DoT Consulting on expecting the same emissions output as new
Discussion
Interesting one, not sure if this has been raised here yet. The Department of Transport have launched a consultation on changing the emissions requirements for in use vehicles. See here.
As I interpret it, there is a loophole around some newer EURO classes of cars, but the proposal would be to shift cars to having to pass the same emissions standard as they would have as-new?
This strikes me as the death knell for any catalysed second hand vehicle that sees an MOT emissions test.
Could a hypothetical car on 100,000 miles pass a homologation Euro 6 test even with a brand new cat? Seems unlikely to me.
I'm all for cracking down on people rolling coal, or de-catting/DPF-deleting brand new, hypothetically low emission cars, but this strikes me as a step too far for those simply trying to keep an old enthusiast car roadworthy.
As I interpret it, there is a loophole around some newer EURO classes of cars, but the proposal would be to shift cars to having to pass the same emissions standard as they would have as-new?
This strikes me as the death knell for any catalysed second hand vehicle that sees an MOT emissions test.
Could a hypothetical car on 100,000 miles pass a homologation Euro 6 test even with a brand new cat? Seems unlikely to me.
I'm all for cracking down on people rolling coal, or de-catting/DPF-deleting brand new, hypothetically low emission cars, but this strikes me as a step too far for those simply trying to keep an old enthusiast car roadworthy.
Edited by LewisA10 on Thursday 27th August 17:27
Having read the consultation proposal in detail, I have these observations:
1. Yes absolutely, a properly-maintained standard car at eg 100,000 should be able to pass the emissions testing level it met when type approved, since that is the requirement baked into the test.
2. I agree there is a current loophole in the law where cars which have been modified with eg decat, EGR blanked off or programmed out, Adblue programmed out can and do sometimes get through MoT (because of the way they test emissions) yet be far more polluting, which is a problem which ought to be addressed.
3. A side effect will be that certain modified cars - like engine conversions, high-power increases (not just a remap) will innocently get caught out by this. But older modified cars (pre Euro emissions era) will be fine.
1. Yes absolutely, a properly-maintained standard car at eg 100,000 should be able to pass the emissions testing level it met when type approved, since that is the requirement baked into the test.
2. I agree there is a current loophole in the law where cars which have been modified with eg decat, EGR blanked off or programmed out, Adblue programmed out can and do sometimes get through MoT (because of the way they test emissions) yet be far more polluting, which is a problem which ought to be addressed.
3. A side effect will be that certain modified cars - like engine conversions, high-power increases (not just a remap) will innocently get caught out by this. But older modified cars (pre Euro emissions era) will be fine.
paul_c123 said:
Having read the consultation proposal in detail, I have these observations:
1. Yes absolutely, a properly-maintained standard car at eg 100,000 should be able to pass the emissions testing level it met when type approved, since that is the requirement baked into the test.
This is the bit I see the issue with. As far as I understand, while it varies based on fuel type & age, the emissions test you do at an MOT currently is not the same as the EURO standard it was tested to when homologated. This would be much more stringent and harder to pass. Considering that many cars with 10/15+ year old cats can need some fettling through a current test this seems a bit alarming to me.1. Yes absolutely, a properly-maintained standard car at eg 100,000 should be able to pass the emissions testing level it met when type approved, since that is the requirement baked into the test.
CoolHands said:
They ve got to get us into evs somehow.
Or it's simply they haven't updated the law since Euro 4/5 changes as it states, even covers that they expect tailpipe emissions from the fleet to be a thing to go on for a long time despite the phase out to EV'sAlso I think this is the bit they are really after along with poorly maintained vehicles -
"Looking more anecdotally at modifications being made to the ECS of vehicles, search engine history suggests that there are many businesses offering vehicle modifications with names such as ‘DPF delete’ or ‘AdBlue delete’. These sorts of changes mean that vehicles will emit pollutants well in excess of the limits set for new vehicles.
The market surveillance unit (MSU), based within the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA), receives intelligence and reports associated with activity that would be considered modification of emissions systems. In 2024, MSU received 331 intelligence reports associated with emissions modifications. We suspect that such reports are likely to be only a small proportion of the activity."
paul_c123 said:
Having read the consultation proposal in detail, I have these observations:
....
3. A side effect will be that certain modified cars - like engine conversions, high-power increases (not just a remap) will innocently get caught out by this. But older modified cars (pre Euro emissions era) will be fine.
not sure modifying a car and increasing its emissions is seen as 'innocent'.....
3. A side effect will be that certain modified cars - like engine conversions, high-power increases (not just a remap) will innocently get caught out by this. But older modified cars (pre Euro emissions era) will be fine.
See: https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&... in the Classics forum for more information
Having just re-read the government release, it seems to me only to be relating to Euro 5 & 6 compliant cars.
Older vehicles with exhaust systems over 62,000 miles or 5 years old, or paralytic convertors over 100,000 miles old, are not affected by the new regulations.
So my 2011 130,000 mile range Rover would seem to be exempt?
I will now go and read the link you kindly posted
Older vehicles with exhaust systems over 62,000 miles or 5 years old, or paralytic convertors over 100,000 miles old, are not affected by the new regulations.
So my 2011 130,000 mile range Rover would seem to be exempt?
I will now go and read the link you kindly posted
and31 said:
Do people with modified cars that currently pass MOT emissions tests have anything to worry about?
It depends on how they plan to test for the things they are looking for. A DPF delete might pass a current MoT, especially on an older vehicle but there is fairly straightforward equipment available that would pick up a missing or faulty DPF .
A deleted cat on a petrol car should fail the current MoT.
An EGR or Adblue delete shouldn’t make any difference to an MoT and testing for NOx emissions is considerably harder to do in a universally consistent way than the current gas/smoke tests.
The consultation also makes it clear that systems that are not working to spec through lack of maintenance will be equally culpable. Given that the majority of deletes are done as a reaction to the crazy unreliability of some of these emission systems and the four figure repair bills that they generate, this may be very unpopular to enforce as well as technically complicated.
LewisA10 said:
paul_c123 said:
Having read the consultation proposal in detail, I have these observations:
1. Yes absolutely, a properly-maintained standard car at eg 100,000 should be able to pass the emissions testing level it met when type approved, since that is the requirement baked into the test.
This is the bit I see the issue with. As far as I understand, while it varies based on fuel type & age, the emissions test you do at an MOT currently is not the same as the EURO standard it was tested to when homologated. This would be much more stringent and harder to pass. Considering that many cars with 10/15+ year old cats can need some fettling through a current test this seems a bit alarming to me.1. Yes absolutely, a properly-maintained standard car at eg 100,000 should be able to pass the emissions testing level it met when type approved, since that is the requirement baked into the test.
They're asking the real world to match (potentially manipulated but certainly controlled) laboratory testing?
Scrap every car on first MOT, then. One step close to us not being 'allowed' to own our own transportation (by 'allowed' they make ownership so difficult that it becomes easier to rent by the hour).
I think it is poorly thought out at the moment.
It is well documented that manufacturers cheated those tests so how can you be expected to keep your car to that standard if the car never actually met it?
Even then, who has done the testing to check if it is possible to have a well maintained car that meets those standards.
Where replacement oem parts are needed to meet the standard, how do you buy them if they are obsolete on an older vehicle?
What difference does it actually make given the number of combustion engines cars will continue to reduce each year?
It is well documented that manufacturers cheated those tests so how can you be expected to keep your car to that standard if the car never actually met it?
Even then, who has done the testing to check if it is possible to have a well maintained car that meets those standards.
Where replacement oem parts are needed to meet the standard, how do you buy them if they are obsolete on an older vehicle?
What difference does it actually make given the number of combustion engines cars will continue to reduce each year?
Surely a number of years wear on camshafts, engines themselves, ignition systems etc are all going to affect the exact emissions produced by any car?
The impliction of the document is that all MOT testing stations will have the full and exact emissions statstics for every variant of every car and be able to test that our cars at say 10 years old are as good or better than those statistics?
It's not making a lot of sense to me.
The stuff about still meeting Euro 5 & 6 on cars that were made to those emissions levels sort of makes sense, as it makes sense that, if a car qualifies as exempt from ULEZ charges then it should actually be compliant every time it enters the ULEZ zone. I can imagine that ULEZ zones will very soon only accept cars that are Euro 5 or 6 compliant. It is in those cities that the highest concentration of fumes exists even with regulation, so it's those kids and asthmatics we need to protect. I have completely given up on ever visiting a ULEZ zone again in my lifetime other than by train. So be it.
Where I live, with fields (still not yet solar panel fields) all around me, I think I have more risk of having my air polluted by the arses of 27 pedigree cattle in the field immediately behind my house, than by passing traffic on the country lane 50 metres away
The impliction of the document is that all MOT testing stations will have the full and exact emissions statstics for every variant of every car and be able to test that our cars at say 10 years old are as good or better than those statistics?
It's not making a lot of sense to me.
The stuff about still meeting Euro 5 & 6 on cars that were made to those emissions levels sort of makes sense, as it makes sense that, if a car qualifies as exempt from ULEZ charges then it should actually be compliant every time it enters the ULEZ zone. I can imagine that ULEZ zones will very soon only accept cars that are Euro 5 or 6 compliant. It is in those cities that the highest concentration of fumes exists even with regulation, so it's those kids and asthmatics we need to protect. I have completely given up on ever visiting a ULEZ zone again in my lifetime other than by train. So be it.
Where I live, with fields (still not yet solar panel fields) all around me, I think I have more risk of having my air polluted by the arses of 27 pedigree cattle in the field immediately behind my house, than by passing traffic on the country lane 50 metres away
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff