Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[JamesV6CDX]

Took my 180k 20 year old L322 V8 LPG Rangie for it's MOT a couple of days ago.

I was (joyfully) amazed that it only failed on an offisde front lower suspension arm balljoint.

The year before, I had loads of advisories for almost all the front bushes and balljoints (both sides) play in track rods, CV Joint / Boot, leak of exhaust gasses, brake discs, corroded brake pipes, etc etc.

I've not done any of those items since the 2021 test, and have done 7k miles since that MOT.

Yet, none of those items were picked up on the new test - not even as advisories.

How can there be so much inconsistency between MOT garages? I can only think different testers have different thresholds for what constitutes "play" or "wear" etc?

[YZ250]

I’ve taken my vehicles to the same garage every year for the last thirty odd years and some of my vehicles have been self healing apparently. The same chap did the mot for most of those years. My Omega got flagged up for faded indicator lenses two years on the trot when it was around six years old, but that advisory never appeared again for the remaining years until I sold it in 2019. My A6 had an advisory for slight play in the front arm lower rear joint both sides last year, but flew through the mot with no advisory this year. I’d covered around three thousand miles in it.

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

Depends on who tests it, and what mood they are in.

[cam.in.head]

just take it to kwik fit. they will all majically reappear again.plus more !

[dave the builder]

An MOT pass just means the car met minimum safety standards at the time of the test .
and the standards are pretty low 
Many people get an MOT and that's it for another year , no maintenance and take NO notice of any advisories on the MOT.
they only go back to a garage before the MOT is due again if the car is not getting them from A to B as it should .
many drivers are not mechanically minded enough to realise the knocks from suspension,engine,moving parts etc may be a sign of imminent failure .
many NEVER check their tyres , lights ,screen wash or even oil 

Many NTs (MOT testers) fail to read the manual or understand it 

some NTs rush a test ,risking missing things , other NTs list everything , no matter how minor ,either to cover their arse , OR for the work ££££

I used to take my cars to the nearest station and get annoyed with fails and advisories i knew where BS .

about 15 years ago I had to get my 1993 carlton tested ,but it didn't have it's C20NE engine ,that had sh*t it's pot full 
It had a 20SEH (cav SRi) lump 

I spoke to 7 MOT stations ,who all said it needed a full CAT emissions test 
I'd read the MOT manual ,knew it should be a BET test .
finally found a test station who said " I'll phone VOSA and ask" he did , BET test done , MOT passed 

I've been taking all my cars there since , NOT because it's a MOT station that "turns a blind eye" or CBA to test properly .

the tester is very strict , also a police special , so he does an honest MOT, that motivates me to make sure everything is in order BEFORE I present a car for test .

It is however good to have a second set of eyes check the cars over too, i case i miss something ,which, I admit ,in the past , I have 

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

An MOT pass just means the car met minimum safety standards at the time of the test .
and the standards are pretty low 
Many people get an MOT and that's it for another year , no maintenance and take NO notice of any advisories on the MOT.
they only go back to a garage before the MOT is due again if the car is not getting them from A to B as it should .
many drivers are not mechanically minded enough to realise the knocks from suspension,engine,moving parts etc may be a sign of imminent failure .
many NEVER check their tyres , lights ,screen wash or even oil 

Many NTs (MOT testers) fail to read the manual or understand it 

some NTs rush a test ,risking missing things , other NTs list everything , no matter how minor ,either to cover their arse , OR for the work ££££

I used to take my cars to the nearest station and get annoyed with fails and advisories i knew where BS .

about 15 years ago I had to get my 1993 carlton tested ,but it didn't have it's C20NE engine ,that had sh*t it's pot full 
It had a 20SEH (cav SRi) lump 

I spoke to 7 MOT stations ,who all said it needed a full CAT emissions test 
I'd read the MOT manual ,knew it should be a BET test .
finally found a test station who said " I'll phone VOSA and ask" he did , BET test done , MOT passed 

I've been taking all my cars there since , NOT because it's a MOT station that "turns a blind eye" or CBA to test properly .

the tester is very strict , also a police special , so he does an honest MOT, that motivates me to make sure everything is in order BEFORE I present a car for test .

It is however good to have a second set of eyes check the cars over too, i case i miss something ,which, I admit ,in the past , I have 

The MOT was introduced in 1960.

I wonder how difficult it was to obtain a pass back then.

[dave the builder]

The MOT was introduced in 1960.

I wonder how difficult it was to obtain a pass back then.

Why you asking me 
I wasn't even born till 1970 

[Nick W]

An MOT pass just means the car met minimum safety standards at the time of the test .
and the standards are pretty low 
Many people get an MOT and that's it for another year , no maintenance and take NO notice of any advisories on the MOT.
they only go back to a garage before the MOT is due again if the car is not getting them from A to B as it should .
many drivers are not mechanically minded enough to realise the knocks from suspension,engine,moving parts etc may be a sign of imminent failure .
many NEVER check their tyres , lights ,screen wash or even oil 

Many NTs (MOT testers) fail to read the manual or understand it 

some NTs rush a test ,risking missing things , other NTs list everything , no matter how minor ,either to cover their arse , OR for the work ££££

I used to take my cars to the nearest station and get annoyed with fails and advisories i knew where BS .

about 15 years ago I had to get my 1993 carlton tested ,but it didn't have it's C20NE engine ,that had sh*t it's pot full 
It had a 20SEH (cav SRi) lump 

I spoke to 7 MOT stations ,who all said it needed a full CAT emissions test 
I'd read the MOT manual ,knew it should be a BET test .
finally found a test station who said " I'll phone VOSA and ask" he did , BET test done , MOT passed 

I've been taking all my cars there since , NOT because it's a MOT station that "turns a blind eye" or CBA to test properly .

the tester is very strict , also a police special , so he does an honest MOT, that motivates me to make sure everything is in order BEFORE I present a car for test .

It is however good to have a second set of eyes check the cars over too, in case i miss something ,which, I admit, in the past , I have 

I can't fault any of that , although I don't worry about fussy advisories. I do fix the ones that matter, or will become a problem before the next test. It does help to know the code - like sill covers fitted actually means 'we've welded enough of these to know they're rotten, but aren't allowed to remove the covers and prove it.'


I use the garage 100m down the road from home for all of the reasons you use yours, plus the convenience(they often park the car in the same space it came from) and they still give me the trade rate. I've never had a car fail on anything I disagree with, and they know the only extra money they will get from me will be for tyres. The owner has mentioned that a couple of cars I've presented 'look shit, but are good underneath unlike a lot we see.'


I vehemently disagree with the MOT exemption for older cars because many owners only ever fix stuff that fails an MOT, and there are lots of  people working on cars whose judgement and workmanship is appalling. No industry allows safety critical inspections to be done by the user or person who did the work for that last reason.

[JamesV6CDX]

Changed the OSF and NSF lower arms yesterday as per the MOT failure for the OSF one. I knew I was changing the correct one, because the tester marked it, and also pointed it out to me on the ramp. I only changed both sides because that’s good practice.

Absolutely nothing wrong with them. Bushes firm and intact, balljoint without play.

It was clear from just jacking and shaking the wheel, that the balljoint which has *actually* failed is the one where the upper front arm meets the hub - not the lower one. 

How can a VOSA trained tester get something so simple, so fundamentally wrong?

Also, the NSF upper balljoint is shot, tonnes of play when shaking the wheel - wasn’t even picked up. I only noticed it because I always do suspension components in pairs!

[countrywoman]

VOSA do not train testers for wear, just to do the procedure correctly. It's down to the persons experience/knowledge or the insufficient training course that some do if they have no mechanical knowledge. You could be a shelf stacker from Tesco's and have never touched a spanner, go on the course and a few weeks later be a NT.     

[dave the builder]

There is also an allowed /permitted amount of wear / play to "pin and bush" depending on the "pin" size
I agree that standards vary massively 
I'd rather have a strict tester who spends the full 45 minutes looking and pay the full £55
than have some spotty youth on an ATL(automated test lane ) do a 20 minute glance and miss something

[JamesV6CDX]

Ok let me be more direct.

The upper front ball joints on both sides are bloody dangerous.

And both we’re missed.

Yet the balljoint it failed on is like new.

Tester is an old guy and doesn’t look like a rookie.

I’m not wanting to kick up any fuss. I’m taking the easy repair as a win I’m just baffled.

[Doctor Gollum]

I always watch the test, and the garage I normally go to allows me to observe directly as they find each item. Also allow the opportunity to carry out a thorough check of the underside whilst it's in the air.

[dave the builder]

Ok let me be more direct.

The upper front ball joints on both sides are bloody dangerous.

And both we’re missed.

Yet the balljoint it failed on is like new.

Tester is an old guy and doesn’t look like a rookie.

I’m not wanting to kick up any fuss. I’m taking the easy repair as a win I’m just baffled.

I'm not disagreeing with you 
testing standards vary massively .

was it a single NT with no "helper" to operate the controls/rock the steering etc ? on an ATL with shaker plates ?

[JamesV6CDX]

Ok let me be more direct.

The upper front ball joints on both sides are bloody dangerous.

And both we’re missed.

Yet the balljoint it failed on is like new.

Tester is an old guy and doesn’t look like a rookie.

I’m not wanting to kick up any fuss. I’m taking the easy repair as a win I’m just baffled.

I'm not disagreeing with you 
testing standards vary massively .

was it a single NT with no "helper" to operate the controls/rock the steering etc ? on an ATL with shaker plates ?

Yep, he did it on his own

[STEMO]

So, he's just 'tapped' stuff with his toffee hammer and wiggled things around a bit, grunted, farted and hoped you cba looking into it. Sounds about average.

[dave the builder]

So, he's just 'tapped' stuff with his toffee hammer and wiggled things around a bit, grunted, farted and hoped you cba looking into it. Sounds about average.

That does sound like SOME NTs  (testers) in the UK Uncle Stemo 
then point the owner to the office for a list of financial penalties 

I'm not disagreeing with you 
testing standards vary massively .

was it a single NT with no "helper" to operate the controls/rock the steering etc ? on an ATL with shaker plates ?

Yep, he did it on his own

if it wasn't an ATL then he needed a "helper" 
ATLs are crap ,you can't beat someone "helper" operating the steering, brakes and controls whilst the NT inspects .
then there's the fee
£30 MOTs    to pay an NT , helper (for the hour) , VOSA fee, test station running costs etc 
so the station is either rushing and doing 3 MOTs an hour (which will be flagged on the VTS device) , OR....
cheap MOT to get work 

[Andy B]

.....
if it wasn't an ATL then he needed a "helper" 
ATLs are crap ,you can't beat someone "helper" operating the steering, brakes and controls whilst the NT inspects .
then there's the fee
£30 MOTs    to pay an NT , helper (for the hour) , VOSA fee, test station running costs etc 
so the station is either rushing and doing 3 MOTs an hour (which will be flagged on the VTS device) , OR....
cheap MOT to get work 

My previous test station used to have me doing the brake press & wriggle of the steering while he was underneath .... he retired & they shut the test station. 

[TheBoy]

My ZX10 used to keep getting an advisory on a notchy headstock, which I could never feel. Ever. So I never bothered replacing it (it's a shit getting the old bearings out of the frame on a bike).

Until it failed its MOT one year.  I couldn't feel it, so I took it home and got various bike mates to try it, and they couldn't find anything wrong.  So I took it back and spoke to the tester. He remembered and said it was really bad, and invited me to hang on until he had finished the current MOT, then he'd show me.  On his steering plate it was clear as day that the bearings were shot, even though riding it felt perfect, as did trying it with and without load on it.

The point being, there are scenarios that can show up faults that otherwise are impossible to see.  So if in doubt, have a friendly word with the chap, and see if he can demonstrate, even if it costs you a drink or 2.

[dave the builder]

I agree
I think an MOT should include a road test ,which is not required for class 4
much of the inspection of suspension etc(class 4)  is with the car beam jacked up ,wheels hanging
with the weight and springs fully extended ,it "loads up" joints

With so many cars driving round with defects , plus the shockingly BAD standard of some driving
 I'm surprised there are not more accidents 

[Andy B]

My current MOT tester doesn't do a roller test on my ML's brakes ... AFAIK he should really do a road brake test with a decelerometer. His rollers will only go one way .. previous tester could spin the wheels on an axle in opposite directions. I assume he just goes off the overall condition of the car. 

[STEMO]

I leave my car and wait for a phone call. They might not even use my car for the test as far as I know 

[dave the builder]

My current MOT tester doesn't do a roller test on my ML's brakes ... AFAIK he should really do a road brake test with a decelerometer. His rollers will only go one way .. previous tester could spin the wheels on an axle in opposite directions. I assume he just goes off the overall condition of the car.

I don't get that 
because it's all wheel drive ?
he'd have to enter some figures on the VTS device for the brakes 

I leave my car and wait for a phone call. They might not even use my car for the test as far as I know 

It's always nice to have the car "on site" when doing an MOT 

[Doctor Gollum]

My current MOT tester doesn't do a roller test on my ML's brakes ... AFAIK he should really do a road brake test with a decelerometer. His rollers will only go one way .. previous tester could spin the wheels on an axle in opposite directions. I assume he just goes off the overall condition of the car.

I don't get that 
because it's all wheel drive ?
he'd have to enter some figures on the VTS device for the brakes 

I leave my car and wait for a phone call. They might not even use my car for the test as far as I know 

It's always nice to have the car "on site" when doing an MOT 

Not necessarily. Only check is for grabbing, binding and obvious imbalance. Of three awd cars I have owned, only the Sierra XR4x4 had the test done with the box in the passenger footwell.

[Sir Tigger KC]

I leave my car and wait for a phone call. They might not even use my car for the test as far as I know 

^This!^ 

[iansoutham]

My current MOT tester doesn't do a roller test on my ML's brakes ... AFAIK he should really do a road brake test with a decelerometer. His rollers will only go one way .. previous tester could spin the wheels on an axle in opposite directions. I assume he just goes off the overall condition of the car.

I don't get that 
because it's all wheel drive ?
he'd have to enter some figures on the VTS device for the brakes 

I leave my car and wait for a phone call. They might not even use my car for the test as far as I know 

It's always nice to have the car "on site" when doing an MOT 

Not necessarily. Only check is for grabbing, binding and obvious imbalance. Of three awd cars I have owned, only the Sierra XR4x4 had the test done with the box in the passenger footwell.

My MOT tester only ever took my Sierra 4x4 out once for that test. Car stopped from 30 mph in a cars length as if someone had dropped an anchor (his words, not mine) and he ended up with suspected whiplash so could barely do any work for over a week. Refused to ever test brakes on that car ever since. And yes, the brakes are massively upgraded from standard and do stop it pretty quickly.

[Doctor Gollum]

My current MOT tester doesn't do a roller test on my ML's brakes ... AFAIK he should really do a road brake test with a decelerometer. His rollers will only go one way .. previous tester could spin the wheels on an axle in opposite directions. I assume he just goes off the overall condition of the car.

I don't get that 
because it's all wheel drive ?
he'd have to enter some figures on the VTS device for the brakes 

I leave my car and wait for a phone call. They might not even use my car for the test as far as I know 

It's always nice to have the car "on site" when doing an MOT 

Not necessarily. Only check is for grabbing, binding and obvious imbalance. Of three awd cars I have owned, only the Sierra XR4x4 had the test done with the box in the passenger footwell.

My MOT tester only ever took my Sierra 4x4 out once for that test. Car stopped from 30 mph in a cars length as if someone had dropped an anchor (his words, not mine) and he ended up with suspected whiplash so could barely do any work for over a week. Refused to ever test brakes on that car ever since. And yes, the brakes are massively upgraded from standard and do stop it pretty quickly.

Mine didn't have ABS, so would quite happily slide when asked to pull up from speed

[Andy B]

.....
I don't get that 
because it's all wheel drive ?

I believe you opps up all wheel drive up if you drive 1 axle & not the other 

he'd have to enter some figures on the VTS device for the brakes  ...

No idea .... he gives me a pass. That's as much as I care. 

[Doctor Gollum]

.....
I don't get that 
because it's all wheel drive ?

I believe you opps up all wheel drive up if you drive 1 axle & not the other 

he'd have to enter some figures on the VTS device for the brakes  ...

No idea .... he gives me a pass. That's as much as I care. 

You do.

The Merc system will tolerate about 5 mph for a very specific period of time, around 15 seconds rings a bell. It's clearly stated within WIS.

At best it ties the transfer case into a knot, but if you're really unlucky you'll do the box and both diffs too.

Given the liability for damage if the test equipment is faulty or they screw up the speed/duration, stomping on the brakes whilst pulling into the test bay to ensure that it pulls up straight and true is enough to get the job done