MOT test passed.

[dingov70]

OOPS , sorry chaps Tonyldee was the intended recipient .

Getting a touch ticked off with testers applying fail criteria incorrectly or failing to read the manual

[Laird Scooby]

Originally Posted by dingov70

OOPS , sorry chaps Tonyldee was the intended recipient .

Getting a touch ticked off with testers applying fail criteria incorrectly or failing to read the manual

I thought it might have been him and i pointed out exactly what you've just said about his car. He didn't seem inclined to pursue it and put the car up for sale.

https://www.volvoforums.org.uk/showthread.php?t=301647

Seems it's now sold according to the thread, hopefully the new owner will revive it!

As for testers applying the wrong test criteria, it seems it's on the rise, many just can't be bothered to get the right criteria for the year of the car or have forgotten that older cars aren't subject to the same emissions test as newer ones.

[rwdkev]

Originally Posted by loki_the_glt

The Exxon Valdez will sail on for another year - a clean bill of health at the marine inspector's place

A bit of good news for the New Year. Congratulations on the pass.

[tonyldee]

I thank you all for your help and suggestions, and yes, I have decided to part with the much loved 960. I have very limited working facilities and at the age of 74+ I'm getting a bit long in the tooth to keep rolling around under a car. I am pleased to say that another Forum member has decided to take her from me and, hopefully do as I had hoped, and at least as one of you suggested, that he will attempt to restore and extend the old girl's life.

[dingov70]

Tell you what Laird Scooby , all the blasted lazy testers are heading for a nasty fall .

Had my local VE ( vehicle examiner ) discussing the point of making sure you apply the correct fail criteria as not doing so will lead to a nasty interview , potentially under caution ! . Best of all these incorrect fail criteria are usually the result of newer testers lack of knowledge

Tony , you are 74+ ! , well fair play to you for having wielded your spanners for so long , all power to you & long may it continue

[Laird Scooby]

Originally Posted by dingov70

Tell you what Laird Scooby , all the blasted lazy testers are heading for a nasty fall .

Had my local VE ( vehicle examiner ) discussing the point of making sure you apply the correct fail criteria as not doing so will lead to a nasty interview , potentially under caution ! . Best of all these incorrect fail criteria are usually the result of newer testers lack of knowledge

I've been wondering how long it would be before that happened. There have been several cars on the forum that have "failed" the emissions test because wrong criteria were applied.
Quite possibly there were other fail points that were incorrectly applied but i've only moticed the emissions ones.

Thing is, most people put their cars in for MoT and get a fail and think it's correct, on another forum i'm on, a consistent "fail" is excessive handbrake travel or lack of reserve travel on the handbrake.

Simple fact is, the handbrakes were designed to be fully on at between 5-8 clicks and have 11 or 12 clicks total travel.

Most recent one was a fail for 7 clicks travel.

Well within the manufacturers spec and working as they should. Many misguided MoT stations will offer to tighten the handbrake cable for a small fee to get a pass but sadly, that is the kiss of death for the rear calipers on those as it stops the auto-adjusters working. The following year or year after, it fails on lack of service and/or parking brake performance and binding rear brakes.

As you say, many of them are new testers and some of them weren't even born when our cars were current and are generally taught the "modern" stuff - when they see something as old as out cars, they have no idea or recollection that things might be different.

[dingov70]

To be fair I have tested cars older than me by a long margin . I'm 57 ( i think )
Oldest car was a 1937 Rolls Royce Phantom III & my younger colleague happily lets me test anything pre 1978 .

This is the manual I use Re: parking ( hand ) brake

1.1.6. Parking brake lever or control

Vehicles first used before 1906 do not need to have a parking brake.

Some defects in this sub-section may not apply to the type of parking brake fitted.

A parking brake lever must have obvious excessive travel before being rejected.

An electronic parking brake (EPB) may apply automatically in certain conditions, such as when the ignition is switched off or when the driver’s door is opened. Testers should be aware of this throughout the test.

Electronic parking brakes must be maintained in operation by direct mechanical means, even though they are applied electronically. However, the mechanism for keeping the brakes applied is usually within brake calliper or motor gear assembly and therefore not easy to see.

Hydraulic parking brakes as an only means of operation are not acceptable on vehicles first used on or after 1 January 1968. However, they may be used to assist the application or release of a mechanical brake.

Quadricycles may be fitted with one of the following types of parking brake:

an over-centre lever that is mounted on handlebars
a gear lever that operates a cable when it’s moved into the park position
a transmission lock, which is the ‘P’ position on machines with continuously variable transmission (CVT)

These machines are type approved and should not be rejected for design features that prevent them from meeting the stated requirements.

If the parking brake is the ‘P’ position on the gearbox, the efficiency of the brake cannot be tested. The tester must therefore assess the brake by using a gradient (ideally 16%), or by attempting to push the machine when ‘P’ is selected.

The over-centre lever type can be brake tested as normal using one of the approved test methods.
Defect Category
(a) Ratchet not holding correctly Major
(b) Parking brake lever pivot or ratchet mechanism:

(i) obviously worn
(ii) worn to the extent that the brake may inadvertently release

Minor
Major
(c) Parking brake lever has excessive movement indicating incorrect adjustment Major
(d) Parking brake control missing, defective or inoperative Major
(e) Electronic parking brake MIL indicates a malfunction Major
(f) Parking brake is not capable of being maintained in operation by direct mechanical action only (vehicle first used on or after 1 January 1968) Major

Many customers rely upon MOT testers to be totally honest due to their own lack of knowledge

[tonyldee]

Thanks dingov70
Not leaving the forum. See my posts on "Japanese imports" Had no time for Volvos originally(carpet slippers and pipe brigade) UNTIL I bought my 960.Fell in love with the look, comfort and even now get comments on a "beautiful" motor. She has served me well and for what I paid for her, the depreciation has cost me a mighty £86 per year. No wonder you guys stick to the breed. Hope my next one lasts and serves me as well.

[rwdkev]

Originally Posted by tonyldee

No wonder you guys stick to the breed

I refuse to drive anything else

Originally Posted by tonyldee

Hope my next one lasts and serves me as well.

I hope so Tony. Time will tell but talk to any Volvo specialist and they'll confirm that the 700/900 is the best for quality and reliability......

[tonyldee]

Certainly can't complain with the reliability and the quality speaks for itself. Only wish I had the facilities to keep her going but she is going to a good home (I hope).
I spoke to the previous owner in the last few days who confirmed that a new speedo was fitted at around 46k. When I had to replace the pod after the capacitors leaked onto the printed circuit and rendered it unrepairable, the odometer read 182k. I then put another 3k using a smartphone app while I sourced a second hand replacement. Total around 240k