tonyg3nwl Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 My van has passed mot but with a couple of advisories. One relates to nearside rear stoplight, saying the a couple of leds have failed. The regs say lhat a loss of brilliance of less than 50 percent is within limits, so it passed Question. Does Autodruise stargazèr 2009 have led based lighting..I was under the impression that it was conventional bulbs...secondly how does one remove the fixing to get inside it, to change the bulb or fix the leds. Anyone know the answer Also, where can I get suitable replacement bulb ( led type) Tonyg3nwl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyg3nwl Posted March 25, 2017 Author Share Posted March 25, 2017 Hi folks, quick update.. have just examined the stoplight problem, and happy to report that the problem was bad contact on base of bulb due to corrosion. Holder cleaned up, bulb replaced and magic, the "missing leds" have magically reappeared. I would have been furious if it had beendeclared a failure in the first instance, with resultant retesting, by a tester who doesnt know what is the difference between a bulb and leds. This will reported back to the mot testing station. Tony3nwl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StuartO Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 Aren't you being a bit ungracious here? The MOT Test is conducted without dismantling and if the requirement is to check whether there is loss of brilliance and there was, surely the Tester did right by making the advisory note. He is simply telling you that something needs attention. And if you had checked your lights and dealt with the dodgy light before the Test, that wouldn't have been necessary, would it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyg3nwl Posted March 25, 2017 Author Share Posted March 25, 2017 My point was that the tester cant tell the difference between a bulb, and a set of led. He incorrectly advised that some leds had failed... Yes I should have checked befor the test, and would have changed the bulb, or cleaned up the contact, but the tester ought to know the difference and report accurately. It makes me wonder what else he did incorrectly, . Tonyg3nwl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 Probably lots, Tony. Why not take it back and ask him to fail it? To be frank, I'd think I'd be grateful that it was passed, and be investigating where the water that caused the corrosion got in, so that I could prevent a reoccurrence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve928 Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 I'm surprised that a 50% reduction in brilliance is allowed. What a soft nation we are when it comes to vehicle condition and the testing thereof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PJay Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 Don't know where Tony takes his van for MOT. We take ours to the local commercial Fiat dealer, where the van is small fry compared to the big boys they test. PJay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bodach Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 I eventually got an mot (after some welding) and both the fail and pass notices have an advisory that the back marker lights dim slightly when something else is turned on. Nobody else can see any problem so it is just a matter of opinion so I ignore it. In any case the marker lights need to work if present but could be removed as not really needed and legal without. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Dave Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 I have never known a partial failure of a standard bulb, so the question is how could an area of the stoplight be failing to light up are there several bulbs? or could it have been that the original bulb had become black in part and this had caused a partial masking of the light emitted in a particular area leading to the confusion. No need to be furious, the tester appears to have been quite fair by bringing this to your attention. He did not fail it which would have been more hassle than the advisory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted March 26, 2017 Share Posted March 26, 2017 Steve928 - 2017-03-25 4:57 PM I'm surprised that a 50% reduction in brilliance is allowed. What a soft nation we are when it comes to vehicle condition and the testing thereof. The MOT regulations for stop-lamps are listed here https://www.mot-testing.service.gov.uk/documents/manuals/m4s01000201.htm Rejection will occur if a stop-lamp is "inoperative or less than 50% of the light sources illuminating” with (presumably) the latter relating to LED lamps. The attached photo is (apparently) of a 2009 Stargazer’s rear and all the round lamps look like common-or-garden ‘bulb’ type. However, if I didn’t know whether the lights on my own vehicles used bulbs or LEDs, I would not be critical of an MOT tester misidentifying the type. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyg3nwl Posted March 26, 2017 Author Share Posted March 26, 2017 Hi folks, thanks for all comments As already posted, faulty bulb holder gave high resistance connection.. holder cleaned up, new bulb fitted. Now have 20 get new spare...trip to halfords...??? Tonyg3nwl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robinhood Posted March 26, 2017 Share Posted March 26, 2017 ...the high-level stop light is LED, however. Given the confusion, and assuming the advisory is worded as it is, I'd be inclined to get someone to stand on the brake pedal, and see whether all the leds in that light up (particularly at the nearside end). ;-) (For clarification, and with reference to Derek's picture, I believe the Jokon-type high-level brake light use clear plastic with red leds - unlike the Hella units - and there have been known failures). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StuartO Posted March 26, 2017 Share Posted March 26, 2017 I suppose human nature being what it is, we don't really like getting advisories when we have an MOT Test, so we feel resentment about them, like getting a black mark we feel we didn't really deserve. It's quite difficult to regard them as constructive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 Robinhood - 2017-03-26 10:02 AM ...the high-level stop light is LED, however. Given the confusion, and assuming the advisory is worded as it is, I'd be inclined to get someone to stand on the brake pedal, and see whether all the leds in that light up (particularly at the nearside end). ;-) (For clarification, and with reference to Derek's picture, I believe the Jokon-type high-level brake light use clear plastic with red leds - unlike the Hella units - and there have been known failures). Tony’s original posting said "My van has passed mot but with a couple of advisories. One relates to nearside rear stoplight, saying that a couple of leds have failed...” and (apparently) Tony identified that the nearside rear stoplight’s brightness was below par, cleaned up that light’s bulb-holder contacts and full brightness was restored. However, as you rightly say, the high-level brake-light is LED-type and the LEDs definitely do fail. The Hella LED high-level brake-light on my 2005 Hobby motorhome became unpredictable, sometimes illuminating at full brilliance with all its LEDs lit, other times illuminating dully and/or with some LEDs not lit. Replacing the brake-light would have been a challenge due to how Hobby had installed it, so when the motorhome went for its MOT in 2014 I mentioned the problem to the tester, saying that the light usually worked OK when the vehicle’s engine was running and what did he think? I added that, if he was unhappy with how the light was operating I would remove it before the test was carried out. Fortunately the Hobby was in a cooperative mood that day and the brake-light worked well enough to pass the MOT test and continued to work (after a fashion) until I sold the vehicle a few months later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul2 Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 Hi As a tester when you do the certificate you have a drop down list and you choose the closest text to the fault you've found. Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 These are advisory notice items relating to a car I used to own and that passed the MOT test in 2010 Advisory notice item(s) Front Suspension arm has slight play in a pin/bush (2.4.G.2) Front brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened (3.5.1i) Rear Brake linkage worn but not seriously weakened (3.5.1e) Rear Brake pipe slightly damaged (2.2.D.2b) Rear Exhaust has part of the system slightly deteriorated (7.1.1a) Offside Front Ball joint has slight play (2.2.B.1f) The ‘code’ (eg. 2.4.G.2) relates to a specific Reason for Rejection section in the MOT Inspection Manual and (as Paul says) the text is chosen from a predefined list. Just out of interest, it might be worth knowing EXACTLY what the advisory notice says about the stop-lamp on Tony’s motorhome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Salisbury Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 Did everyone miss it or is it me of the question how do you get at it as I have an Auto Cruise Pace and initially found it almost impossible to get the panel ofl to access the bulbs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 It was evident from Tony’s 2nd posting that access to the stop-lamp bulb had been gained, so advice on how to do this was no longer necessary. Your Pace is a panel-van conversion, so the method of accessing stop-light bulbs won’t be the same as for a coachbuilt Stargazer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.