4 years before first MOT. Good/Bad idea?
- Thread starter Orionaut
- Start date
Terrible idea, I've seen 3 year old cars look more ropey than 20 year old ones. There are going to be a load of cars now driving around with nails in their tyres, non functioning lights, chrtismas tree lights on dash, damaged shocks, wear-ed out brake components etc/
It'll still go backwards, forwards and around a corner just about so where's the issue?
That's the mentality of the general public when it comes to cars, they're like washing machines as long as they basically function then the most involved many will get is putting fuel in it simply because it'll stop doing all the fun things mentioned above if they don't.
The way I see it, imagine driving on the motorway bombing down at high speed with a nail in your tyre or damaged sidewall and it blows out and you lose control and smash into other cars. Or drive around with a damage shock & it suddenly collapses when your cornering and you veer into some pedestrians, or you drive around with two broken rear lamps & some truck driver fails to spot you at night and smashes into you, or some child steps into the road & you try to perform an emergency stop, but your brakes are shot so you get poor grab.
Personally I would lower the MOT to 2 years at the very least if not a year after registration, as the age of a vehicle doesn't correlate to how its being maintained or the wear & tear being put on it, I don't understand the rational of testing when 3 or 4 years old.
Personally I would lower the MOT to 2 years at the very least if not a year after registration, as the age of a vehicle doesn't correlate to how its being maintained or the wear & tear being put on it, I don't understand the rational of testing when 3 or 4 years old.
but thought I would expand on the points to make it clear.