New emissions legislation

[dig123]

There is UK Gov consultation out re emissions and modifications to cars that could effect emissions, with fines for modifications failed MoT s. Probably worth a read and a response before it is too late.

Octane focuses on classic cars but would also impact on modern cars with modifications.

https://www.octane-magazine.com/articles/classic-c...

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/in-use...

Edited by dig123 on Wednesday 26th August 21:36

[jfdi]

"Around two‑thirds of Euro 5 and Euro 6 diesel cars were emitting more than 3 times the level allowed."

So have two-thirds have been poorly maintained or had DPFs etc removed, or could it be the manufactures quoted figures to meet the legislation were nonsense.
New legislation will just result in lots of perfectly good cars being scrapped, but then that seems to be what they want to keep the masses spending, despite the manufacture of a new car being far more polluting than keeping an old car running.

[ATG]

The problem is that the "perfectly good cars" aren't perfectly good at all. And the argument that it is more environmentally damaging to replace them doesn't actually stack up. I haven't looked at the proposal, so it may be bks, but those aren't good arguments.

[John D.]

Emissions.

[camel_landy]

Lies, damn lies, and statistics... So who are we supposed to believe?

On the one side, we're being told "Around two‑thirds of Euro 5 and Euro 6 diesel cars were emitting more than 3 times the level allowed.", yet only last week we get a report to say that ULEZ is working. (I'm not going to bother splitting hairs about the BEV stats in there... You know what I mean.)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1l1r1zne1ro

M

[Dewi 2]

During the course of a year, my 4.7 creates fewer emissions than a Ford Fiesta.
Not reflected in road tax though, but the wasters never obtain the full annual amount from me.

Recently I had a thought about the considerable reduction to my insurance premium last year, now under £200.
I wonder whether the insurer might now be including MoT mileage figures, as part of their risk calculations?

[Grey_Area]

dig123 said:

There is UK Gov consultation out re omissions and modifications to cars that could effect omissions, with fines for modifications failed MoT s. Probably worth a read and a response before it is too late.

Octane focuses on classic cars but would also impact on modern cars with modifications.

https://www.octane-magazine.com/articles/classic-c...

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/in-use...

They've left something out.

[LTP]

I have just completed the on-line consultation response. I suggest others do the same rather than wait for the likes of AMOC. I suggest the focus should be on the impracticality of maintaining the original emissions performance outside of the life of the original equipment, especially as the OEM has no obligation to continue to supply parts until the last vehicle is no longer roadworthy.

I'll leave it up to those who have deleted EGR, catalysts or had a remap, etc. how they respond on those issues (many of which would technically fail the current MOT if spotted).

Up to you guys, of course, but at least you'd have done something.

[LTP]

camel_landy said:

Lies, damn lies, and statistics... So who are we supposed to believe?

On the one side, we're being told "Around two?thirds of Euro 5 and Euro 6 diesel cars were emitting more than 3 times the level allowed.", yet only last week we get a report to say that ULEZ is working. (I'm not going to bother splitting hairs about the BEV stats in there... You know what I mean.)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1l1r1zne1ro

M

The two things can be true at the same time.

[Square Leg]

Grey_Area said:

They've left something out.

[Terminator X]

This reads to me as just a ruse to get ICE off the road. What about the poor people who can't afford new or newish 2nd hand cars ...

"Even with the rapid uptake of zero emission vehicles (ZEVs), large numbers of internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles will remain in use for many years. This highlights the need for continued government action, as the 2030 and 2035 phase‑outs alone will not resolve in‑use emissions from the existing fleet."

TX.

[Jon39]

Terminator X said:

This reads to me as just a ruse to get ICE off the road.
What about the poor people who can't afford new, or newish 2nd hand cars ...

Or:-

- The huge number of people who live in terraced houses, without driveways for charging.
- Those who are not persuaded by the tax-payer funded, or manufacturer financial inducements.
- Those who detest huge, wasteful depreciation.
- Those who dislike the enormous complexity of EVs, which if unlucky, result in massive repair bills or vehicles being written off prematurely as uneconomic repairs.

Here is one example. A short scrape underneath the EV.
Probably just an out of sight blemish for an ICE car, but this 2025 Ford Explorer was written off. It still looked brand new.

How many EV buyers really know about battery cooling systems?
That can be one of the common causes of expensive problems ?


https://youtube.com/shorts/Id-mrexiBAA?is=Pp-TbR_J...








If you have a privately owned EV, keeping a note of George's contact details might be a wise idea. He resolves issues that main dealers want to charge enormous amounts (in this instance it would have been £35,000, hence the write off).

[Jon39]

Here is one for the government enquiry to drool over.

A car built in Detroit in 1911, now in the UK.
9.2 litre V8 aeroplane engine and as you can see, no nonsense in the exhaust system.
In fact nothing in the exhaust system.

Looking at those exhaust pipes, probably fairly loud, but road legal and taxed until January 2027.

[LTP]

No need to go abroad.



It was at the recent PH Annual Service in the hangar building. Built in the UK, taxed until next year.



1933 Rolls Royce Phantom The Grenadier fitted with a Meteor 27,000cc V12 engine.
This car was originally a Phantom II with a Park Ward saloon body, and belonged to Baron Sir George Riddell who owned the News of the World and other newspapers. At some point it ended up being stored in a field for many years but was rescued in 2018. The car was a wreck but chassis perfect. During a 5 year restoration it was fitted with a Meteor Rolls Royce V12 27litre non supercharged engine, used in tanks and similar to the unit that powered the WWII Spitfire, Hurricane and Lancaster. The body now an aluminium Boat Tail.
860 BHP.
1960 lb-ft Torque.
Uses a litre of petrol a minute on tick-over and averages 3mpg.
Weighs 3.5 Tonnes and has 3 radiators.

One other bonus over similarly-engined cars is that as it has a genuine Rolls-Royce chassis it can correctly wear the Palladian grille, the "RR" badge and "Spirit of Ecstasy" mascot

Edited by LTP on Wednesday 26th August 19:03

[AdamV12V]

I d love to hear the thoughts from all the many AM owners who have either a BR style primary decat or a secondary decat.

Interestingly AM sold the secondary decat / bypass kits themselves and some cars such as the VH2 gen AMR V12 Vantage S came with that factory pre-installed, despite falling under the same type approval as cars which had it fitted at the time of said type approval!

My car falls into such a category having had the titanium exhaust and bypass pipes fitted several years ago and genuinely having passed several mot s with them fitted.
Under the strict rules of the mot it should fail having been modified even though it actually meets the necessary emissions outputs.

How would a future owner of such a vehicle be reasonably expected to know that such a car could cause them to get into trouble with the police should there be reason to stop the vehicle.

And here s another consequential dynamic arising - will insurance companies then use this as an excuse not to pay out on claims if it turns out the vehicle no longer complied with such legislation and thus was deemed illegal to be on the road.

At the moment it is much simpler, it either has or does not have a current mot. This new proposed legislation introduces a whole new dynamic that in effect the mot standard could be dynamically reassessed at any time and the car demand not fit to be on the road!

Utterly bonkers proposed legislation!!!

[V8 Minotaur]

I have to admit, my GPF insert business hasn’t really taken off yet, but the parts are cheap and I’m prepared to keep at it 👍

[V8 Minotaur]

AdamV12V said:

At the moment it is much simpler, it either has or does not have a current mot. This new proposed legislation introduces a whole new dynamic that in effect the mot standard could be dynamically reassessed at any time and the car demand not fit to be on the road!

Errrm, I think you’ll find that a GPF delete is already illegal. You are altering the product from how it was originally type approved for a particular market.

This is possible only if you then obtain a design certificate from a notified body stating that the changes provide an alternative way of achieving the same effect as the original type approval.

I’m pretty sure this has never been done.

Hence why they are sold with a not for road use disclaimer.

Nothing new there.

That’s not to say I haven’t seriously considered a GPF delete myself. However, on the AM6 Vantage the filters are visible and not behind the front under trays. It would be fairly easy to link the VIN to a GPF fitted? MOT question.

[Dewi 2]

AdamV12V said:

I d love to hear the thoughts from all the many AM owners, who have either a BR style primary decat, or a secondary decat. ...

I am one.
Somebody would have to be extremely clever to detect the modification though.

MoT emissions are exactly the same, before and after.
External appearance of the cats is identical in every detail to factory, no welding involved.
Nothing at all to make anyone suspicious, but they would need to remove the cats and look inside with a boroscope.

If I remember prior to MoTs, I move the hidden switch to valves closed.
On the occasions that I have forgotten to do that, no one has made any comments about the wonderful sound, but have said, "She is mint".

[Dewi 2]

AdamV12V said:

This new proposed legislation introduces a whole new dynamic that in effect the mot standard could be dynamically reassessed at any time and the car deemed not fit to be on the road!

Before proposing new legislation, would it be sensible to enforce existing legislation.

Steal £199 of goods from a shop, no enforcement.
Operate a barbers shop, with no customers, bank £thousands cash each week, no enforcement.
Enter this country illegally, no enforcement.
Every day more dreadful acts are revealed. Five youngsters in a car. We are told that four of them had a total of 37 prosecutions, but still not put in jail. They knew they were outside the law.
You can add many other examples.

Drive at 24 mph in a 20 mph limit, then there is enforcement, £100 fine, thank you very much.

We are seeing this country going down hill fast.

[Dewi 2]

LTP said:

I have just completed the on-line consultation response. I suggest others do the same ...

Do you have much experience of government, or council public consultations?

The normal pattern usually involves loaded questions, and then ignoring the public response anyway.
Decisions are made before public consultations.