Another MOT shake up

[piglet]

but I found the draft regs: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... -draft.pdf

Most of it's sensible, albeit poorly defined.

If it's in there it's hidden away in hours of reading that I don't have time for.

Definition of dangerous:
dangerous – defects that are a direct and immediate risk to road safety or having an impact on the environment

Fairly vague, could the environment clause result in a dangerous fail for an oil leak?

[Captain Jack]

Sadly, this means I'll probably have to put the DPF filter back in (have the non-bashed out one in the garage), though I'll keep the remap ! I will wait and see what happens before doing anything but I can always just put the filter on for the MOT and remove afterwards

Wonder what will happen to 2.2 HDI chaps who have all mostly gutted and mapped out the bastard thing...

[Welly]

Sadly, this means I'll probably have to put the DPF filter back in (have the non-bashed out one in the garage), though I'll keep the remap ! I will wait and see what happens before doing anything but I can always just put the filter on for the MOT and remove afterwards

Wonder what will happen to 2.2 HDI chaps who have all mostly gutted and mapped out the bastard thing...

You've bashed one out in the Garage? or did I miss-read something

As far as I know you will only fail if you've obviously removed a DPF from a car that should have one from the factory. If it looks like it's in place and passes the smoke test then it's fine, oh hang on did someone say there must be no smokeage if there's a DPF fitted? I guess you'll always get some smoke from a HDi without a filter. I guess that's the test then, smoke from a dpf'd car means it's not there??

[Captain Jack]

Yeah, that's the ambiguous thing - any "visible" smoke from a DPF car is a fail. Though, in neutral, there is very little smoke no matter how hard I rev.

However. They also need to use the "plate" emission limit, which is on the sticker in the engine bay, which in my case is 0.52 whatevs. Looking at previous MOTs without DPF (and passing!) the emissions were 0.51 and 0.67, which is verrry close. Emissions when I had the DPF intact was something like 0.05...

I'll sit and watch.

[Doggy]

I haz no 'plate' or sticker in the engine bay as 406 dpf's pre-dated any requirement to have one.
I thought that came in with Euro 4 in 2005, but Uncle Google implies it was not until Euro 5 in 2008/9.
Either way I don't see any MOT emission limit changes being retrospectively applied to cars built before the legislation existed.

[Captain Jack]

So my 2007 will still be Euro 4... hmm.

But the rulez say that any car that was originally fitted with one should still have one. And you still have an empty shell for the DPF... Eh..

[trem1]

I had heard it would apply to cars produced after 2008, which would tie in with euro 5. Guess we all need to wait and see what develops.

[GingerMagic]

I heard ages ago it was for cars produced after 2008 but I guess it's up to the MOT inspectors interpretation..

Later models need the DPF removed and cut open to defap them, and the weld seam is a giveaway - not so for the 406

As aside, both my defapped 406s flew through the smoke test with virtually no visable smoke at all - I think blanking the EGR helps massively...

[Captain Jack]

Yes, post-2008 was also my understanding but who knows. My 407 is 2007 but clearly has (had!) a DPF filter...

[Welly]

Just to help you, I've emailed the DVSA and the Department of Very Lost Applications with your Reg No. and VIN just to check what is required for MOT.

I also said that the standard DPF had been removed, I hope this helps.

[Captain Jack]

Thanks Welly, ever so helpful!

[GingerMagic]

Just to help you, I've emailed the DVSA and the Department of Very Lost Applications with your Reg No. and VIN just to check what is required for MOT.

I also said that the standard DPF had been removed, I hope this helps.

Thanks Welly, I'll be sure* to pass on that information* to the new owner....

[Bailes1992]

I think removing an EGR and DPF on anything Euro 5 or newer is a no-no now. That was the issue I had with my previous Focus, knowing all the issues I was having were down to the emmisions equipment and I wasn't going to be able to remove them without worrying every time the fuzz was behind me.

My Father-in-law and I always interrogate all the cars before they go for MOT's. Get them right in the air and have a good look and a pole about, it's amazing what you find that may not even be an MOT fail but you decide to replace items anyway.

Rust is a huge issue for me. We've lost two KA's that run perfectly to rust at less than 10 years old. I've decided all my cars will have extra protection from day one. The Duster will be staying until it's fit for the scrapyard, it's going to get battered over the coming years with our little imminent arrival so it's not worth replacing when it's a few years old. I've just ordered some Krown T40 to try, it's a Canadian product that's supposed to go on like WD40, it creeps into welds, seems, electronic connections etc and sets like an extremely thin candle wax. I've managed to get a litre bottle of it, so going to try it on the Defenders engine bay and bulkhead first. If it's any good I shall treat the entire Duster in it before this winter.

[grasmere59]

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/ ... -cars-fail
I think if i am reading it right it will only affect post 2005/2006 cars.

[mjb]

In the MOT testing manual I linked above - 8.2.2.1 "Emission control equipment fitted by the manufacturer missing, obviously modified or obviously defective" or "Evidence that the diesel particulate filter has been tampered with" is a major fail.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/ ... -cars-fail
I think if i am reading it right it will only affect post 2005/2006 cars.

The guardian is saying DPFs mainly come in post-2006 cars, which is obviously not the case here