# New EU MOT rules on the UK from tomorrow



## Deleted member 4850 (Mar 19, 2013)

How will the strict new MOT rules affect all of us in the motorhoming fraternity? From tomorrow apparently there will be lots of more stringent new tests, on warning lights and airbags, speedos and CATs and computer systems. New tough MoT rules could see thousands of failures - Telegraph

The unfair bit seems to be that we in the UK will still have to have our vehicles tested every year, rather than after 24 months, as takes place in many other parts of the EU. Will it be toughest on old vehicles or newer ones?


----------



## Randonneur (Mar 19, 2013)

This just proves the point that modern cars have become far too complicated electronically.  :scared:

I would love to know how they're going to test the airbags though!!! :hammer: :raofl:


----------



## Sky (Mar 19, 2013)

I bet they'll put the price up too.


----------



## dave docwra (Mar 19, 2013)

I may be in a minority, but I believe it is about time the safety systems fitted to cars were checked & failed if found to be faulty as part of a modern vehicle test.

Dave..


----------



## nicandnina (Mar 19, 2013)

*New MoT Rules*

As an example though, it would previously have been possible to pass the MoT with a fault in the brake system (eg: faulty ABS) simply by disconnecting the warning light.  Now the tester needs to see the light come on at first when the ignition is turned on and which should then go out indicating that it's functioning correctly.  Whilst this might mean more MoT failures it doesn't seem to me to be an unreasonable test.


----------



## hextal (Mar 19, 2013)

I really hate all of the safety systems that are being constantly imposed - I know that probably makes me wierd, but I think they make people far too over confident.

I'm much more of the school of thought that driving around with a big spike on the steering wheel will make you drive quite safely.

As a biker I have to say that modern cars are pretty much idiot proof, so the fact that we still have so many crashes would seem to suggest that people's skill levels are falling to fairly dire levels.  Why not make drivers better rather than allow poorer driving to be supplemented by more gadgets?

Right - i'm off back under my rock again.......


----------



## Wooie1958 (Mar 19, 2013)

Mine`s in 2 weeks today , we`ll see how it goes , i always stay and watch.

I`m trying a new MOT Station this year after the  *" FIASCO "*  last year with the AL-KO Handbrake.


----------



## Teutone (Mar 19, 2013)

nicandnina said:


> As an example though, it would previously have been possible to pass the MoT with a fault in the brake system (eg: faulty ABS) simply by disconnecting the warning light.  Now the tester needs to see the light come on at first when the ignition is turned on and which should then go out indicating that it's functioning correctly.  Whilst this might mean more MoT failures it doesn't seem to me to be an unreasonable test.



that's not new, has been like this for ages. Most of the tester just didn't bother to have a closer look when the light didn't come on in the first place.


----------



## ivecotrucker (Mar 19, 2013)

hextal said:


> I really hate all of the safety systems that are being constantly imposed - I know that probably makes me wierd, but I think they make people far too over confident.
> 
> I'm much more of the school of thought that driving around with a big spike on the steering wheel will make you drive quite safely.
> 
> ...



I quite agree. I am not a traffic accident statistician but I would wager that most accidents are caused by people, not by their vehicles. Nanny (Euro) state rides again.


----------



## rrs2010 (Mar 19, 2013)

It actually came in in January last year and up until tomorrow (20th) only an advisory could be given for the new testable items that had been introduced, as of tomorrow it's in full swing..

More details here: MOT changes from 2012 | AA


----------



## jogguk (Mar 19, 2013)

Not just warning lights and stuff.

It now covers tow bars and a full functioning check of 13pin tow sockets. 7 pin sockets only require a visual check though.
I have seen some weird tow bar lash-ups on M/H's in the past

I'm screwed then as I have an American 4 pin flat trailer socket:rolleyes2 Never actually towed a trailer)

John


----------



## Luckheart (Mar 19, 2013)

Woo hoo - well for me any way, My 26 year old VW got through on Saturday and she's to be sold to a new breed of wilder. One that doesn't need an onboard loo yet. Unless you count those rare earth relays in the gauntlet box, it doesn't have that many computers either.

It's had: 
Apples
Blackerries
A mouse
The odd floppy
Bits of a bus
A Mac


----------



## jamesmarshall (Mar 19, 2013)

I find it galling that our Government is quick to accept the imposition of the more stringent European MOT test but refuses to make the test every two years in line with other European countries. More cost to UK motorists.


----------



## jogguk (Mar 19, 2013)

Strongly disagree with your view: 
ABS is a massive safety feature. Seen so many comparisons, a non ABS car will never stop as quick as an ABS equipped one. (except slow speed in snow).  Your overlooking the other feature of ABS, Almost full control of the steering, try that with locked front wheels.

Edit: Another plus for ABS on vans & M/H's is that it does away with the need for the notoriously crappy, unreliable weight proportional valve used to limit braking forces on  rear axles. 

John


----------



## dave docwra (Mar 19, 2013)

A non ABS vehicle can stop quicker then a vehicle fitted with ABS with the right driver, but these drivers are normally highly trained and not your Mr/Mrs/Ms Average.

Also most if not all modern systems do a lot more calculations & operate other systems under the heading of ABS/EBS.

Have you not got a oil & water level warning light?  

Dave..


----------



## dave docwra (Mar 19, 2013)

jogguk said:


> Another plus for ABS on vans & M/H's is that it does away with the need for the notoriously crappy, unreliable weight proportional valve used to limit braking forces on  rear axles.



I think you are confusing ABS with EBS, but you are right with EBS it removes the need for a load sensing/weight proportional valve.

Dave..


----------



## hextal (Mar 19, 2013)

dave docwra said:


> A non ABS vehicle can stop quicker then a vehicle fitted with ABS with the right driver, but these drivers are normally highly trained and not your Mr/Mrs/Ms Average.
> 
> Also most if not all modern systems do a lot more calculations & operate other systems under the heading of ABS/EBS.
> 
> ...



Got an oil pressure warning light (not sure about t'other), but I just check the fluids as a matter of course, so i've not seen it/them other than when putting key in ignition.  

You can get sensors for the tyres to let you know if they are deflating, but you can tell how the tyres are by looking at them and feeling how the vehicle is handling.

I'm not a fan of ABS but can kinda see how some would prefer it, but traction control!!  Ok, if you have a car with a zillion BHP and need to get off the starting grid fast I can see a need, but if a person seriously needs traction control on a bog standard family run-about then they really need to look to public transport for the sake of those around them.

Our lass's car throws a dash warning if a bulb is out - what sort of person can't see light (or more specifically it's absence)?? 

Sorry - this is one of my major gripe type topics.  Right up there with the "do not eat this hair-dryer" type warning labels.


----------



## fofeg101 (Mar 19, 2013)

I browsing in the motoring section of our public library a few months ago, I spotted a Hayne's Manual for the Ford Cortina MKIV, I used to own the estate version, I thumbed through the book, there were no references to ABS, ECU, EBS or any of the the troublesome Gizmos which plague our present day vehicles. The manual was printed on proper paper, not the recycled  loo paper the latest ones are printed on, and the photos were crisp and clear. Those halcyon days of uncomplicated motoring.....OK, I'll concede that I used to have to change the over head cam and followers every 20K miles.


----------



## fofeg101 (Mar 19, 2013)

hextal said:


> I really hate all of the safety systems that are being constantly imposed - I know that probably makes me wierd, but I think they make people far too over confident.
> 
> I'm much more of the school of thought that driving around with a big spike on the steering wheel will make you drive quite safely.
> 
> ...


On the same theme, the CTC did a survey a few years back, it was all bought about by the possible introduction of compulsory helmet wearing for cyclists, they found cyclists rode faster, and, significantly, took more risks when wearing a helmet than without one.


----------



## Wooie1958 (Mar 20, 2013)

hextal said:


> You can get sensors for the tyres to let you know if they are deflating, but you can tell how the tyres are by looking at them and feeling how the vehicle is handling.





In my opinion most people out there wouldn`t even Know or Care if they had a problem with their tyres !

A few weeks back whilst driving home the car infront had a virtually flat rear tyre and was carrying on without a care in the world.

We came to some traffic lights which i know take for ages to go through the sequence, so i popped out to tell the driver it was nearly flat.

They saw me coming in the wing mirror and lowered the window , i asked if they knew it was nearly flat and their response was :-

" What The F**k Has That Got To Do with You " and shut the window !


----------



## dave docwra (Mar 20, 2013)

Have to agree with Wooie1958 so many people have not got a clue on how or what basic checks need to be completed on a vehicle, I work with drivers who drive heavy vehicles for a living & some need all the safety features fitted to get them through the day.

Dave..


----------



## edina (Mar 20, 2013)

Wooie1958 said:


> In my opinion most people out there wouldn`t even Know or Care if they had a problem with their tyres !
> 
> A few weeks back whilst driving home the car infront had a virtually flat rear tyre and was carrying on without a care in the world.
> 
> ...



Sad world ain't it!


----------



## ricc (Mar 20, 2013)

my brother in law lives in spain now...the mot is a bit different over there...i gather its done at government testing stations that dont do repairs.... you drive youre own car onto the brake tester...ive heard a tale of the gov inspector pulling a spanish girl out the driving seat to redo the brake test with him pushing the pedal cos he thought it was failing cos she wasnt pressing hard enough on the pedal..

my car has abs .. only time ive noticed it working was when doing a stopping test on an icy snowy lane ten yards from my own front gate... im of the opinion its unnecessary for a competant driver on the road.


----------



## Deleted member 24143 (Mar 20, 2013)

ricc said:


> my brother in law lives in spain now...the mot is a bit different over there...i gather its done at government testing stations that dont do repairs.... you drive youre own car onto the brake tester...ive heard a tale of the gov inspector pulling a spanish girl out the driving seat to redo the brake test with him pushing the pedal cos he thought it was failing cos she wasnt pressing hard enough on the pedal..
> 
> my car has abs .. only time ive noticed it working was when doing a stopping test on an icy snowy lane ten yards from my own front gate... im of the opinion its unnecessary for a competant driver on the road.



I lived in France for some time and the test is done every 2 years by the government. The test centres do not do repairs so if you fail then you have to either fix it yourself or take it somewhere else then return for a retest. The French inspector I went to was very helpful and once pointed out that my steering joint on one wheel was wearing and to have it replaced but didn't fail my car. 

The system used here in the UK is open to abuse by garages who fail cars just so they can make money. It is better to have your MOT done at a council facility if possible.

A point was made about airbags but if you disable the passenger airbag for safety reasons, you might have a backwards facing baby seat fitted, then would this mean a fail because the airbag isn't working?


----------



## Deleted member 4850 (Mar 20, 2013)

IMO every new driver should have skid pan training in a car without all the bells and whistles and get a certificate for it before they sit their test. Needless to say this would be ruled far too costly. There's so much atrocious driving about it's frightening. We taught our kids to drive both off road and on road, in old Volvos mainly, and took them all terrain karting when they were kids...they could opposite-lock years before they took their tests and now I feel totally safe with both of them.

Contrast that with yesterday: I had a lass of about 18 years old, on her phone the whole time, driving two inches from my rear bumper for 8 miles on a slushy road where there wasn't a cat in hell's chance of getting past me. On a blind bend in the middle of Lochmaben I had to stop to let an oncoming HGV past and thunk! she hit my rear step! Then she reversed and raced off down a side road! No damage to me but you see this kind of idiot driving so often now it's practically the norm.  and we have to make cars and MOT's to save their stupid skins...grrrr!!:mad2:


----------



## Wooie1958 (Mar 20, 2013)

[No message]


----------



## jogguk (Mar 20, 2013)

[No message]


----------



## Teutone (Apr 13, 2013)

Oh dear oh dear....

You know so much about racing cars........errrmm nothing?

Racing cars having NO ABS is not because it's better without it. It's actually quite the opposite. If somebody would bother to take you round a race track in a touring car with a properly tuned 4 channel ABS, I can garantee you will need new underpants afterwards because you won't believe how late one can brake right down to the apex. Even with dry/wet mix on the track. NO driver in the world brakes better than this. Fact. Because as a driver with manual brakes you can only control 2 wheels at a time, not all 4 individually as the ABS can. 
And with a manual braking system you will have to life with a SET brake balance front to rear (to a degree, there as some rear break limiter sytems in some cars). The 4 channel ABS will ALWAYS brake ALL four wheels with the maximum traction available from the EACH tyre. 

How are YOU going to do this??

They only ban ABS to make the races more spectacular for the the fans because all the driver aids can work so efficent that it would be a much more boring race.
The real challenge is to have the driver aids (in a racing car) always mapped to give the maximum at the given condition.
You can't compare this to the road going ABS which has a lot of variables to cope with and is mapped a little bit more on the "conservative" side. And most of the newer cars now have 4 channel ABS, the older or cheaper cars do only feature 3 channel. (3 channel = 2 front wheels independent + both rear wheels)

And ABS took so long to come to bikes because bikes do something very different to cars in case you haven't noticed. They LEAN over when going round bends. Simply the hardware and software took much longer to develop to make a BIKE ABS working reliable. And not because manual braking is better. If you are a drivng god that is.

Only because your son is running round a racing track on a bike does't make you an expert.


----------



## n brown (Apr 13, 2013)

jogguk said:


> Not just warning lights and stuff.
> 
> It now covers tow bars and a full functioning check of 13pin tow sockets. 7 pin sockets only require a visual check though.
> I have seen some weird tow bar lash-ups on M/H's in the past
> ...


 don't forget,if it's not there it can't be tested.take off the towhitch and the socket/s and tape up the wires


----------



## hughb (Apr 13, 2013)

*Long live older vehicles!!*

Guess my dear old (1986) Mercedes will fly through as normal in a few weeks - no CAT, airbags, a speedo still run on a speedo cable. No electronics, no problem.


----------



## yorkieowl (Apr 13, 2013)

Had ours tested just as the new regs came in (a 2003 coachbuilt), was just as quick an MOT and no problems, think if you keep up to maintenance it wont be any more of a problem, same price as last year, £45.


----------



## sparkydave (Apr 13, 2013)

all this technology does in my opinion is teach people that they don't need to learn common sense, a lot of things like ABS are fantastic in themselves, as a piece of technology, BUT, in your average vehicle, it shouldn't be necessary, people just manage by learning less, 

automatic wipers- if you can't work out when to put your wipers on, should you be allowed out of your house unaccompanied? 

automatic lights- see above, and how long will it be before we see someone who doesn't know how to switch their lights on, because they've never needed to do it?

            technology is largely being introduced as a sales gimmick, and designed to allow idiots to survive, how long before the vehicle fails it's test because the automatic wipers don't work when the tester chucks some water at the windscreen??


----------



## lebesset (Apr 13, 2013)

Kryten said:


> I lived in France for some time and the test is done every 2 years by the government. The test centres do not do repairs so if you fail then you have to either fix it yourself or take it somewhere else then return for a retest. The French inspector I went to was very helpful and once pointed out that my steering joint on one wheel was wearing and to have it replaced but didn't fail my car.
> 
> The system used here in the UK is open to abuse by garages who fail cars just so they can make money. It is better to have your MOT done at a council facility if possible.
> 
> A point was made about airbags but if you disable the passenger airbag for safety reasons, you might have a backwards facing baby seat fitted, then would this mean a fail because the airbag isn't working?



there are more than 5,000 testing stations in france , and every one is privately owned 
MOT testing stations used to have to be separate from workshops in the uk ; are you saying this has changed ? if the station belongs to a workshop you are not under any obligation to have them carry out repairs required 
it will continue to be legal to disable front airbags to enable the fitment of rear facing baby seats


----------



## RoaminRog (Apr 13, 2013)

*Mot*

Just had my motorhome mot'd by a garage in Snetterton, just off the A11, and he is only charging £30 for a Class 4 mot. It is run as a family concern by Iain and Lisa Harkness. They trade as H.A.S. and can be contacted on 01 953 887442.
I can assure you that I have no vested interest in this company but I am always happy when able to impart good news. Did I mention the free coffee while you wait?


----------



## jogguk (Apr 13, 2013)

n brown said:


> don't forget,if it's not there it can't be tested.take off the towhitch and the socket/s and tape up the wires



Already done:wave: Easy with american towbar receivers, just pull the hitch out of the 2" socket:lol-053:

John


----------



## Iain69 (Apr 13, 2013)

hextal said:


> I really hate all of the safety systems that are being constantly imposed - I know that probably makes me wierd, but I think they make people far too over confident.
> 
> I'm much more of the school of thought that driving around with a big spike on the steering wheel will make you drive quite safely.
> 
> ...



Totaly agree with you, I think they should have cars without any safety devices for learners just a basic car like we had in the 70s/early 80s, How can someone trully learn to drive if you have abs, esp,tc and all the other safety devices to aid you, with all that you should never crash , but it leaves a driver with no experiance for if or when they drive something without all the toys :scared:


----------



## Iain69 (Apr 13, 2013)

I do think the mot is going to far these days, it was started to ensure a car was safe for the road but now its way beyond that .


----------



## Teutone (Apr 14, 2013)

I am a little bit astonished reading some comments in this thread.

"take it off and it can't be tested and fail you"

Don't you want to have a WORKING and SAFE towbar on your vehicle? With all the lights working as they should? If that's the case anyway, why take it off?

And if it's NOT the case, get it rapaired!!!! I have seen many trailers indicating the opposite side of the tow car or no brake lights.Or all the lights on. Or only very dim lights.

And you are still thinking this shouldn't be tested in an MOT???

If your airbag light is on and you take the bulb out, fair enoug. That's only about your own safety.

But whatever can cause any harm to OTHERS should be tested and if it doesn't work, get it fixed! Or delete it PROPERLY.

It is debatable if driver aids are good or bad. And as long as noboby comes up with a official statistic that accidents and death have increased since the introduction of ABS, Airbags, ESP, I am convinced they improve general safety on the roads.

Sure there is always an occasion where the human can outsmart the electronic. But that's only on a very few circumstances (ABS and driving slow on snow comes to my mind)

Don't blame the car manufacturers offering these aids, blame the regulators for not training drivers to a higher standard!
Every driver these days should attend compulsory training with his OWN vehicle to learn how to properly brake and do a bit of skidpan training to be prepared if he /she ever gets into trouble.

I bet a lot of motorway accidents wouldn't happen if people would realise how HARD they can really brake!

And if you think an UK MOT is harsh, just go to Germany. I can assure you that 30% UK roadlegal vehiicles wouldn't even drive off the german MOT station after testing. They would deregister them on the spot.


----------



## Teutone (Apr 14, 2013)

you are always good at dishing out but not very good at the receiving end.....

And yes, a modern ABS WILL compensate for poor driving skill. Why has it been developed if there wasn't a need? Braking on sliperry surface is rather difficult in a straight line already. Add a bend to it and you will benefit from a modern ABS without a doubt.
Like I said already, the computer can brake the individually, the driver can't. Same for traction control.
You can only push the throttle, the computer will see each driven wheel seperately and will apply power as suitable.

Take a modern 4x4 with hill decent. You would never be able to drive like this if you not a pro.

And there are plenty of modern road cars with 4 channel ABS nowadays, not only race cars.

All the REALLY fast motorbike racers I know use the rear brake. That what makes them really fast. They just know when and how much to apply. There mere mortals like us just can manage it with the rear wheel just touching the ground under braking.

oh and sorry for the 3 weeks delay. I do work sometimes and don't read all of the forum. It's not that important to me.


----------



## jonkil (Apr 14, 2013)

The new stringent MOT rules have been implemented here in Southern Ireland for years.
Our workshop has invested quite a bit in diagnosis equipment to repair the modern electronic systems, ABS, SRS etc.
Its amazing how many systems have had bulbs removed, and more modern dashes destroyed by people removing the SM LED;s to "put the light out" !
SRS system repairs can be expensive in some cases, not uncommon to have repairs costing many hundreds of pounds..... so all in all it will in some cases cost owners more to have those systems repaired to have a MOT pass.

As for the ABS debate, as part of our business we also prepare quite sophisticated modern rally cars. ABS is not fitted in many cases but the caliber of driver using those cars is not the same as the average road user. The really modern racing systems are really good and those will begin to filter down to road cars in the future, all 4 channel and in the case of 4 wheel drive cars they are 6 channel (both driveshafts have sensors and limit/allow both wheel lock up).... 
There is no doubt whatsoever that ABS do make road cars safer for the average driver.


----------



## maingate (Apr 14, 2013)

I agree with some of what you say David (is that a first?).

A lot of big 4 x 4 vehicles are permanent 4WD albeit with some fancy addons. They consume more fuel and tend to wear tyres quicker. Why they have done away with manually selecting 4WD (or the low range) is beyond me. The fact is that they are now just posing machines for tossers and are unsuitable for offroad use. Look how many got stuck in the snow despite the advances in technology.

I also drove off road extensively overseas. The truth is that I did not need 4WD very much but it was essential at times.

I would slam these Chelsea Tractors with high duty, no matter how 'clean and green' it is.


----------



## Techno100 (Apr 14, 2013)

Wooie1958 said:


> Mine`s in 2 weeks today , we`ll see how it goes , i always stay and watch.
> 
> I`m trying a new MOT Station this year after the  *" FIASCO "*  last year with the AL-KO Handbrake.



Mine passed last week but they said my handbrake is right on the pass line of 60% What was the fiasco you had?


----------



## mark61 (Apr 14, 2013)

Vehicles with these safety features should also have a huge boxing glove behind the sun visa. Safety feature activated followed by a whack round the head.

Saying that I did have a chance to thoroughly muck about on empty Swedish roads with loads of snow. ESP is amazing. 

Permanent 4x4 or part time 4x4, doesn't make that much difference if any.


----------



## Wooie1958 (Apr 14, 2013)

Techno100 said:


> Mine passed last week but they said my handbrake is right on the pass line of 60% What was the fiasco you had?




Mine flew through as well this year ( April 2nd ) , however last year was a Joke

The MOT station i used to use  had MOT`d the van from it`s first one at 3 years old to date ( 3 in total ) so they knew the van well and 
always commented on it`s condition.

Last year they said it had failed on the Handbrake ( just ) and came in at 17% ( ? ) so while it was there they lifted it up on the Main Ramp
and i had a look underneath with the Owner ( MOT tester ) and we saw that one side of the Handbrake Cable had almost seized.

There was what looked like a split in the cable and moisture had probably got in and rusted it.

To cut a VERY VERY long story short..........they then spent 2 weeks trying to fit numerous Peugeot Handbrake Cables to a ALKO Chassis
despite me telling them it was a ALKO cable that would be needed.

The first ALKO cable they fit they put on completely wrong and had it tangled around the top and back of the shocks which cut into the
cable and rust started in that one as well.

The second cable ( Overnight Couriered ) from ALKO after a 8 day delay due to being shipped from Germany went on OK.

Whilst having the van in and out of the garage 3 times  to sort this out the managed to damage the step twice and catch the Awning on
the door frame.

The reason they gave was that they had never seen or worked on a Motorhome with a ALKO Chassis before.......*ollocks

This garage is in the " MMM Recommened Book " of Garages and MOT stations.

I  E-mailed the MMM at the time ( last year ) but i`ve not even had so much as an Acknowledgement of them.


----------



## mark61 (Apr 14, 2013)

Yes, you are right, it's all about the tyres. A 4x4 with low profiles is going no where in the snow.

I have BF Goodrich AT tyres which are M&S, not a strictly a winter tyre as they are not a soft compound, but are legal everywhere that requires winter tyres by law, provided they have adequate tread.(5mm + I think?)  I regard them as a "jack of all trades" tyre, and are known for their longevity. I sell mine when they reach 50000 miles.
Funny enough AT tyres are generally much better in soft snow then proper winter tyres, but obviously nowhere near as good on wet/icy roads.

I was very impressed with ESP. Having the opportunity to play with it safely on open roads was an eye opener, it reacts so quickly and it really does know where you wanted to go, I would never believe it if I hadn't tried myself. ESP indeed. Yet I still don't like the thought of a computer having so much control. lol. But as you say, I did have reasonable tyres for the situation. I wouldn't have got that far up North on the tyres most UK 4x4's are fitted with.

Hill decent is another subject, scary.


----------



## Techno100 (Apr 14, 2013)

Thanks very much for your time :cheers:


----------



## iveco4x4 (Apr 14, 2013)

Have a 22 year old truck - what ABS / Airbag / traction control etc etc 

I do have Front & rear difflock lights +  4x4 light, I'm hguessing they won't be checking those

Rich


----------



## mark61 (Apr 14, 2013)

iveco4x4 said:


> Have a 22 year old truck - what ABS / Airbag / traction control etc etc
> 
> I do have Front & rear difflock lights +  4x4 light, I'm hguessing they won't be checking those
> 
> Rich



Who needs traction control when you have a proper 4x4.

My next one will be proper too


----------



## hextal (Apr 14, 2013)

mark61 said:


> Who needs traction control when you have a proper 4x4.
> 
> My next one will be proper too



A while back the head of ktm was asked why the rc8 didn't have traction control when many similar sports bikes did. His response was 'why do you need traction control if you have traction'.

I just quite liked that as a response.


----------



## Teutone (Apr 15, 2013)

hextal said:


> A while back the head of ktm was asked why the rc8 didn't have traction control when many similar sports bikes did. His response was 'why do you need traction control if you have traction'.
> 
> I just quite liked that as a response.



what a stupid response from KTM. Well you might not need a traction control because your engine hasn't go enough power??

Like Enzo Ferrari.Aerodynamics? That's for people who can't build powerful engines.


----------



## hextal (Apr 15, 2013)

Teutone said:


> what a stupid response from KTM. Well you might not need a traction control because your engine hasn't go enough power??
> 
> Like Enzo Ferrari.Aerodynamics? That's for people who can't build powerful engines.



And breathe........

His point was that tc is all well and good but you only need it when losing traction. If the chasis is well set up then you will have more traction without the need of tc.

A couple of the bike mags ran the bike against the new ducati panigale with full multi setting tc and concurred.  basically the bike with no tc was faster and more stable because it was set up better.

The point im trying to get at is that these things can add benefit but seem to be used to make up for low rider/driver skill and poor car/bike setup.

I feel like im having to have more kit cos other people are bad at driving.


----------



## Bigpeetee (Apr 15, 2013)

fofeg101 said:


> I browsing in the motoring section of our public library a few months ago, I spotted a Hayne's Manual for the Ford Cortina MKIV, I used to own the estate version, I thumbed through the book, there were no references to ABS, ECU, EBS or any of the the troublesome Gizmos which plague our present day vehicles. The manual was printed on proper paper, not the recycled  loo paper the latest ones are printed on, and the photos were crisp and clear. Those halcyon days of uncomplicated motoring.....OK, I'll concede that I used to have to change the over head cam and followers every 20K miles.



Didn't they also have a section on repairing rusty holes??

As they got older they went faster as the body weight reduced due to the tin worm.

Very good car for the time and mine didn't destroy the valves when the timing belt went.


----------



## Smaug (Apr 15, 2013)

mark61 said:


> Who needs traction control when you have a proper 4x4.
> 
> My next one will be proper too



Take care with 4x4's the apparent good traction can be an illusion as it can all go pear shaped very quickly when cornering or braking - and very badly pear shaped if you are daft enough to do both at the same time!

It's back to the false confidence you can get when the car does the thinking for you.


----------



## mark61 (Apr 15, 2013)

Was really referring to off roading, where traction control is just a mickey mouse attempt to do replace difflocks.
But yes, it is true, some 4x4 drivers assume just because they can go, they can also stop.


----------



## Teutone (Apr 15, 2013)

the good old days with no electronics or drivers aids. It was soooo good.

Hmmmm, was it? Imagine such an engine today.
-- high fuel consumption
-- high emissions
-- low power
-- bad drivability (compared to todays engines)
-- relative short life span (compared to todays engines)
-- short service intervals

I think some people have to take the rose tinted glases off when looking at the old stuff. Don't get me wrong, I would love to have less complicated stuff under the bonnet which I can repair myself.
BUT I also like to drive a 170bhp big estate car with a load of comfort, very little service (Oilchange every 19000 miles!) AND 50mpg+ economy. 200k+ miles on the clock and still running well.
Switching my heated seats on in the winter, nice cool air con in the summer, nice and quite on long runs.....

 How's about that?

Sure the downside is that IF something goes major wrong, you will have to face big bills. Or even a write off! But there is the option of warrantee......


----------



## Smaug (Apr 15, 2013)

Hhhhmmm, I have a 1981 car that has ABS, Cruise control & fuel injection, but it cost around 50 grand new! So not exactly yer average motor.


----------



## hextal (Apr 15, 2013)

Don't get me wrong. The idea of kick starting a 1200 twin would not appeal particularly. Im certainly not against all things electric. Its just that we appear to have gone past useful and into bizarre.

Automatic wipers, parking assist, lane drift warning, automatic braking. If a person feels they need these things then i honestly don't think they should really be on the road.


----------



## mark61 (Apr 15, 2013)

Have a 68 Citroen HY van I picked up in France last year, with a bit of luck may even pass MOT this week. These vans were well passed their sell by date even in the 60's. VW T2's, Transits, were light years ahead. No wonder only the French bought them. :lol-053:
no servo, no windscreen washers, no self parking wipers, no self cancelling indicators, about 30hp. I love it. LOL 

But I also appreciate the luxuries of a modern van.


----------



## QFour (Apr 15, 2013)

I suppose that if we switched to 24 month MOT's then there would only be HALF the income that is generated at the moment. This would put a number of MOT Stations out of business and increase the number of people out of work. If on the other hand we had one every 6 months it would DOUBLE the number of MOT's and therefore provide thousands more jobs in the service industry ... Hmmmmmm hope know one of any inportance in the Government read this .. :dance:


----------



## Teutone (Apr 16, 2013)

You need my ex-mechanic as a manual starter! Grabbing a 996 at the exhaust ends and off he goes overtunring 12.7:1 Compression! Not quite the norm, I know but still an impressive view to see him push starting such a bike on his own when the rest of the grid is running around with motorised power rollers. (Pilot in the saddle of course)


----------



## hextal (Apr 16, 2013)

Now that sound like a useful mate to have around


----------



## 1978lovebus (Apr 16, 2013)

nicandnina said:


> As an example though, it would previously have been possible to pass the MoT with a fault in the brake system (eg: faulty ABS) simply by disconnecting the warning light.  Now the tester needs to see the light come on at first when the ignition is turned on and which should then go out indicating that it's functioning correctly.  Whilst this might mean more MoT failures it doesn't seem to me to be an unreasonable test.



Answer to that is connect the abs light to the oil pressure light...


----------



## GRWXJR (Apr 17, 2013)

Some of the electrical 'aids' are a bit OTT, and I'm not a fan of most.  ABS excepted  - in perfect conditions such as a track, where a skilled operator can plan and use ALL his skill, it is possible to better it.  But in an emergency where you instinctively hammer on the anchors and your reflexes take over, then finesse isn't present, and ABS can save your bacon.

As for the rest.... well modern vehicles now cocoon the driver from the outside world - I pay attention to what other drivers are doing around me (as a bike rider this has helped keep me alive).  So many are zoned out, with a behaviour much like a bloke sat idly watching tv, than a person in control of a mass or metal at speed.

I recall that some study or other came up with that (not that its rocket science) all of us have a perceived level of risk that we are comfortable with (though of course that threshold will vary from one to another).  Humans like to operate at or close to this risk threshold, and only get stressed once their personal limit is exceeded.

So what?  Well - it means that really, really bad drivers are driving at speeds (relative to the environment and conditions) that they simply don't have the mental and physical skills to handle safely.  And they are doing this because the vehicles that are 'safest' engender a reduction in the drivers perceived risk threshold - so they drive with either less attention, or speed up (or both).

The thing is, people will happily admit that they are rubbish at all sorts of sports or other things - but not many will own up to being a poor driver.  And often the most sanctimonious and ones who believe that they are a good driver simply because they don't speed - they don't consider that perhaps their own skill and risk threshold is simply at the lower end of the scale, so they can't cope.  Often as well, the sanctimonious non-speeder is also the one who drives with no real attention, 'safe' in the supreme knowledge that they are a good and responsible driver.

Being a 'good' driver is what nearly all claim - where the evidence to the contrary is everywhere.  I reckon some fella's would sooner confess to being rubbish in bed before they'd confess they were an awful driver!

I'm all for a car being 'roadworthy' and tested to see that it is.  But all these gadgets and 'safety aids' largely to nothing to address road safety at all because of the way the human mind works.

A spike in the centre of the steering wheel might be a bit OTT - but compare driving say an original Mini at 60mph compared to any modern car.  60 feels a LOT faster and more risky in the Mini (so you're on the ball), while it feels virtually stationary in the new car, and you've also got your airbags, NCAP 5 safety rating and so on to make you feel that you are taking a lot less risk (so encouraging more speed combined with less input and attention from the driver).  Of course you aren't really - crash either at that speed and yer organs will still be mush.

Accident/Crash prevention still really needs the driver to be paying attention, use good judgement and consideration, and to always be looking toward accident avoidance, not accident survival.  Modern systems do very little in this respect - they just encourage drivers to be even more Ignorant, Incompetent or Inconsiderate (or all 3).

This is why motorcyclists tend to be better drivers - they KNOW they'll be hurt or killed in ANY collision with another vehicle, so they have to be vigilant, defensive and always look to avoid the accident, as that is the only real way to ensure you survive.  Car drivers largely do not do this - and the better the car they drive, the more the vehicle is complicit in encouraging this behaviour in them.

(sorry - didn't mean to bash out war n peace! )


----------



## GRWXJR (Apr 17, 2013)

While I'm at it though.... I drove a friends brand-new VW Tiguan yesterday.

It has an electric and automatic handbrake.  Pull up & it applies the handbrake for you.  Let out the clutch and it releases it for you.

1.  What a horribly complex system - when a cable handbrake is simple, reliable and does the job excellently.

2.  This is just another 'ease of use' system that 'dumbs-down' the driver so that their skill level diminishes further, and they have even less responsibility and less charge of the vehicle.  Sorry, but if a driver can't operate a handbrake, do hill starts etc. then they really ought to take the bus, not get a car that does it for them.

This car will also parallel park for you!  Again - seeing as it has all around parking sensors to aid the driver  - so a competent driver should not need this complex system.  Again - if you cannot park a car with decent mirrors and parking sensors, then you should take the bus.

This new car is back in the dealer today as it has already 'lost' the entire menu relating to the bluetooth function for the phone (so right now the driver cannot have a chat on the phone while the car parks itself?) - I shudder to think about buying something like this when its a few years old and out of warranty!


----------



## GRWXJR (Apr 17, 2013)

I don't know, but would hazard the guess that the modern 'safer' car is actually contributing to incidents and collisions, and that (assuming a suitable constant exists to make reliable comparisons) that accident rates are actually on the increase per mile travelled.

People may well be SURVIVING these shunts better, so the death-rate might show an opposite trend (and seeing as most accidents happen in congested areas and minor roads rather than M-ways, then this is entirely possible) - but that in itself is NOT the reason to say that motoring is safer.

"I crash more often, but its ok cos my Volvo is super-safe" is hardly the way forward - especially if its me on my motorcycle the clown runs into, or a bus queue, or schoolkids crossing a road or......

The amount of folks (young women in particular - who I also see as the largest growing demographic for uber-aggressive and pig-ignorant attitudes behind a wheel btw) you see texting while driving HAS to tell you that the driver is blissfully unaware of the dangers, and that their perceived risk levels are stupidly low given the fact they are moving at lethal velocity (a 30mph heavy impact is plenty enough to tear your heart away from your chest wall and disconnect the plumbing - this ain't good for you).  I've seen ppl texting while driving on an 'A' road at 60mph+, while wandering about all over the road.

The idea should be not to HAVE the collision in the first place.  Short of removing the driver from the equation altogether (so he/she cannot do anything rash / violent/ stupid / incompetent / aggressive etc.) then the vehicle cannot really do much to change that - in fact the tech is more likely to have the opposite effect.

A 'safe' car for me - well airbags, ABS, crumple zones etc. to increase the chance of surviving - accepted.  But making cars virtually silent and isolating the occupants so well so they do not perceive the speed and the risk, and all these gadgets to fool them further into a feeling of complete safety are things more likely to get them involved in a crash in the first place IMO.


----------



## Sparks (Apr 17, 2013)

Post Deleted


----------



## GRWXJR (Apr 17, 2013)

> So why didn't you catch the bus instead?



Coupla reasons...

1.  I can drive and parallel park without the gizmos (you don't HAVE to use the park feature btw).

2.  Where we live bus services ain't exactly great (massive understatement), and couldn't take us where we needed to be.

3.  Friend has Terminal Cancer and standing around freezing waiting for a bus wouldn't have been the best idea for him - I had only my works van available - so we used his car.

Thanks for asking though.


----------



## Sparks (Apr 17, 2013)

Post Deleted


----------



## hextal (Apr 17, 2013)

One if the potential issues is risk compensation. 

I used to abseil professionally and it was one of the safest areas of construction.  despite it being technically one of the most risky. Predominantly because the risk was so high it was always your focus. Now look at the number of accidents on low risk stuff.

I got chatting to one of the safety consultants a while back who had been called in to review an issue with the Hong Kong police. Basically, in the one year period following introduction of bullet proof vests the incidents involving officers getting shot doubled.

The vests were leading them to take more risks than they did before.

I worry cars will do the same


----------



## Teutone (Apr 17, 2013)

so you say remove the seat belts to make driving safer because drivers would be **** scared without belts and drive slower? I can see the traffic jams doubling with everybody driving over defensice.

In the past we didn't need such a lot of safety stuff because there was a lot less traffic about and people didn't need to commute such long distances just to make a living. I clock 20k miles up a year easily just to earn my money. 

As much as I agree that there is a lot of stuff about these days we don't really need, but for all of you which just can't let go of the good old days with these nice simple cars, would you feel happy to let your offspring loose in one off them in todays traffic??? I wouldn't feel comfortable cloking my miles up in todays traffic in a 40 year old car.


----------



## Smaug (Apr 17, 2013)

Teutone said:


> so you say remove the seat belts to make driving safer because drivers would be **** scared without belts and drive slower? I can see the traffic jams doubling with everybody driving over defensice.
> 
> In the past we didn't need such a lot of safety stuff because there was a lot less traffic about and people didn't need to commute such long distances just to make a living. I clock 20k miles up a year easily just to earn my money.
> 
> As much as I agree that there is a lot of stuff about these days we don't really need, but for all of you which just can't let go of the good old days with these nice simple cars, would you feel happy to let your offspring loose in one off them in todays traffic??? I wouldn't feel comfortable cloking my miles up in todays traffic in a 40 year old car.



Defensive driving doesn't create traffic jams or congestion, but it can improve traffic flows as people create space around themselves & traffic streams can filter easier. Defensive doesn't mean slow or hesitant, it means not leaving yourself exposed to the mistakes others may make, it means leaving extra stopping distance in front if the dope behind is up yer bum(per), it means looking & adjusting your speed on approaching a roundabout so you can merge with teh flow rather than stopping & then looking. Lots of other examples, I'm sure you get my drift tho.


----------



## Teutone (Apr 17, 2013)

Smaug said:


> Defensive driving doesn't create traffic jams or congestion, but it can improve traffic flows as people create space around themselves & traffic streams can filter easier. Defensive doesn't mean slow or hesitant, it means not leaving yourself exposed to the mistakes others may make, it means leaving extra stopping distance in front if the dope behind is up yer bum(per), it means looking & adjusting your speed on approaching a roundabout so you can merge with teh flow rather than stopping & then looking. Lots of other examples, I'm sure you get my drift tho.



I wrote OVER defensive.

I fully agree with what you wrote and it would be such a nice thing if this would the reality.
I might print it off and show it to the idiot who always pulls in front of me on a rainy motorway as soon as I leave just the hint of a safety gap.


----------



## hextal (Apr 17, 2013)

At the risk of going off topic my concern is that we humans have recently become so risk averse that it is leading to us loosing the skills that we need to survive.

It's natural to worry and be scared for the safety of others:-

I better not leave my baby in her new room for the first time tonight, something terrible may happen
I better not let my child out of my sight, they may get hurt/kidnapped/run-over
I better not let my kid go to school, they may not get the correct education
I better not let them go to university, they may get into drugs

etc etc

These are all natural thoughts, but if you acted on them all to extremes in order to alleviate all risk to that person, then they won't develop the skills they need to cope on their own.

I think modern gadgets are doing the same.


Seriously, look around and tell me people arent getting more stupid and helpless these days (or perhaps i'm mixing with the wrong crowds).:lol-053:


----------



## GRWXJR (Apr 18, 2013)

When I was a teen and wanted to learn to drive a car  -  I was lucky with a good head-start in that I already rode m-cycles, and had also driven tractors & land-rovers quite a bit helping out at hay-time on local farms - when you were big enough to press down the clutch, but too small to throw the bales high enough - you got to drive the tractor & trailer round the fields so there was an extra adult to load/stack.  There was also the 'Silage Grand-Prix', where ferrying silage from the Forage Harvester to the Silage Pit had to be finished once started, so 'getting on with it' was necessary - great fun.  All this on hills where marginal (if that) brakes and big weight meant using the machinery properly to keep it and you in one piece.

I can only imagine what today's 'risk-averse' society & H&S nannies would make of such things now!

The stuff I learnt to drive in (on the road) was shonky old crap - a matter of it being a) economic necessity and b) parents not wanting to risk their more decent car & essential car in the hands of a 17-year-old - so I had to get my own.

Instead of looking at this a bad thing, I was told - "Learn to drive in a banger, which requires much more input and effort, and you will learn so much more and be able to drive ANYTHING.  Learn in a new car and the reverse is certainly NOT true.

And so it was.  I was never concerned moving vehicle to vehicle, different types, sizes and so on.

Now a lot of folks on here may well have a nice modern motor with all the Gizmo's - but the chances are (like me), you learnt a long time ago on stuff a LOT more basic, with more marginal brakes and suspension, steering etc. which forced you to watch the road more attentively, to learn to *feel* what the vehicle and road surface are doing - to understand understeer and oversteer, what happens when you lose traction etc. and how to compensate/correct it.

The concern is - the more recent generations of drivers have none of these skills - most learner cars in the last God knows how long have been diesel - so you don't even need decent clutch control not to stall it.  The drivers have no clue about what happens if they encounter a situation where their car cannot 'do it for them'.

So they don't possess the basic road-reading and machine control skills, are blissfully ignorant of the fact, and the 'safe' environment and marketing of the vehicle they drive actually entices them into a false sense of security so they put less input into what they are doing.

Seems like it's a sensible conclusion that all of the above is a recipe for MORE accidents to me - and how can MORE accidents mean 'safer'?

The Scandinavians have always had a thing about 'safe' cars (think Saab & Volvo).  Yet their new drivers have to undertake off-road skills tests and learn to drive on skid-pans and gravel etc. to gain their licence - i.e. they instill in their road users a necessary skill level before they let them loose.

UK cars have a weak link - and that is the nut behind the steering wheel - the squashy organic thing that's supposed to be in charge of it.  The quality of this essential component is often alarmingly poor.


----------



## ricc (Apr 18, 2013)

i started driving on roads at 16 years old some 40 odd years ago...on a tractor where standing up and jumping up and down on the brake pedal had little discernable effect on velocity... it taught forward thinking and use of engine braking....not easy to double declutch and change down a gear either.
seat belts in cars held you in the seat so you felt safer cornering at higher speeds.
comprehensive insurance has led to a dont matter if i bend it culture.
clarkson and top gear has produced a generation of drivers who dont think beyond speed and acceleration.
back in the late 70's i clocked up mega miles in the company escort van.... home in somerset to head office near cambridge was a regular 200 mile run , the difference in time between driving like an idiot and fast but sensible was negligible...you picked up more time by looking ahead and picking lanes at roundabouts in slow moving traffic than by marginal overtaking at speed on the open road.
my first brand new company car was a mk 5 cortina estate... in the early eighties... to be honest i dont think a new car today is much of an improvement in real everyday driving terms.  the cortina would get to seventy briskly , sit at 85 on the motorway all day and do low thirties mpg
my current vw sharan does basically the same..but .uses a bit less fuel and probably safer in a smash.  but all the goodies like leccy mirrors, heated seats, etc even aircon are rarely if ever used.  the only time ive ever felt abs working was in a test stop on a snow covered road.


----------



## mark61 (Apr 18, 2013)

Those new fangled electric windscreen wipers, just another thing to go wrong.


----------



## mark61 (Apr 18, 2013)

I vaguely remember my old man moaning about the wipers on his Thames 400E van, must have been the same thing.
He got a VW after that, lol


----------



## Byronic (Apr 18, 2013)

mark61 said:


> Those new fangled electric windscreen wipers, just another thing to go wrong.



Those good old vacuum  "powered" wipers they never went wrong, the side valve ohv engines that could sometimes make an icredible 20,000 miles without a decoke or head gasket replacement, those long lasting bodies that never rusted, the bodywork hand crafted with a lead filler finish, so precise was the panel fit, the cross ply tiyres that hardly ever sustained a puncture, the marvellous push button tune-in radios, steering joints that needed a greasing every 1, 2, or 3000 miles or else they'd be worn out at 8000 (think kingpins) great for keeping you fit. Low tech oil, grease, rubber, coolant , God how I miss them.

You can keep the modern technology I want all the above, next year I'll possibly privately import an Indian Hindustan. I'm sure it'll have at least some of those wonderful advantages. Or perhaps I'll go for an old Cortina. They were so long lasting there's bound to be thousands to pick from. Somehow I think I'll be in a very short queue!!


----------



## GRWXJR (Apr 18, 2013)

Ah - the wonderful sport of 'extreme sarcasm' eh?

There is a 'happy medium' y'know.  No-one is suggesting a return to vacuum wipers, or acetylene lights come to that.

But... 'rain sensitive wipers'?  If your eyesight and brain isn't capable of registering that there is rain on the windscreen, and then turning on and adjusting the rate of your wipers, then should you really be driving anyway?

The point is that there is reliable, effective systems that are being over-complicated and compromising reliability and sustainability for a tiny 'gain' in user-friendliness.

People get led by the nose by the marketing to believe that they want and need this stuff.  And when it goes wrong at the roadside?  An automatic parking brake?  Give me a break - how complex is the system and electric motors, with the weight and complexity (plus its connected to the computer and dash so I'm guessing the 'brain' can shut down the car if it fails?).  I will never buy a car with such a handbrake system as long as there is a conventional cable-braked alternative available instead.

The potential bills for ancillary equipment such as handbrake, wipers, and other electronics that take away simple tasks from the driver mean that cars like my mate's uber-complicated VW Tiguan are likely to mean it'll be written-off as too costly to keep on the road a lot sooner than if it was less complex.  This will suit the car-maker as folk will be forced to buy more cars, while we'll all have to spend a lot more wedge to stay mobile.

Any minor issue with a car can now have you ringing for the Breakdown Truck, instead of being able to get home - you can't make a judgement call - the car goes into 'Limp-mode' or something stupid, or just won't go.  So you have to take it to the 'nearest' dealer and get our wallet out.

These cars are now filtering down to the people who can't afford new, warranted cars - and they are failing all over the place.  The motor that preceded my mate's new VW Tiguan was a 2007 Ford Mondeo - which 'developed' a ECU fault so it'd drain the battery - over £1K for the ECU plus labour, which they could not be sure would fix the problem.  The car was deemed worth £1700 at trade-in - with 43K miles on it.

Look out on the roads - a lot of the cars still doing well on the roads reliably are often smaller hatchbacks & the like - stuff around 2001-ish.  Well-engineered, new enough to be good, economical enough, and old enough to have reasonably simple and reliable electricals, and cheap enough new not to be loaded with gadgets, which makes them reliable and affordable runabouts.  I think there is the happy medium and the example of a good compromise right there.

My daughter runs a late- 1990's Nissan Micra.  Its kept going while many of her friends 'better' newer cars have been off for repair bills that she simply couldn't afford.  But these sorts of vehicles are being taken away steadily by 'progress'.

The modern car like a Golf weighs double what the first generation did - loaded with all kinds of crap that we don't actually need.  Sure some of its useful (ABS) and some of it is nice to have and does make it 'nicer'.  But its gone way beyond practicality, sustainability and sense into the realms of the ridiculous IMO.


----------



## Byronic (Apr 18, 2013)

GRWXJR, I am in total agreement with you. Things are now overcomplicated with many gadgets and gizmos of dubious benefit. But some people seem to refer to a past where all or at least most aspects of vehicle construction was or were better than now. I'm pointing out a short list of what I consider to be of a significantly bettered standard nowadays, following on the theme from the Mark61 "vacuum wiper" post.

Further, I'd agree that possibly the 90's saw cars being produced with just about the right balance between practicality and use of electronic technology and modern materials. 

I also practise what I believe, my M/H is non electronic, and as simple as myself.


----------



## Teutone (Apr 18, 2013)

GRWXJR said:


> Ah - the wonderful sport of 'extreme sarcasm' eh?
> 
> There is a 'happy medium' y'know.  No-one is suggesting a return to vacuum wipers, or acetylene lights come to that.
> 
> ...



I agree with all you say.

But I still like my rain sensitive wipers 
It's not the "get going on it's own" what I like, it's the fact that they adjust to the actual amount of rain. So you don't have to fiddle with the intermittend setting all the time when the spray gets a bit more or less. Don't knock it before you tried it :cool1: Just don't forget to disable them before you enter a car wash.......

I was so disappointed when I saw the "new" beetle. Rather than making a car in the spirits of the real beetle, they just covered a Golf with a beetle body. It's even worse on mpg than the Golf!!


----------



## Byronic (Apr 18, 2013)

Teutone said:


> I agree with all you say.
> 
> But I still like my rain sensitive wipers
> It's not the "get going on it's own" what I like, it's the fact that they adjust to the actual amount of rain. So you don't have to fiddle with the intermittend setting all the time when the spray gets a bit more or less. Don't knock it before you tried it :cool1: Just don't forget to disable them before you enter a car wash.......
> ...



Nothing wrong with that wiper innovation, can only assist safety. I think what some of us are saying is, do the plusses outweigh the disadvantages given the probable added complexity of this over the more conventional system. If it reliably lasts the life of the vehicle, then yes. If it doesn't, then perhaps the more conventional setup might have been preferable, perhaps no more reliable but cheaper and simpler to fix. 

Can end up going round in circles on all this, I'm losing the will to live.

The "new" VW beetle. A great PR campaign didn't they keep it in short supply for a while so they could create a waiting list and consequently charge a premium price.


----------



## GRWXJR (Apr 18, 2013)

I've driven modern stuff with all the gizmo's - cars and vans in work as well as 4x4's that have loads of the toys in.

But, I don't need them, and I don't miss them when I don't have them.  I'm quite happy doing it myself thanks.

I don't actually like the auto-wipers actually & feel they are worse - the damn things often operate when I'd rather they didn't and smear a screen that would have been far better left well alone - but the gadget takes the decision away from me.  Irritating!

Its funny, but there's a trend where more and more people (prob not the youngsters so much) are liking more basic and older cars and motorcycles.  Its not just the rose-tinted specs and nostalgia either - people LIKE the fact that they have to be involved in the process, rather than feeling like a virtual passenger when they drive, and pretty much superfluous.  A modern car seems to have about as much character and appeal as white goods - and I can't get excited about my washing machine either.

I'm the same with my motorcycles - I don't WANT a ride-by-wire throttle and electronic suspension.  My bike does everything a 15K Multistrada does, at a fraction of the cost, is totally home-serviceable and needs my input to make it go properly.  I like that, plus I'd feel way more confident taking my (2004) so-called out-of-date and basic motorcycle across the continent than something bristling with electronics.  The chances of me being able to keep going or get myself going are much higher.

Yes, the newer Ducati is MUCH faster and MUCH better  - on Paper.  In the real world on real roads though, the difference is marginal - certainly not 12K's worth.  And the daft thing is that I actually have greater peace of mind than the guy on the technological marvel.


----------



## landyrubbertramp (Apr 18, 2013)

GRWXJR said:


> I've driven modern stuff with all the gizmo's - cars and vans in work as well as 4x4's that have loads of the toys in.
> 
> But, I don't need them, and I don't miss them when I don't have them.  I'm quite happy doing it myself thanks.
> 
> ...



good post
ive had loads of diffrent cars im not echanic but can do basic stuff since ive had my landrover its only been in a gargare once in 5 years . it does everything i need and can easily be fixed , when it ent for its mot if anything fails its an easy self fix


----------



## Byronic (Apr 18, 2013)

I'm possibly misunderstanding you but is not the Mondeo a Cortina built to today's standards. Perhaps you mean a Mondeo without all the crap that you me and many others consider superfluous? 
How many motorists do you think pick the version of whatever model of car with all the electronic bling, in preference to the base model??


----------



## GRWXJR (Apr 18, 2013)

> How many motorists do you think pick the version of whatever model of car with all the electronic bling, in preference to the base model??



Its a good question.  My guess is that it probably has a fair bit to do with your disposable income, and how much of it you're prepared to invest/risk in your car.  You're maybe more likely to buy a 'loaded' car if you are more concerned with having all the blingy gadgets than you are about the potential cost (to buy and to maintain).

A lot of folks spend strong money on a new/recent car, as they have no clue about a car's mechanics & so are looking to 'buy' peace of mind in safety & reliability.  I think this has been a strong tactic throughout automotive history  - and at at least till say the 90's it had merit.  I just don't think it has today (on the reliability front) - quite possibly the opposite.

So, if you change your car for a new 'un ever (say) 3 years, then its long-term reliability and sustainability isn't too much of a concern (for you) - except possibly on resale / trade-in value maybe.  I think this factor is why Mfr's get away with so much low-grade materials in lots of gadgetry - they know the original buyer isn't too worried maybe?  Look at Renaults record with electricals - failing window motors at £150 a pop are common, and many other things too - they load a (relatively) cheap car with loads of extras for the punters - but to give so much HAS to mean compromise on the quality and cost of the bits.

On the other hand, I know a guy who bought the most basic Kia Cee'd he could get in 2009 - not even leccy windows.  He wanted basic as he saw basic as reliable long-term, and he planned on keeping the car for many, many years and maximising his return on it.  He took advantage of the 'Scrappage Scheme' (remember that?) and got £2K for a flogged to death Skoda Felicia against it.

So his buying decision was based on being 'tight' and erring on practicality and no-frills - he wants very long-term ownership with strong reliability and low running costs - for him this meant 'basic'.  Hard to argue that he's not right.  Agree though that he's in a minority - but he's the smart one who'll spend a lot less on his motoring than most new car buyers (if money is a major issue that is).

Thing is, Joe Public is barraged with the marketing to feel that they should have and need all the gadgets in the way the cars are promoted and sold - the reality is of course that we don't at all - but they marketing suits have successfully generated a need and an expectation where before there was none.


----------



## Byronic (Apr 18, 2013)

GRWXJR
A good reply and as said much has been applicable from the start of motoring. Near word for word my own pub night argument. (and for the high point in clever marketing, think Apple). "Barraged with marketing" resulting for instance in paying extra for the alloy wheel option on a motorhome when the standard steel wheel option is often lighter and takes less maintenance?
The single most important factor in my motorhome choice is reliability, everything else is secondary at best. In my car not so important a factor.
So bearing that in mind the m/home is simple, non electronic, almost impossible to overload, can within reason be adapted (eg just recently welded up a motor bike rack no problems fitting it). Apart from MOTs has never been in a garage in its 20+ years. I can maintain every aspect of the thing mechanically/bodily, at least to date. I only do about 6,000 miles annually so a few less mpg or more L/100km over a new or near new model isn't of much concern. Of course it has downsides...it's noisy and slow for a start. Most m/homers I'm sure would want something newer slicker and quicker. Who's right and who's righter is just down to personal choice in the end, preferably an informed choice.


----------



## Byronic (Apr 18, 2013)

Looks to me at least that we are all singing from the same hymn sheet on this broad topic. Which wife had the best looking body!!
The Landy sounds much like grandmas axe, lasted 50 years only needed 6 blades and 10 handles other than that was just like new!


----------



## BillyPants (Apr 18, 2013)

Whilst we may be barraged by adverts, it's how we respond to them that counts. People buy new cars with gimmicks on as a status symbol, and the ad people know that, hence why they add little gimmicks. It's bizarre to think that adding a CD and changer and leccie windows and automatic windscreen wipers can be a deal maker, but it's true, they can. And the majority of people suck this stuff up and buy new cars as often as they possibly can so they can show their 'status' friends, neighbours, and of course to themselves. That's why car manufacturers add new toys, to sell more cars, it's a simple equation for them to make more money.

They're also making vehicles more difficult to repair to make more money. No-one can tell me that the dealers and manufacturers aren't in each others pockets, and the Govt is involved with their legislation for kickbacks. Being a noob to motorhoming when I bought my second van in 2004 I bought brand new. Never again. Never ever again. When this one dies and I have some money I'm buying an older, basic one. Every single year this van has cost me a minimum of £1k on repairs and maintenance, and although some things about new are good, most things are not, the main one being the inability to do most jobs yourself. And the benefits of a new engine are, 21 mpg, ECU that runs in 'safe mode' without telling me why, ECU that prevents the engine starting on a  regular basis and even the dealer doesn't know why, over £300 to replace a battery and £1,200 for a steering rack to be fitted, madness.


----------



## GRWXJR (Apr 18, 2013)

Byronic - my campervan is a 2.5Di Tranny-engined LDV Convoy, so I think I probably can match your motorhome in the 'basic' stakes - I doubt its possible to be much simpler and still have moving parts :lol-053:

But yes - I got 'Sully' of course due to budget limitations, but I was thinking about the potential bills for anything going wrong as well as initial outlay when I bought it.  I might have stretched the budget to something a bit more modern, but when combined with the potential costs for a failure - I took the decision that the old agricultural LDV was for me.

I was (like yourself) prepared to put up with slower and less refined, for basic reliability, low parts costs and relative simplicity (no DMF clutches, electronic injection - high pressure common rail system, computers etc. etc. ).  Also a couple less mpg than a newer van seemed fair enough when compared to the potential cost of one breakdown of a more complex machine to me too.

Funny thing is - the LDV is slow - no 2 ways about it.  But despite all the super-duper modern cars with mega-hp, the speed limits on A roads are dropping, and traffic does run slower than 10-years ago IMO - so the old girl doesn't actually get in the way or fail to keep up as much as I thought it would.

If I felt I could afford a much more refined van, then I suppose I could also then afford to pay to fix it.  Horses for courses.


----------



## lebesset (Apr 18, 2013)

am always amused to see the EU being blamed for introducing over the top regulations 

anyone noticed that 2 year MOT's are the norm in the EU , but when it was mooted for the uk ,who managed to get it blocked , vested uk interests , that's who 

maybe MORE EU regulation is what we REALLY need


----------



## GRWXJR (Apr 18, 2013)

Wow - I guess Billypants just reinforced the point - thats a heavy price in annual mtce on top of the running costs.

21mpg doesn't sound special either (unless the m-home is HUGE!).  My lil Convoy (not a m-home so slightly less 'aerodynamics of a bungalow' I expect) does more than that (27-ish in hilly Wales - I'd hope to get 30 maybe somewhere flatter).


----------



## BillyPants (Apr 18, 2013)

Mines a 2004, 2 litre swb Boxer. God knows why it only does 21 mpg, but that's all I get. It's just on 3 tons. 3 years ago new rear springs cost me £400 to buy and £1,200 for the dealer to fit. They weren't done correctly but after months of complaints to Robins and Day I got nowhere. I now know that on older vans replacing the leaf springs is actually a simple job that would take half a day. If anyone is ever tempted to buy new I could make a compelling case not to.


----------



## GRWXJR (Apr 18, 2013)

Billy - is it a Luton, and do you drive fast (60+).

If no to both, then I can only think that either the 2L is a bit weedy for the size/weight (tho bet it makes loads more Hp than the paltry amount in Sully's 2.5 non-turbo lump which is shoving a twin-wheel axle 3.5T gross LWB Hi-Top along) or that there is something wrong with it.

I've read a fair bit about EGR valves causing heavy fuel cons and smoking (I disabled mine & adjusted the pump & mine goes loads better for it - easy with some help from the internet) - I have no idea, but maybe you have similar issues?

I doubt you've done the miles for the engine to have real wear problems, so unless your brakes are binding or some engine  / fuel issue, then surely you ought to get more than 21mpg?  I wonder if there are any other Boxer owners who can tell you what they get?


----------



## BillyPants (Apr 18, 2013)

GRWXJR said:


> Billy - is it a Luton, and do you drive fast (60+).
> 
> If no to both, then I can only think that either the 2L is a bit weedy for the size/weight (tho bet it makes loads more Hp than the paltry amount in Sully's 2.5 non-turbo lump which is shoving a twin-wheel axle 3.5T gross LWB Hi-Top along) or that there is something wrong with it.
> 
> ...



Last year a dealer in Preston dismantled, cleaned, checked and reassembled the rear brakes which still have original shoes in, but I have just tripped over 100,000 miles. Front pads had their first replacement last summer. I get no smoking from it, and little torque in low gears unless I ram it a bit. I never, and I mean never, exceed 60mph on my clock, which according to satnav is about 55mph. I do this partly cos mine has a luton and has the wind resistance of a multi storey building, and partly just cos I'm a careful driver. I use minimum revs to pull away and am always in the right gear, trying to keep revs at a steady 2500rpm.  I have no idea what egr valves are are what pump you adjusted, although some time ago a mechanic said there was some adjustment I could make, but when I took it to a garage they said it as rubbish and my engine has no user adjustable parts. 
I've been on the Peugeot owners forum to no avail so now I'm sort of resigned to it as for a year I can find no answer. 
Oh...it didn't used to be like this, I could easily get 32mpg on motorways at 55mph in good weather. I have no recollection when that stopped though. 

This leads me to of course say, if it was a 20-25 year old engine there would probably be much more I could do with it, but even dealers with their computers can't do anything with it. Not all so called advancements are in fact an advance.


----------



## Byronic (Apr 18, 2013)

GRWXJR said:


> Byronic - my campervan is a 2.5Di Tranny-engined LDV Convoy, so I think I probably can match your motorhome in the 'basic' stakes - I doubt its possible to be much simpler and still have moving parts :lol-053:
> 
> But yes - I got 'Sully' of course due to budget limitations, but I was thinking about the potential bills for anything going wrong as well as initial outlay when I bought it.  I might have stretched the budget to something a bit more modern, but when combined with the potential costs for a failure - I took the decision that the old agricultural LDV was for me.
> 
> ...




Match your van for basics? Well I think I can....kind of inverted boast I suppose, or a variation on a race to the bottom LOL. But consider this:

What has Pushrod OHVs, 
No timing chain or rubbery variation of cambelt.
Gear driven valve gear.
Twin Drive (Fan) Belts... so if one snaps.
Semi elliptic springs all round.
Twin wheel rear drive.
3400kg payload 2400kg after converting to M/H (not strictly a simplicity item I suppose)
Vacuum assisted split circuit brakes with load valve. No ABS EBS BBC or ITV!
Runs on virtually any diesel brew.... Bosch mechanical inj. pump.
Easily replaceable lighting bulbs.
Replaceable cartridge Fuel and Oil Filters not Canister. Could use old socks in Morocco...dirty fuel.
If auto gearbox, can be bump started.
No turbo (turbo and intercooler optional)
No anti pollution equipment (not good) but simple.
Engine can be removed straight out from the front.
Handbook describes Front Wheel Tracking With String and Stick.... So Inspiring for a DIYer!!

Is the spec. above simpler than your Transit?

Anyway you probably know it's a MB 609D, or 709D, .....814D. The models up to 1996 prior to going electroni/re -engined  and becoming the Vario.
I could afford to replace with new but every year I talk myself out it. Cheaper to run than the car. But keeping the bludy rust at bay that's another story!!

Paradoxically the options list for this MB light truck even 20 years ago would shame that of many cars today. Mine has none I would have liked a Jake Brake and the higher ratio axle.


----------



## GRWXJR (Apr 19, 2013)

I reckon you win!  I can run you quite close though (tis an LDV after all - 2000 plate but a LOT older design).  I've added mine in brackets (or parenthesis if yer posh!) on the end of yours.....

What has Pushrod OHVs, (Not sure, but it does have pushrods)
No timing chain or rubbery variation of cambelt. (gotta cambelt - but if it does break it doesn't lunch the motor like sp many do)
Gear driven valve gear. (nope - see above)
Twin Drive (Fan) Belts... so if one snaps. (just the one)
Semi elliptic springs all round. (The LDV has leaf springs - do I win that one on the antique front?)
Twin wheel rear drive. (Yup- mine too)
3400kg payload 2400kg after converting to M/H (not strictly a simplicity item I suppose) (mine still rated at 3500kG gross)
Vacuum assisted split circuit brakes with load valve. No ABS EBS BBC or ITV! (Brake compenstator thingy)
Runs on virtually any diesel brew.... Bosch mechanical inj. pump. (yup - mine has Bosch Inj pump too)
Easily replaceable lighting bulbs. (Yup)
Replaceable cartridge Fuel and Oil Filters not Canister. Could use old socks in Morocco...dirty fuel. (No - spin on)
If auto gearbox, can be bump started. (on an LDV?  MT75 5-speed manual gearbox - out of the ark)
No turbo (turbo and intercooler optional) (No turbo here either)
No anti pollution equipment (not good) but simple. (EGR Valve.  Pointless and saps power, so I've disconnected it!)
Engine can be removed straight out from the front. (Think so too - don't want to try though!)
Handbook describes Front Wheel Tracking With String and Stick.... So Inspiring for a DIYer!! (Whats a handbook?)

Is the spec. above simpler than your Transit?  (LDV with Tranny running gear - but yes - you win!)


----------



## GRWXJR (Apr 19, 2013)

Billypants


> I have no idea what egr valves are are what pump you adjusted, although some time ago a mechanic said there was some adjustment I could make, but when I took it to a garage they said it as rubbish and my engine has no user adjustable parts.



The EGR valve in mine is a simple butterfly valve that is actuated by a linkage from the throttle, and is situated between the Air Cleaner Intake and the Fule Injector Air intake.

It is supposed to cut emissions (not quite sure how, but summat to do with recirculating gasses back through the motor).  In reality all it seems to do is make the throttle heavy, and the motor sluggish and gutless.  EGR valves often fail in the closed or partially closed position (think they are more electrically operated ones - surprise surprise!) and then the motor smokes and drinks juice and performs badly.  This is cos the valve is supposed to open progressively as more throttle is applied (just like a carb butterfly but for a different purpose).

I removed the linkage and the air intake pipe so I could see the valve, then used Zip Ties to lock the valve in the fully open free-flowing position.  Loss of the mechanical linkage instantly made the foot throttle lighter, and improved engine response.

Next, there is an anti-tamper cap on the top of the fuel injector pump (Bosch) on my engine.  When prised out it reveals a screw and locknut arrangement.  This adjusts the amount of fuel the pump can flow, and on LDV's this was screwed down (some say to limit performance of the LDV by Ford so it wasn't as good as their own Transit with the same motor) and to allegedly improve emissions & consumption.  You can open this up (up to 2 full turns on mine) to get some urge of of the engine.  Mine's been opened up 1.5 turns.

In reality, the EGR & Pump setting as std kill the mid-range, so you have to rev the nuts off the van to make progress and change down gears much more as it flags on hills, so that more than negates any saving, while making the van much worse to drive - you needed not so much forward planning, as to send in a planning application!  This isn't helped by the fact that the EGR makes the pedal heavy, and also puts a delay on delivering what limited power you get as well.

Doing the mods hasn't really touched fuel cons, gearing is the same so speed is unchanged too.  But it now can be short-shifted rather than revved, pulls up hills loads better and is far easier and nicer to drive.

Ive heard that EGR valves are bypassed on lots of vehicles, usually for a performance and mpg benefit.  This is only 2nd hand info and stuff off the 'net though, whereas I did the above to my van myself.

Hope this helps.


----------



## runnach (Apr 19, 2013)

Some intereting comments re the merits of new vs old technology,and manufacturers and dealers joint coercion in wooing new customers but so far no one has it the nail on the head.

Manufacturers are interested in selling new cars.

Any car larger than a fiesta is sold in the main to the company car market.

A lot of the cars a contract hired, the contract hire companies are given fleet support. (Discount) direct which is reflected in the rental
3 year warranties,assist in predicting the rental element of the charge

Having run dealerships, reduced service times which are indepeently verified reduced warranty claims make keeping a service dept efficient harder tlan. Ever

End users are often given a rental amount to spend so go for the toys etc

When the cars filter back to the used car market you and. I foot the bills,is when the end users start taking mopre interest in the nuts and bolts
Channa


----------



## Byronic (Apr 19, 2013)

GXRXJR, Call it quits. No wait a minute I see on another post you admit to having an EGR, what the hell is that. I don't have one of those, sorry I win Lol.
BTW semi elliptics are leaf springs. Antique...mine are 20 years old. Do I get a Point?

Seriiously though, something LDV size is much more practical for use in the UK, and the summer Euro tour. Mine is used in the Med. every year for 5 or 6 month every winter. I rarely use it in the UK. So to coin a cliche it's horses for courses, as indeed many Wilders have posted over the years.


----------



## GRWXJR (Apr 19, 2013)

I know I burble on so you probably fell asleep - but I did concede defeat in the last post.

I don't have an EGR valve now either - well I do, but it ain't doing anything cos it's been got at!


----------

