MOT Time Again

timber tailored · Unread post by **timber tailored** » 08 Apr 2008, 22:19

Hi Folks,

It's that time again for my Xantia 2.1 SX. Last year she did pass but there was a recommendation which hopefully somebody can translate for me. What does this recommendation mean and I quote "Front both rear bushes bonded suspension deteriorated but can function as intended (2.4.F.3)" Any assistance would be gratefullyappreciated.

Brian

jeremy · Unread post by **jeremy** » 08 Apr 2008, 22:51

I think it means wishbone inner back bushes have deteriorated. Remedy - replace.

Testers handbook is here - look for chapter and verse - they have to quote it when failing.

http://www.motuk.co.uk/default.asp

JohnD · Unread post by **JohnD** » 09 Apr 2008, 08:47

Even if you use a different MOT station the advisory will appear as soon as the tester logs on your car. If the advisory hasn't been attended to, it'll fail.

Unread post by **RichardW** » 09 Apr 2008, 09:13

It won't necessarily fail on a non attended to item - the test is based on condition on the day only - however, the tester is likely to pay special attention to anything that has previously been mentioned. 'Excessive play' is pretty much a personal thing - my ZX passed last year with what I would have termed excessive play in a wishbone bush, and excessive noise in a wheel bearing, but failed on a slightly manky exhaust

I would take it and see - changing wishbone bushes in a Xantia is not a job to taken (too) lightly.

MikeT · Unread post by **MikeT** » 09 Apr 2008, 09:35

JohnD wrote:Even if you use a different MOT station the advisory will appear as soon as the tester logs on your car. If the advisory hasn't been attended to, it'll fail.

I think you may be mistaken there. I had a car fail on several items and also given several advisories. When I took it to another MOT station to get a quote for the work, the tester said he didn't agree it was a failure so I booked it with them and none of the previous failures or advisories were repeated! It passed with flying colours and the conclusion I draw is the first tester was a rip-off merchant.