mot testing lpg cars with cats

In message , aandmbrown writes

Lots of discussion on this from time to time on uk.rec.cars.lpg. Many people express opinions but I have yet to see a definitive legally based statement. The commonest opinion is that checking for the presence of the cats is not part of the MOT inspection, and so you couldn't be failed as long as you present on LPG and pass the appropriate emissions test. The next question is whether your vehicle is still road legal under Construction & Use Regs and I certainly don't know the answer to that.

Alan, there are some weird and wonderful rules about cats. IIRC any vehicle manufactured after 1st January 1995 is required to have cats unless it passed the EU emissions tests without them at homologation time. The fact that the engine now runs on LPG is irrelevant.

When you change the engine in a car the emissions test that the MOT centre carries out should be related to the engine in the vehicle. So, if you change from a 300Tdi to a 1998 vintage Td5 then you don't need cats - they passed EU emissions without them - but a later Td5 will need cats - due to tightening up of EU emissions levels.

Tdi's from 1/1/95 onwards (and maybe earlier) all had cats fitted. Obviously only one per vehicle though :-)

If I'm wrong on this someone else will surely put me right.

Regards Steve G

remove the nospam to email me

A cat is not required for the mot or under construction and use regs even if it had one fitted originally, assuming it passes the emissions test

And if you present the vehicle on LPG then it's tested as a non cat vehicle anyway

Andy

No you don't need cats as long as it passes the emissions test and if you fit a 1998 engine to a 1975 vehicle it's tested as a 1975 vehicle and if you fit a 1975 engine to a 1998 vehicle it's tested as a 1975 vehicle provided you can prove the engines date of origin although god know why you would do it this way

Also there is no separate test for cat equipped diesels Unless it's a truck applying for a reduced pollution certificate

Andy

See, I knew someone would put me right :-)

LOL Steve G

remove the nospam to email me

My local LR specialist has put dozens of V8's through the MOT having removed the cats at a variety of test stations without problems. The only downside would be if you ever wanted to return to petrol use, ie if the duty goes up a lot on lpg then you will have to buy new cats and they are not cheap.

As I intimated in my first post, presence of a cat is not checked for in an MOT. However the fact that your vehicle has passed an MOT does not make it road legal. For example in the context of LPG, the MOT inspection does not check that all your gas components are stamped to the appropriate EU standards for manufacture of parts for use on automobiles. However your vehicle would not be road legal if you were to fit parts not so stamped.

For those who say it is OK to remove cats, and I don't wish to say or imply that they are wrong, could you pleas explain the base of knowledge which leads you to make the statement. If it is just on the basis that they are not required for MOT, that is not sufficient justification to say that removal is OK IMHO.

LOL

If you check, there is nothing in the Road Vehicles (construction and use) Regulations 1986. or in any of the subsequent Amendments about having to have Cats fitted etc that I can find There is however a requirement for the vehicles to meet the appropriate emissions standard. To meet these standards the normal way is to fit a cat. but it is not a legal requirement I have checked this with the people from the ministry of transport If however you know of another law or regulation that it comes under I would be interested to know

As for a vehicle not being road legal if fitted with LPG parts not stamped with EU standard I find nothing in the C&U regs about this. I can understand Insurance companies voiding cover therefore making the vehicle not legal. but ICBW Again I'd be interested to know where you got this from for future reference

Andy

Indeed and my opinion is based entirely on empirical evidence, however, if removing the cats is not legal/allowed and it is not picked up at MOT time, when is it going to be picked up? Possibly as part of an insurance investigation in the event of an accident but it would be difficult to conclude safely that the lack of a cat contributed to a road accident so I doubt they will care. There are quite a few of these things that people commonly do and assume are OK such as resting their arms on the top of the door panel while driving. The construction and use regs frown on using things for purposes they were not designed for and the top of the door was not designed as an arm rest! You can legally fit cross-ply tyres to an original 90/110 but not to a Defender because they were never originally homologated for cross-plies. I wonder if drivers are supposed to be aware of all this minutae or whether it's all actually written down somewhere.

I want to fit air bags to my 110.

Should I fit several, or is it sufficient to have one mounted just in front of the heater matrix and allow it to deploy along the ductwork? I'm also worried that I may not be able to see out of the front window after deployment, which could be embarrassing if I'm still going along the road at the time. Is a periscope sensible?

You've run out of gas and so are running on petrol. You are on your way to fill up and get pulled over for a roadside check. (Don't know what the rules are for these - are they he same as for Mot, only checking what its actually running on at the time)

Ignorance of the law is not a defence. It does raise some questions though in a wider context about the many modifications which are made to Land Rovers. Did you see the letter in this months LRO from a guy who had bought one with RR front axle and heavily modified steering? You'd have thought he would have checked b4 buying it. The homologating issue is an interesting one, but something I am not too familiar with. All this lot is probably buried in a mountain of EU regulations somewhere, but you can eventually end up trying to prove a negative, which is well nigh impossible.

You use your right to refuse an emissions test (which you are legally entitled to do unless you have been involved in an accident where a police officer has reason to believe that emissions were a contributory factor). You ARE legally obliged to offer a date (7 day period) in the next 30 days and a location where the test may be carried out by them.

Obviously anyone with any sense will choose a local MOT station as the location and book the vehicle in early to have it tested (and adjusted if necessary) before the VI people get there. (Assuming they actually bother to turn up). I suppose you could fit some cats if necessary...

This is all part of the act that allows the roadside checks in the first place.

I'm pretty sure someone posted a link to the act here some time ago.

cheers

Dave W.