On 22/08/2023 14:37, Tim Lamb wrote:
> In message <kkjq7rFfhfnU2@mid.individual.net>, Mark Carver
> <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> writes
>> On 22/08/2023 13:54, Tim Lamb wrote:
>>> In message <uc24ih$2cjui$1@dont-email.me>, Max Demian
>>> <max_demian@bigfoot.com> writes
>>>> On 21/08/2023 19:32, Joe wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> There's still a bit of flexibility and subjectivity in MOT testing.
>>>>> You
>>>>> want the kind of tester who will replace a failed bulb during the test
>>>>> and not demand a re-test. Fortunately I found one like that and he's
>>>>> still in business about twenty years later.
>>>>
>>>> One way is to combine the MOT with a routine servicing on the
>>>> grounds  that most potential MOT failures should be covered by the
>>>> service.
>>>
>>> Quite. Excellent plan if use was anywhere near 10k/annum. Currently
>>> less than 2k.
>>>
>> Even more reason to give it an annual service then. Very low mileage
>> isn't necessarily a Good Thing !
>>
>> Servicing intervals have always been a specified mileage, or a
>> specified time limit (typically 12 months) for that reason
>
> So. You are going to have the engine oil/filter, pollen filter etc.
> changed unnecessarily?
>
No. Just go for the oil and filter. Leave air and pollen

> I can check tyre tread depth, working lights, indicators, screen wipers
> etc. for free.
>
> Rust on brake pipes, chassis, rubber bush faults etc. not so easy but
> still not hugely age related for a garaged vehicle.
No, you should be OK.

>>
>

--
“But what a weak barrier is truth when it stands in the way of an
hypothesis!”

Mary Wollstonecraft

On 22/08/2023 13:59, Tim Lamb wrote:
> In message <uc297i$2dele$1@dont-email.me>, The Natural Philosopher
> <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes
>> On 22/08/2023 10:15, Tim Lamb wrote:
>>> In message <uc1t4f$2baen$5@dont-email.me>, The Natural Philosopher
>>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes
>>>> On 22/08/2023 09:42, Tim Lamb wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Having studied the rust on the calliper holding bolts, I am nervous
>>>>> of  taking on the job anyway.
>>>>
>>>> Its not the rust that you can see, it's the rust that you cannot...
>>>>
>>>> Most bolts will break free with a 2 ft breaker bar and a good
>>>> fitting  socket.
>>>>
>>>> Ive never seen a caliper bolt actually shear.
>>>  I don't suppose you have attempted that on a 13 year old vehicle!
>>
>> No. Mostly mine were 15-25 years old back in the day :-
>>
>>>  I have decided to stick with the MOT appointment. The real issue is
>>> that  a fail clashes with a planned holiday such that the MOT will
>>> have  expired before I can organise repairs.
>>>
>> Well you wont need the car on holiday will you?
>
> I plan to take the other one. I'll be admiring the windmills as we go
> through West Suffolk:-)

Well remember every windmill is another 0.1 penny on the cost of your
electricity.

>>
>>
>

--
A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on
its shoes.

On 22/08/2023 16:01, Andrew wrote:
> On 22/08/2023 09:42, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 22/08/2023 09:20, Tim Lamb wrote:
>>> In message <uc1ls6$2ae58$1@dont-email.me>, The Natural Philosopher
>>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes
>>>> On 21/08/2023 19:04, Tim Lamb wrote:
>>>>> I am sure this will have been done elsewhere but I suspect this
>>>>> will be  quicker:-)
>>>>>  General experience of vehicle testers and minimum residual
>>>>> thickness of  brake discs.
>>>>> My wife's mk9 Ford Fiesta has a minimum thickness figure of 21mm
>>>>> cast to  the outer shaft.
>>>>> Careful measurement with my trusty imperial micrometer gave
>>>>> averages of  0.843 and 0.837 which I reckon to be 21.41mm and 21.26mm.
>>>>>  The pads have a bit of life left so my intention is to argue a
>>>>> threatened fail with the tester.
>>>>>  Any thoughts?
>>>> MOT standards are well below what I would consider 'safe driving' .
>>>> Don't be such a skinflint. Replace the lot.
>>>
>>> It's a shopping trolley!
>>
>> Still needs brakes - even more so, as urban driving is covered in
>> total arseholes and idiots. Many on bicycles.
>>
>> I pulled out on front of a car doing 10mph and turning left into my
>> road, only to find a motorcycle had decided to overtake him.  He threw
>> the machine down and slid into me. Got up and apologised profusely. He
>> had a bent fairing and a grazed knee.
>>
>> If that had been a pedal cyclist today I would probably have been
>> banned from driving. My fault for not realizing he would never have
>> read the highway code and the rule about not overtaking at junctions.
>>
>>>
>>> My Passat does any real travelling.
>>>
>>> The intention has been to replace it with a battery job but the
>>> removal of incentives and the steep price rises rather off putting.
>>
>> A set of discs and pads will cost you way less than a battery car.
>>
>> At some stage those discs are going to be judged to be scored beyond
>> safety. That is in fact far more relevant than thickness of either -
>> if you think about it pad and disk thickness is about brake fade at
>> high speed. But *scored* disks and pads is all about braking force
>> available at *any* speed.
>>
>>
> Shopping trolley cars do not travel at high speed though.
That was my exact point. Pad and disk thickness is less an issue than
how scored they are.

--
A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on
its shoes.

On 22/08/2023 09:17, alan_m wrote:
> On 22/08/2023 08:27, David Wade wrote:
>> On 22/08/2023 07:52, Pancho wrote:
>>> On 22/08/2023 07:50, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 21/08/2023 19:04, Tim Lamb wrote:
>>>>> I am sure this will have been done elsewhere but I suspect this
>>>>> will be quicker:-)
>>>>>
>>>>> General experience of vehicle testers and minimum residual
>>>>> thickness of brake discs.
>>>>> My wife's mk9 Ford Fiesta has a minimum thickness figure of 21mm
>>>>> cast to the outer shaft.
>>>>> Careful measurement with my trusty imperial micrometer gave
>>>>> averages of 0.843 and 0.837 which I reckon to be 21.41mm and 21.26mm.
>>>>>
>>>>> The pads have a bit of life left so my intention is to argue a
>>>>> threatened fail with the tester.
>>>>>
>>>>> Any thoughts?
>>>> MOT standards are well below what I would consider 'safe driving' .
>>>> Don't be such a skinflint. Replace the lot.
>>>>
>>> How easy is it to replace a disk, diy?
>>
>> The last I did was on a Fiesta and it was less that a couple of hours
>> job to do the fronts, but it was old really crappy. I did the pads at
>> the same time. Plenty of videos on YouTube:-
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3LrWoKzqZ4
>>
>
>
> If you have never done it before also use your mobile phone to take
> photos as you dismantle, especially of any clips you remove. This will
> give you the clues for re-assembly when its not 100% intuitive how they
> fit back in.

Although, it's not such a problem with brakes - as, if in doubt, you can
just refer to the other side.

On 22/08/2023 18:18, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> If you have an existing MOT that is valid they have *no legal right* to
> prevent you from driving it.
> And if they do, report them to the authorities.,

From HM Gov site

Driving a vehicle that’s failed

You can take your vehicle away if:

* your current MOT certificate is still valid
* no ‘dangerous’ problems were listed in the MOT

Otherwise, you’ll need to get it repaired before you can drive.

If you can take your vehicle away, it must still meet the minimum
standards of roadworthiness at all times.

You can be fined up to £2,500, be banned from driving and get 3 penalty
points for driving a vehicle that has failed its MOT because of a
‘dangerous’ problem.

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 22/08/2023 09:25, Tim Lamb wrote:
> In message <uc1lv9$2ae77$1@dont-email.me>, Pancho
> <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> writes
>> On 22/08/2023 07:50, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 21/08/2023 19:04, Tim Lamb wrote:
>>>> I am sure this will have been done elsewhere but I suspect this will
>>>> be quicker:-)
>>>>
>>>> General experience of vehicle testers and minimum residual thickness
>>>> of brake discs.
>>>> My wife's mk9 Ford Fiesta has a minimum thickness figure of 21mm
>>>> cast  to the outer shaft.
>>>> Careful measurement with my trusty imperial micrometer gave averages
>>>> of 0.843 and 0.837 which I reckon to be 21.41mm and 21.26mm.
>>>>
>>>> The pads have a bit of life left so my intention is to argue a
>>>> threatened fail with the tester.
>>>>
>>>> Any thoughts?
>>> MOT standards are well below what I would consider 'safe driving' .
>>> Don't be such a skinflint. Replace the lot.
>>>
>> How easy is it to replace a disk, diy?
>
> It looks doable on U tube. I particularly liked using a G cramp to
> compress the calliper piston:-)

That works for front disk brakes, but not for many rear ones.

Some incorporate the handbrake self-adjuster on a threaded section,
behind the piston. To get those to retract, you have to push them in
(hard) and turn them at the same time. I have managed it on one car
using a g-clamp, a very broad bladed screwdriver and a lot of iggling
about, but the next one proved impossible.

I bought a proper rewind tool (like
https://www.amazon.co.uk/CNWOOAIVE-Piston-Caliper-Rewind-Replacement/dp/B08JLJ4VFR?th=1),
that does the job far more easily.

On Tue, 22 Aug 2023 09:15:02 +0000, charles wrote:

> I wonder how old you actually are, I bought my (new) electric Skoda at
> the age of 81. No problems.
>

I bought my Leaf when I was 81 and I can chime with Tim in that having
tried to read the 300+ page manual I've forgotten most of it and I still
don't know what half the knobs and buttons do especially as the icons on
them don't make it blindingly obvious! For instance it has cruise control
but I don't know which button sets it, so I just keep my right foot
still. :)

--
TOJ.

On 22/08/2023 14:27, Tim Lamb wrote:
> In message <5vf*PWsoz@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, Theo
> <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes
>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 22/08/2023 10:15, Tim Lamb wrote:
>>> > I have decided to stick with the MOT appointment. The real issue is
>>> that
>>> > a fail clashes with a planned holiday such that the MOT will have
>>> > expired before I can organise repairs.
>>> >
>>> Well you wont need the car on holiday will you?
>>
>> The problem being needing to pay a full retest fee if the faults aren't
>> fixed within 14 days of the MOT.  It is often a race to get it booked
>> in and
>> done in time.
> Assuming they let me drive it home:-)

I've never had a failure that would cause that.

I did ask one of the testers about that situation and he said, "At the
end of the day, when I close up, the cars are left parked outside. If
you've collected it overnight, I can only assume that you picked it up
on a truck or trailer."

>> Although there is the option of leaving it with the testing station to
>> fix
>> it while you are away - depends if their quote is likely to be fair or
>> not.
>
> Current thinking is to ask for a quote. Bit tight within the 14 days to
> get someone else to do the work and take it back but just about
> possible. Holidays are a nuisance!

I mainly use testing stations that don't do any repair work - other than
changing a failed bulb - as there is no incentive to fail something
unnecessarily to get work.

On 22/08/2023 10:45, Andy Burns wrote:
> Tim Lamb wrote:
>
>> We have family in North London so ULEZ is an issue.
>
> 18-22 y/o cars are ULEZ compliant

Petrol from Euro 4 (2005/6), but diesels only from 2015 (Euro 6) IIRC.

On 22/08/2023 07:52, Pancho wrote:
> On 22/08/2023 07:50, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 21/08/2023 19:04, Tim Lamb wrote:
>>> I am sure this will have been done elsewhere but I suspect this will
>>> be quicker:-)
>>>
>>> General experience of vehicle testers and minimum residual thickness
>>> of brake discs.
>>> My wife's mk9 Ford Fiesta has a minimum thickness figure of 21mm cast
>>> to the outer shaft.
>>> Careful measurement with my trusty imperial micrometer gave averages
>>> of 0.843 and 0.837 which I reckon to be 21.41mm and 21.26mm.
>>>
>>> The pads have a bit of life left so my intention is to argue a
>>> threatened fail with the tester.
>>>
>>> Any thoughts?
>> MOT standards are well below what I would consider 'safe driving' .
>> Don't be such a skinflint. Replace the lot.
>>
> How easy is it to replace a disk, diy?

For most cars you have to undo a couple of extra bolts in addition to
the two when you change disc pads. It's not much more difficult that a
pad change.

Some vehicles, and I can think of 2 offhand, where the disc is bolted to
the back of the hub and the hub has to be removed. It all becomes a
right royal pain if there's a driveshaft to remove as well.

On 22/08/2023 19:20, SteveW wrote:
> On 22/08/2023 09:25, Tim Lamb wrote:
>> In message <uc1lv9$2ae77$1@dont-email.me>, Pancho
>> <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> writes
>>> On 22/08/2023 07:50, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 21/08/2023 19:04, Tim Lamb wrote:
>>>>> I am sure this will have been done elsewhere but I suspect this
>>>>> will be quicker:-)
>>>>>
>>>>> General experience of vehicle testers and minimum residual
>>>>> thickness of brake discs.
>>>>> My wife's mk9 Ford Fiesta has a minimum thickness figure of 21mm
>>>>> cast  to the outer shaft.
>>>>> Careful measurement with my trusty imperial micrometer gave
>>>>> averages of 0.843 and 0.837 which I reckon to be 21.41mm and 21.26mm.
>>>>>
>>>>> The pads have a bit of life left so my intention is to argue a
>>>>> threatened fail with the tester.
>>>>>
>>>>> Any thoughts?
>>>> MOT standards are well below what I would consider 'safe driving' .
>>>> Don't be such a skinflint. Replace the lot.
>>>>
>>> How easy is it to replace a disk, diy?
>>
>> It looks doable on U tube. I particularly liked using a G cramp to
>> compress the calliper piston:-)
>
> That works for front disk brakes, but not for many rear ones.
>
> Some incorporate the handbrake self-adjuster on a threaded section,
> behind the piston. To get those to retract, you have to push them in
> (hard) and turn them at the same time. I have managed it on one car
> using a g-clamp, a very broad bladed screwdriver and a lot of iggling
> about, but the next one proved impossible.
>
> I bought a proper rewind tool (like
> https://www.amazon.co.uk/CNWOOAIVE-Piston-Caliper-Rewind-Replacement/dp/B08JLJ4VFR?th=1), that does the job far more easily.
>

I bought a kit that should just about to any rear caliper. I'm sure it
only cost £20 or so.

My policy is to invest in the tools I need for a quick and safe job.
Easily justified with the cost of alternative garage labour.

I would go further. Sometimes it can be quicker and more convenient to
do the job yourself, taking into account the time in arranging,
travelling and sometimes sitting around waiting for the job to be done.

On 22/08/2023 09:25, Tim Lamb wrote:
> In message <uc1lv9$2ae77$1@dont-email.me>, Pancho
> <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> writes
>> On 22/08/2023 07:50, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 21/08/2023 19:04, Tim Lamb wrote:
>>>> I am sure this will have been done elsewhere but I suspect this will
>>>> be quicker:-)
>>>>
>>>> General experience of vehicle testers and minimum residual thickness
>>>> of brake discs.
>>>> My wife's mk9 Ford Fiesta has a minimum thickness figure of 21mm
>>>> cast  to the outer shaft.
>>>> Careful measurement with my trusty imperial micrometer gave averages
>>>> of 0.843 and 0.837 which I reckon to be 21.41mm and 21.26mm.
>>>>
>>>> The pads have a bit of life left so my intention is to argue a
>>>> threatened fail with the tester.
>>>>
>>>> Any thoughts?
>>> MOT standards are well below what I would consider 'safe driving' .
>>> Don't be such a skinflint. Replace the lot.
>>>
>> How easy is it to replace a disk, diy?
>
> It looks doable on U tube. I particularly liked using a G cramp to
> compress the calliper piston:-)
>

Standard practice. But keep an eye on the master cylinder, which may
possibly overflow. I use a repurposed kitchen baster to suck out any
surplus fluid.

Also, be aware that you're likely to need a 7mm allen key for some of
the parts. It's a size which doesn't come as standard with many sets.
--
Cheers,
Roger

On 22/08/2023 09:39, Tim+ wrote:
> Tim Lamb <tim@marfordfarm.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <uc1ls6$2ae58$1@dont-email.me>, The Natural Philosopher
>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes
>>> On 21/08/2023 19:04, Tim Lamb wrote:
>>>> I am sure this will have been done elsewhere but I suspect this will
>>>> be quicker:-)
>>>> General experience of vehicle testers and minimum residual thickness
>>>> of brake discs.
>>>> My wife's mk9 Ford Fiesta has a minimum thickness figure of 21mm cast
>>>> to the outer shaft.
>>>> Careful measurement with my trusty imperial micrometer gave averages
>>>> of 0.843 and 0.837 which I reckon to be 21.41mm and 21.26mm.
>>>> The pads have a bit of life left so my intention is to argue a
>>>> threatened fail with the tester.
>>>> Any thoughts?
>>> MOT standards are well below what I would consider 'safe driving' .
>>> Don't be such a skinflint. Replace the lot.
>>
>> It's a shopping trolley!
>>
>> My Passat does any real travelling.
>>
>> The intention has been to replace it with a battery job but the removal
>> of incentives and the steep price rises rather off putting.
>
> Second hand EV prices are coming down. Always worth having a shufty on
> Autotrader.
>
> Eg.
> https://www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202307219911848?sort=price-asc&advertising-location=at_cars&fuel-type=Electric&include-delivery-option=on&postcode=KA7%204QX&fromsra
>
> More seriously, plenty of old Leafs around.
>

They soon be falling off the trees - (sorry)!

--
Cheers,
Roger