Talk Morgan Forums Community The Malvern Arms UK MOT consultation

There is ,when a 1960 suspension eg, moriss 1000, is put through the Mad shaking device for the front wheels on a modern test.

Tim#

You are a severe pessimist. We have a vast number of supporters in the "classic" motoring arena that are in government that IMHO will never allow "classics" to be outlawed. I reallise we should never rely upon politicians fro ANYTHING but when it comes to our toys it is a different matter?

I've never heard of or seen this device, what is it? I always help out when my car is MOT'd, doing stuff like operating the switches and steering while the tester does his thing, and I've not seen one of these.

Now that is boundless optimism! I bet you buy lottery tickets too? :-)

The shaking thing that is mentioned is a "shaker plate" and is used at mot stations that are approved for one man testing. Its not at every garage.

Shakerplates are useful in some cases but do not show up all faults. They are quite violent but dont forget so is travelling along badly maintained roads!

Imo an experinced tester using the old system without shakerplates is just as effective if not better.

Must add that shakerplates do not inflict any harm to a vehicle unless something is totally worn out anyway, in which case it would merit a fail anyway

I had a squeak in the front suspension that I just couldn't pin down prior to the last MOT. By using this device the tester and I discovered it was one of the diagonal tie rods: although it wasn't loose in any way if you held the tie rod while the car was being shaken the squeak stopped. I don't know how I'd have found the problem otherwise.

If the owners are so concerned why would they mind paying for the MOT once a year.

What you have to remember is motor car engineering is a moving thing. Practices that were common in the early days of motoring, supposedly obsolete in 1914 (my Motor handbook of 1914 says so...) were in fact still being done in 1930 when my three wheeler was made. However, I doubt anything made after 1946 would have them. So there is a good chance, a tester picked at random has never seen anything like the old car presented. Things like that were the justification behind the 1960 date for exemption we currently have.

But a rolling 40 years is un autre bouilloire de poisson...

I don't think other than the severely tight fisted object to paying for a yearly inspection, but when the 'expert' has never met the feature, is wrong, sometimes dangerously so, the matter does need consideration. My nearest centre that tests old cars properly and knows the engineering is 15 miles away, and I'm in St Albans (I accept there might be one nearer in London, but the advisability of going through that traffic for a test is very suspect).

Something needs to be done, but the proposal is daft. The more people who fill it out honestly should reveal that, but you do need to be a bit clever as the whole thing is slanted to get the answers they want by asking only the questions that lead to those answers.

Hopefully they get lots of answers, the one question they should have asked - but don't is what year or years are your cars? It'll never be proven, but I suspect they'll get very few answers from owners of 1930 or earlier cars, and most of the respondents will either be speaking from the sidelines, or have in my view, a relatively modern car that is either 40 years old or soon will be.

So please, whatever your views - if you've not yet done the questionnaire, please do!

Of course we would rightly say that one dangerous car is one too many.. But how big is the risk when I haven't seen anything classic on the road for ages. Where are they all I wonder? If in private garages because they are worth too much to use then they are no risk at all.

I suppose it is a numbers issue? With the Plus 8 I have 4 motorcycles so it all adds up to mot them all when I might not use them all regularly. As a competent engineer I would always do basic safety checks before use.