Sabres and the MoT

Moderators: scimjim, Lukeyboy46, erikscimitardemon, Roger Pennington, philhoward

User avatar
heathsabre
RSSOC Member
Posts: 406
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 7:10 am
Location: Orpington
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 14 times
Contact:

Sabres and the MoT

Post by heathsabre » Sun Apr 14, 2019 10:30 am

So far we have not declared our Sabres to be of "Historic Interest" at the time of renewing their tax. To be honest I have always forgotten to do so at those times. So we have just renewed the MoT for the Prototype (prior to it moving to new custodianship) and our Sabre Six convertible. The process passed exactly as it always has. So the option to continue to obtain a “professional” examination of our old cars once a year seems to remain. Given that we are happy to continue with this arrangement, can anyone suggest a disadvantage with not declaring “Historic Interest”? This is, of course, different from the situation regarding tax status.


Regards
Tony & Jaki Heath
RSSOC Sabre Registrars

1964 Sabre Six GT
1963 Sabre Six convertible

User avatar
peter freeman
RSSOC Member
Posts: 9648
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 12:12 pm
Location: Newcastle
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 335 times
Contact:

Sabres and the MoT

Post by peter freeman » Sun Apr 14, 2019 11:13 am

I intend having our Coupe MOt'd every year as I think it will not be long before the insurgence Co's ask for a engineers report. Best to be ahead of the situation IMO and they can hardly refuse a MOT cert as its the legal requirement for cars under 40 years old and it gives a independent look at the car for things I may have missed or just cannot test - brake efficiency etc.



User avatar
Will Anderson
RSSOC Member
Posts: 1534
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 12:58 pm
Location: Moray, Scotland
Has thanked: 55 times
Been thanked: 35 times

Sabres and the MoT

Post by Will Anderson » Sun Apr 14, 2019 8:21 pm

Other than the saving of fifty odd quid I am having difficulty in convincing myself of the benefits of registering "Historic Interest" for the 5a, at least at this stage as I would still want to pay for an annual safety check for my own peace of mind.

However, the divergence of MOT rules and regulations from historic internal combustion and basic technology is going to make the MOT less relevant to our cars as time goes on. My own opinion is that there should be a basic cut down MOT for 40+ year old vehicles concentrating on the safety and technology in those vehicles.

As Peter suggests; the insurance companies, I am sure, will be monitoring accident rates in exempt vehicles and whether or not the Government removes the need for a MOT if the risk to the insurers increases or there are a number of big pay outs they may well introduce their own requirements.

All just my opinion, of course!


Will Anderson - RSSOC 4230 & Middlebridge Registrar
SE5a 1973, SE5a 1972, Middlebridge 14, 42, P.O. Middlebridge 46 & 67

User avatar
philhoward
RSSOC Member
Posts: 24546
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 5:41 pm
Location: Staffs, UK
Has thanked: 45 times
Been thanked: 562 times
Contact:

Sabres and the MoT

Post by philhoward » Sun Apr 14, 2019 9:00 pm

One of the moderns in the fleet (current tow car) went for its MoT a week ago and was declared unsafe to drive due to excessively worn rear brake pads and both failed number plate bulbs (which were “never wear out” LEDs which actually were working a week earlier!). The rear pads weren’t actually that bad at between 3 and 3.5mm when removed. I put it for the MoT after doing some wheel swapping to get a set of MoT acceptable tyres (although I won’t be travelling any distance on them as they’re 5-7 year old Chinese specials) as two of them had slight nicks on the sidewalls although have been fine for the thousand miles I’ve used them.

Was the car “unsafe” before and “safer” now?...

To my mind, it’s probably less safe now at this point in time as I’ve got rear brakes that need to bed in until they reach normal braking efficiency and tyres I won’t be driving any further than the local tyre fitting emporium for fear of doing impromptu unwanted changes of direction. Number plates are reflective so a 5W bulb isn’t going to make it any easier to read.

The danger is when the VHI system gets abused - currently it’s a nicety that can be used by those who known their cars, what makes them tick and what would cause it to be unsafe and what’s just an inconvenience and can be looked at when the next weekend off comes up. I read of stories from MoT testers who pretty much condemned a car due to more rust and holes than metal on a car just before VHI came in, then see the same car later on with no apparent change in its condition “self-declared” fine for the road. As far as I know, you can’t remove VHI status from a vehicle once applied? If you buy a car so declared does that mean you can never actually get an MoT on it, even if you want to?

It’s only one fatality from blowing up in someone’s face.


Phil Howard
Scimitarweb Forum Admin
SS1 1600 Rooster Turbo; Sabre Mk1.5, Sabre Mk2
Previous: SE5/5a/SS1 No.1/SS1 Rooster/SS1 1800Ti/SE5a 24 Valve
http://www.ss1turbo.com
Never try and argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you based on experience.

Dcrosby13
RSSOC Member
Posts: 905
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2016 5:28 pm
Location: Warrington
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 28 times

Sabres and the MoT

Post by Dcrosby13 » Sun Apr 14, 2019 9:03 pm

I don't trust mot testers, seen a few dodgy motors pass and a few safe cars fail so I'd rather do my own checks.


I break stuff...... :w

User avatar
Will Anderson
RSSOC Member
Posts: 1534
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 12:58 pm
Location: Moray, Scotland
Has thanked: 55 times
Been thanked: 35 times

Sabres and the MoT

Post by Will Anderson » Sun Apr 14, 2019 9:20 pm

philhoward wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 9:00 pm
Was the car “unsafe” before and “safer” now?...
Agreed, in some cases it is compliance rather than safety - your point about number plate lamps is a case in point. Driving without number plate lamps is not inherently dangerous but old tyres we know are but I don't think there is anything in the MOT that limits the age of a tyre on a vehicle?
philhoward wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 9:00 pm
The danger is when the VHI system gets abused .... I read of stories from MoT testers who pretty much condemned a car due to more rust and holes than metal on a car just before VHI came in, then see the same car later on with no apparent change in its condition “self-declared” fine for the road. As far as I know, you can’t remove VHI status from a vehicle once applied? If you buy a car so declared does that mean you can never actually get an MoT on it, even if you want to?

It’s only one fatality from blowing up in someone’s face.
Agreed.


Will Anderson - RSSOC 4230 & Middlebridge Registrar
SE5a 1973, SE5a 1972, Middlebridge 14, 42, P.O. Middlebridge 46 & 67

User avatar
scimjim
RSSOC Member
Posts: 36884
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2006 10:08 pm
Location: Gloucester
Has thanked: 120 times
Been thanked: 891 times

Sabres and the MoT

Post by scimjim » Sun Apr 14, 2019 9:36 pm

philhoward wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 9:00 pm
As far as I know, you can’t remove VHI status from a vehicle once applied? If you buy a car so declared does that mean you can never actually get an MoT on it, even if you want to?
You have to declare VHI every year at tax renewal - that means that if you’ve modified it, you must MOT it.

You can take a VHI declared vehicle for an MOT at any time.


Jim King

SECURE DRY STORAGE FOR YOUR SCIMITAR

Current: SE5 (8Ball), TI SS1 (snotty), 1600 SS1 (G97), 1600 SS1 (C686CCR), 2.5TD SE5a (diesel 5a), 6 x random other SS1s.
Previous: SE5, 3 x SE5a, 2 x SE6a, 3 x SE6b, GTC, 2.9i GTC, 3 x 1600 SS1, 1300 SS1, Mk1 Ti Sabre, Mk1.5 CVH Sabre
Chief mechanic for: 1400 K series SS1 (Megan3), 1400 CVH EFi SS1 (Grawpy), 1300 SS1 (Number One) & Sarah's coupe.
CURE THE FAULT - NOT THE SYMPTOMS

User avatar
Old and Slow
RSSOC Member
Posts: 923
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 5:37 pm
Location: East Berks
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 41 times

Sabres and the MoT

Post by Old and Slow » Sun Apr 14, 2019 10:26 pm

I took 660XYB for an MOT as usual - if I ever think of selling it on then I think MOTs provide some level of reassurance to a prospective acquirer; also the chap what did mine took me into the pit to look at "future potential problems" which I might not have spotted, only having axle stands etc when I crawl underneath.
I used to think it would be great to not have to worry about putting a car through the MOT, but not any longer...... It might only be valid for the day of the test, but it is a good incentive to do the right thing.


Philip Needham
Ashley-bodied TR3; '54 Ford Consul; '55 AC 2-Litre Saloon;'65 850 Mini; '70 Ford Zodiac MkIV; XR3i
'81 911SC Targa, '64 Sabre Six

User avatar
philhoward
RSSOC Member
Posts: 24546
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 5:41 pm
Location: Staffs, UK
Has thanked: 45 times
Been thanked: 562 times
Contact:

Sabres and the MoT

Post by philhoward » Sun Apr 14, 2019 11:09 pm

scimjim wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 9:36 pm
philhoward wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 9:00 pm
As far as I know, you can’t remove VHI status from a vehicle once applied? If you buy a car so declared does that mean you can never actually get an MoT on it, even if you want to?
You have to declare VHI every year at tax renewal - that means that if you’ve modified it, you must MOT it.

You can take a VHI declared vehicle for an MOT at any time.
Cheers Jim - in that case I fell foul of internet folklore, not being in that boat.


Phil Howard
Scimitarweb Forum Admin
SS1 1600 Rooster Turbo; Sabre Mk1.5, Sabre Mk2
Previous: SE5/5a/SS1 No.1/SS1 Rooster/SS1 1800Ti/SE5a 24 Valve
http://www.ss1turbo.com
Never try and argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you based on experience.

User avatar
scimjim
RSSOC Member
Posts: 36884
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2006 10:08 pm
Location: Gloucester
Has thanked: 120 times
Been thanked: 891 times

Sabres and the MoT

Post by scimjim » Mon Apr 15, 2019 8:40 am

Will Anderson wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 8:21 pm
However, the divergence of MOT rules and regulations from historic internal combustion and basic technology is going to make the MOT less relevant to our cars as time goes on. My own opinion is that there should be a basic cut down MOT for 40+ year old vehicles concentrating on the safety and technology in those vehicles.
Anything that’s introduced to the test is never backdated, so there’s no real change to the testing of our cars. Essentially, we already have a “basic cut down MOT” - not just for 40+ but for every single part that’s not applicable to vehicles of specific ages (eg parking brakes for pre 1906 vehicles, service brakes on pre 1915 and pre 1968 vehicles, ABS on post 2010, mirrors pre 1978 and 1983, etc, etc, etc). IMHO the manual has improved beyond recognition over the past decade and whether you want to test your vehicle or not, you can’t blame the regulations.

There’s also a specific chapter in the introduction for exempt vehicles:

Vehicles of historical interest (over 40 years old)

Some vehicles of historical interest may be exempt from statutory MOT testing. Such vehicles must be over 40 years old and not substantially changed.
Owners of these vehicles may still request a statutory test be conducted. In these circumstances, you must register the test on the MOT testing service and carry it out in the usual way and issue the appropriate documentation.
You should remember that certain components on historic vehicles may have been manufactured to have a greater degree of play or tolerance than is found in modern vehicles.
If you, or your assistant, aren't familiar with the controls of a historic vehicle, you should ask the vehicle presenter to operate or demonstrate the controls.


Jim King

SECURE DRY STORAGE FOR YOUR SCIMITAR

Current: SE5 (8Ball), TI SS1 (snotty), 1600 SS1 (G97), 1600 SS1 (C686CCR), 2.5TD SE5a (diesel 5a), 6 x random other SS1s.
Previous: SE5, 3 x SE5a, 2 x SE6a, 3 x SE6b, GTC, 2.9i GTC, 3 x 1600 SS1, 1300 SS1, Mk1 Ti Sabre, Mk1.5 CVH Sabre
Chief mechanic for: 1400 K series SS1 (Megan3), 1400 CVH EFi SS1 (Grawpy), 1300 SS1 (Number One) & Sarah's coupe.
CURE THE FAULT - NOT THE SYMPTOMS

User avatar
Old and Slow
RSSOC Member
Posts: 923
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 5:37 pm
Location: East Berks
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 41 times

Sabres and the MoT

Post by Old and Slow » Mon Apr 15, 2019 5:29 pm

Correct me if I'm wrong (many often do!) but I believe one of the few items that was backdated is the presence of windscreen washers (on vehicles with a screen and wipers).


Philip Needham
Ashley-bodied TR3; '54 Ford Consul; '55 AC 2-Litre Saloon;'65 850 Mini; '70 Ford Zodiac MkIV; XR3i
'81 911SC Targa, '64 Sabre Six

User avatar
scimjim
RSSOC Member
Posts: 36884
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2006 10:08 pm
Location: Gloucester
Has thanked: 120 times
Been thanked: 891 times

Sabres and the MoT

Post by scimjim » Mon Apr 15, 2019 6:22 pm

Wipers and washers are required on vehicles fitted with a screen that doesn’t fold or has another means of providing the driver with an adequate view through the windscreen to the front, left and right. I don’t know if that was backdated or not but if it was it was 40 years ago or more :D

Edit - and seat belt for 65-81 vehicles (driver only) was probably retrospective decades ago.


Jim King

SECURE DRY STORAGE FOR YOUR SCIMITAR

Current: SE5 (8Ball), TI SS1 (snotty), 1600 SS1 (G97), 1600 SS1 (C686CCR), 2.5TD SE5a (diesel 5a), 6 x random other SS1s.
Previous: SE5, 3 x SE5a, 2 x SE6a, 3 x SE6b, GTC, 2.9i GTC, 3 x 1600 SS1, 1300 SS1, Mk1 Ti Sabre, Mk1.5 CVH Sabre
Chief mechanic for: 1400 K series SS1 (Megan3), 1400 CVH EFi SS1 (Grawpy), 1300 SS1 (Number One) & Sarah's coupe.
CURE THE FAULT - NOT THE SYMPTOMS

User avatar
Will Anderson
RSSOC Member
Posts: 1534
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 12:58 pm
Location: Moray, Scotland
Has thanked: 55 times
Been thanked: 35 times

Sabres and the MoT

Post by Will Anderson » Mon Apr 15, 2019 9:06 pm

scimjim wrote:
Mon Apr 15, 2019 8:40 am
Will Anderson wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 8:21 pm
However, the divergence of MOT rules and regulations from historic internal combustion and basic technology is going to make the MOT less relevant to our cars as time goes on.
Anything that’s introduced to the test is never backdated, so there’s no real change to the testing of our cars.
IMHO the manual has improved beyond recognition over the past decade and whether you want to test your vehicle or not, you can’t blame the regulations.
There’s also a specific chapter in the introduction for exempt vehicles
Thanks Jim but my point was not now but in future. I think the MOT in 15-20 years is going to be a very different beast with a focus on emerging technology and systems which may be so far removed from what we have now that a specific historic test, not a combined one MOT fits all, might be required because of the test complexity.

Or, I could be talking complete b**l*cks because my name is not Nostradamus! :lol:


Will Anderson - RSSOC 4230 & Middlebridge Registrar
SE5a 1973, SE5a 1972, Middlebridge 14, 42, P.O. Middlebridge 46 & 67

roymck
RSSOC Member
Posts: 1070
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 11:33 am
Location: Dorking Surrey
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 23 times

Sabres and the MoT

Post by roymck » Tue Apr 16, 2019 7:22 am

Trouble is Some MOT testers have no experience of older cars ,eg my friend left his A30 for MOT and they snapped off the ignition key in the lock as they didn’t realise to start the car you pull out the knob marked S . Also my wife’s Morris 1000 convertible failed because the passenger seat was not fixed properly , it was designed for the backrest to fold forward and then the whole seat to tip up to allow access to the rear seats...

What would fail the MOT although the car is 100% street legal ? Having a space saver tyre fitted



User avatar
scimjim
RSSOC Member
Posts: 36884
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2006 10:08 pm
Location: Gloucester
Has thanked: 120 times
Been thanked: 891 times

Sabres and the MoT

Post by scimjim » Tue Apr 16, 2019 12:52 pm

roymck wrote:
Tue Apr 16, 2019 7:22 am
What would fail the MOT although the car is 100% street legal ? Having a space saver tyre fitted
Space Savers aren't 100% street legal at all, they're for emergency use only with specific limitations imposed.

The term "space saver" was removed last year and what it would fail on now, is tyres on the same axle being different sizes (which seems fair enough to me - I certainly wouldn't present a car in that condition?)


Jim King

SECURE DRY STORAGE FOR YOUR SCIMITAR

Current: SE5 (8Ball), TI SS1 (snotty), 1600 SS1 (G97), 1600 SS1 (C686CCR), 2.5TD SE5a (diesel 5a), 6 x random other SS1s.
Previous: SE5, 3 x SE5a, 2 x SE6a, 3 x SE6b, GTC, 2.9i GTC, 3 x 1600 SS1, 1300 SS1, Mk1 Ti Sabre, Mk1.5 CVH Sabre
Chief mechanic for: 1400 K series SS1 (Megan3), 1400 CVH EFi SS1 (Grawpy), 1300 SS1 (Number One) & Sarah's coupe.
CURE THE FAULT - NOT THE SYMPTOMS

Post Reply

Return to “Early Sabre”