Mansfield
|
| posted on 17/8/06 at 08:31 PM |
|
|
Minimum brake pad thickness for MOT
Hi
The in-Laws 96P Corsa is in for MOT Saturday morning, so I had a look over it tonight.
The (front) pads are down to about 2mm. Rest of the car will sail through.
I will struggle to find the time to fix them pre-MOT, it really needs disks as well.
These are the original pads, car has done a genuine 30K, so I am not worried if I can't do them for a month. I dont want to fail as I think its
full test fee for a retest, I would rather spend that money on the car in the first place.
MOT - Pass or Fail ?
Thanks, David
|
|
|
|
|
theconrodkid
|
| posted on 17/8/06 at 08:44 PM |
|
|
when i did mot,s i would fail it for that amount of pad...and if it was a jap/french car/the owner shot animals/birds
who cares who wins
pass the pork pies
|
|
|
andybod
|
| posted on 17/8/06 at 08:52 PM |
|
|
the legal requirement used to be 1 mm min but could have changed now but personally if visibly that low 2mm i'de have failed them as well theres
not alot of material left at 2mm think of how quick heat would build and brake fade
|
|
|
ch1ll1
|
| posted on 17/8/06 at 08:56 PM |
|
|
id fail them at that !
|
|
|
Danozeman
|
| posted on 17/8/06 at 09:02 PM |
|
|
As a rule if the linings thinner than the metal plate then change them. Most places i know would fail it for that.
Corsa pads only take 10 mins to change and are probably only a tenner.
Dan
Built the purple peril!! Let the modifications begin!!
http://www.eastangliankitcars.co.uk
|
|
|
Mansfield
|
| posted on 17/8/06 at 09:03 PM |
|
|
Thats Pass 0 - Fail 4 (Fail 7 if you include the three 'xtra' from theconrodkid - EDIT did I imagine them??).
Bugger.
I was hoping for an advise instead of a fail.
Thanks for your help.
[Edited on 17/8/06 by Mansfield]
[Edited on 17/8/06 by Mansfield]
|
|
|
Peteff
|
| posted on 17/8/06 at 11:13 PM |
|
|
If the pad's been in there 9 years it's probably separating from the backing anyway. I'd change them for safety's sake, the
amount of water they've seen will be rusting them apart.
yours, Pete
I went into the RSPCA office the other day. It was so small you could hardly swing a cat in there.
|
|
|
Steve&Steve
|
| posted on 18/8/06 at 07:37 AM |
|
|
This website...
http://www.motuk.co.uk/mcmanual_320.htm
says 1.5mm in the 'reason for rejection' column under 'f'. (NOTE 1.5mm at ANY point)
I would mention it to the tester that you know the pads are nearing the limit but still within MOT guidelines. Ask him to look at them first just to
confirm.
I think without saying something they may get failed as in most cases it would be in the customers interest to have them changed by the garage rather
than put back on the road for another 12months.
Steve.
|
|
|
02GF74
|
| posted on 18/8/06 at 08:54 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by andybod
theres not alot of material left at 2mm think of how quick heat would build and brake fade
surely the friction material is not as good at conducting heat as metal so having a thinnner pad allows the heat to reach the backing eaiser so less
heating up?
(although passing heat to the caliper that way is not good IMO)
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 18/8/06 at 09:55 AM |
|
|
Not strickly speaking a fail but an advisory, however the tester could refuse to carry out a roller or road brake test on the grounds to do such could
damage the brake disc.
Because of long service intervals o modern cars and to prolong the life of the caliper my general policy on brake pads is to change before the pad
wears to 50% thickness
[Edited on 18/8/06 by britishtrident]
|
|
|
