Mot

[alpenmac]

"Nigel", being a 1973 Stag, does not legally need an MOT: however in line with most members I have decided for peace of mind to have him tested annually anyway. I had hoped that he would pass with no advisories but no - see attached. We try to do the best for our pride & joys only to be foiled by ?over? protection.

[022Dave]

So does that also apply to underseal being present?

[jakesmig]

I don't see that as being an unreasonable comment, and my pal who is garage owner and MOT inspector says it isn't uncommon to see toy town repairs hidden behind lashings of underseal.
Not everybody is blatantly outstanding, conscientious and virtuous as us Stag owners.

[alpenmac]

Good point jakesmig, however it was MOTed at the same garage that did the waxoiling.

[MandM]

Arse covering, the next thing underside painted!

PS Thick underseal I could see but Wax oil !

[Ritchie6]

Arse covering, the next thing underside painted!

My cars underside is painted body colour (Delft Blue) and the inside of all the chassis members were waxoiled by the PO but nothing is showing and no parts are covered over to hide anything. Makes it very easy to see how good and corrosion free everything is. It's true that years ago layers of thick crud was daubed over chassis bits to cover up shoddy work,even places where fibreglass was used but surely those days are behind us aren't they?

Richard

[rwdstag]

I am working on my TR7 at the mo and finding the most unbelievable amount of crap covered up repairs however I know the stag is as good or better than came out Coventry
i think the mot thing is down to your capabilities
no short cuts etc everything checked and double checked
if you can do that then why pay for someone to tell you there is too much waxoil
Rich

[Andy S]

I recently saw an advisory on a modern car we were considering purchasing that stated the Tester was unable to check the engine because it was covered by a plastic panel.


Andy S.