New EU MOT rules on the UK from tomorrow

  • Thread starter Deleted member 4850
  • Start date
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.

I agree with all you say.

But I still like my rain sensitive wipers :p
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!!
 
I agree with all you say.

But I still like my rain sensitive wipers :p
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!!

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.
 
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.
 
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.

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
 
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??
 
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.
 
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.
 
Last edited:
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!
 
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.
 
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.
 
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
 
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).
 
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.
 
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?
 
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?

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 - 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.


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.
 
Last edited:
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!)
 
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.
 
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
 
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.
 

Users who viewed this discussion (Total:0)

Back
Top