Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Audi S4/A4/A4 Cab (B7 Chassis)' started by rhinoman, Dec 9, 2013.
From next year.
New MOT Rules Punish Diesel Particulate Filter Removers
Question is.... How will they enforce it? Any diesel tuner worth their money will leave the DPF shell but just remove the core. An MOT monkey can't start removing the DPF to see if the core is still present.
Didn't know that was possible. The article indicates a visual inspection. I'll have a chat with a mate that has a MOT garage, see what he's been told.
Couple of blokes at my works have had exactly that done, old shell is still in place.
I'm a mot tester myself. I think it's going to be a visual I inspection only Most of the things on a Mot is visual inspection only anyway. If you can't see it you can't fail it.
Like hub caps you can't remove them on a mot. So if you have a bolt or a nut missing and you cant see if it has a bolt/nut missing from the outside and inner hub then the Mot tester can't fail it.
You can even put some duct tape over the hole.
Alloy wheels fitted without spigot rings. If the centre cap is missing and you can clearly see there is no spigot ring then you can fail it but if there is a centre cap then you can't fail it.
Brake pipes and fuel lines if you can't see them corroded the mot tester can't fail it. This is why engine covers and under trays are fitted are always a advisory on audi's.
Or let's say your car has a corroded brake/fuel pipe. Cover it in grease and the mot tester can't even use the brake pipe corrosion assessment tool to check it as the tester is not allowed to remove the grease.
Rear brake drums. If the wheel cylinder is leaking a bit of brake fluid but the tester can't see fluid on the Drums or backplate. The mot tester can't fail it.
Or let's say you have a dodgy seat belt. Strap a child seat in it and the MOT tester can't remove it to test it so he will just advise it on a child seat fitted.
The a4 dpf is pretty well hidden anyway so the tester will do well to spot it.
Also if the dpf has been cut and gutted how does the tester know nothing is inside? It could have been cut open for a visual inspection?
Sorry to rant but loads of people moan at advisories on a MOT like under trays being fitted , engine covers, child seats, oil leaks,
It's just to cover the person testing it. If the car goes down the road and the bake pipes pop and it's under a under tray, the person that tested it won't be sent to prison!
Spare tyre's best, if they find a flat one you fail yet if there isn't one you don't.
Windscreen has a crack? No problem just take the windscreen out and pass haha.
My car didn't come with a DPF anyway .
spare tyre defective is an advisory
It all comes down to how MOT stations are going to 'check' is a DPF is present and if there was one fitted from the factory.
I have a 2007 3.0tdi, DPF was fitted to some models, not others. I believe a code in the VIN is the determining factor... will they know this?
Checking the ECU will obviously tell you if a DPF is there or not, but it won't tell you if there ever has been one.
How does one distinguish a DPF from a CAT/silencer? I could have my DPF sensor pipe spot welded to my new exhaust and claim it's a DPF?
The only way this will work is if they introduce stricter emissions tests of the exhaust gasses, which will probably highlight I don't have a CAT either...
Are we going to be able to claim the cost of a new DPF from the garage which removed it in the first place (telling people it is not a legal requirement)?
Same way petrol drivers get away with de-cat, just go to a 'friendly' garage and no one will be any wiser.
There will be a fun tax soon, Â£10 every time you smile CCTV will send you a bill in the post...
Passed my MOT at the weekend with no advisories, the DPF was not an issue.
My mechanic who fabricated my exhaust also did the MOT, so it was never going to be an issue, however he doesn't believe it's a problem for the B7 as the DPF was an option.
For anyone around the midlands I'm happy to put you in touch with him if you have concerns about MOT's etc, also I got a service (oil, filter, lube & thorough check over) and MOT for about Â£125... not bad considering there's 7-8 litres of oil in there!
We had a special notice come through on the Mot computer (vts) it actually starting on 26th feb.
I spoken to VOSA since and they said it should be printed on the vt40 when the vehicle is logged on. Also xenon lights should have auto level lamps and washers. Some of the new merc's don't have washers as they are under so many lumens. Also this will be printed on the vt40.
Same with most Mot if you can't see it you can't fail it. If you have aftermarket wheels with no spigot rings and there is a centre cap then you can't fail it as you can't see the spigot ring but I'd there is no centre cap and you can clearly see there is no ring then you can fail it. As for the windscreen claim you have to remove the washers and wipers as well as the stalk I think. Also I'd you retro fitted xenon lights then remove the front and rear lights and side repeaters. And say Its for day time use. The mot tester will advise car was tested with no lights at the time.
7-8 litres of oil yes but is it the correct grade to your car?
Yes, 5w-30 from memory? He also used genuine parts/oil because I specifically request it.
Depends on which spec 5/30 he used, 125.00 for all what he did does sound to cheap.
So car with retro fitted hid lamps without headlamp levelling will now be an mot fail?
That's not what the MOT Inspection Manual (April 2013 Issue) says, it says IF fitted headlamp levelling and headlamp washers must work - but they are not required to be fitted.
Section 1.7 says:
I'm having my Citroen C1 MOT'd next week which has retrofitted HID, and if they fail it I'll be appealing.
Does sound quite cheap actually. I mean the oil filter is about 10 quid and well the oil from audi, if its the long life stuff it will be 5w30 which is most likely what they used and garages tend to use tripleqx which is quite cheap to them like Â£20 for 5 litres.
Thou personally recommend 5w40.
You got a bargain then. At work we swear by mann hummel. Does not matter if the car is old or new we still fit mann hummel. If we can't get mann hummel then it's purflux or hengst. I would steal clear from cheap brands
Mann Hummel supply oe oil filters to BMW
Hengst supply oe oil filters to Merc
Purflux supply oe oil filters to most French cars
We did have a Ferrari california in at work, we ordered a genuine Ferrari oil filter for Â£25/30 it was a perflux oil filter lol
You are correct but if it does not pass a beam patten check then it's a fail. Also xenon retro fit lights are not made for your normal head light therefore your insurance is instantly void as your headlamp was CE approved for halogen lights and not xenon.
It's a bit of a Gray area but a mate had a focus with xenon lights and his insurance was void. It might pass a mot but Mot laws are different to road laws believe it or not.
When we where on the training course they said if a boy racer had blue chav led washer jets then it will pass a mot. As what you are testing for is a side light and the blue chav washers are not part of a mot just like the front fog light.
I do not rate euro car parts what so ever I also do not rate tripleQX as its euro's own branded oil.
A mate of mine with a large garage also says exactly the same thing.
Ok fair enough they do good quality stuff but the cheap stuff is cheap and it is cheap for a reason. Vag,BMW and Merc use them brands named above so what is the different from going to a BMW dealer to buy oil filter and buying a Mann hummel oil from another supplier?
In all reality an oil filter is an oil filter, the oil itself is much more important.
Of course if you own/drive a 2.0 tdi you have much more to worry about!
Well. I still think regular servicing compared to long life rubish. Apparently Audi say a air filter every 60k? What the hell. Every 2-3 years at tops
I don't rate ECP as a number 1 service because they make the most mistakes , but they make the most mistakes because they are combined with their sister company Car Parts 4 Less, the busiest.
I do however use their cheap Guttmann filters, which I've found no bad info on. They are only a bit cheaper than Hengst and alike but with my over servicing I'm not worried.
I also use Quantum Long life oil ( rumoured to be produced by Castrol and possibly is Castrol Edge ) that I drop as soon as 5k. And a magnetic sump plug.
I'm not 100% sure about the Triple QX oil, but it does get sent off to be approved to reach the specs.
That applies whatever bulbs you have.
You're assuming that I haven't informed my insurance company about the HID retrofit...
I'm well aware of that idiosyncracy - I used to work for a car manufacturer and had close links with the homologation department.
Which is crazy - as the blue "light" is just as visible. Further proof, if it were needed, that the MOT should actually test for compliance with the C&U (and other applicable) Regulations and not have it's own different set of criteria.
I'm not 100 percent sure on the law on xenon retrofit as its a grey area. As I was told xenon lights should not be fitted in a halogen head lamp as it was CE approved for halogen. There for in my eyes are a insurance void.
Also I am not sure if notifying you insurance will help or not. It's like telling the insurance you have a dpf delete and a remap? Even though it passes through a Mot it's still illegal.
The fusses is because of the dpf this is why the road tax is cheap so once you remove it your road tax should be as much as some cars without a dpf. Like the Audi a4 3.0 Quattro b7 on a May 2006 the road tax is in the Â£400ish mark. After September 2006 they dropped to the Â£250ish for road tax because they fitted a dpf