For those interested in old cars.

[Joseph_Pestell]

1 hour ago, alastairq said:

At this juncture [still on tyres] I'd like to present an observation which is not intended to be racist or anything-ist [mods please note, but kindly inform me before banning  my presence, to save me messing with my computer, and complaining to BT?}

Recently, [in York, as it happens] the Police [and doubtless the DVSA as well as the York City Council]...discovered, in checks, that an awfully large number of taxis [private hire, probably, or minicabs?]....had tyres which not only were illegal, but actually right down to the canvass, and beyond...some even running around on flat tyres.

 

Now, normally a UK driver would at least try to do something about the situation on their vehicle before it got  as bad.....or would at least consider the safety aspect, one would hope?

However, I feel one has to look at the national origins of  these minicab & PH drivers, to see how different  attitudes might prevail?

Looking to see what is considered 'normal' as far as tyres were concerned, in places like, Bulgaria/Roumania, Afghanistan, etc, where a lot of the 'taxi' drivers hail from?

They are simply applying 'standards,' which in countries such as i've mentioned, and others, are considered to be 'normal'..especially outside of the glossy cities? If the car still works, in other words, why worry about a bit of canvass showing?

These folk are only applying standards they have always considered 'normal'....Perhaps they cannot 'see' our own points of view on the matter? After all, they haven't actually crashed, or hurt customers, have they?  [Which has to be the criteria when considering 'safety'.....not what 'might' have happened if circumstances had been different?    After all, we all consider ourselves as 'safe' drivers if we manage to get from A to B in one piece, don't we?}

 

The attitudes towards driving, and vehicle standards is more & more being dictated by what is deemed acceptable in other parts of the world. Where sheer economics dictate vehicle & driving standards?

Which ought to be a worrying aspect to those of us who frequently inhabit our crowded public highways?

 

The recent case of a VW Golf being stopped, locally, sporting no tyre at all, and severe overcrowding inside [kids, adults, all crammed in]...the driver possibly not concerned, as that was 'normal' behaviour when getting from A to B, ''back home?''  Possibly wondering why the Police were taking such a  high handed attitude here, when such things would be ignored  in other parts of the world?

It must be difficult to adapt one's culture in regard to vehicles and driving, when confronted with the UK's somewhat strict, and possibly over-bearing Laws concerning safety and road use?  

The Police doubtless have  difficult problem when confronted by someone who has been made to realise they have broken the Law, but yet, doesn't fully understand what all the fuss is about? 

 

Differing ideas of  'normality,' perhaps?

 

 

I'm sorry but I don't really buy this. Many of these drivers have been here for many years and have had plenty of time to adapt.

[alastairq]

1 minute ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

I'm sorry but I don't really buy this. Many of these drivers have been here for many years and have had plenty of time to adapt.

 Equally, many more have not!   Especially with the increase in various kinds of migration over recent years. Minicabbing is a job not popular with the national workforce.  [Like, picking potatoes?] 

Unsocial hours, poor incomes, etc...

[Joseph_Pestell]

21 minutes ago, alastairq said:

 Equally, having a current [even a fresh] MoT doesn't mean the vehicle is roadworthy.

 

 

 

Too right! I had the sub-frame of a Triumph 1300 fall off of the car due to corrosion less than 48 hours after a passed MOT.

[Northmoor]

27 minutes ago, alastairq said:

 Neither is there one when booking an MoT test.

[The Law recognises that there never can be one, when applying rules to the mainland UK as a whole.]

 

Hence it is perfectly 'legal' to buy a car without a current MoT,  in London [or, more cheaply, in Wales] and drive it home to Scotland, providing one pre-books an MoT test in Scotland.

Mind, before setting off, it is wise to remember the driver's responsibilities as far as roadworthiness is concerned. In all its aspects.

 

 For, not having a current MoT doesn't mean a vehicle is unroadworthy.   

 

Equally, having a current [even a fresh] MoT doesn't mean the vehicle is roadworthy.

 

I have often been disappointed when folk pontificated about the MoT exemption for old motors.

Of how the exemption will allow any old wreck to be legally driven on the roads?

 

Which, of course, will be unlawful, if that wreck is actually unroadworthy for some reason or other.

 

Therefore the above argument is fallacious.

 

[Being without a valid MoT is a minor traffic offence.....Being unroadworthy is another matter entirely]

 

Indeed, it is perfectly legal to drive a vehicle on the public roads, without it having a registration plate [if one has not been issued]

 

How many folk out there inthe big wide  wotsit would declare such a thing as 'illegal?'

Much the same fallacious argument occurs from people who tell cyclists they shouldn't use the roads because unlike car drivers, they haven't paid "Road Tax".

[MrWolf]

4 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

Much the same fallacious argument occurs from people who tell cyclists they shouldn't use the roads because unlike car drivers, they haven't paid "Road Tax".

 

Quite, though it annoys me having spent the better part of £1000 getting my other half through her motorcycle test to see idiots flying around ignoring all road (and pavement.) rules on electric scooters that are as fast as a moped.

 

As for perceived MOT laws I remember someone announcing loudly that I must have a dodgy test on a 1955 Vauxhall because I hadn't been made to remove the rocket ship bonnet mascot and the marker blades from the top of the front wings.

 

[Dunsignalling]

49 minutes ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

Too right! I had the sub-frame of a Triumph 1300 fall off of the car due to corrosion less than 48 hours after a passed MOT.

If that had been mine, the garage that tested it would have lost their permit to do so PDQ. I hope you reported the incident.

 

IIRC, unless they can prove the owner has refitted a defective part or the fault has arisen afterwards, the testing station can be held responsible for any missed defects for a minimum of two weeks from the date on the certificate.

 

Clearly, the level of corrosion must already have been critical at the time of the test and they either didn't look or looked the other way.... 

 

John

Edited July 27, 2021 by Dunsignalling

[Joseph_Pestell]

5 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

If that had been mine, the garage that tested it would have lost their permit to do so PDQ. I hope you reported the incident.

 

IIRC, unless they can prove the owner has refitted a defective part or the fault has arisen afterwards, the testing station can be held responsible for any missed defects for a minimum of two weeks from the date on the certificate.

 

Clearly, the level of corrosion must already have been critical at the time of the test and they either didn't look or looked the other way.... 

 

John

 

I did indeed put in a complaint but nothing came of it. Garage closed since and site redeveloped.

[Dunsignalling]

On the other side of the coin, I used to have a Peugeot 206 with a towball that partially obstructed the number plate. The garage obligingly refitted it upside down to avoid the need for a retest. 

 

John

 

And, yes, I did leave it like it for a fortnight...

Edited July 27, 2021 by Dunsignalling

[Northmoor]

3 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

If that had been mine, the garage that tested it would have lost their permit to do so PDQ. I hope you reported the incident.

 

IIRC, unless they can prove the owner has refitted a defective part or the fault has arisen afterwards, the testing station can be held responsible for any missed defects for a minimum of two weeks from the date on the certificate.

 

Clearly, the level of corrosion must already have be critical at the time of the test and they either didn't look or looked the other way.... 

 

John

I had an S-type Jag, bought from a dealer.  I knew it was cheap, but having had a decent look over it I thought it worth the money.  The previous MOT certificate had no advisories.

After 6 months, it failed on corrosion in three places with advisories in two others.  Unless the previous owner celebrated passing the MOT by parking it in the sea, that MOT was as "bent as a nine-pound-note".

[alastairq]

To be fair [to testers] there is a limit as to how far a tester may prod areas of a vehicle.

Also, with modern {IE, made this, or the last decade of the last, century] vehicles much of the  exterior of the bodywork is hidden behind plastic sheathing. Which testers are not allowed to remove.

Hence esoteric stuff like X Jagwars can have their rotten sills hidden for  half a lifetime, until the rot appears at the very ends in the wheel arches?

 

MY favourite testers have been known to have a test of mine cancelled [to save me money] by claiming I had insufficient fuel for the test.

When on the way to the test an insignificant cross member eventually parted company at one end, with the chassis.  Took it away, got an agricultural engineer who was used to the commonplace problem, fix it for just over a hundred quid..back a day or so later to pass the test.

My tester always liked that vehicle, it was his favourite to 'borrow' to go to his Mams for lunch..It could shift nicely, and all the brake pipes were copper...[my doing]  He also liked the way I overcame the 30 cm rule with rust...or anticipated a possible failure.  He once passed my suzuki even though one tyre was a different size to the other three....just. It was one of the two sizes of tyre the manufacturer recommended, and was on the little pressure sticker. One of my front tyres had the inside edge worn smooth,so I swapped it for the spare for the test. The spare being [still s] the 'odd' size.

He told me the worn tyre was still legal and would have passed [he would have advised replacement before next test]...All to do with the measurement of the longitudinal deep treads, not the thinner, less deep, edge sipes.  I replaced it anyway, after a while....30 quid wonders from Camskill...They do the job.

I have even repaired a puncture using one of those dogzpubes repair kits...Very easy to use, I had acquired a big nail which was worn down, but a very slow puncture.  So one of these Chinese kits for a fiver, complete with tools and the glue....a half hour of poking and riving the old nail out, then ten minutes of poking and reaming, inserted the hairybit with glue, pulled it out, left for a   cuppa, then trimmed the surplus with the blade provided....Jobzagoddun!

Sound as a pound now, no air loss. Plus, enough left to fix 20 punctures!

Mind, I don't 'do' much more than 55 mph anyway....just to annoy everybody!  Seeing as how no-one offers to pay for the extra petrol needed to go faster?

 

 

 

 

[PhilJ W]

I once had a car where I had to replace the steering rack (not for an MoT) and I took it into a local garage to have the rack replaced. The garage didn't do MoT's so when it was due a couple of months later I took it to another nearby garage which promptly failed it on the steering rack. When I took it back to the first garage the owner blew his top and was on the phone tearing them off a strip. I was then told that I could get MoT's done in the council workshops and from then on had my MoT's done there. Garage #2 eventually stopped doing MoT's and then shut.

Edited July 27, 2021 by PhilJ W

[alastairq]

I have had a car fail on emissions [t was running bike carbs] literally a matter of  half an hour after it had been released from expert tuning on a rolling road, where the emissions were well within the parameters for MoT.

When I immediately returned to the rolling road tuners with a complaint, it was tested again and found to be unchanged from the first results. The tuner  concerned [a well respected ancient fella]...then got onto the tester to ask how come their readings were different? Turned out, the machine used at the MoT test spot had not had its filters properly maintained. {This was many years ago now, but still this century]....

I got a 'free' retest [it only failed on emissions]...after the tester  had serviced their machine properly.  Also got an apology, although to be fair it wasn't the tester's fault. The owner of the spot was also a tester, and had responsibility for the machines he owned.

I never returned there, needless to say.  Not for tests, at any rate.

 

For some years recently I had a number of fails merely for number plate issues....Not cheap, number plates!! {Gone are the days when I could get away with hand painting them!]

 

[pH]

Back to pictures. Saw this on last evening’s stroll. Only two streets away, but I’ve never seen it before. A Chevy Chevelle - year undetermined.

 

 

 

 

[MrWolf]

1967 with that grille.

[Captain Cuttle]

This seems pretty rare and in a remarkeable state body wise, not  too familiar with how many of these left though.

 

https://barnfinds.com/all-original-1965-humber-super-snipe-estate/?utm_campaign=Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Newsletter+(Daily)

 

[Dunsignalling]

33 minutes ago, Captain Cuttle said:

This seems pretty rare and in a remarkeable state body wise, not  too familiar with how many of these left though.

 

https://barnfinds.com/all-original-1965-humber-super-snipe-estate/?utm_campaign=Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Newsletter+(Daily)

 

According to the www.howmanyleft.co.uk website,165 taxed + 60 on SORN. Doesn't differentiate between saloons and estates, though.

 

I saw a Humber Hawk estate on the road yesterday, on a F plate, so 1967/8.

 

John

Edited July 27, 2021 by Dunsignalling

[PhilJ W]

Austin 7 centenary coming up.

https://a7centenary.com/?fbclid=IwAR3LXE2IBZx8i5qRUaT1MYXJJIACThyBuFLYooYsPqZjybMdtkleI9-5-V4

[Captain Cuttle]

Talking Pictures Friday Morning 3.20am, 1930s Car Racing Around The World.

 

Classic racetracks Tripoli, Nurburgring, Donnington Park and Indianapolis.

[johnlambert]

I often think it's more special when you see an unusual car doing something normal.  In this case, going to the supermarket.

 

I'm sure the DeLorean DMC12 doesn't need any introduction.

[russ p]

32 minutes ago, johnlambert said:

I often think it's more special when you see an unusual car doing something normal.  In this case, going to the supermarket.

 

I'm sure the DeLorean DMC12 doesn't need any introduction.

 

When you say normal did it appear out of nowhere doing 88mph down the car park? Maybe should have asked the driver what year he thought it was , or really confused him by calling him dad!

Seriously though nice to see. A while back I saw one painted red looked so much better 

[petethemole]

I saw one yesterday driving along a suburban street in Southampton.

[MrWolf]

Oddly enough, I have had my own Back to the future moment this afternoon, heading back to Ingleton from Skipton in a Friend's 1972 Marina saloon we were passed in the opposite direction by a red 1972 coupé.

I don't know who looked more shocked, them or us!

[Northmoor]

Saw this in the Horsted Keynes car park today.  As I took this, right on cue a guy walked past and told his two young sons that Grandad had one of those.....  The air dam looks like it had clipped a speed bump, but generally it looked about three years old.

[PhilJ W]

Is that an Edsel poking out in front of the hearse?

[BernardTPM]

1959 Edsel. The last 1960 model had a front very like a contemporary Pontiac.

Edited August 1, 2021 by BernardTPM