What An MOT Experience Today...

"David Taylor"

Thread starting to warm up and getting a bit *too* technical for Dave now :-)

John

And what are the prescribed limits you think apply to this car for CO and why is it different to a max of 0.3

Indeed you are a fool.

Jimmy ( snipped-for-privacy@invalidaddress.co.uk) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :

Hmmm. Mine gave a max of 0.2% for that, and 0.3% for natural idle.

Against limits of?

Not necessarily - according to the pass sheet I got on Monday, it wouldn't.

Idle - (955rpm, they must have had the aircon on) CO = max 0.30% (Mine passed - 0.01%)

Fast idle - (2580rpm) CO = max 0.20% (Mine passed - 0.10%) HC = max 200ppm (Mine passed - 5ppm)

I don't recall the Lambda min/max limits, but mine was *bang* on 1.00.

John ( snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :

Bwaahahahahah - it lost you somewhere around your first post.

Adrian ( snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :

Tell you what, John, why not post the full results from your emission printout, including the pass/fail levels?

Actually the 0.3 figure is the natural idle BET test limit.

We know it failed that and went onto a full cat test. The data in the analyser for the Ford Fiesta full cat test would allow up to 0.5 CO

Jimmy ( snipped-for-privacy@invalidaddress.co.uk) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :

Ah, 'kay. I've never had one fail the quick test.

Well, it's a Fester, I s'pose.

So - John - any chance of the complete emissions printout?

Emissions results, engine code, and build date from VIN number (two letters before the last group of numbers) would be helpful, too.

Was the MOT VT30 a red printed sheet, or a blue handwritten one ?

-------------------------------- Visit The MOT Forum:

John wrote on Wed, 21 Sep 2005 11:10:12 GMT:

You said the CO reading (for either the fast idle, or natural idle test, I can't recall which right now and it's irrelevant) was around 0.4 compared to the limit of 0.3.

The tester's manual on ukmot.com clearly states:

Reasons for rejection:

... b. In the 2nd fast idle test, one or more of the following exceeds the vehicle specific or default limits continuously for the last 5 seconds of the 30 second countdown" . Carbon monoxide (CO) . Hydrocarbons (HC) . Lambda (l)

c. In the idle test. the following gas exceeds the vehicle specific or default limit continuously for the last 5 seconds of the 30 second countdown: . Carbon monoxide (CO) ...

Why would you expect it to pass?

Well, you were willing to give the tester ANOTHER 44 quid without doing anything to fix the items it failed on. So yes, there is at least one fool who is easily parted from his money in here.

He has said somewhere it was a printed (computerised) test therefore the VOSA computer did the brake calculations.

Your comments that we're all talking crap. If you ARE an MOT tester, you'll have no problem uploading a scan of your certificate and posting a link will you?

Of course it is. I'm only imagining the CGLI 383 Pt2 I have...

Actually it is, especially with regard to the brakes. The only age relevent part is the CAT.

More than you.

AND THAT BEARS NO EFFECT ON THE BRAKES FAILING.

OK, I'm a qualified mechanic. Quite happy to scan my CGLI certificates including the modules sections showing MERIT and DISTINCTIONS if you want proof.

Explain it to me.

BRAKES.

Prescribed limits for a non CAT.

Emissions aside, the BRAKES for a start.

WOOOOOWWWW.

Dave...I humbly salute your usenet ability to post the mother of all rebuking put downs.

So now you're arguing that they're using the wrong analyser?