If NCT's were introduced for classics......

SpitfireIV

......just how many classics do you think would survive?!


Its just something that I've been pondering! :rolleyes:


A lot of UK imported classics are ones that have failed the MOT or simply wouldn't get through. The same ones that, in reality, if were put through an appropriate NCT here wouldn't pass either. I see a number of cars at shows that look good from a distance but, up close the work, patching and rust is obvious!

We do get off pretty lightly here. I'm sure theres many highly restored, clean, safe, well maintained examples, but, on the other hand theres a fair few rust buckets; mutton dressed as lamb etc.

Seen one MkI Fiesta at a show recently, and I see the same guy driving around town in it, the tyres are beyond ridiculous, cracked walls and bald! Its a danger, now, perhaps he doesn't even realise; maybe its all for the retro/hipster look, mechanics (or safety?) aren't a priority?


What do you guys reckon?

macplaxton

CroppyBoy1798 wrote: »

A lot of UK imported classics are ones that have failed the MOT or simply wouldn't get through.

I reckon that is not the case at all. They might end up that way a year or two after coming in though.

What I first noticed when I came over here was the shocking state of quite a few tyres.

The Big Red Fella

Most of the good cars dont be at shows imo!

w124man

I reckon all vehicles from at least 1950 should have an NCT or DOE. We have all seen som e real shockers over the years and it needs to be sorted IMHO.

I mean you even hear stories of fellas having ADO16 automatics without reverse ...... :rolleyes:

winnie the schtink

sure i won't be coming back:)

Max Headroom

Look in your local supermarket car park...check how many "modern" cars have an NCT..i'd guess half......;)

I'm sure its on the way at some stage, my import had a long mot....

corktina

you ust live in a bad area. Most cars in mine are taxed and tested

Dades

Just a point - the NCT can and does apply to classics (mine heading in on Friday...)
It's only cars registered on 31 Dec 1979 or before that are exempt.

That said, I'd say a lot if not most pre-1980 cars would fail something in an NCT test and a good chunk of them would get a DO NOT DRIVE sticker on the window.

MrFoxman360

Are there statistics available regarding road traffic accidents resulting from mechanical issues with vehicles?

hi5

In the UK they're talking about a 30 year rolling exemption coming in, like we had.

http://www.classiccarsforsale.co.uk/news/general/800023295/eu-directive-to-exempt-pre-1984-classics-from-mot-test-is-lunacy/

Cleveland Hot Pocket

hi5 wrote: »

In the UK they're talking about a 30 year rolling exemption coming in, like we had.

http://www.classiccarsforsale.co.uk/news/general/800023295/eu-directive-to-exempt-pre-1984-classics-from-mot-test-is-lunacy/

Surely then, they would implement similar here too?

shineon23

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

Surely then, they would implement similar here too?

If it's not, then we may see even more 80s classics around on UK plates.

macplaxton

A total non story that.

It's a directive, not a regulation so the UK can and will gold-plate it.

That's why they still have 3-1-1 testing even though there is recurring talk of 4-2-2. Too many vested interests so it's never going to happen.

mister gullible

An NCT for pre 1980 cars would be an unnecessary pain in the ass in my opinion. Most lads keep their cars well and I can't remember when I last saw someone driving a pre 80s car in a dangerous fashion (probably back in the 70s or 80s).
It's self righteous nonsense. FFS stop inviting more nanny stateism.

Merrion

Mine would definitely fail - the speedo hops around like an ECG even when the car is in neutral, indicator affects the brake lights too (all of them) and every so often the engine sounds like a gun fight. I'd still rather see a thousand perfectly roadworthy Ssanyongs crushed before it.

countrydude

Merrion wrote: »

Mine would definitely fail - the speedo hops around like an ECG even when the car is in neutral, indicator affects the brake lights too (all of them) and every so often the engine sounds like a gun fight. I'd still rather see a thousand perfectly roadworthy Ssanyongs crushed before it.

all minor problems why not just fix them

Agricola

Well I'd get done for a slow/not powerful enough windscreen washer pump and probably various other little assorted niggles that the NCT would deem as catastrophic.

Cleveland Hot Pocket

Are the vintage/black plates going to pass an NCT?
Has anyone done an NCT on a post 1980 ZV plated car?

macplaxton

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

Are the vintage/black plates going to pass an NCT?

Yes, if they're done right (and they are tested right). It's covered in the NCT manual.

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

Has anyone done an NCT on a post 1980 ZV plated car?

Not yet, but likely to in the not-to-distant future.

Tzar Chasm

I would be in favour of a basic mechanical roadworthiness test for all classic cars, basics like brakes, tyres and lights should be checked each year, if the test was carried out by competent operators it would be a good thing. Of course there lies the problem, the numpties in the nct centre, I could see them failing everything on the basis that they just dont understand it.

No rear seatbelts in your 76 Capri - fail
No ABS on your 62 Zodiac -fail
Rear wheels on you R4 not in line -fail

Dades

Tzar Chasm wrote: »

Of course there lies the problem, the numpties in the nct centre, I could see them failing everything on the basis that they just dont understand it.

No rear seatbelts in your 76 Capri - fail
No ABS on your 62 Zodiac -fail
Rear wheels on you R4 not in line -fail

AFAIK, they can't fail you on something not there that was never an original feature. Seatbelts for example only need to be working if factory fitted and would only have become standard when the law required them.

(Yes, I realise you're being tongue in cheek. :P)

aujopimur

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

Are the vintage/black plates going to pass an NCT?
Has anyone done an NCT on a post 1980 ZV plated car?

The plates must be the ones in use at the time of original reg. or rereg.

Cleveland Hot Pocket

aujopimur wrote: »

The plates must be the ones in use at the time of original reg. or rereg.

Is it not that pre 1992 cars can have silver text on black background plates, and after that must have the EU plates?

Dades

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

Is it not that pre 1992 cars can have silver text on black background plates, and after that must have the EU plates?

I think only pre-1987 can have non-white plates, and after they must be white with black text. Also, after 1993 they must have the euro symbols.

Not sure, but pre-1987 plates are only restricted in terms of readability which might be down to the individual tester. I've seen white, red, silver on black, etc.

ianobrien

I'd be in favour for NCT for classics. I'd be in even more favour if they designated some centres for the testing of classics and had suitably trained personnel for the treatment of classics.

There are plenty of classics that are dangerous both structurally and mechanically that need to be weeded out and/or repaired. The best reason for having an NCT was a couple of years ago on a classic run I was behind a Rover P5 that was dangerous. The rear axle moved sideways over bumps, the car speared left under breaking and the car didn't track "true". On the lunch halt, the owner of the Rover was dead against the NCT in all forms as the logic was that his car is fine so it didn't need it. On closer examination, the reason for the axle movement was the mounting points were flexing (and coming away in my hand).

Any 70's car should have no problem passing the NCT. Before it got too old to be tested, the '77 Escort passed the NCT no problem on brakes, suspension, etc. (The emissions were not tested as anything pre '81 is emission exempt). The car was factory spec mechanically and it passed first time. The car doesn't have rear seat belts, rear fog lights, handbrake warning light and it still passed. Since then, the brakes have been rebuilt (only the brake pedal and the rear drum backing plates were not rebuilt/touched) and every suspension bush, shock absorber and front springs were changed. I imagine that if I NCT'ed it in the morning it would pass (if I ever get around to sorting the hot running issue - motivation is low.....)

w124man

Dades wrote: »

I think only pre-1987 can have non-white plates, and after they must be white with black text. Also, after 1993 they must have the euro symbols.

Not sure, but pre-1987 plates are only restricted in terms of readability which might be down to the individual tester. I've seen white, red, silver on black, etc.

1.
Owners of vehicles registered prior to 31 December 1990, have the option of converting their registration
plates to the new format.
2.
Vehicles first registered on or after 1 January 1991
For vehicles registered on or after 1 January 1991, letters and numbers must be black set against a white
background of reflex reflective material. The flag of the European Communities, the Nationality Symbol,
IRL, and the Irish language name of the City/County of registration to be shown. No other marks may
appear on the plate. Any additional tabs, etc. outside the dimensions shown for the registration plate are
not considered part of the plate.
3.
Vehicles first registered on or after 1 January 1987
For vehicles registered on or after 1 January 1987, letters and numbers must be black set against a white
background of reflex reflective material and minimum dimensions should be as shown in the sketches on
page 09.
Vehicles first registered prior to 1 January 1987
Reflex Reflecting Registration Plates
Front registration plates should have black numbers and letters on a white background. Rear registration
plates should have black numbers and letters on a red or white background.
4.
Non-Reflex Reflecting Registration Plates
Front and rear registration plates should have white, silver or light grey numbers and letters on a black
background.

rezvw

I'm against nct for pre 1980 cars for a number of reasons.

*Nct centres are already snowed under being booked out 2 months in advance.

*(Some) nct mechanics wouldn't be bothered by treating the cars with care.

*"Character" wouldn't be allowed. Cars would need to be stock and working exactly as they were made. My daily recently failed because I had a non original (but perfect functioning) internal bonnet release handle. Most classic cars have DIY fixes which don't affect safety.

*I believe the main reason nct would be brought in for classics would be for the revenue. I already pay enough to keep my cars on the road. I'm not happy to pay another €50 EACH a year to nct my classics. This on top of all the other sneaky taxes us Irish are being made to pay.

*I honestly don't believe that classics are the cause of accidents on Irish roads. I'd like some stats on this though.


I have 2 classics. I maintain both myself and they receive much more attention and cash than my daily driver.
Both may not be 100% perfect yet but they're fully safe to be on the road.
Both have character which not every nct tester would appreciate. No one but me can get 2nd gear in one of them while the other has a window which won't go back up properly. Most of us here have issues like this which don't bother us but the nct centres wouldn't pass.
I can't understand the amount of people on here who would be HAPPY to have NCT.

Sam Russell

The NCT needs to be thought out again.

The NCT should have a minimum validity of 12 months. Currently, it can have a validity of just over 3 months. The idea of an 'anniversary date' is nonsense when most cars are sold in the first 3 months of the year. This has an impact on the secondhand car market (who wants a car with a short NCT?) and on the difficulty of getting a test date (currently two or three months wait).

There should be simplified test for cars over 25 years (with low annual mileage), just safety items, with advisories for simple items - perhaps for all items. (It can be time consuming to fix an item due to non-availability of parts- and the fixing may not be urgent). Also the test could be run by a specialist company or organisation.

The NCT history of a vehicle should be available online for owners, including previous fails. Annual mileage should be recorded on the tax form as well, and this should also be available online to owners - it would help combat clocking. Obviously, prospective owners would require sight of this information.

The insurers may have a part to play in deciding on NCT matters. Some cars do not go far on public roads, and the insurer may be happy to allow it without an annual NCT - maybe every two or three years.

There are not enough test centres at the moment, and there should be a second company offering the test. (What happened to competition in the EU?)

I think that all cars should undergo a test every year, from one year old onwards. That way, the NCT becomes part of renewing your tax, insurance, servicing, and then NCT. No biggie. Just the test should be appropriate for the vehicle.

johnty56

I took my daily driver for test the last time, a modern merc, and the guy testing it drove it off the ramps when they seemed to be not fully down and over the four wooden chocks..treating the car with the care and attention you would love to see given to a mint 600 grosser or 20s Rolls no doubt

Merrion

countrydude wrote: »

all minor problems why not just fix them

I do - and new problems come along. It's like painting the Forth bridge I tell ye ;-)

swarlb

Are you not overthinking the NCT v's Classics. It does not have to be a test, as regards using the modern NCT equipment.
Basically all it needs is a room with a ramp, and a comprehensive checklist. I seem to remember that as a requirement for getting a car classed as 'vintage' on the logbook insured, you had to get an 'engineers report'. At the time I lived in Dublin, and a local Opel Garage did it for me each year. The form was supplied by the insurance company, and the Garage filled it out and stamped it.
Simple enough thing, covered brakes, suspension, tyres etc, and 'general condition of bodywork'.
Somewhere along the way, this requirement obviously ceased to exist.

Sam Russell

swarlb wrote: »

Are you not overthinking the NCT v's Classics. It does not have to be a test, as regards using the modern NCT equipment.
Basically all it needs is a room with a ramp, and a comprehensive checklist. I seem to remember that as a requirement for getting a car classed as 'vintage' on the logbook insured, you had to get an 'engineers report'. At the time I lived in Dublin, and a local Opel Garage did it for me each year. The form was supplied by the insurance company, and the Garage filled it out and stamped it.
Simple enough thing, covered brakes, suspension, tyres etc, and 'general condition of bodywork'.
Somewhere along the way, this requirement obviously ceased to exist.

True enough. Any good garage could do it, as is done in the UK (mainland - NI use VOSPA). A few garages could be licenced to do it, and it could be administered by the few insurance companies that insure classics.

Dades

Where's the government take in THAT idea?

It's something to do with a car IT MUST BE PUNITIVE!

Sam Russell

Dades wrote: »

Where's the government take in THAT idea?

It's something to do with a car IT MUST BE PUNITIVE!

I do not think that they have been asked. Also I do not think that they think.

oceanman

cant see it happening, not enough pre 1980 cars on the road to make worth while for any government,.... its all about revenue at the end of the day.

Sam Russell

But if you say that, why introduce it for 1980 onwards classics?

oceanman

many more 80s cars on road than 70s or older I would imagine, it has to generate enough revenue or nobody in government is really interested.

Type 17

Sam Russell wrote: »

But if you say that, why introduce it for 1980 onwards classics?

Around 1980, a lot of stuff was modernised in the motor industry, due to legislation introduced around the world - e.g.: VINs were introduced (replacing chassis numbers), maximum emissions were lowered, fog lights were introduced in some markets, etc.

Before 1980, the range of features present/absent in various cars would vary a lot, but it would be easier to assess '80-onwards cars.

steveone

I really am tiring of the type of posts highlighting the truly shocking condition of the irish classic car fleet. Time after time im reading about 'real shockers' and bikes disintegrating before our eyes. If you see a vehicle in this totally unsafe condition post a bloody pic and shame the owner. I personally own a classic and it's clean down to its braided brake lines, and several friends all have theirs in possibly better condition. I've been to four shows this year and saw plenty of praiseworthy cars.with owners all to willing to show you around them and bend your ear on the quest for the missing oem nut and bolts. The super dooper nct passed my daily car with 2 cracked brake discs, how safe is that compared to my classic (which i'm apparently hiding from the nct) which is running four pot calipers with grooved/vented discs and s/s lines? Please give up this nct nonsense and leave people enjoy their hobbies without bringing the sky in.
Editing because i realise now that fitting better brakes puts undue stress on the car and will most likely be outlawed............

Sam Russell

^^^^ I agree with that but would like to see a simple (and cheap) test introduced that would allow owners to be certain that their car's structure is in fact as sound as they beleive. Rust is a terrible curse, but filler is worse. The previous owner can (and does) bodge and dodge in a way the beggars beleif. Most owners are concientious because that is their hobby, but lemons are moved on instead of being scrapped.

I would love the facility that could allow me to inspect the undeside of my classics to check all the nasties that might be their - rusty brake and fuel lines, rust eating into the structural parts of the underneath, undue play in UJs, track rods, etc. and burst rubber gaitors that let the grit in to destroy steering racks and other joints.

I am not sure I would trust the current NCT crowd to do this for me, but I am sure that some service could be provided.

Cleveland Hot Pocket

Most NCT monkeys (they can't be mechanics) don't take enough care of crappy and not so crappy dailys. How could they be trusted with classics??

steveone

I don't have any issue with sympathetic testing of classic vehicles however where the established setup has more faults than anything else theres no way im giving them my car to rev the life out of a standard 8 valve, then give it back to me broken and ultimately unroadworthy- like they do with the daily. Computer says no.....
I'm lucky in that i've a robust reasonably modern engine,imagine giving in a hundred year old car or something rare as hens teeth?
Imagine making OAP's do physical fitness tests designed for fit young people.

I apologise for partly hijacking the thread but Its important to monitor posts that make wild accusations and that represent the nct as the classic car boogey man.... The forum is becoming the go to for motoring on the web. Enthusiasts and uninitiated alike find their way in. All we need is someone looking for an axe to grind to see these and we're off the road.

mannurse

If you feel that your car needs an NCT simply as a means of checking it's roadworthiness, then I think owning a classic car is the wrong hobby for you.
As mentioned above, the vast majority of classic car owners have their cars in a1 condition as that is part of the hobby. If you can't fix/pay someone to fix your car then why have one (on the road).
I detest bringing my modern car in and signing the waver so they can rev the sh1t out of it.
Plenty of garages will do pre NCT inspection for you, it doesn't need to be legislated.

oceanman

mannurse wrote: »

If you feel that your car needs an NCT simply as a means of checking it's roadworthiness, then I think owning a classic car is the wrong hobby for you.
As mentioned above, the vast majority of classic car owners have their cars in a1 condition as that is part of the hobby. If you can't fix/pay someone to fix your car then why have one (on the road).
I detest bringing my modern car in and signing the waver so they can rev the sh1t out of it.
Plenty of garages will do pre NCT inspection for you, it doesn't need to be legislated.

well said. I wouldn't give those NTC 'goons' a wheelbarrow to work on...

Means Of Escape

MrFoxman360 wrote: »

Are there statistics available regarding road traffic accidents resulting from mechanical issues with vehicles?

More to the point when did anyone ever see a classic or vintage car buried in a modern car on the news?

ba_barabus

Means Of Escape wrote: »

More to the point when did anyone ever see a classic or vintage car buried in a modern car on the news?

They get stuffed pretty often. Have a look in the gates of crash repair centers and you'll always see a few.

Cleveland Hot Pocket

ba_barabus wrote: »

They get stuffed pretty often. Have a look in the gates of crash repair centers and you'll always see a few.

I wouldn;t think "pretty often" would be quite the story :pac:
But yeah, I've had to frequent some crash repair places and some breakers yards even and there were some poor classics in both

swarlb

Means Of Escape wrote: »

More to the point when did anyone ever see a classic or vintage car buried in a modern car on the news?

I think the use of the word 'vintage' has been abused slightly over the years. Using the correct definition of the term neither an 80's Golf or a 60's Cortina is truly 'vintage'.
Classic, is another term being loosely used to describe anything that is simply an 'old' car.
I doubt very much if there are too many 'classics' as in cars from the 50's or 60's or 70's being involved in road accidents on a daily, monthly or yearly basis. There might be the odd incident with an early to mid 90's car, but that would probably be the extent of it.