wrap or replace exhaust?
- Thread starter --tom
- Start date
Sponsored Links
--tom,most MOT testers will assume the exhaust under the wrapping is u/s and fail it anyway. What wraps I have seen,are wrapped round wet then they sort of set hard.So when your flexi bit flexes,it cracks the wrapping anyway.
Don't waste your time and money on wraps,go get a new one,it's cheapest in the long run.
Don't waste your time and money on wraps,go get a new one,it's cheapest in the long run.
Sponsored Links
On what do you base this bizarre statement?yes2mud said:
Are testers entitled to assume whatever they want?
If I put a patch on my rusty but sound exhaust box that makes it look as though I've patched a hole, can the tester fail the box?
If the exhaust isn't leaking, how can it fail?
A sound welded patch is ok,anything that looks like a bodge has to be failed.
With all the complaining,blame the garage,it's just had an MOT and the exhaust has fallen off attitude around these days,testers will take no chances with gun-gum repairs.If that sounds bizzare Softus then tough!
With all the complaining,blame the garage,it's just had an MOT and the exhaust has fallen off attitude around these days,testers will take no chances with gun-gum repairs.If that sounds bizzare Softus then tough!
dont know what car it is but have a look somewhere like this to get an idea on prices http://www.onlineautomotive.co.uk/
To what extent is the flexi section leaking? By saying flexi section, I've got the picture in my head of the criss-cross overlapping mesh sort of section. Is it that sort? If its that than I wouldn't waste my time trying to mess with that.
Anything that looks like a bodge has to be failed? Thats a bit vague. Define bodge for me.
Anything that looks like a bodge has to be failed? Thats a bit vague. Define bodge for me.
yes2mud said:
Not the case. If it passes, it's a pass. If it fails, it's a fail.
"anything that looks like a bodge" is not a fail.
Proving case:
My exhaust has a hole in it and I asked the garage to replace the part before its MOT last week. The part did not arrive, but the car passed the MOT.
The tester said, "In all about excesses with fails to condem a part e.g. excessive play in suspension bushes = fail... your car passed emissions so the exhaust is not execssivly worn so it's OK"
From the MOT testers manual:
1. Examine the condition of the whole exhaust system, including the silencers and mountings, for security, deterioration and completeness
2. With the engine running
a. check the exhaust system for leaks
Note: A durable repair to an exhaust system which effectively prevents leaks is acceptable providing the system is structurally sound
b. assess subjectively the effectiveness of the silencer in reducing exhaust noise to a level considered to be average for the vehicle.
Read into it what you will
1. Examine the condition of the whole exhaust system, including the silencers and mountings, for security, deterioration and completeness
2. With the engine running
a. check the exhaust system for leaks
Note: A durable repair to an exhaust system which effectively prevents leaks is acceptable providing the system is structurally sound
b. assess subjectively the effectiveness of the silencer in reducing exhaust noise to a level considered to be average for the vehicle.
Read into it what you will
Assuming that you've quoted the tester accurately, then what he's told you is utter b*llocks.mrgtv said:
The criteria for failing an exhaust system are more than simply the emissions tests. For example, it's required to not leak. If your exhaust system was leaking then it ought to have been failed. If a leaking system is patched up such that it doesn't leak, then it would not be failed on the grounds of leaking.
And a classic case of not reading the post.Softus said:Assuming that you've quoted the tester accurately, then what he's told you is utter b*llocks.mrgtv said:
The criteria for failing an exhaust system are more than simply the emissions tests. For example, it's required to not leak. If your exhaust system was leaking then it ought to have been failed. If a leaking system is patched up such that it doesn't leak, then it would not be failed on the grounds of leaking.
My quote and the quote from the tester says nothing about leaks nor the full extent of the checks performed on an exhaust. All I said was the exhaust had a hole in it. *If* it was leaking, then that *may* come under the category of excessive wear.
I also said, "anything that looks like a bodge" is not a fail as long as it passes so I believe you're agreeing with me.
Oh really. Then please transform into English the tester's words that you quoted, so that there can be no misinterpretation. For example:mrgtv said:And a classic case of not reading the post.Softus said:Assuming that you've quoted the tester accurately, then what he's told you is utter b*llocks.mrgtv said:
The criteria for failing an exhaust system are more than simply the emissions tests. For example, it's required to not leak. If your exhaust system was leaking then it ought to have been failed. If a leaking system is patched up such that it doesn't leak, then it would not be failed on the grounds of leaking.
______________
In that case you have a revolutionary new type of exhaust that can have a hole in it and yet not leak.
Contrived nonsense. Holes in exhausts systems are caused by corrosion, not wear.
You may believe so if you wish.
Sponsored Links
