18 replies to this topic

[minimotor_JD]

Hi All,

 

For the first time I had my car not pass an MOT due to it requiring a brake servo (i've been told), I've had the obp pedal box installed since 2012 and not had any issues regarding MOT's in the pass, the MOT'er is saying that the car is failing by not locking the front wheels on this particular part of the test.

 

( http://www.obpltd.co...me=classic mini)

 

Its a 1991 Mini but registered in 1992 April 

 

Any suggestions? Maybe I should take it to a different MOT place! 

[yeti21586]

Are you able to adjust the front brakes at all?

[nicklouse]

interesting. as a servo will not increase the braking power.

 

sounds like the tester needs to apply more power.

 

if it needs to lock the front brakes then you need to change the MC piston size.

[minimotor_JD]

Are you able to adjust the front brakes at all?

 

I can adjust the brake bias as its split front to rear

 

 

interesting. as a servo will not increase the braking power.

 

sounds like the tester needs to apply more power.

 

if it needs to lock the front brakes then you need to change the MC piston size.

 

I was thinking that too - Likely hasnt come across this type of setup before as its a new MOT place I'm using - More force required, will feed that back.

 

Interesting they're saying they're happy with the brake performance!?? - Odd

[nicklouse]

I would wind more bias to the front for the test and remember so you can readjust for road use later.

[imack]

What is the actual reason for rejection on the failure form?
Front brakes not locking out isn't in itself a reason for rejection so long as the overall efficiency is over 50%.
Having said that, if you can't lock the front brakes you've got a problem or weak legs!
Or is he trying to fail it because he doesn't like the fact that the servo is missing?
Just had a very quick look at the manual and can't see that servo missing is a rfr.

[Itsaminithing]

Section Braking Systems and Additional Braking Devices

 

Just had a very quick look at the manual and can't see that servo missing is a rfr.

From the Jan 2012 MOT Inspection Manual (but it goes back before that edition)

Section 3.6 Braking Systems & Additional Braking Devices

Reason for Rejection

1. A servo:        a. missing when fitted as standard

Edited by Itsaminithing, 19 March 2019 - 09:58 PM.

[imack]

Section Braking Systems and Additional Braking Devices

Just had a very quick look at the manual and can't see that servo missing is a rfr.

From the Jan 2012 MOT Inspection Manual (but it goes back before that edition)
Section 3.6 Braking Systems & Additional Braking Devices
Reason for Rejection
1. A servo: a. missing when fitted as standard

Manual changed in may 2018, I know it used to be in there but I can't quickly see a reason for rejection in the current manual.

[cal844]

If it's missing it can't be tested, simple! You don't need lights or indicators, nor a handbrake....

[imack]

If it's missing it can't be tested, simple! You don't need lights or indicators, nor a handbrake....

Yeah, you can get away with not testing certain items if they're not fitted, but not everything. I know about the lights but it has to meet a certain criteria to not require lights from memory.
Handbrake? Thats a new one on me, I'll have to look it up....

[Itsaminithing]

 

Section Braking Systems and Additional Braking Devices

Just had a very quick look at the manual and can't see that servo missing is a rfr.

From the Jan 2012 MOT Inspection Manual (but it goes back before that edition)
Section 3.6 Braking Systems & Additional Braking Devices
Reason for Rejection
1. A servo: a. missing when fitted as standard

Manual changed in may 2018, I know it used to be in there but I can't quickly see a reason for rejection in the current manual.

 

I see what you mean....

Section 1.1.10 Brake servo units & master cylinder (hydraulic systems)

a. brake servo     i. defective or ineffective -Major category

                            ii. inoperative - dangerous Category

& absolutely nothing at all about a servo having been removed!!!!!

(despite the fact that it's not mentioned in the section on what changes there were to the previous editions).

 

If only we knew a MOT inspector we could ask about this

[Dan the Van]

Is it a 998?.If so servo was optional not standard.(never fitted to my 89 Mayfair).

[imack]

I don't know what year they were fitted as standard

[cal844]

My 89 Mayfair has one, my 80 estate doesn't

[Cooperman]

I spoke with my MoT tester and he said that whether or not a servo is fitted is immaterial. What the braking system MUST do is to meet the braking force requirements as shown on their rollers.

 

But that is just one tester's interpretation.