thought I would give you a heads up - there has been a lot of rumours about what is going to change - here is the official 2012 testing manual (will not come into effect until 1st Jan 2012):

 

http://www.dft.gov.uk/vosa/repository/MOT%20Inspection%20Manual.pdf

 

Changes include:

 

HID kits will now be a failure :cursing:as they need to have headlamp washers and a self levelling feature

 

removal of cats where one was fitted as standard

 

ball joint rubber boots are now a testable item & will fail if split

 

PAS fluid level testable

 

ESP warning lights on

 

SRS warning lights on

 

TPMS warning lights on

 

Engine mounts (FWD vehicles only?)

 

drivers seat adjustment works

 

Battery now testable & any visible wiring

 

tow bar electrics testable

 

 

 

No mention of testing for chip tuning - something that was discussed.

bloody stupid why do HIDs as a failure they are so much better than standard crappy headlights, surely anything that improves your nightime visability should be allowed.

 

Another instance of this half assed goverment failing. :(

 

Why single out HID's as needing washers and self leveling systems if this is the case surely this should be for ALL headlights.

Edited October 17, 201114 yr by ZX-TT

Oh balls

So, for HIDS Does that mean they have to be removed for the test, What if someone bought the car with them in ? And what about 99 spec JDM with no washers ?

Where in that document does it say HID's are a failure if they don't have headlamp washers and a self levelling?

Where in that document does it say HID's are a failure if they don't have headlamp washers and a self levelling?

 

Headlamps 1.7 page 1

Ahh hang on after re readng it doesnt say they are illegal it just says if the lights have washers or leveling systems thes must work.

It does? What it read is:

 

"Vehicles equipped with High Intensity Discharge (HID) or LED dipped beam headlamps may be fitted with headlamp washers and a suspension or headlamp self levelling system.

Where such systems are fitted, they must work; however, it is accepted that it may not be possible to readily determine the functioning of self levelling systems. In such cases, the benefit of the doubt must be given."

Where in that document does it say HID's are a failure if they don't have headlamp washers and a self levelling?

 

section 1.7 - but now I have read through it properly it looks like items only need to be tested if actually installed.

 

looks like we may be OK after all on the HID kit front! :)

 

Information:

 

Vehicles equipped with High Intensity Discharge (HID) or LED dipped beam headlamps may be fitted with headlamp washers and a suspension or headlamp self levelling system.

Where such systems are fitted, they must work; however, it is accepted that it may not be possible to readily determine the functioning of self levelling systems. In such cases, the benefit of the doubt must be given.

Headlamp washers may work in conjunction with the windscreen washers (when the dipped beam headlamps are switched on) or by a separate switch.

HID lamps may be identified by:



taking a few seconds to reach full intensity



having a bluish tinge to the light



having an igniter module/inverter behind the headlamp



having ‘DCR’ marked on the headlamp lens.

HID headlamps use high voltage and extra care should be taken when inspecting these items.

 

Method of inspection:

Where HID or LED dipped beam headlamps are fitted, switch on the headlamps and check the operation of any headlamp levelling and cleaning devices fitted.

 

Reason for rejection

A headlamp levelling or cleaning device inoperative or otherwise obviously defective.

yeah seems like HID's are fine

I think the Cats are going to be a factor for more cars. Am I right in saying then that a cat needs to be fitted even if it built before the previous cut off date?

 

My car was ok to be de-catted on an MOT but now seems it may not be. *****x.

I think the Cats are going to be a factor for more cars. Am I right in saying then that a cat needs to be fitted even if it built before the previous cut off date?

 

My car was ok to be de-catted on an MOT but now seems it may not be. *****x.

 

looks like on our cars (not in the database) up to 95 you will be ok:

 

On vehicles that qualify for a full cat emissions test, check the presence of the catalytic converter.

 

our cars do not have a full cat test - as its not in the database (unless that has changed LOL) then you carry out a BET test (Basic Emissions Test) - if itr fails you carry out a non cat test.

 

So I would assume we would be ok (upto mid 95 registered cars) as we only need a non cat test

I'll get mine done december!

Edited October 17, 201114 yr by big_jim

looks like on our cars (not in the database) up to 95 you will be ok:

 

On vehicles that qualify for a full cat emissions test, check the presence of the catalytic converter.

 

our cars do not have a full cat test - as its not in the database (unless that has changed LOL) then you carry out a BET test (Basic Emissions Test) - if itr fails you carry out a non cat test.

 

So I would assume we would be ok (upto mid 95 registered cars) as we only need a non cat test

 

Sweeet, mines a 91 JDM so hopefully should be ok.

Sweeet, mines a 91 JDM so hopefully should be ok.

 

lets hope so

 

I will update on these new test items if I get any further information :)

Why single out HID's as needing washers and self leveling systems if this is the case surely this should be for ALL headlights.

 

HID's are affected more by dirt on the lens than reflective lights. Also HID's are horrid if they're on non projection lights.

 

Also from today there is a new white paper based MOT certificate, which imo looks horrid. But the positive about it, is that you can't just rip the VT32 (Advisory notice) from the pass. Without having the colour coding it makes my life harder, since I deal with all the paperwork in an MOT station :(

Also from today there is a new white paper based MOT certificate, which imo looks horrid. But the positive about it, is that you can't just rip the VT32 (Advisory notice) from the pass. Without having the colour coding it makes my life harder, since I deal with all the paperwork in an MOT station :(

 

I prefer it :) Cant believe it has taken so long to do it this way TBH!!

 

Traders are going to hate the advisorys being listed on the pass cert!! :whistling:

All sounds like basic stuff. i thought most of it was on the std mot test anyway??

 

Nothing to worry about then :biggrin:

All sounds like basic stuff. i thought most of it was on the std mot test anyway??

 

 

no, its all new testable items - thats why I posted it!! :slap::lol:

Yeah i know that. but my tester did most of that anyway. for for me its the norm :lol:

I don't see the point in making MOT tests ever more stringent - cars are getting safer and more modern, and cheaper, so why treat cars like they're all 30-year-old bangers with the doors about to fall off.

 

Sarcasm aside, I can't honestly remember the time I last saw a car or even a van in an unroadworthy state!

I don't see the point in making MOT tests ever more stringent - cars are getting safer and more modern, and cheaper, so why treat cars like they're all 30-year-old bangers with the doors about to fall off.

 

Sarcasm aside, I can't honestly remember the time I last saw a car or even a van in an unroadworthy state!

 

one word money. the goveremnt wants us all to buy brand new cars to make money

I don't see the point in making MOT tests ever more stringent - cars are getting safer and more modern, and cheaper, so why treat cars like they're all 30-year-old bangers with the doors about to fall off.

 

Sarcasm aside, I can't honestly remember the time I last saw a car or even a van in an unroadworthy state!

 

I should take some pictures of cars I see that are unroadworthy! :scared:

I should take some pictures of cars I see that are unroadworthy! :scared:

 

Yep, we had a couple of Ford Ka's and there was so much rust on them, it was unreal. Only 64k ish on the clocks too.

 

When my Z went in for some welding work, that was rusted on the n/s/r arch infront of the wheel higher than the textured area... and don't get me started on K11 Micras or N15 Almeras lol...

Sweeet, mines a 91 JDM so hopefully should be ok.

 

JDM Z's souldn't be put up to the cat test anyway, as they're not on the emissions database. Which is why my De-cat JDM Z (registered in '98) passes the non-cat test.

 

Also HID's are horrid if they're on non projection lights.

 

Pretty much this is what this HID fiasco is all about. People putting these kits in inappropriate headlight housings that just blinds everyone.

 

If any questions are asked come MOT time for our cars (especially the JDM's) and the kit has been installed very neatly (read: looks stock). Then you could play the "It was built that way" card and damned if they could prove otherwise.

I don't see the point in making MOT tests ever more stringent - cars are getting safer and more modern, and cheaper, so why treat cars like they're all 30-year-old bangers with the doors about to fall off.

 

Sarcasm aside, I can't honestly remember the time I last saw a car or even a van in an unroadworthy state!

 

Blame the EEC, for a change it isn't the UK government behind the changes. The EEC is requiring that testing in all the member states is standardised. The idea being a test in the UK is exactly the same as everywhere else, that way we can all accept each others test certificates.

 

We are already pretty strict so imagine what some of the changes are going to be like in some of the other countries. That being said we can opt out of some of the items that have been requested and as far as I understand it the changes have yet to be signed of by the ministers so they aint set in stone as yet ( though they are likely to be passed )