DoE testing - The Last Word

Slidey

Oh, i remember this argument before.

Just to educate this dumb poster, exactly how does the park brake work on these alko campers? Drum, disk, magnet?

These are just trailing axles with atorsion type set up?

Pjwal

Irishgoatman wrote: »

Sorry, I didn't realise that:rolleyes:.

I was just pointing out that some sort of consultation was done by them.

Perhaps peasant or someone can recall how it came about that we were involved?.

I'll try looking back at old threads.

ok. i offered them my motorhome to look at questionable changes that were made to the axle weights and gvw a few weeks before testing started, they declined saying it was not an issue, but now after one week of testing-its an issue on many motorhomes.

Pjwal

Slidey wrote: »

Oh, i remember this argument before.

Just to educate this dumb poster, exactly how does the park brake work on these alko campers? Drum, disk, magnet?

These are just trailing axles with atorsion type set up?

who are you educating?

Irishgoatman

With regard to the RSA not informing people about a consultation going on.

The first mention of a test being proposed, that I can find on here, was a thread started on 21/07/09. This meant some people had heard about it and were, presumably, talking about it before then.

When I heard about it on boards I contacted the RSA and received a reply on the 24/11/09 informing me that they wished to consult with all interested parties on the various issues.

After that whenever I was parked up and talking to other owners the subject always came up.

Irishgoatman

Pjwal wrote: »

ok. i offered them my motorhome to look at questionable changes that were made to the axle weights and gvw a few weeks before testing started, they declined saying it was not an issue, but now after one week of testing-its an issue on many motorhomes.

If you've got the paperwork, where they declined your offer, that's a nice hammer to hit them with!!.

Slidey

Pjwal wrote: »

who are you educating?

Myself.

Pjwal

Irishgoatman wrote: »

If you've got the paperwork, where they declined your offer, that's a nice hammer to hit them with!!.

no paperwork i am afraid. it was verbal with rsa rep doing an inspection on test centre, and also with the autherising officer for our area, who i showed the plate to because i had the camper at work with me on a day that he called. i tried to get involved in discussions with them from when we first heard about the introduction of testing of campers which would have been in around 2009 as you said, because of owning one(that doesnt have youth on its side) and been a tester, i felt i had something to offer. i didnt know about the alko axles manufacterer stating about useing a different procedure for testing thier park brake, we tested 2 of them yesterday with no probs, i ll continue to try to get the rsa to look deeper in that, until then, they have to be tested same as everything else.

Pjwal

Slidey wrote: »

Myself.

they dont look any different a set up then any other axle with disc brakes, i cant see whats making them different to look at them, the one thing i would say is the whole axle is a light weight flemsey looking thing that i wouldnt have a whole of faith wight, they are usually just a 4 inch round pipe with a 6 inch extinshion welded into the middle of them, and they are fitted into cut out grooves in the chassis to hold them in plase with a few bolts, they are trailer axles made to fit, nearly homemade looking, oh and yes, a torsion or leaf suspension, with light shocks outside the chassis rail, the stub axles are on bearings like a citroen berlingo set up, i would hate to get a puncture on one because you have to jack them seriously high before the wheel is off the ground.

Pjwal

Irishgoatman wrote: »

With regard to the RSA not informing people about a consultation going on.

The first mention of a test being proposed, that I can find on here, was a thread started on 21/07/09. This meant some people had heard about it and were, presumably, talking about it before then.

When I heard about it on boards I contacted the RSA and received a reply on the 24/11/09 informing me that they wished to consult with all interested parties on the various issues.

After that whenever I was parked up and talking to other owners the subject always came up.

yes, i v spoken to other owners about it at sites also, its just from previous experience and dealings with the rsa on other new testing requirements that they dont discuss/consult near enough, and regulary get it wrong, but who are we to argue eh!

Aidan_M_M

Assuming it's a Ducato based vehicle , regardless of whether it's single or double rear-axle(s) , the actual braking mechanism is all Standard fiat ducato . wheel bearing , bub , caliper , disc (drum on older vehicles) etc . And if it's twin axle , there is just a second cable attached to the central pull cable/rod . And the axles look quite substantial to me , I can't see how you'd bend one without harming the chassis .

Slidey

Pjwal wrote: »

they dont look any different a set up then any other axle with disc brakes, i cant see whats making them different to look at them, the one thing i would say is the whole axle is a light weight flemsey looking thing that i wouldnt have a whole of faith wight, they are usually just a 4 inch round pipe with a 6 inch extinshion welded into the middle of them, and they are fitted into cut out grooves in the chassis to hold them in plase with a few bolts, they are trailer axles made to fit, nearly homemade looking,

Exactly.

There is no earthly reason they cannot be tested on a rolling road. I have tested them before and didn't need to call in a 15 man clean up team to tidy the test lane after they exploded and showered the place with shrapnel.

Had this discussion here before, you are wasting your time trying to reason.

i do agree the chassis does not look like it could be pulled down, that is no longer an issue though it the testing is being done on presented weight

Aidan_M_M

one thing I will add , is that the Disc braked axles haven't as solid feeling a handbrake as the drum braked ones , and I certainly wouldn;t trust one as an emergency brake . They need to be properly adjusted , not just tightened at the handbrake cable.

Pjwal

Slidey wrote:

Pjwal wrote:

they dont look any different a set up then any other axle with disc brakes, i cant see whats making them different to look at them, the one thing i would say is the whole axle is a light weight flemsey looking thing that i wouldnt have a whole of faith wight, they are usually just a 4 inch round pipe with a 6 inch extinshion welded into the middle of them, and they are fitted into cut out grooves in the chassis to hold them in plase with a few bolts, they are trailer axles made to fit, nearly homemade looking,

Exactly.

There is no earthly reason they cannot be tested on a rolling road. I have tested them before and didn't need to call in a 15 man clean up team to tidy the test lane after they exploded and showered the place with shrapnel.

Had this discussion here before, you are wasting your time trying to reason.

i do agree the chassis does not look like it could be pulled down, that is no longer an issue though it the testing is being done on presented weight

Well as I said before. I tied down a good few of them and pulled the brake to full potential and had no probs, I don't see why the manufacterer says not to. But if the manufacterer hasn't enough confidance in it's own product to withstand that, then due consideration should be givin to that.

Pjwal

Aidan_M_M wrote:

Assuming it's a Ducato based vehicle , regardless of whether it's single or double rear-axle(s) , the actual braking mechanism is all Standard fiat ducato . wheel bearing , bub , caliper , disc (drum on older vehicles) etc . And if it's twin axle , there is just a second cable attached to the central pull cable/rod . And the axles look quite substantial to me , I can't see how you'd bend one without harming the chassis .

No, it's no ducato componants. It's a replacement axle fitted when an alko chassis is used. But I still can't see why it's not tested as standard.

Morgan The Moon

Pjwal wrote: »

not everybody that owns a motorhome is on boards.ie.

That is part of my point. If we are to follow the European model, does anybody think they will introduce part year taxing! Incidentally consider the revenue collected across the board off Motorhome owners in the state and ask what state provided facilities are provided for us in comparison to our European counterparts. I'm all for testing etc. But just do it right!

Malta1

Another happy camper here.....got van DOE done yesterday at VTN centre in Ardcavan Wexford. Failed on dip lights......the tester told me where to get Beam Benders and that I should not try to fit them, rather bring them back to him and he would do them for me.
Purchased benders and not only did he fit them, he also got out the spanners to slightly adjust the headlight level. Left with a pass cert and a smile

Well done to the guys in the test centres that are going beyond what they need to do

Pjwal

Malta1 wrote: »

Another happy camper here.....got van DOE done yesterday at VTN centre in Ardcavan Wexford. Failed on dip lights......the tester told me where to get Beam Benders and that I should not try to fit them, rather bring them back to him and he would do them for me.
Purchased benders and not only did he fit them, he also got out the spanners to slightly adjust the headlight level. Left with a pass cert and a smile

Well done to the guys in the test centres that are going beyond what they need to do

See. We are not the enemy:-)

Irishgoatman

Just purely out of interest as I've nothing better to do until the rugby comes on. Good win yesterday.
.
Has anyone got a camper that was manufactured in 2002 and tested between the 1st of Jan last year and the 30th of April this year?

If so I'm just wondering what the score is with regard to the test cert.
If the answer to the above question is yes, then you had it tested when it was 9 years old, and you would have been entitled to a cert for 2 years, BUT as it becomes 10 years old this year you need a test every year!.

What do you do? do you have it tested again and lose a year on the cert that you have or do you get a years grace?.

Answer on a post card please to...............

Aidan_M_M

Pjwal wrote: »

See. We are not the enemy:-)

I agree , but I have to clarify the issue with axles and brakes on Al-Ko chassis . I've been working on them for 10 years+ , and have worked on older ones and new ones , and haver NEVER seen anything other than Fiat components on a Ducato base vehicle , used for the brakes . Yes the actual axle beam is Al-ko , as are the dampers and springs( torsion bars to be more correct) , but any I've seen still had the Fiat hub and brakes mounted to the swing arm.

Pjwal

Aidan_M_M wrote:

Pjwal wrote:

See. We are not the enemy:-)

I agree , but I have to clarify the issue with axles and brakes on Al-Ko chassis . I've been working on them for 10 years+ , and have worked on older ones and new ones , and haver NEVER seen anything other than Fiat components on a Ducato base vehicle , used for the brakes . Yes the actual axle beam is Al-ko , as are the dampers and springs( torsion bars to be more correct) , but any I've seen still had the Fiat hub and brakes mounted to the swing arm.

Ok. I v never been inside the hub. So if it is ducato brakes, what is the problem that alko have with testing the brakes, fiat have no problem with it.

Pjwal

Irishgoatman wrote:

Just purely out of interest as I've nothing better to do until the rugby comes on. Good win yesterday.
.
Has anyone got a camper that was manufactured in 2002 and tested between the 1st of Jan last year and the 30th of April this year?

If so I'm just wondering what the score is with regard to the test cert.
If the answer to the above question is yes, then you had it tested when it was 9 years old, and you would have been entitled to a cert for 2 years, BUT as it becomes 10 years old this year you need a test every year!.

What do you do? do you have it tested again and lose a year on the cert that you have or do you get a years grace?.

Answer on a post card please to...............

I am afraid, as I understand it. In that case you will only get the year. It would be the same as doing an nct on your car 3 month after it's due date. It will just lose that amount of time before it is due again.

Morgan The Moon

Aidan_M_M wrote: »

I agree , but I have to clarify the issue with axles and brakes on Al-Ko chassis . I've been working on them for 10 years+ , and have worked on older ones and new ones , and haver NEVER seen anything other than Fiat components on a Ducato base vehicle , used for the brakes . Yes the actual axle beam is Al-ko , as are the dampers and springs( torsion bars to be more correct) , but any I've seen still had the Fiat hub and brakes mounted to the swing arm.

Hi Aidan, My original query is not the testing of the brakes ie the disk brake operation. My query is the parking brake testing procedure of a Tagg Axel Al-ko chassis. It would be extremely helpful if you where able to clarify what you consider the correct procedure would be. Many Thanks, Moc

Morgan The Moon

Malta1 wrote: »

Another happy camper here.....got van DOE done yesterday at VTN centre in Ardcavan Wexford. Failed on dip lights......the tester told me where to get Beam Benders and that I should not try to fit them, rather bring them back to him and he would do them for me.
Purchased benders and not only did he fit them, he also got out the spanners to slightly adjust the headlight level. Left with a pass cert and a smile

Well done to the guys in the test centres that are going beyond what they need to do

Hi, I thought "beam benders" where a temporary product used for enabling a visiting motorist a "temporary solution to a problem". Visiting motorist could be you in a foreign country, or a visitor coming here from another country requiring "temporary" beam benders" if your vehicle is registered in Ireland then the lights would surely have to permanently corrected. That is of course if it was done correctly. It would mean new headlight units. The same situation could be considered if you turned up for a test with a hole in the exhaust, I bet your man would not fit a "temporary" bandage to get you through. It is encouraging to hear that you where helped, enjoy your travels.

Pjwal

Morgan The Moon wrote:

Malta1 wrote: »

Another happy camper here.....got van DOE done yesterday at VTN centre in Ardcavan Wexford. Failed on dip lights......the tester told me where to get Beam Benders and that I should not try to fit them, rather bring them back to him and he would do them for me.
Purchased benders and not only did he fit them, he also got out the spanners to slightly adjust the headlight level. Left with a pass cert and a smile

Well done to the guys in the test centres that are going beyond what they need to do

Hi, I thought "beam benders" where a temporary product used for enabling a visiting motorist a "temporary solution to a problem". Visiting motorist could be you in a foreign country, or a visitor coming here from another country requiring "temporary" beam benders" if your vehicle is registered in Ireland then the lights would surely have to permanently corrected. That is of course if it was done correctly. It would mean new headlight units. The same situation could be considered if you turned up for a test with a hole in the exhaust, I bet your man would not fit a "temporary" bandage to get you through. It is encouraging to hear that you where helped, enjoy your travels.

I think your correct that they are ment as a tempory solution. But I can't imagen too many people are going to buy new headlights. I would imagen that alot of people will just remove the beam benders as soon as they have to drive at night as they do decrease brightness a bit. But that's just my opinion. One of my headlights is LHD and the other is RHD. Maybe that's the way to go.

Irishgoatman

Pjwal wrote: »

I am afraid, as I understand it. In that case you will only get the year. It would be the same as doing an nct on your car 3 month after it's due date. It will just lose that amount of time before it is due again.

I'm afraid that you are mixing two things up here.

If you have a Car,tested 3 mths after its due date, that means that you have been driving illegally for 3 mths. That is very obvious.

What is not obvious is where if anywhere have you read, I certainly haven't seen it, that although you have a cert that is valid for 2 years you must ignore the second year if this brings your vehicle over 10 years old and have another test done?.

Yes it has been clearly stated that cars, and now campers, over ten years old must have an annual test, but nothing has been said concerning the anomily that I pointed out and was looking for an answer for.
It is very easy/obvious to say that you have to have it tested again but where is the rule that states?.

I am hoping that someone in that position will have the/an answer.

Morgan The Moon

Pjwal wrote: »

I think your correct that they are ment as a tempory solution. But I can't imagen too many people are going to buy new headlights. I would imagen that alot of people will just remove the beam benders as soon as they have to drive at night as they do decrease brightness a bit. But that's just my opinion. One of my headlights is LHD and the other is RHD. Maybe that's the way to go.

I love it!! Why didn't the manufacturers think of that. You should patent it quick.

Pjwal

Irishgoatman wrote:

Pjwal wrote:

I am afraid, as I understand it. In that case you will only get the year. It would be the same as doing an nct on your car 3 month after it's due date. It will just lose that amount of time before it is due again.

I'm afraid that you are mixing two things up here.

If you have a Car,tested 3 mths after its due date, that means that you have been driving illegally for 3 mths. That is very obvious.

What is not obvious is where if anywhere have you read, I certainly haven't seen it, that although you have a cert that is valid for 2 years you must ignore the second year if this brings your vehicle over 10 years old and have another test done?.

Yes it has been clearly stated that cars, and now campers, over ten years old must have an annual test, but nothing has been said concerning the anomily that I pointed out and was looking for an answer for.
It is very easy/obvious to say that you have to have it tested again but where is the rule that states?.

I am hoping that someone in that position will have the/an answer.

Sorry, I do understand your question, but I am not good at putting into words what I mean. As far as I can gather from the info we ve been given, firstly all certs are only valid for 12 months, but a special concession been given for a 12 month extinshion on certs for campers less then 10 years old. And if the camper reaches it's 10th birthday on a date that occurs before the 1st anniversary of the test date. Then the camper will not have the benfit of the concession of the second year.
But that is my opinion/interpetation to which I am open to correction.
And I have not seen mention of that sinario on paper.

Irishgoatman

Pjwal wrote: »

Sorry, I do understand your question, but I am not good at putting into words what I mean. As far as I can gather from the info we ve been given, firstly all certs are only valid for 12 months, but a special concession been given for a 12 month extinshion on certs for campers less then 10 years old. And if the camper reaches it's 10th birthday on a date that occurs before the 1st anniversary of the test date. Then the camper will not have the benfit of the concession of the second year.
But that is my opinion/interpetation to which I am open to correction.
And I have not seen mention of that sinario on paper.

Sorry but you are wrong again.
Please don't take this the wrong way but you need to read the details of the test again.

All campervans are to be treated the same way as cars as far as the frequency of testing is concerned.

Every 2 years until the vehicle is 10 years old and thereafter yearly.

The consession that's being given is for people who had a camper, that was under 10 yrs old, tested pre 1st March and would at that time have been issued with a 1 year cert.

Pjwal

Irishgoatman wrote: »

Sorry but you are wrong again.
Please don't take this the wrong way but you need to read the details of the test again.

All campervans are to be treated the same way as cars as far as the frequency of testing is concerned.

Every 2 years until the vehicle is 10 years old and thereafter yearly.

The consession that's being given is for people who had a camper, that was under 10 yrs old, tested pre 1st March and would at that time have been issued with a 1 year cert.

no sorry,and i am not meaning to be argumentitive, but the cert bit, i do know for sure, because the council software has not been updated, when you take your pass statement from the test centre and pay your e6 or e13 to change it for a crw, the date of expirey on the crw will state 12 months minus 1 day from the day the vehice was tested, but the law are still accepting that is valid for 24 months once the vehicle is less then 10 years old.

Pjwal

Morgan The Moon wrote: »

I love it!! Why didn't the manufacturers think of that. You should patent it quick.

thanks, i might just do that:D