Track car/windscreen MOT question.

[carlosvalderrama]

Bit of a strange question this, so bear with me...!

I have an MGF which is quite heavily modified for the track, it's caged and stripped and so on. It's occurred to me recently that I may be able to junk the screen, A posts, wiper mech and all the ancillaries.

So the question is, as it's still road legal at the minute, can I pass an MOT with no windscreen at all? I've pored over the regs and there are a number of checks to be made on the screen, but no clear mention of the requirement for one.

I've had mixed advice on both sides, but I know of no-one who has done this or something like it before. Can anyone help?

[jagracer]

Good question, I'd refuse to test it on the grounds it's not safe for me to drive it.

[carlosvalderrama]

That's another thing I'd not thought of!

Obviously I'd be using my lid in it all the time, but I can't assume an MOT tester would.

Although at the last MOT it wasn't so low it wouldn't get on the rollers, so it never left the garage.

[spdpug98]

There are plenty of kit cars out there without windscreens that all pass SVA / IVA & MOT's, so I can't see there being a problem

[jagracer]

Ah, hang on brain's not in gear, I forgot it's an open car, have you removed the screen and frame work? If so I wouldn't worry but if the frame was still on it'd be more of a case of covering my arse as far as VOSA are concerned.

[Chris71]

You should be fine. There's no legal requirement for a screen.

Plus if you don't have a screen you obviously don't need wipers and washers; I'm fairly sure both are a legal requirement if you do.

[casbar]

I have a full cage and no screen on my Caterham, and its never failed an MOT.

[carlosvalderrama]

Jagracer, yes, by the time I'd be done there would be nothing there but Rollcage tubes roughly where the A pillars were.

Thanks for all the replies, a lot more positive than I was thinking!

[MGRacer]

carlosvalderrama said:

Bit of a strange question this, so bear with me...!

I have an MGF which is quite heavily modified for the track, it's caged and stripped and so on. It's occurred to me recently that I may be able to junk the screen, A posts, wiper mech and all the ancillaries.

So the question is, as it's still road legal at the minute, can I pass an MOT with no windscreen at all? I've pored over the regs and there are a number of checks to be made on the screen, but no clear mention of the requirement for one.

I've had mixed advice on both sides, but I know of no-one who has done this or something like it before. Can anyone help?

I have to ask one question, why would you want to?

[TorqueRacing]

MGRacer said:

carlosvalderrama said:

Bit of a strange question this, so bear with me...!

I have an MGF which is quite heavily modified for the track, it's caged and stripped and so on. It's occurred to me recently that I may be able to junk the screen, A posts, wiper mech and all the ancillaries.

So the question is, as it's still road legal at the minute, can I pass an MOT with no windscreen at all? I've pored over the regs and there are a number of checks to be made on the screen, but no clear mention of the requirement for one.

I've had mixed advice on both sides, but I know of no-one who has done this or something like it before. Can anyone help?

I have to ask one question, why would you want to?

I would guess weight as thats the main reason why I removed mine from the Caterham. On a 130bhp seven it added about 10mph to the top speed and was much more fun as you felt everything!

One thing though, on a 7 it is not part of the structure whereas the MGF on the other hand may benefit from the windscreen adding rigidity/strength. Yor cage will compensate somewhat but you may find issues with flex around the bulkhead.

[dellow]

The tester would have to pass it as if it's not fitted then it can't be tested, and your right if you remove the screen the you can junk the wipers and washers too.

If I where you I would add a small aero screen as even a 2" screen will eliminate a lot of wind buffeting

[carlosvalderrama]

You're right there, it's going to need some investigation to make sure it's not going to act like there's a hinge in the middle afterwards. The screen itself will provide a significant amount of lateral stiffness to the shell in this area, losing it could make it parralellogram a little. It'll be an opportunity to extend the cage to the front turrets at least, and some cross bracing in this area may help. If I go for it, a couple of perspex uprights will be going on to compensate a little.

As for why, well mass is the main reason, windscreens are very heavy. But I also have a bit of a 'thing' for screenless cars. My dream garage contains an SLR Stirling moss, a euro spec Renault Sport Spyder and one of those concept TT's audi did with a miniscule screen.

Thanks for all the assistance, it'll be a late autumn project as I don't want to ruin the summer by making a mess of it now, so I'll assess the structural impact in the next few months.

[MGRacer]

Well, I admire someone that is up for a challenge and it certainly could look interesting.

MG Rover have done it before so it may be worth tracking down the cars (in a museum) and see what they did differently: http://www.mgf.ultimatemg.com/group1/MGF_concepts/...

Best of luck.

This is what my race car looked like with no bonnet!! PMSL

[GC8]

jagracer said:

Good question, I'd refuse to test it on the grounds it's not safe for me to drive it.

Is this a valid reason for refusal? Why would you need to drive a two wheel drive car? As far as Im aware I dont need a windscreen to pass an MOT (and VOSA have agreed), nor wipers/washers - and this on a closed car.

[jagracer]

GC8 said:

jagracer said:

Good question, I'd refuse to test it on the grounds it's not safe for me to drive it.

Is this a valid reason for refusal? Why would you need to drive a two wheel drive car? As far as Im aware I dont need a windscreen to pass an MOT (and VOSA have agreed), nor wipers/washers - and this on a closed car.

If you read one of my later posts you'd see I re-read the OP and said I was wrong. But as far as a refusal to test goes, I could need to drive the car to test the brakes if there is a problem using rollers.

[mr_fibuli]

jagracer said:

Good question, I'd refuse to test it on the grounds it's not safe for me to drive it.

I had to take my MOT tester out for a blat in my screenless Westy after passing the test

[GC8]

jagracer said:

GC8 said:

jagracer said:

Good question, I'd refuse to test it on the grounds it's not safe for me to drive it.

Is this a valid reason for refusal? Why would you need to drive a two wheel drive car? As far as Im aware I dont need a windscreen to pass an MOT (and VOSA have agreed), nor wipers/washers - and this on a closed car.

If you read one of my later posts you'd see I re-read the OP and said I was wrong. But as far as a refusal to test goes, I could need to drive the car to test the brakes if there is a problem using rollers.

I did see that, but you seemed to be tying-in that the car was open. My contention was that cars dont need windscreens and I was also questioning whether the slim possibility that youd have to use a decelerometer would allow you to refuse to test the vehicle. Of course, had this been an Impreza Turbo (or any other vehicle requiring a Tapley meter) then Id have understood - sort of.

[Gerald-S1]

So?

Did you do it?
Can it be done?.....