More Bureaucratic bunkum to make our lives a misery.

[bhm1712]

The issue is, how many accidents or injuries have been caused by these extra checks, and how many will be prevented by them?

The MOT test was supposed to be a check of significant main mechanical components, not random things which might not work at some or other indeterminate future time.

Yes the MOT test was originally intended for checking those things but car technology has come a long way since then! It has to be relevant to today's cars. I would say that some of those if not all of the extra checks are vital to cars which have the tech fitted.

Going back to an earlier post regarding a vauxhall corsa and the garage saying ignore the light because there's loads of things it could be and most are not important - that's just pure ignorance And lack of knowledge of their own trade. They might have been better tone honest and say "we ain't got a clue so can't help you"

 

[pred]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-relax-MOT-rules-despite-safety-concerns.html


I told you! We're following the friggin krauts again!

 

[Whitespirit66]

Going back to an earlier post regarding a vauxhall corsa and the garage saying ignore the light because there's loads of things it could be and most are not important - that's just pure ignorance And lack of knowledge of their own trade. They might have been better tone honest and say "we ain't got a clue so can't help you"

That situation isn't uncommon. A mate's 7 series Beemer went to a main dealer because it would barely run, and was undriveable. Took then 2 weeks and the help of a senior technician from BMW's head office to get it sorted.

All the manufacturer trained mechanics and test equipment struggled to rectify the fault. That's just the thing, these cars are so stupendously complicated that even the manufacturer's agents struggle.

It's a bit like the iPhone thing. All the lemmings lap up the newest and latest versions, with 90% of the functions rarely used. The end result in car terms, is a vehicle that's OK for the first owner or two, but when it starts ageing, someone's got to pay to maintain all this kit.

 

[chapeau]

And old cars never ever stumped a main dealer mechanic ?

 

[Whitespirit66]

And old cars never ever stumped a main dealer mechanic ?

Not just 'a' mechanic, the whole dealership's very expensively fitted out workshop and all the mechanics. Also their computer diagnostics, etc, etc.

Part of the trouble is also the over reliance on computer diagnostics. If the computer doesn't know or mis-diagnoses the fault, then often they're stumped. Then it's often a case of part swapping.

I would be very surprised if a whole of the staff in a main dealer's workshops couldn't diagnose a badly running car in the days when they were fitted with carbs, coils, distributors, points, etc. Even earlier ECU controlled cars wouldn't have proved too much of a challenge to those who had experience rather than computers to rely on.

 

[peterperfection]

These days I wouldn't trust a employed garage mechanic to change a wheel on my wheelbarrow .
They dont fix- they just replace !!.

 

[bhm1712]

thats the main problem. No so called vehicle tech ive ever spoken to actually knows much about the cars they are supposed to be trained on. They rely on technical service manuals and computers. They dont have wiring diagrams or if they do, they dont know how to use them. Cars with modern engine management systems need engineers at electrical controls and instrumentation sort of level. Seems to me that if the "computer ses no" they become stumped rather quickly. Even with all the tech, circuits and components can be broken down into seperate parts, each with its own course of events of what it/they should be doing.

If the technicians do not know how to follow a flow sequence and work using something like the half split method of fault diagnosis then what chance have they got? I bought myself a fault code reader for my cars and each time the light has been on, it has only taken a matter of 30 mins or so to locate the faulty part.

If they put the MOT to every 2 years then id say it will just encourage people to leave potentially life threatening faults on the car because they know it doesnt need an MOT for alot longer.

 

[nickso]

BHM, you will likely never see a vehicle tech with the qualifications and skills you desire as they will find higher paying jobs elsewhere.

Fact is manufacturers are scamming the public with unnecessary "safety" and efficiency features poorly designed and executed. There is also absolutely no need for any car component to be coded to the vehicle, the anti theft cry is just laughable.

I will stick to my older cars, easy to work on on my drive, largely cheap and abundant parts new or second hand, high spec for little money and cheaper to insure and run in general.

All I need to worry about are those ***** in Brussels making it difficult to run or modify them in the future.

 

[chapeau]

If the technicians do not know how to follow a flow sequence and work using something like the half split method of fault diagnosis then what chance have they got? I bought myself a fault code reader for my cars and each time the light has been on, it has only taken a matter of 30 mins or so to locate the faulty part.

I am sure they could do that too, in 99.9% of cases, we only hear about the 0.1%. Modern cars are vastly better engineering wise than the stuff from 20 years ago.

What does annoy me is a failure of a £10 sensor will stop the engine running, but for the 100,000 miles the sensor works fine it contributes to a better engineering solution. However, often the impending failure of the sensor will be picked up by the computer and you will get a warning light. If you ignore it then you only have yourself to blame.

But if people want to work on their old cars then that's great. But you can still work on your modern cars too, in general it's still a mechanical part than needs replacing. The big problem with modern cars now is that you need elastic arms to get to the things.

 

[bhm1712]

I agree. I too have an old car - 1979 Pontiac Trans-am which is a joy to work on. Modern cars have far surpassed the safety and efficiency of older cars.

 

[Burnerman]

I must be getting soft, but I don't want to drive a vehicle without air bags, seat belt tensioners or ABS.....or chuck out tetraethyl lead anymore.
On my first cars, back in the 70's, if I had had a crash it wouldn't be a recovery truck that was needed, rather a dust pan and brush
John

 

[Big Tone]

I think the biggest and best safety feature of all is the driver’s brain. For some, or many, it’s the worst feature and that’s where all the modern safety can come in use. I wouldn’t trust some drivers I see with a wheelbarrow! Being a biker too, the car is just to keep me warm and dry on bad days; anything else on top is a bonus.

My old Micra is known for being good in every aspect except in a crash; in which case I’m going to die. The way I see it though is I’m still umpteen times safer than on any bike. We can’t all drive around in a Volvo or second hand Saab.

The beauty of the old vehicles, least we forget, is you can work on them! On modern stuff you’d just take it to the dealer or garage and write a blank cheque. (Been there, done it). My motorbike, by stark contrast, has enough electronics and sensors to get a rocket on Mars.

The trouble with today’s dumed-down world is that common sense values have been replaced with ‘intelligence’ wot knows better, like the example earlier of my laptop on the passenger seat or speed cameras which are clueless about the prevailing conditions and situation.

And of course it’s all done under the elf & safety umbrella. If you propose anything under the guise of better safety and ‘oh my - think of the children’, (no matter how dumb), chances are it’ll get the green light.

I just goes to show how you can fool some of the people all of the time or all of the people some of the time..

 

[Whitespirit66]

I agree. I too have an old car - 1979 Pontiac Trans-am

Nice one!! That's a proper car. Iconic, efortless cruising with a big lazy engine, simple and cheap to fix. OK, the petrol bills are a bit - but you only get what you pay for.

Pics please.

 

[bhm1712]

 

[Whitespirit66]

She's a beauty. Like the way it dominates 2 spaces - one mean, little UK car park space isn't enough. Wouldn't look twice at Italian exotica, but big Yank cars always interested me, saloons and sports/muscle cars.

Can I ask if she is fitted with the big V8? You may be asked to provide audio as well as the photos. Has a trophy-hunter taken the badge from the nose? Apart from that, she looks immaculate.

Thanks for the photos. I'm more than a little envious.