encouragement 

were so welcomed hope  you do start posting again. 

Hope is all Ok with you.

 

Cheers Phil


  • 0
1972 TR6




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users