Changes to 2011 MOT Scaremongering???

[youngsyr]

Read this article which sounds like absolute bllcks to me from a second rate website, but does anyone know any more about it?

wrecks2riches said:

Still 13 months away until these new regulations come into force, but some interesting changes. From MOT from December 2011, the below changes will come into force, which will be very bad news for some.

HID lights – Specifically those aftermarket kits that give the very bright headlight beams. Any cars found with these kits will be an automatic MOT failure. Testers are able to easily spot the difference between HID kits, and manufacturer fitted Xenon’s. Easy to spot as Xenon cars have suspension level sensors, in car beam adjuster, and usually headlight washers.

Chipped ECU’s - Unsure of just how/if this one will realistically be enforced, but any cars with chipped ECU’s will in theory be an MOT failure. I can only assume VOSA have found an easy way of checking ECU software through the cars OBD port (diagnostic plug).

Wiring harness – The general condition of he wiring harness will be checked to make sure there is no rubbing or chaffing, and that the harnesses are in generally good condition. If unsecure, or damaged again MOT failure.

Airbag warning lights - If any warning lights are illuminated, it will again be an MOT failure.

Source: http://wrecks2riches.co.uk/2010/10/2011-changes-to...

[youngsyr]

cbcbcb said:

It's mentioned in the "Matters of testing" MOT testers' newsletter, issue 48.

http://www.dft.gov.uk/vosa/publications/newsletter...

It says

newsletter said:

Other items – such as headlamp
bulb and unit incompatibility,
headlamp levelling devices and
illegal engine ‘chipping’ – will need
further thought before we can get
a workable solution for MOT
stations.

Referring to the EU directive in question: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?...

Section 6.1.9 lists

EU said:

6.1.9. Engine performance - Visual inspection - (a) Control unit illegal modified (b) illegal engine modification

Looks like it is coming, but even VOSA don't know how to police it.

What is "illegal" engine chipping - it's not illegal to modify or "chip" your ECU?

[youngsyr]

Negative Creep said:

youngsyr said:

cbcbcb said:

It's mentioned in the "Matters of testing" MOT testers' newsletter, issue 48.

http://www.dft.gov.uk/vosa/publications/newsletter...

It says

newsletter said:

Other items – such as headlamp
bulb and unit incompatibility,
headlamp levelling devices and
illegal engine ‘chipping’ – will need
further thought before we can get
a workable solution for MOT
stations.

Referring to the EU directive in question: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?...

Section 6.1.9 lists

EU said:

6.1.9. Engine performance - Visual inspection - (a) Control unit illegal modified (b) illegal engine modification

Looks like it is coming, but even VOSA don't know how to police it.

What is "illegal" engine chipping - it's not illegal to modify or "chip" your ECU?

It says visual inspection so how would you know the ECU has been modified? Also I'm confused about how an engine modification could be illegal, unless it's declared to your insurers of which the MOT station has no way of knowing

If it's just a remap of the standard ECU, then you wouldn't be able to tell by looking at it, but many cars cannot have the standard ECU remapped and so will have piggback ECUs or even full replacement ECUs fitted which will be obvious.

[youngsyr]

aeropilot said:

youngsyr said:

What is "illegal" engine chipping - it's not illegal to modify or "chip" your ECU?

Non TUV approved would be a better description than illegal, but, essential the same thing I guess.

It is the case in other parts of the EU already..... if any part isn't TUV approved it can't be fitted......and that includes ECU upgrades. Which is why factory approved (and therefore TUV approved) ECU upgrades are so much more expensive than aftermarket....... but in some EU states, that's all you can do, and the UK WILL go that route before too long........it's been warned about for some time, but people keep sticking their heads in holes in the ground and going LA-LA-LA-LA etc.

I believe there are similar laws in California, where modifications need offical ("CARB") approval to be legal for their smog checks and if it can happen in the States, I've no doubt it can happen in the EU.

[youngsyr]

Dog Star said:

Oh yes! Johnny Saxo and his Chinese bright blue laser death beam HIDs: goodbyeeee!

Yeah right, because no car has ever passed an MOT with non-road legal parts fitted!

[youngsyr]

Compo_Simmonite said:

...Obviously pre March 2001 vehicles the road tax is set by engine size and not CO2 so they won't be affected.

Paul H

...unless the engines are bored/stroked/swapped.

[youngsyr]

Welshbeef said:

I've mentioned a few times re ved or comp car tax being charged incorrectly due to remapping.

It's no different to theft yet when I highlighted it there was a lot of pushback from what I can only assume are those with a vested interest ie remapped cars. Probably the vast majority legal from an INS point of view but from ved they remapped so push out more c02 so should pay more. Just as they don't agree with the law doesn't mean it should be not paid.

First of all, I would imagine the vast majority of cars that are tuned were already in the highest tax band for their year to start with.

Secondly, how do you propose that those modified cars that aren't already in the highest tax band go about having their CO2 emissions checked, and who pays for the test if the CO2 level is the same or lower?

Finally, no doubt all cars vary in their emissions output even from new, let alone once they've been abused for a few years. Do you believe that modified cars that aren't running their official CO2 output should be tested, but unmodified cars that aren't running their official CO2 levels shouldn't?

[youngsyr]

aeropilot said:

Olivera said:

The only alternative is to ban any and all ECU modifications completely.

I'm sure that is the intention with TUV approval, as already applies in some EU states. If the part/ECU/widget/whatever doesn't have TUV approval certificates it can't be fitted.

Pointless: many car's ECUs can be remapped with no visible sign from the exterior. For many it would also take a lot of investigating with diagnostic software to determine whether they had been remapped.

Some cars, such as the Evo FQ cars are remapped by their offical distributors after they reach the UK (Evos are built in Japan) to achieve different power levels.

You would have to know which each timing and fuel map on each car looked like to be able to tell the difference between them.

[youngsyr]

300bhp/ton said:

aeropilot said:

Olivera said:

The only alternative is to ban any and all ECU modifications completely.

I'm sure that is the intention with TUV approval, as already applies in some EU states. If the part/ECU/widget/whatever doesn't have TUV approval certificates it can't be fitted.

I don't see the sense in that at all. A MAP is far more than just for making power. It is and needs to be refined all the time, car makers don't usually create a dingle map and never touch it again. Heel the "M" button in a BMW M5 basically alters or modifies the ECU map and many cars are self learning too.

And as said, if you ban ECU maps, do you suggest banning carb tuning too?

The M button won't alter maps in all likelihood, I think it's much more likely that the pushing the button tells the ECU to switch to a different set of maps that are already stored on the ECU.

Likewise "self-learning" ECUs; all the ones I've seen start with a standard set of maps for running under "normal" conditions with additional timing and/or fueling being added or subtracted under certain parameters as dictated by the software programming. Therefore all the information is there to start with.

For what it's worth, most post mid-90s and later ECUs already automatically switch the parameters for running the engine under idle and low load compared to when the car is actually being driven for emission test purposes.

Even complex ECUs therefore do not "alter" or "modify" themselves, they simply run more than one map or possibly interpolate between several maps according to a set algorithm. It's therefore possible to check if the maps and/or software on these ECUs has been interfered with by comparing them to a standard set of maps and algorithms. This may not be easy in many cases unless you have access to the manufacturer's ECU software, but it is certainly possible if you have the will to do it.

Some ECUs even keep track of the amount of times the ECU has been accessed or flashed.

Edited by youngsyr on Wednesday 10th November 10:08

[youngsyr]

CooperS said:

Just fitted some HIDs by my local specialist and sailed through the MOT my head light beam focus is much better than my flat mates running cheap legal halford lights and I don't blind other road users.

How would you know if you did?

Anyway, it's off topic but being blinded by other cars' lights depends a lot on what you're driving rather than their lights. In an MX-5 where you sit about 6" off the ground you are blinded by pretty much every other car. SUV lights seem to be at eye level.

[youngsyr]

300bhp/ton said:

youngsyr said:

300bhp/ton said:

aeropilot said:

Olivera said:

The only alternative is to ban any and all ECU modifications completely.

I'm sure that is the intention with TUV approval, as already applies in some EU states. If the part/ECU/widget/whatever doesn't have TUV approval certificates it can't be fitted.

I don't see the sense in that at all. A MAP is far more than just for making power. It is and needs to be refined all the time, car makers don't usually create a dingle map and never touch it again. Heel the "M" button in a BMW M5 basically alters or modifies the ECU map and many cars are self learning too.

And as said, if you ban ECU maps, do you suggest banning carb tuning too?

The M button won't alter maps in all likelihood, I think it's much more likely that the pushing the button tells the ECU to switch to a different set of maps that are already stored on the ECU.

Likewise "self-learning" ECUs; all the ones I've seen start with a standard set of maps for running under "normal" conditions with additional timing and/or fueling being added or subtracted under certain parameters as dictated by the software programming. Therefore all the information is there to start with.

For what it's worth, most post mid-90s and later ECUs already automatically switch the parameters for running the engine under idle and low load compared to when the car is actually being driven for emission test purposes.

Even complex ECUs therefore do not "alter" or "modify" themselves, they simply run more than one map or possibly interpolate between several maps according to a set algorithm. It's therefore possible to check if the maps and/or software on these ECUs has been interfered with by comparing them to a standard set of maps and algorithms. This may not be easy in many cases unless you have access to the manufacturer's ECU software, but it is certainly possible if you have the will to do it.

Some ECUs even keep track of the amount of times the ECU has been accessed or flashed.

Edited by youngsyr on Wednesday 10th November 10:08

With due respect, how is the end result any different? Switching to a different MAP is in essence a "new active" map. Being pre programmed shouldn't make any odds or if it done aftermarket.

It's not the end result that's the issue - it's the process which leads to it that you have either misunderstood or explained incorrectly and is relevant to this thread: if it's possible to detect an ECU that's been manually adjusted, then it's possible that an MOT could include a test for it.

In your understanding of how the ECUs work it would be extremely difficult to tell apart an ECU that alters or modifies its standard maps automatically or at the touch of a button from the same ECU that had its maps or algorithms been manually altered.

However, my understanding is that it's comparatively very easy to tell the difference between an ECU with several standard maps and algorithms and the same ECU that has been remapped.

If my understanding is correct, the ECU being pre-programmed as standard would make a big difference to it being remapped by an after market tuner.

[youngsyr]

300bhp/ton said:

youngsyr said:

It's not the end result that's the issue - it's the process which leads to it that you have either misunderstood or explained incorrectly and is relevant to this thread: if it's possible to detect an ECU that's been manually adjusted, then it's possible that an MOT could include a test for it.

I don't believe that it is or will be possible to detect this. There are too many different systems out there. And as said before "define ECU". A car may have lots of ECU's.

It is possible to detect differences between a standard ECU and a remapped one in every case I've seen, whether it's practical to do it is another matter.

300bhp/ton said:

Then you'd have to define "manually" adjusted. e.g. Prodrive spec Impreza's had the ECU altered by the dealer/Prodrive.

The smart Roadster has a latter map available either at cost or free if you have it serviced at a dealer and request it.

There was also an optional MAP which made more power, again dealer installed. MINI do the same sort of thing with the JCW package on the Cooper S. The dealer "re-maps" the ECU.

Again, it's possible to have a definition of a non-standard ECU, we have this for insurance purposes, it doesn't seem that it would be outside the realms of possibility to bring it in for the MOT, if the government/EU were so inclined.

300bhp/ton said:

youngsyr said:

In your understanding of how the ECUs work it would be extremely difficult to tell apart an ECU that alters or modifies its standard maps automatically or at the touch of a button from the same ECU that had its maps or algorithms been manually altered.

However, my understanding is that it's comparatively very easy to tell the difference between an ECU with several standard maps and algorithms and the same ECU that has been remapped.

I suspect that is very highly dependent on the exact car and ECU/PCM device and software it uses. You would also likely need a "standard" map and a comparison tool to compare against.

Well, ECUs tend to be manufactured by just a few companies rather than all the individual car manufacturers, so you'd be surprised just how similar ECUs are across different makes of car.

Once again, it's possible to have access to standard maps and it's possible to have a tool that compares them (MS Excel will do it in most cases).

300bhp/ton said:

What about plug in control boxes that don't alter the base map at all?

They'd be easy to spot if fitted for the MOT and it would be clear whether these are fitted as standard, just as with aftermarket parts in the US which are CARB or non-CARB approved.

300bhp/ton said:

youngsyr said:

If my understanding is correct, the ECU being pre-programmed as standard would make a big difference to it being remapped by an after market tuner.

But how would you know which was which?

Again, you would just need to compare the maps against standard maps (or to be more precise, you would need to compare the data in the .rom files). There are plenty of people who can do this now, so it is possible, whether it's practical again is open to debate.

[youngsyr]

J4CKO said:

If they cant kept track of all the people here illegally, people claiming benefits for people who dont exist and keep track of highly sensitive information on laptops my remap seems safe, failing that like a lot of people do for services anyway, put it back to standard via the programmer.

Its just too complicated, and no I dont know it for a fact but what chance to the government stand against devious and tech savvy petrolheads when searching for our "Remaps of Mass Destruction"

The important difference is that illegal immigrants can't be made to pay for a test to see if they're here illegally and can't be fined more cash when they fail the test.

Unfortunately Pistonheads, even tech-savvy ones, can and that is why we're a target.

[youngsyr]

300bhp/ton said:

And in short it just lunacy to want to check a map for any sensible purpose that an MoT should be looking for.

If you are to ban this, then you'd also have to ban everything car tuning or performance related. No more exhaust, intakes, induction kits, cams, ported heads, different engines, different fuels, nitrous oxide and so on.

I never said it was practical or sensible, just that it was possible.

You seem to think that it is inpractical, non-sensical and impossible, the last bit is what I disagree with.

[youngsyr]

ben_h100 said:

Is there ever the danger (and I'm talking years down the line here), that when taking your car for a MOT, the garage would simply plug their laptop into your OBD port and `reflash` your ECU map back to standard, wiping any map you have on there?

Like an `all cars will be standard` vision set out by the government?

To what extent are engine modifications banned in Germany? (As stated by a previous poster).

Again, possible (at least on cars with OBDII and later), but not likely.

The liability issues if they brick your ECU, which is an expensive part, would probably preclude it.

Years ago you would have to take your ECU apart and substitute micro-chips etc to be able to remap them, it wouldn't take much for a manufacturer to go back to this type of set up and make it extremely difficult for an ECU to be stealthily remapped, if they were so inclined.

Even then you could still sneakily alter your car's performance by adjusting the signals going into the ECU, as many piggyback units used to do.

The bottom line is though that no matter how clever a manufacturer gets in locking up their ECUs, there is a lot of money to be made in working out how to unlockthem and there are very smart people out there with the inclination to try.

[youngsyr]

Dracoro said:

Rockatansky said:

aeropilot said:

Warnings about this stared a number of years back in various motoring organisations, but essentially the 'modding' industry have adopted the typical 'oestrich' syndrome and all the while bit by bit....we are creaping towards it.

I never miss an opportunity to quote Martin Niemoller:

In his world, was EVERYONE a socialist, trade unionist or jew?

Were there NO people from the middle or right? No christians, muslims etc.?

Not many muslims, I wouldn't have thought, he was a Christian and there were plenty of people on the right... unfortunately they were Nazis and in power.