Driving theory test - is this a fair question?

[wolosp]

My son has just taken his theory test. But a question that he was unsure of was something like this:
"If you were to push down on a corner of your car and release it, and the car's suspension bounced several times, what is the cause of this? Is it....
a) Low tyre pressures.
b) Faulty shock absorbers.
c) (some other possible reason)"

My son answered 'a'.

Now, I do not see the relevence of this question when establishing the suitability of a person to drive a car safely.
I can see what the writer of the question was getting at, but feel that the question should have been worded differently as not all experienced drivers, let alone novices, would know what a shock absorber did.
Being pedantic, it should have read 'damper' and not shock absorber .
I would suggest something like...."If you pushed down on a corner of your car and released it, and the car's suspension bounced several times, would this be normal - yes or no?"

Many drivers have no need to know how a car works etc,. but do need to recognise a fault.

He was extremely chuffed however, as this was his only incorrect answer .... smart !

[smeagol]

Now, I do not see the relevence of this question when establishing the suitability of a person to drive a car safely.

I would suggest something like...."If you pushed down on a corner of your car and released it, and the car's suspension bounced several times, would this be normal - yes or no?"

Many drivers have no need to know how a car works etc,. but do need to recognise a fault.

I think your last sentence hits the nail on the head. The fact is that the damper and other key areas of a car are an important part of car safety. I believe the test should test whether a driver can recognise faulty brakes, steering and suspension but agree with you that the question could be better worded (or that the answers could be better) such as

a) This is normal and shows the car is working correctly.
b) There is a fault with the car but is not serious. Car can be driven normally and the fault easily rectified at a normal service or by normal maintenance.
c) There is a fault and is serious. The car can be driven with caution but should be repaired as soon as possible.
d) The car has a serious dangerous fault and should not be driven.

Rather than a diagnosis of what the problem is.

>> Edited by smeagol on Wednesday 9th April 19:38

[planetdave]

Seems like a good question IMHO. Popularly dampers are shox and as such an important part of vehicle safety should have been mentioned by any ADI worth the cash. Also yes/no answers not allowed since any fule can say so/guess ( Q.do you know all 50 of the united states? A. Yes)

Do you really want more morons on the road

[smeagol]

Quite right dave, but an ADI is not a mechanic, a driver should be able to spot of a fault and gauge its seriousness but should not have to be able to diagnose the problem. Look at the questions on this forum (eg my suspension is making squeaking noise is this normal?)

>> Edited by smeagol on Wednesday 9th April 19:44