Jump to content

MOT rule change LED bulbs in headlights


Recommended Posts

Just now, stillp said:

But TRs don't have "existing halogen headlamp units", so surely this doesn't apply?

The words were obviously written by someone who thinks that all incandescent headlight bulbs are halogen. Don't forget that non-halogen bulbs pre-date even sealed beam headlamps and so are really ancient history.  

Whether the testers recognise  the distinction in the words depends to be seen. I would guess they probably won't. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, stillp said:

But TRs don't have "existing halogen headlamp units", so surely this doesn't apply?

Next MOT time, I'll take a pair of filament bulbs with me just in case!

Pete

Exactly. There's been a lot of chatter about this on other classic marque forums and it looks quite simple - unless you're talking about headlamp units originally made for a halogen bulb (which the new MOT rules forbid you to upgrade), then you're fine. Putting LEDs in an old-school tungsten headlamp units is still okay - unless as Tony says you're intending to rally the car in which case be careful of the relevant motorsport regs.

In practice: if your TR has had the original factory units replaced/upgraded at some point in the past to 'replica' units with H4 bulbs, technically no you couldn't bung an LED in those. But on the other hand how is an MOT tester going to know what type of bulb that Prince-of-Darkness tripod lookalike unit had in it when it was supplied by Moss or whoever, twenty years ago?

More generally this probably underlines the reason why >40 year old cars have been exempted from MOTs, as modern MOT standards move further and further from relevance to our old motors (BUT I don't want to get started on the "MOT or not" debate"! :rolleyes:).

Nigel 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I have had the below confirmed by Richard Bauckham (Specialist Motor Underwriter KGM Insurance) as follows:

 

“We are happy to confirm that we have no issues with LED replacement bulbs and this will not affect the insurance in any way, provided that the bulbs fitted are of the equivalent or higher rating (watts to lumens) than the standard fitment bulbs.”

 

This does not indicate that they are legal but does mean that your insurance will not be invalidated by fitting them.

 

Please note this excludes the fitment of angel eye style headlamps.

 

Thanks

 

Pete

 



 

Peter Barrett Cert CII | Cherished Vehicle & TR Register Insurance Manager

A-Plan Insurance
2 Foregate Street, Worcester, WR1 1DB

t:01905 930740

e:peter.barrett@aplan.co.uk

w:www.cherishedvehicleinsurance.co.uk

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, RogerH said:

I am mounting a 100 mm diameter one of those above the Chuck on my drilling machine to get light where I am working.   My current challenge is to find a Sensibly price 12 volt dc rectified from mains transformer.  The common ones that go on domestic ceiling lights do not give smooth wave so the led is dimmer than if connected to my 12 volt battery charger.  May well end up with a 12 volt bus bar from the battery charger!

Peter W

D90DB85C-2C72-4744-8ED5-CFE6258F3084.jpeg

F293AF23-F996-4A3D-B0BE-D64D9CC466B8.jpeg

792ADF29-59D4-4B6D-9A3F-DE2BA84439CB.jpeg

Edited by BlueTR3A-5EKT
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Z320 said:

sorry me, a stupid question, but I ask for a friend:

what does MOT mean in full words, please?

Ministry of Transport

The MOT test (Ministry of Transport, or simply MOT) is an annual test of vehicle safety, roadworthiness aspects and exhaust emissions required in the United Kingdom for most vehicles over three years old.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The (non?) legality of aftermarket LED conversion is covered on the Autobulbsdirect website. The disparity between "legality" and MOT compliance" is referenced.

 

https://www.autobulbsdirect.co.uk/blog/are-led-headlights-legal-in-the-uk/

Edited by spyder dryver
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, spyder dryver said:

The (non?) legality of aftermarket LED conversion is covered on the Autobulbsdirect website. The disparity between "legality" and MOT compliance" is referenced.

 

https://www.autobulbsdirect.co.uk/blog/are-led-headlights-legal-in-the-uk/

Funny that 'H' stands for halogen. I thought the H prefix for headlamp bulbs predated halogen technology by many years.

Pete

Edited to correct 'halogen'!

Edited by stillp
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have often wondered what would happen if someone went to court for not having a "Ministry of Transport certificate" and claimed that it was not possible to have one because there is no longer a  "Ministry of Transport" .

(It ceased to be in 1970)

Charlie.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, spyder dryver said:

The (non?) legality of aftermarket LED conversion is covered on the Autobulbsdirect website. The disparity between "legality" and MOT compliance" is referenced.

 

https://www.autobulbsdirect.co.uk/blog/are-led-headlights-legal-in-the-uk/

Again we have more confusion. The first main paragraph from the link

legislation.gov.uk (section 4 & 5) states that dipped beam and main beam headlights are required to have an

approval mark (usually E mark) or a British Standard mark. For nearly every other application on your vehicle, an approval mark is also required.

But aren't our cars predating all this nonsense

 

Roger

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, stillp said:

Funny that 'H' stands for holgen. I thought the H prefix for headlamp bulbs predated halogen technology by many years.

The requirements for car bulbs are here:

https://unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/trans/main/wp29/wp29regs/R037r7e.pdf

The specification for the H-prefix bulbs does not dictate the fill gas but it does dictate the wattage and light output.  While it may be possible to achieve the latter without a halogen fill, the bulb life would be very short. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, stillp said:

I believe the original date of the ECE Reg was 1958 - could halogen bulbs be bought then?

According to Wikipedia:

The H1 was the first halogen lamp approved for automotive use. It was introduced in 1962 by a group of European bulb and headlamp manufacturers. The bulb was not approved for use in the US until 1997.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My understanding is if you fit original period lighting that were made for the manufacture at the time your fine no E marking needed, because we are fitting new made today parts they must be E marked compliant( this doesn't just apply to lights) With the MOT the tester only tests what is fitted at time of test and is not allowed to strip and inspect so if the headlights pass the inspection and beam test thats it a pass! however LED headlight bulbs or assemblies should be E marked. Please dont swear at me its just my thoughts

Chris

Link to post
Share on other sites

The lighting regulations have not been updated since 1989.  When I started making my LED rear bulbs I did a thorough check on the regs,

Only vehicles made after 1986 needs to use approved (marked) bulbs. That lets us off the hook on that one.

There is nothing in the regs that prevent tail lamps, stop lamps, & number plate lamps being LED type for pre 1986 vehicles.

However, headlamps are required to be 30 Watts minimum.   LED types draw less that that, approximately half. (mine are 19 Watts)

and Indicators are required to be 15 to 36 Watts. LED types vary, mine draw 5 Watts.

These two cases technicaly fail to meet the requirements, but only due to the out of date wording.

If the wording had been "Equivalent Wattage" then They would comply.  This is what I would argue if ever questioned, but the likelyhood of that actually happening is, I think, pretty remote.

Of course if the 30 Watts minimum were to apply to the pair of headlamps (the regs don't say that it doesn't) ---------

Regarding the MOT, if it fails it fails, I don't legally need one anyway, my reason for taking my TR for an MOT is to get a 2nd opinion on the safety of the car.

Bob.

Edited by Lebro
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Charlie D said:

I have often wondered what would happen if someone went to court for not having a "Ministry of Transport certificate" and claimed that it was not possible to have one because there is no longer a  "Ministry of Transport" .

(It ceased to be in 1970)

Charlie.

Per sentencing guidelines, starting point is Band A fine (=50% of a week's income). I'm not suggesting you'd get a higher penalty for being cheeky, BUT if you'd pleaded guilty in the first place rather than playing silly sausages you'd have got 33% off. :)

And if you'd accepted the FPN as offered by the police you'd just be 100 quid out of pocket. :D

(The offence, actually, is "no test certificate" not "no MOT").

Nigel

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please familiarise yourself with our Terms and Conditions. By using this site, you agree to the following: Terms of Use.