Talk Morgan Forums Community The Malvern Arms UK Government vehicle regs changes afoot..?

Picked this up on another forum.... Fake news...?




https://www.gov.uk/government/consu...ct-of-in-use-emissions-of-road-vehicles?

Consultation document. It was bound to happen - certainly not fake news.

For what it’s worth I responded saying why it’s a bad idea via the online form, they are only giving you a few days to do it too… crafty bunch.

Well, we already have emission measurements during MOT s so is this more related to the government’s drive to get as many ICE vehicles off the road by the end of the decade in order to promote EV use?
Another tool in the armoury…wait for increasing ICE road taxes, increasing fuel tax, etc. as we approach 2030.

Seems unnecessary legislation to me. Isn't this a crucial part of the MOT test? Perhaps it's a case of a failure to enforce existing and perfectly adequate law: it's still fairly common to see cars/vans proceeding down the road in a cloud of noxious fumes!

I think this may be targeting diesel more than petrol vehicles, as they do worse with emissions as they age. They are always looking for another way to fleece us, however, so all older cars are always going to be a prime target for a greedy left wing government. Ed Miliband will try anything to virtue signal the motorist out of existence.

It's just another way of getting ICE cars of the road, as most likely many struggled to meet their original emissions even Euro 6 when new, as like the published MPG figures ,were usually achieved in lab conditions, not in real world driving.and not acheveable outside the staged and contrived lab conditions.

Hence the recent emission cheatng software debaracle....I'm sure is not the first instance of car manufacturing fudges. Even if they did meet the standards when new, its unlikely that the catalytic convertors, ecu and sensors are operating in as new condition and ensuring the car delivers the emission standards for a new car. Just take eg the commonly used GDI engine by most manufacturers which are recycling dirty polutants and how gummed up they are compared to when new.......Sue's Mercedes Oxy sensor is a regular failure weakness on all modern Mercedes especially for low mileage cars, so the likihood the car even though amazingly well serviced will most likely not meet the then when new manufacturers decared model specific emission standards


Only a matter of time before, the historic vehicles are forced off the road on emissions etc. got to find different ways of getting people out of ICE...

All the more reason to look closely at the post 92s cars which are not 40 years old and historic and meet the Euro 1 and Euro 2 much higher limits emission standards eg Mercedes which achieve a Euro 4 TUV sticker when touring Germany.....so I've been reliably informed. Whereas later cars may struggle more to meet their more demanding limits. This became very important when UK VED was based on emissions, which are determined in part by the mpg they achieve, which in reality we never achieve on the road outside the lab conditions......times maybe a changing. Just a change of tyre size or tyre compound away from the original specified tyres may alter your resultant emissions.

I'm sure the Government has complied the results of recent MOT emission tests and running that against declared when new manufacturers emission standards to see the fail rate against the manufacturers declared emmissions rather than the relevant Euro standards.With 40 million ICE cars on the road it will be interesting to see the way this heads.........................could be they give a percentage within latitude for the MOT,but may also consider reclassifying the VED band your car is in and resultant VED you pay.......lots of ways of skinning a cat, especially the earlier punishing VED rates pre 2017.

I asked AI the following:-

While Euro 4 standards were not legally mandated across Europe until January 2006, a handful of forward-thinking manufacturers began engineering petrol engines in the late 1990s that easily met the strict Euro 4 Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) limit of 0.08 g/km.Because clean air schemes like London’s Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) rely solely on the NOx value for petrol vehicles, certain late-1990s petrol cars can be proven fully compliant if you obtain a Certificate of Conformity (CoC) from the manufacturer to update the vehicle's registry.1990s

A few of the 1990's cars engineered to meet Euro 4 emissions

BMW 3 Series (E46 Generation — 1998 onwards)Many early E46s equipped with the M52TU or M54 inline-six petrol engines (such as the 323i, 328i, and 330i) produce NOx emissions well below the 0.08 g/km threshold. BMW famously provides the CoC paperwork to owners free of charge.

Mercedes-Benz SL-Class (R129 Facelift — 1998–1999)Late-90s models that swapped the older inline-six engines for the newer M112 V6 (like the SL320) and the M113 V8 (like the SL500) run exceptionally clean. Models built from late 1998/1999 frequently qualify under the NOx limits

.Porsche 911 (996.1 Generation — 1998–1999)Early water-cooled Carrera 2 and Carrera 4 models equipped with the 3.4-litre flat-six often output NOx numbers as low as 0.035 g/km. This is less than half the maximum allowed for Euro 4 compliance.

Lexus GS300 & IS300 (Late 1990s)Toyota was an early adopter of ultra-clean powertrain tech. Models packing the naturally aspirated 2JZ-GE 3.0-litre inline-six engine comfortably achieve low enough emissions to bypass Euro 4 restrictions.


Ford Puma (1.7-litre — 1997 onwards)This nimble, 90s coupe featured a high-tech 1.7-litre engine co-developed with Yamaha. Thanks to its advanced variable valve timing (VCT), it runs remarkably clean and can clear the Euro 4 bar

.Aston Martin DB7 Vantage (1999)Introduced in 1999, the Vantage version swapped the old inline-six for a 5.9-litre V12 designed under Ford's ownership, which featured more modern, tightly controlled emissions mapping.

⚠️ Critical Warning for BuyersIf a car was registered before 2001, databases (like Transport for London's checker) will automatically label it non-compliant by default because the factory emissions data wasn't standardized on registration documents back then.To legally drive them in emission zones without charges, you must request a Certificate of Conformity (CoC) from the vehicle manufacturer's homologation department, proving the vehicle produces less than 0.08 g/km of NOx, and upload it to the local transport authority for manual approval

.

Unless I have misunderstood the proposals, this looks like nothing more than making it illegal to delete the emissions control functionality that a car was fitted with when new. As such, all it does is to close a loophole.

Have I misread it?

That's how I see it, it's to close off the delete DPF's, EGR's for example that cause MOT fails & expensive bills to replace...but then there's the dodgy MOT centres that will still do it anyway

Every day I see illegal number plates, over tinted side windows, black tail lights, let alone the stuff you can't see, that should all be picked up at the MOT rules now

Iit is already illegal to use a vehicle on UK public roads if its factory-fitted car emission controls have been deleted, disabled, or removed.

The Legal Framework

Under the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations (specifically Regulation 61a), it is an offense to use a vehicle on a public road that has been modified in a way that causes it to no longer comply with the air pollutant emissions standards it was designed to meet.This ban covers all major emission control systems, including:Diesel Particulate Filters (DPF) and Gasoline Particulate Filters (GPF)Exhaust Gas Recirculation (EGR) valves and coolers (whether blanked off or mapped out)Catalytic ConvertersAdBlue / SCR (Selective Catalytic Reduction) systems

Penalties and Consequences

MOT Failure

During an MOT test, inspectors check for standard emissions equipment. If a component like a DPF or catalytic converter has been removed or visibly tampered with, it results in an automatic MOT failure, making it illegal to drive the vehicle on the road

.Fines:

Driving a modified vehicle that breaches these standards can incur roadside fines of up to £1,000 for a car and £2,500 for a light commercial vehicle/van.
Invalidated Insurance:

Removing emission controls is a modification that affects roadworthiness. Failing to declare this modification to your insurer typically voids your policy, leaving you personally liable in the event of an accident.

Exceptions

Modifying or deleting emission controls is only legal if the vehicle is used exclusively off-road, on private land with no public access, entered into dedicated motorsport/track events, or intended strictly for export to countries where such modifications are permitted.

Pretty much! Although it's not just deliberately manipulating emissions:

"We have chosen not to distinguish between excess emissions caused by poor maintenance of a vehicle and those caused by modifications made to vehicles."

My reading is that the MOT standards haven't been updated since Euro 4. Cars built to Euro 5 and 6 standards aren't tested to those standards. The proposal is to change the MOT system to use the standard in force when the vehicle was built, rather than the current method of periodically updating the law to cross-reference the Euro standards:

"This means that the following will be prohibited:
using a vehicle on the road which has been maintained or modified in a way that means it no longer meets the emissions standards that it was approved to"

In other words, closing the current loophole and making sure it doesn't reappear at the next Euro standard update.

So in a nutshell when I remove my dual Cats with the bypass pipes and change the ECU external resistor as per normal post MOT - carry on as normal just revert to "as fitted" as I do some years.

So what is all the fuss about - prey tell

All the time there are murderers and thieves out there if anyone gets pulled with this one the polis need to get a bloody life, this should be jobsworth Civil Servants work akin to the new breed of offensive/aggresive street furniture posing as traffic wardens..

Interesting perspective Richard... (-: I watched a CH4 YT vid on economics recently where a suggestion of the UK`s decline was summed up by a renown American economist, in that he suggested we had evolved from ruling the waves to waving the rules, which kinda works for me...!

I also beamed up the https://fbhvc.co.uk/ website in the off chance they might have reported on any possible implications, though nothing found..

Thank you George, what a great link.

Absolutely right.

So far £295 million has been spent on the 359,000-page planning permission for the Lower Thames Tunnel linking Tilbury with Gravesend.

The Laerdal tunnel, connecting Oslo and Bergen, cost £140m to build.

Unreal and typical the English talking about it whilst the ROW get on with it 😂😂 quietly 🙏🙏

Sorry just choked on my rice crispies.

So we have spent £295m on a review document. They built and had it productive for £140m.
Why don't the British get angry about farces like this and just roll over as if it was acceptable.

I get so angry about paying taxes when I hear they are being handled like this. Rather than just look at ways of getting lightly used vehicles off the road I would prefer if they really looked at waste first. Not angry enough to want them to hire Musk and reform DOGE though. It would be so interesting to create a Ministry of Ex-Ministers. Take the knowledge no doubt in many ex-government staff who know where the money is being burnt and enable them to go at it with pruning sheers. Not just on programs but possibly on the private parts of knowingly public-private money wasters. I have been employed by two US VC startups that went public on less money than that.

Back on or close to topic.
The Aero's both need a "very good warming up" before being put in for MoT.
Interestingly the Coupe got a good chunk of the options list thrown at it as the factory demo car. That included the "high capacity sports cat converters" which apparently needed to be fitted after the car was handed over to avoid registration issues. So does that mean it would be factory and should pass with normal levels? (sound and puff puff)

Just like all govt business these days, all jockey and no horse.

Get rid of the Government bureaucrats and their stupid regulations...less people to design and draw up stipulations and requirements, less to check and check and double check bullshit now required in planning submissions. I'm surprised that the EU even considers wanting the Uk back, the UK bureaucrats were responisble for most of the EU regulations.....I think they can do better without our help, but they still have to deal with the French Civil Service.

I assumed emissions for petrol engines mentioned in above document refer to testing under closed loop fuel control where the pre CAT O2 sensor(s) keep ideal stoichiometric ratio of air to fuel via injector opening times. I also thought this was already tested at MOT.

I would imagine therefore any tuning via ECU re-mapping wouldn't be affected since such would only come into play during open loop conditions triggered at startup, heavy acceleration etc., when O2 sensor(s) are ignored and fueling is controlled by ECU map.

I am pleased that you found interest in the website link Richard, though perhaps best if one occasionally organises Morgan or other get togethers, perhaps avoid beaming up the following link and going into full rant mode....?

https://fbhvc.co.uk/news/article/fe...d-light-touch-regulation-for-martyns-law

Being up here in the mountains where the air is thin (well that's my excuse) do I read your comments correctly in that this is another governmental non event?