New changes to the testing of vintage Cars/Trucks?

corktina

yes but my point i that it is entirely legal to drive these sub-standard cars on the road with no NCT and to get any potential death trap off the road, a test for every car of some sort would be necessary. it's a ridiculous argument to say that a test isn't necessary because no statistics exist to show dangerous cars are involved in accidents. It's a preventative measure, and a test would raise the standards overall and perhaps prevent a fatality.

edit...OK so it isn't entirely legal, but I'm sure you get my point.

Means Of Escape

Regarding a test in general I would argue that the NCT was pushed forward by SIMI whose members I'm sure benefitted greatly given that many took up the "scrappage scheme"(another cod) scrapping perfectly good cars that may have failed on minor problems.
The Greens failed to point out that the energy required to destroy these cars and have new ones built negated their bs mandate.
Either way most vintage car owners know that one is goosed if one is in a collision driving an old car due to poor driver protection ie reinforced chassis,airbags so they HAVE to drive defensively hence their excellent track record .
It's the goon in the modern NCTd car they have to worry about.

The NCT for vintage cars will do nothing for safety on the roads
Slowing down , anticipating what's up ahead, keeping your distance etc will regardless of whether your car has an NCT

Pro NCT fans don't give vintage owners enough credit that they know that the condition of the car that they are driving could put them in a pine box.

Sam Russell

Following on from the above, most drivers of vintage cars are experienced drivers with an interest in cars and how they work. They drive them because of this, and not merely as transport.

Insurance companies limit cover to those over 25 that have a main daily everyday car. This cuts out the boy racers.

The NCT if applied to these cars will cause a huge number off the road because it will make it difficult to get them road legal with the current setup of Applus, and its inability to give tests on demand, the insistance of an anniversary date, and its 28 day retest rule.

There is also the likelyhood of these tests being based on the modern car test that is more than a safety test - and whose main purpose is to force cars off the road and into a crusher.

corktina

I know loads of classic owners who don't know the first thing about maintaining their cars and only bought them to be part of the gang... they either pay someone to maintain the car or simply don't bother, dragging it out of the shed once or twice a year for the Club run or Paddies Day.

Sam Russell

Would they bother dragging it out for the annual trip to the NCT?

Cleveland Hot Pocket

I'd say they will just drive on.
Like I've done with my 300zx since mid 2013 when the NCT expired.

Means Of Escape

I see there is a claim that 200k cars are not NCTd in this country
Some back log to clear even if their numbers have included SORD cars and others left in sheds and fields to rot.

Good luck with getting a "tailor made "test for the vintage cars or a sympathetic ear from a Garda if this BS proposal arrives

Sam Russell

Does that 200k include vehicles that are less than 4 years old? Or tractors?

The Big Red Fella

Tried to get the everyday car booked in for nct yesterday nearest date is early march????? bloody joke thats what it is!

whisky_galore

The Big Red Fella wrote: »

Tried to get the everyday car booked in for nct yesterday nearest date is early march????? bloody joke thats what it is!

Fix the existing system first before issuing proposals. But this of course is Ireland where we do things ar*e about face, where we must be seen to do something, anything even if it's wrong.

corktina

The Big Red Fella wrote: »

Tried to get the everyday car booked in for nct yesterday nearest date is early march????? bloody joke thats what it is!

might have said this before...just phone and you'll get a much much earlier date

The Big Red Fella

corktina wrote: »

might have said this before...just phone and you'll get a much much earlier date

Sorry to burst your bubble mate but i did phone & cant get a date:eek:
i got march date on line

corktina

You need to tell them if they cannot give you a date within 28 days then they must give you a free test. I doubt anyone ever got a free test! Check out their website, the info on the procedure is there.

macplaxton

corktina wrote: »

I doubt anyone ever got a free test!

Pay attention at the back Corky!

May I refer you back to post #223 of this thread.

And for the avoidance of further doubt, exhibit A:

NCTrefund by macplaxton, on Flickr

corktina

you are officially the exception which proves the rule.....

Means Of Escape

corktina wrote: »

you are officially the exception which proves the rule.....

"Book him Danno"

macplaxton

"...murder one."

I get your point though that not enough people beat them over the head with a big stick about it. If they did then they might actually get their finger out and operate a more streamlined booking process...


...nah, it'll never happen.

type85

Any feed back/ decisions from the RSA on this yet?

Kenny Logins

type85 wrote: »

Any feed back/ decisions from the RSA on this yet?

Nope.

http://www.rsa.ie/en/RSA/Your-Vehicle/Vehicle-Standards/Information-Notes-Consultations--EU-proposals-/Consultations-/Closed-Consultations/Testing-of-Vintage-Vechicles/

hi5

2000 responses, not bad.

Sam Russell

I think they got three and a half thousand replies but rejected those they thought were duplicates (nearly half of them) but it is not a vote, nor is it a petition.

However, I hope they take note of what I suspect was the majority submission - a return to a rolling 30 year exemption.

Means Of Escape

Kenny Logins wrote: »

Nope.

http://www.rsa.ie/en/RSA/Your-Vehicle/Vehicle-Standards/Information-Notes-Consultations--EU-proposals-/Consultations-/Closed-Consultations/Testing-of-Vintage-Vechicles/

Probably didn't expect the volume of replies
Luckily enthusiast did put their opinions forward otherwise the worst case scenario would have been adopted due to the revenue it would have gathered for them.
Again half assed ideas proposed by people not in the know
Possibly facing a 40 year rolling as a compromise
30 year rolling doubtful as the present state of post jan 1980 nct better for them €€€€€€€€€€

Dades

Certainly harder for them to ignore the people with that many submissions. Harder, but not impossible.

Sam Russell

Dades wrote: »

Certainly harder for them to ignore the people with that many submissions. Harder, but not impossible.

It has not stopped them in other areas. They appear to me to have designed the format of the submission replies to give an assumed answer. The later questions were drawn up assuming particular replies to earlier questions.

I live in hope but fear the inevitable.

corktina

Means Of Escape wrote: »

Probably didn't expect the volume of replies
Luckily enthusiast did put their opinions forward otherwise the worst case scenario would have been adopted due to the revenue it would have gathered for them.
Again half assed ideas proposed by people not in the know
Possibly facing a 40 year rolling as a compromise
30 year rolling doubtful as the present state of post jan 1980 nct better for them €€€€€€€€€€

It never ceases to amaze me how people think that the NCT is a money-spinner!

mgbgt1978

23% Vat on every Cent taken in by Applus+.

boardsuser1

Next they'll start testing cars from 1 year old instead of the current 4 years(taxi's currently undergo this obviously) ,taxed to the hilt we are.

Sam Russell

KC161 wrote: »

Next they'll start testing cars from 1 year old instead of the current 4 years(taxi's currently undergo this obviously) ,taxed to the hilt we are.

Actually, testing every car every year is not such a bad idea if the test is purely safety related. 27% (according to the NCT site) fail the first test at 4 years old. That is an enormous figure, and should cause the RSA heart ache, rather than chasing down the vintage cars that are hardly on the road at all.

The current 4 year start causes many people to trade in their three year old 'before it requires testing'. This provides a natural level of business for the motor trade as many financing of new cars is for a three year period. This is the incentive for the Government.

The next period is the change over to annual testing at ten years is another impetus for owners to trade up. It would appear to be intuitive to change the car at 10 years old.

The annual testing, together with the abandonment of the idea of an anniversary date would be a positive move in my opinion, but the test would need to be redrafted to be safety related.

boardsuser1

Sam Russell wrote: »

Actually, testing every car every year is not such a bad idea if the test is purely safety related. 27% (according to the NCT site) fail the first test at 4 years old. That is an enormous figure, and should cause the RSA heart ache, rather than chasing down the vintage cars that are hardly on the road at all.

The current 4 year start causes many people to trade in their three year old 'before it requires testing'. This provides a natural level of business for the motor trade as many financing of new cars is for a three year period. This is the incentive for the Government.

The next period is the change over to annual testing at ten years is another impetus for owners to trade up. It would appear to be intuitive to change the car at 10 years old.

The annual testing, together with the abandonment of the idea of an anniversary date would be a positive move in my opinion, but the test would need to be redrafted to be safety related.

I'm 100% behind it from a safety perspective, but in hindsight that would be used as a smoke screen to extract more cash from people, it'll happen yet,just like introducing an nct type test for bikes,as for the vintage cars,the vast majority of those are in far more superior condition than alot of the modern cars on today's roads, would it not be more sensible to let independent garages test the car's like is done for commercial vehicles? Or would that not be viable

Sam Russell

The British system started with local garages doing the NCT (MOT) but it had enormous levels of corrupt certificates being issued. I]Word on the street was garage x would give bent certs as long as the car had four wheels[/I. When testing started in NI, they had a Gov agency run the test. The British test is now conducted with an on-line connection (as far as I know) with the actual results of the test logged. This should cut down on the abuse. [It is still possible to have a fake car on the ramp - not sure if they connect to the on-board computer].

One big problem is the practice of clocking, and if garages were to log service/maintenance onto the NCT/Shannon systems this could cut out such practice.

Perhaps the first 3 NCTs could be done by main dealers (whether they supplied the car or not) which would help cut down the 27% failures at 4 years. They could include it as part of an annual service - they have no need to charge the full fee as they are checking anyway. An audit would show up naughties.