The Irish Mitsubishi FTO Owners Club

Posted: **Sun Mar 08, 2009 10:14 pm**

Have a look..

http://www.rsa.ie/NEWS/News/NCT_Consultation.html

The RSA has launched a consultation paper, today Monday 23rd February 2009, seeking the views of car owners and those involved in the motor trade on proposals to add new test items to the National Car Test in early 2010. The consultation also considers the introduction of annual testing for cars which are over 10 years old.

The RSA believes that the new test items will improve the safety of vehicles on our roads and assist in achieving the main objective of the Governments Road Safety Strategy to bring Ireland's road safety record into line with "best practice" countries throughout the World. The proposed changes to the NCT are:

Clarity of windscreen and front side windows
Excessively tinted windscreens or front side windows present a significant safety hazard for drivers and their occupants. It is proposed that the glass in the windscreen and front side windows will be required to have a light transmission level of not less than 65% in order to pass the test.

Rear fog lamp
Rear fog lamps enhance the visibility of a car in foggy conditions by indicating the vehicle's position and direction of travel to other road users. The rear fog lamp, where fitted, will be checked to ensure that when in use it provides a red light which is clearly visible.

Reverse lamp
The reverse lamp of a vehicle provides illumination to the rear when backing up, and warns nearby drivers and pedestrians of a vehicle's backward motion. The reverse lamp, where fitted, will be checked to ensure that when in use it provides a white light which is clearly visible.

Tyres
Car tyres are the only point of contact between a vehicle and the road. The standards to which tyres are designed and built, is critical to ensuring adequate grip is maintained with the road surface. An "E" or “e” mark indicates that the tyre is certified to comply with international regulations. It is proposed that the vehicle will fail if an E or e mark is not visible.

Malfunction indicators for Airbags, Electronic Stability Control (ESC) systems and Electronic Braking Systems (EBS) / Anti-Lock Brake system (ABS).
Today’s cars are fitted with a number of warning lamps on a dashboard that let the driver know if certain critical safety, performance and environmental features are not working properly. They are important safety features and it is in the interest of the driver and road safety that all safety systems in the vehicle are in full working order. Vehicles will be checked to ensure that, where fitted, the malfunction indicators for Airbags, Electronic Stability Control (ESC) systems and Electronic Braking Systems (EBS) / Anti-Lock Brake system (ABS) are in correct working order. The vehicle will fail if a malfunction indicator is not working or indicates a defect in the system.

Rear registration plate lamp
Rear registration plate lamps provide essential illumination to the registration plate of a vehicle once parking lights are activated.

Vehicle exhaust noise
The nuisance caused by excessive noise from vehicle exhausts is regularly the subject of comments and complaints received by the RSA. A new test is proposed at NCT whereby sound levels will be checked in order to ensure acceptable sound levels are not exceeded.

Annual testing of vehicles over 10 years old
At present two thirds of cars aged 10 years and older presented for a test do not pass first time. It is proposed that annual testing be introduced for cars ten years and older. Cars over 30 years old would continue to be exempt for the moment.

The introduction of the new test items will have no implications for test fees. The owners of vehicles over 10 years old, however, would be required to bear the cost of an annual test.

The document “Proposals for changes to the NCT in 2010” may be viewed and/or downloaded here.

The RSA would greatly appreciate the views of the public. Responses may be submitted up to 27th March to:

National Car Test Consultation
Road Safety Authority
Moy Valley Business Park
Primrose Hill
Ballina
Co. Mayo
or by email to nctconsultation@rsa.ie

On completion of this consultation process the RSA will be making proposals to the Department of Transport regarding the items to be included in the National Car Test from 2010.

Roadworthiness testing of passenger cars in Ireland first began in January 2000. At present, cars in Ireland are subject to periodic testing on reaching the 4th anniversary of their first registration and every 2 years thereafter. A total of 833,357 cars were tested in 2008.

I for one am going to write them - there's more than a few things on that list I don't agree with..

what do you think?

Posted: **Sun Mar 08, 2009 10:41 pm**

Couple of issues that are gonna affect FTO owners -

1:
"Rear fog lamp
Rear fog lamps enhance the visibility of a car in foggy conditions by indicating the vehicle's position and direction of travel to other road users. The rear fog lamp, where fitted, will be checked to ensure that when in use it provides a red light which is clearly visible."

- Nasty ass aftermarket foglamps are gonna be an eyesore on our FTO's. We'll have to come up with a group buy for an integral kit in the OE lamps.

2:

"Vehicle exhaust noise
The nuisance caused by excessive noise from vehicle exhausts is regularly the subject of comments and complaints received by the RSA. A new test is proposed at NCT whereby sound levels will be checked in order to ensure acceptable sound levels are not exceeded."

The majority of FTO OE exhausts have long since rotted off the cars - so depending on what levels will be set for the NCT - this could see anyone with an aftermarket exhaust failing an NCT. Would be VERY interested to see what parameters they set for exhaust noise considering previous suggestions would have put many OE exhaust systems over the limit.

3:"Annual testing of vehicles over 10 years old
At present two thirds of cars aged 10 years and older presented for a test do not pass first time. It is proposed that annual testing be introduced for cars ten years and older."

This is gonna mean much more expense for the majority of FTO owners.

With regard to tyres - I saw a much more dangerous initial draft of this doc which stated they wanted all cars to run the recommended tyre that came on the vehicle - this would have lead to all sorts of monopolys on tyre pricing - happy to see the wording changed on this one.

Posted: **Sun Mar 08, 2009 10:53 pm**

I personally can see no issue with the items listed. In N.Ireland all cars over 4 years old must be tested annually I agree with this as it would amaze you how many people dont check their cars from one year to the next. Totally oblivious any thing is wrong until car breaks down/ something falls off! An entusiast or those who maintain their vehicle to a good standard have nothing to fear from these proposals. surely these are positive steps toward improving road safety?
What particular items listed do you have issue with?

Posted: **Sun Mar 08, 2009 11:26 pm**

In response to MFFTO
I'm persuming as members of FTO Eire most of us would be enthusiasts and therfore aim to keep our cars in tip top condition anyway.
I sympathise with your point regarding rear foglight, I have my rear foglight flush fit in to the rear bumper and this looks like OE fit and wasn't a major job to tackle. I will post pics if any one is interested.
In regard to the exhaust test I have a Blueflame catback system with 5" tailpipe and passed an MOT N.I. equivelant of N.C.T
I echo your sentiments regarding the issue of tyres thank god we dodged that bullet as this would have meant not being able to increase the size of your wheels when purchasing aftermarket alloys!
In regards to cars not passing first time, then clearly they aren't in a road worthy condition. the likelyhood of a car failing first time would increase if it hasn't been tested for two years as opposed to annually :smt102

Posted: **Sun Mar 08, 2009 11:36 pm**

I think what MFFTO is talking about is converting the inner brake lights to fogs rather that having to cut into the bumper.

A much better job IMO.

Posted: **Sun Mar 08, 2009 11:38 pm**

Myfeckin FTO wrote:1:
"Rear fog lamp
Rear fog lamps enhance the visibility of a car in foggy conditions by indicating the vehicle's position and direction of travel to other road users. The rear fog lamp, where fitted, will be checked to ensure that when in use it provides a red light which is clearly visible."

It does say where fitted so if its not there its not tested would i be right with that as for direction of travel i think the colour of the lights would tell you that i mean you see a car on the road the lights are red i think that tell you Which way its going

Posted: **Sun Mar 08, 2009 11:49 pm**

They do enough damage without letting them hook up to the car's ECU to test diagnostic lights! Don't see how they're going to be able to do that one to be honest.

In the last 10 days, my car went in for the NCT, brake hose burst, brother's car went in and came out with a thump thump noise in the brakes, and his gf's car came out with a broken timing belt tensioner.

Hearing loads of other stories of cars going in fine and coming out with stuff broken during the test.

The rear fog seems to state 'where fitted' so unless a rear fog has been fitted to the FTO it probably wouldn't be affected.

What the rear number plate lights have to do with car safety I really don't know.

Posted: **Sun Mar 08, 2009 11:50 pm**

I personally take issue with reducing the test to anually, double the cost, thus making more money for the new company contracted to carry out tests. Next thing they will try and introduce is testing for car 2 years or older.

In relation to fogs, all european cars are fitted with them and it is a very easy job to convert the rear lights to fogs. Not a big fan of the fog cut into rear bumper.

Posted: **Sun Mar 08, 2009 11:59 pm**

I would have said the same as Elaine, the way I read it, if there is no fog light there, I don't think you have to fit one?

The exhaust one stands out for me though. All other others (bar making the exam an annual one) are to do with visibility of one sort or another, and having done some research on road traffic collision rates for my thesis, I know that a huge majority of accidents happen because the people involved didn't see the other car/bike/pedestrian for one reason or another. Tyres have fairly obvious safety implications also, but I have yet to come across an accident caused by a loud exhaust.

Equally, I was surprised at the number of accidents associated with poor vehicle maintainence, from what I remember it was very low, so I'd question the need for the test to be made more frequent.

Posted: **Mon Mar 09, 2009 12:16 am**

Nothing I see on that list is something that in my mind has anything to do with road safety...

to me those amendments look like.

1. Money making and job creation
2. A bunch of people wanting to make a difference in area that should really be covered by legislation

I'm going to spend a couple of days simmering and then do a good constructive write up with alternative solutions to what they're trying to achieve.

A loud exhaust never killed nobody - unless it feel on them from a great height.

If somebody wants to obscure their identity - they're gonna wear a baliclava if they cant have black-tinted windows.

Rear fog-lights? - Fair enough. As for the rest - in it's present state..A pile of jibber jabber.

If the RSA does want to make the roads safer they could start by doing something about the state of them across the country. Everybody knows that an uneven surface increases brake distance - not to mention the very thought of the hopeless road markings that are painted using a non reflective paint thus making it difficult to see them in the dark..(alternative paint with reflective crystal are and have been available for many years).
That in turn brings me to cats-eyes - they work great when the roads are clean, only roads aren't exactly known for being clean in Ireland. Paired with the reflective paint, 2ft posts on both sides of the road with different color cats eyes depending what direction you're traveling would be a better and cheaper to maintain alternative.
(similar posts are already in place on n52 between the m6 and Mullingar)

2cents - unsweetened and unprofessional..

Posted: **Mon Mar 09, 2009 9:35 am**

still won't be getting an NCT. Unless its to aid sale of the car. My own experience (plus several articles in the irish times) have lead me to believe the NCT are a bunch of crooks. Failing certain "numbers" of cars to reach a financial objective. No thanks. When I get a letter in the post from a solicitor I'll pay them the 50euro and get it done. Or alternatively I'll just buy one for 250euro (like some mates did) to save me putting the cat back in and back out.

Posted: **Mon Mar 09, 2009 1:27 pm**

Agree with McGon, money making bunch of crooks.

If you don't do your NCT don't you have to back pay for all the months you didn't?

I suppose if things are coming out broken, eyes peeled to the glass looking in while they are doing it to the point where they feel uncomfortable...

Posted: **Mon Mar 09, 2009 1:43 pm**

optical illusion wrote:..If you don't do your NCT don't you have to back pay for all the months you didn't?...

No, I don't think this is true, you're thinking of tax.

Janus is spot on about the road markings. These, and widening of roads at junctions have a huge effect on collision rates. To be fair to the RSA and Co. Councils, these are targets in low cost road improvment works. I discussed this with galway co co specifically, and they have dozens of targetted junctions they would like to improve. Sadly, a lot of them never go ahead due to a farmer or land owner trying to make a quick buck over a couple of feet the council need to buy. The cost of trying to settle it might be 2/3 times the cost of the actual road works, so they just leave it seen as there are plenty other potential junctions the money can be spent on.

I agree with the majority of whats said, and that the NCT guys are just trying to make more money out of it, but I think the window tinting and fog lights are legitmate concerns.

But then again, we'd need to have drivers who actually know how to use fog lights. :roll:

Posted: **Mon Mar 09, 2009 2:24 pm**

I don't believe that it's a money making scam, the test is only 49 euro and for that you're getting a technician to check over the car using hi-tech equipment. I can't see how the operators would be making a considerable amount per car. I appreciate they have high and garunteed volume though.

I'm not in favour of these new changes re: exhausts etc. but a lot of it makes sense.

Posted: **Mon Mar 09, 2009 2:27 pm**

Just to clarify, I don't think the NCT itself is a money making racket in general, I'm with colm on that. But I think upping it to an annual thing is unnecessary.

Posted: **Mon Mar 09, 2009 5:03 pm**

The NCT is €60 if I'm not mistaken, well thats what I paid about two weeks ago putting my mates car through.

If you don't do your NCT don't you have to back pay for all the months you didn't?

No what happens there is if you only get 2 years from when the NCT is due. So if your NCT is done 6 months after its due date instead of getting 2 years from the day it was done you only have 18 months. (ie two years from the due date).
With regard to the RSA's recommendations I dont agree with them. There are a lot of things that could be done with roads, driver education, road lighting etc to make the roads safer.
What has the loudness of an exhaust got to do with safety?????
Also who are these people and what qualifications do they hold that makes them an authority on road safety. Gay Byrne was a good chat show host but I dont see how that automatically qualifies him to comment on these things.
I dont know about you guys but I know a lot of people who use the NCT as a way of finding out what it is they need repaired on their car in order to pass. They are doing this because some places that Pre-NCT cars were advising people to have things fixed that were nothing to do with the NCT. In fact I'm positive the guy that recommended I do it that way was an NCT tester. We were having a conversation about a friend of mine who was failed an NCT for having a cracked radiator and paid the tester €250 IIRC to pass only to find out when he had the same problem on his next car it wasn't even part of the NCT.
I would be interested to know how many accidents that occur every year are caused by the car being "unroadworthy". I can guess (and nearly guarentee its a very small percentage. I would also like to know if that figure has been signifigcantly reduced since the NCT was introduced.

Posted: **Mon Mar 09, 2009 6:27 pm**

karlf wrote:No what happens there is if you only get 2 years from when the NCT is due. So if your NCT is done 6 months after its due date instead of getting 2 years from the day it was done you only have 18 months. (ie two years from the due date).

THAT's the one!

Posted: **Mon Mar 09, 2009 7:45 pm**

some good points there lads. Just to make my point clear, I think the regulatory testing of all cars to ensure that the brakes and steering and lights etc are of a certain standard is a GREAT idea. I just don't agree with the monopoly the NCTS have on the tests. It should be like an MOT where you can go to a garage of your choice.

Posted: **Mon Mar 09, 2009 11:03 pm**

Bernard wrote:I think what MFFTO is talking about is converting the inner brake lights to fogs rather that having to cut into the bumper.

A much better job IMO.

I was merely offering an alternative for which a kit already exists, although I suppose would not be to difficult for those in the know to fit a dual filament lamp in the place of one of or both the existing tail lights. would require a relay to switch a permenant fused supply as the wattage requirements for a twin fog light set up would be greater than that of existing tail lights!

Posted: **Mon Mar 09, 2009 11:15 pm**

mcgon1979 wrote:some good points there lads. Just to make my point clear, I think the regulatory testing of all cars to ensure that the brakes and steering and lights etc are of a certain standard is a GREAT idea. I just don't agree with the monopoly the NCTS have on the tests. It should be like an MOT where you can go to a garage of your choice.

MOT's here in N.I. are carried out in government run test centres!
I agree the conveniece element of taking your car to the MOT station of your choice as in GB appeals, but keep in mind theese test stations more often than not double as garage services. therefore they have everything to gain by failing your vehicle as your likely to instruct them to go ahead with the corrective work! :wink:

Posted: **Tue Mar 10, 2009 12:22 am**

gary d wrote:
Bernard wrote:I think what MFFTO is talking about is converting the inner brake lights to fogs rather that having to cut into the bumper.

A much better job IMO.
I was merely offering an alternative for which a kit already exists, although I suppose would not be to difficult for those in the know to fit a dual filament lamp in the place of one of or both the existing tail lights. would require a relay to switch a permenant fused supply as the wattage requirements for a twin fog light set up would be greater than that of existing tail lights!

Gary - Quite a few guys have already gone the route of an integral Foglight in the FTO rear OE unit - far better option than the additional fog light cut into the rear bumper route.

Posted: **Tue Mar 10, 2009 12:27 am**

Heres one for you,

I recently put my brother in laws 04 IS200 throught the test. Failed on the following items.

1 Tracking _ fair enough. Tracking corrected
2. Driver light alignment _ corrected, bulb in incorrectly
3. One rear tyre fitted wrong way round. corrected

4 rear suspensin bushing worn. Now this is the problem. They marked the bush they reckoned was worn. I checked it removed the hub and double checked it, no problem in my opinion. Tried to source bush through factors with no luck, main deler only. Lexus supply the complete hub only at approx €500.
So I cleaned the bush, applied some son of a gun to the rubber and brought it in for retest. Passed no probs, so I saw my chance to query what was worng with the bush in the first place, and this was the reply "that paricular bush has a tendancy to wear on the majority of those cars". I then proceeeded to let him know the bush was not replaced, his response was "well it is fine now"

Money making racket

Posted: **Tue Mar 10, 2009 12:29 am**

Same technician I should add

Posted: **Tue Mar 10, 2009 3:16 am**

My old gpx same thing failed on bushes worn on anti roll bar took them out they looked like new i replaced them with polys passed.But in my opinion nct is a joke i know one person who had gone in with there car passed and was leaving the nct centre and the exhaust mid section fell off.Might be coincidence but i reckon it was the vigorous jerking/shaking of the testing equipment that done the damage it must have been visible if they looked properly.NCT=Another goverment laughable tax scheme.
Why dont they provide a mechanic or car electrician so if you do fail for ie..light alignment or something similar that for your E60 it gets sorted before you leave so you can return home safely knowing what you failed on has been fixed to a proper standard.

Posted: **Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:10 am**

gt94 wrote:Why dont they provide a mechanic or car electrician so if you do fail for ie..light alignment or something similar that for your E60 it gets sorted before you leave so you can return home safely knowing what you failed on has been fixed to a proper standard.

Because then there would be rantings about the tests being rigged in an effort to sell parts and services. As it is, this accusation can't be made.
We put loads of cars through NCTs on behalf of customers (everything from Yaris's to Lexus RX300's) and the vast majority of them pass first time. If the car is properly maintained there shouldn't be any major issues, granted on older cars there's more potential for things to go wrong - which unfortunately adds weight to the argument for annual testing of 10 year old cars.

The Irish Mitsubishi FTO Owners Club

Road saftety authority, NCT consultation

Road saftety authority, NCT consultation