40+ year-old cars no longer need a MOT

[Max Demian]

Is the power "adequate"?

[Max Demian]

It's all right as long as it is preceded by a man carrying a red flag.

[Jethro_uk]

Which are offences on *any* vehicle.

Even the MOT says it's not a guarantee of safety.

[Andrew]

Seeing a Morris 1000 marooned at a road junction with one of its front wheels sticking out at an odd angle used to be quite common. Would an MOT have detected that dodgy ball joint ?.

[Tim Streater]

No point in responding. It's only Dave "if it's not black it must be white" Plowman ranting again.

[Andrew]

More like wasn't sufficiently skilled to drive it safely in all weather conditions.

[spuorgelgoog]

"Exceedingly adequate".

Gentlemen who drive themselves drive Bentleys.

Owain

[whisky-dave]

Must have been the same program I was watching. I remmebr when at a Singers ownsers club when they were talking about MOTs one said he can't drive it on the public road because it didn't have any br eak lights that's how it was build obviously no seat belts either, so he to ok it to the show/event on a trailer.

For me it'd make sense for all cars to be checked and those cars should com e up to the standard of the time they were built. What I wouldnlt want is old cars that were scrapped being brought back into use by the sort of people that do dodegy/dangerous repairs and the like an d then using them unsafely or selling them on to the unknowing.

I wonder if there's any cars with dodgy cladding ;-)

[tabbypurr]

yes, and owners of such vehicles normally do that.

yes & yes. Things are very different today. Any more daft questions?

you don't need to go back that far. Even something as modern as the Ford Anglia has around twice the stopping distance of today's cars. Go back 80 years and it's much worse.

it's not perfectly safe to take any car on the road.

Owners of classic cars don't do that - unless they are that way as original. With those they drive suitably paranoidly, and the result is a well below average accident rate.

a different topic entirely in fact

yes, and classic car owners already do that, making an MOT a bit pointless. We're not still in the 60s.

NT

[tabbypurr]

Late 60s Rollses are nice in their own odd way, but were never really performance cars. Plenty of grunt but the suspension was not able to deal with it well. I hope the late 70s ones were better.

NT

[tabbypurr]

s one said he can't drive it on the public road because it didn't have any break lights that's how it was build obviously no seat belts either, so he took it to the show/event on a trailer.

not hard to use a trailer board with it, or other removable lights. I think if I had an old Singer I'd be a bit nervous about taking it on the road :)

ome up to the standard of the time they were built.

some oldies were never upto such standards to begin with

to use by the sort of people that do dodegy/dangerous repairs and the like and then using them unsafely or selling them on to the unknowing.

I've never seen those sort of practices with classic cars - not in modern t imes that is. People who buy such cars either really know their stuff, or t he very few that don't get them thoroughly checked.

Clad vehicles are certainly not common but they do exist. Look at some of t he early house cars etc.

NT

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Right. So are you saying the MOT is pointless on any vehicle? You can't have it both ways.

Never said it was. Merely a check of the condition *at that time*.

[whisky-dave]

I was in Tesco Express behind the chauffeur. a Gold colour bentley continental I think.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

I'd like anyone to explain to be how a 39 year old car *must* have an MOT, but a 40 year old one not. What changed that suddenly made that so?

But then idiots like you have never been capable of logical thought. Let alone any knowledge of old cars in practice.

[whisky-dave]

OTs one said he can't drive it on the public road because it didn't have an y break lights that's how it was build obviously no seat belts either, so h e took it to the show/event on a trailer.

nk if I had an old Singer I'd be a bit nervous about taking it on the road :)

come up to the standard of the time they were built.

into use by the sort of people that do dodegy/dangerous repairs and the lik e and then using them unsafely or selling them on to the unknowing.

times that is.

That's because they are classic cars rather than just old cars. Theere;s an oldish car in my street looks a right state almost like it;s be en dumped, it might be a classic not sure who that is defined.

that don't get them thoroughly checked.

I agree but I see that changing, if people think they can use old cars chea ply.

the early house cars etc.

Have you seen this most amusing . I've no idea what sot of MOT that would n eed.

100m MPH shed

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Lighting regs were one of the few which were retrospective. Cars built with only one tail light had to be converted to two. Same with single dip headlights. All this in the early 1950s. And that Singer almost certainly had a brake light when new.

Seats belts are different.

Quite. All it needs is decent maintenance. And it's a complete fallacy an old car owner will always maintain them perfectly.

It already happens. Some older cars can be quite valuable. Plenty profit in bodging them up for sale to the unwary. Perhaps even more so today, where so few do any work on their everyday car, so have never learned how to service and repair.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Care to provide some proof of that? Which 'old car' clubs are you active in?

Pray tell what has changed so an annual safety check on a vehicle is no longer needed?

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Often wondered why changing the radiator grille made that sort of difference? ;-)

[Jethro_uk]

No, you said that.

I just said that in and of itself, an MOT is not some sort of magic spell that makes a car "safe". By that token, the *lack* of an MOT doesn't automatically make it a deathtrap.

As always, in the real world, the truth lies somewhere between the two.

The bottom line *should be* "if we remove the requirement for cars over

40 years old to be regularly tested, is there any increased dangers to the public ?"

If the research undertaken suggests not, then it seems a fair situation - especially (as suggested elsewhere) there are not inconsiderable costs in trying to enforce MOTs on older cars. Which would result in MOT stations simply refusing to conduct such tests and you and I having to pick up the bill for subsidising government test stations to do the test.

It seems a unique example of evidence-based policy. Probably slipped though while all the Brexit bollocks is being debated .... if so, bring it on.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

That certainly shows you have no direct knowledge of the hobby. I'd suggest you find yourself a forum etc dedicated to classic cars and see if you them think all the owners as responsible as your guess.