No license requirement for a classic car?

[igor]

One year mot for everything appears to work in the UK. Not a fan of their over forty years old exemption though.

[BlownCorona]

On 29/03/2024 at 20:26, Nominal said:

 

What makes a 2000 car safer over a year than a 1999?

Nothing, that's what.

what makes a 1999 safer than a 1998
Nothing, thats what. 
what makes a 1998 safer than a 1997
Nothing, thats what. 
what makes a 1997 safer than a 1996
Nothing, thats what. 
what makes a 1996 safer than a 1995
Nothing, thats what. 
what makes a 1995 safer than a 1994
~~~~~~~~~~
What makes a 1886 safter than an 1885
no one had invented a car in 1885, thats what. 



Its not a stupid rule when you consider the basic logic that a line must be draw at some point, and at the time of inception 2000 was a round number that was ~15 years old, so fairly modern (brand new my most of our standards) a rolling point for the 1 year wofs would be dumb because the initial assumption was that the newer 2000+ cars were safer overall and while newer new cars may be even more safe, the original 2000+ cars are just as safe as they originally were.

3 year wofs for new cars on the other hand is a fucking disaster and i have no idea what the upside was. 

There could be a case for bumping cars to a 6 month inspection due to expected wear/tear/dodgy repairs but perhaps 40 years to align with classic rego and unlikely to affect the everyman, kinda echos Harrys comment above.

[Nominal]

That's not what I said, why would doing a 1 year wof check on a 1999 car be any more risky that a 1 year wof check on a 2000 car?

 

Do you actually drive an old car? The 6 month wofs are a pointless waste of time and money.

[igor]

Many of us daily our old cars.

[Nominal]

16 minutes ago, igor said:

Many of us daily our old cars.

Does it need external checking every 6 months to be 'safe'?

[igor]

I do not believe so but the opinions of others may vary widely. As stated previously the UK regime of annual inspection for all seems to work quite well.

[Nominal]

7 minutes ago, igor said:

I do not believe so but the opinions of others may vary widely. As stated previously the UK regime of annual inspection for all seems to work quite well.

You can get an MOT exemption (i.e. no WOF) when the vehicle is 40 years old in the UK.

[440bbm]

I def agree that the old girls that are being used on weekends and such like should have different rules to follow than daily drivers.

[igor]

26 minutes ago, Nominal said:

You can get an MOT exemption (i.e. no WOF) when the vehicle is 40 years old in the UK.

As stated previously I do not believe this is a good idea.

[igor]

11 minutes ago, 440bbm said:

I def agree that the old girls that are being used on weekends and such like should have different rules to follow than daily drivers.

Where, and how, would you draw the line? Limited annual mileage traveled or some other criteria?

[oldrx7]

21 minutes ago, 440bbm said:

I def agree that the old girls that are being used on weekends and such like should have different rules to follow than daily drivers.

9 minutes ago, igor said:

Where, and how, would you draw the line? Limited annual mileage traveled or some other criteria?

All of which is getting silly - simple rules for what should be a simple system.

 

Annual wof's for all cars. 

 

[JustHarry]

21 hours ago, Nominal said:

 

Do you actually drive an old car? The 6 month wofs are a pointless waste of time and money.

 

On 29/03/2024 at 20:13, JustHarry said:

1 year wofs on a classic car are a bad idea imo.

If your getting upset over a 60$ wof then don't own a classic car.

And if the upset is from needing repairs every 6 months then it shows the car actually needs work and isn't safe for 1 year so the 6 month is kinda doing its job 

But if jt passes who cares its probably the cheapest part of owning a classic car

 

[Nominal]

27 minutes ago, JustHarry said:

 

 

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

 

[440bbm]

For me its finding someone actually reasonable that understands old cars, having a little bit of cool with them. That understands the actual rules, doesnt claim everything needs cert. or doesnt expect it to be like a 10yr old car. 

For me, its not about it being unsafe, noone wants that, but just being reasonable to some mods and bit of oldschool. 

[kiwi808]

1 year wofs for cars that are 10 years old. This is a rolling date.

6 months wofs for everyone else. While we are responsible motorists, you only have to look at the state of some of the cars and vans driven around here that shows there is a blatant disregard for maintenance when it comes to new New Zealanders and tourists.

[keltik]

Unpopular opinions (and wall of text from a non-expert) incoming. 

As a workshop that does a lot of newer stuff - the 3 year first WOF works pretty well for 99% of people. The average driver round here does about 10-15,000km per year. By the third year, it's time for tyres... The majority of those cars are inspected annually for servicing anyways so a cut tyre, puncture or crappy wiper blades gets picked up then. Hardly ever do bulbs or anything else within the first 3 years. If someone does really high mileage and kills their tyres quick - an annual WOF check would pass them, then they'd be bald within 6 months because the time between 1.5mm of tread and a bald tyre isn't very long for a high mileage driver.

My argument for keeping 6 month WOFs on the older stuff is that things seem to go from OK to broken much quicker. A wheel cylinder starts leaking, brake caliper seizes up or a rubber bush splits or something starts dropping oil onto the exhaust.  It's not that the cars are inherently less safe, they're just at that age where things fail from time more than mileage.  So I'd put a 20 year sliding scale on 6 monthly inspections. 

The current most dangerous cars on the road (that we frequently fail) are the 2002-2012 high mileage shitters that get little maintenance and zero fucks given by the owners. They roll in with cords hanging out the tyres, one headlight out, valve covers pouring oil onto the manifold, ball joints knocking, smeary windscreens you can't see out of....and do you know what - they all passed the last WOF a year ago.

The WOF requirement is really there to force people to at least get the car checked by a professional. It makes absolutely no implications that your car is safe to drive at any point other than the 45mins the WOF inspector looks at it. It's hopefully checked to a standard that most things would last to the next mandated check.

We currently can't expect drivers to be responsible for knowing if their car is safe to drive because people are idiots and there's very little accountability. I'm pretty sure in blighty, if you got pulled over with 4 bald tyres - that's enough points for loss of licence? 

So whats the solution. It's fucking complicated. I don't know how much a slightly chafed seatbelt webbing, non functioning tail lamp or a stonechipped windscreen actually contributes to the accident rate and I don't trust the government to know or tell us the truth either. Perhaps we can continue fine tuning the inspection process to focus on the items that really make a difference to safety and spend less time failing cars for 34% tints or a slightly crusty rubber bush or a tiny bit of scabby surface rust on a subframe. 

TLDR: Tyres, brakes and lights should absolutely be checked often. Maybe other things don't need to be?

[gibbon]

many of us squeeze a year out of our 6 month wofs 

[RUNAMUCK]

3 hours ago, keltik said:

 I don't trust the government to know or tell us the truth either.

This statement doesnt require any context whatsoever. If it were 2010, id be puting this in my signature.........

[smokin'joe]

On 23/04/2024 at 12:10, kiwi808 said:

1 year wofs for cars that are 10 years old. This is a rolling date.

6 months wofs for everyone else. While we are responsible motorists, you only have to look at the state of some of the cars and vans driven around here that shows there is a blatant disregard for maintenance when it comes to new New Zealanders and tourists.

the simple fact that people can back out of/ enter  their garage during darkness, and not pick up on the fact that one headlight has blown, truly fecken astounds me. what other obvious things do not compute behind their retinas

 

[igor]

Mindless automatons many of them.