IT’S A FAIR assumption that most people who own classic or vintage cars will look after them well and drive them only occasionally, writes JOHN CRADEN
According to research on old car usage here, undertaken in 2006 by the Irish Vintage and Veteran Car Club (IVVCC), 88 per cent of historic vehicles in Ireland are used less than three times a week, while 78 per cent travel no more than 2,000km a year.
These are some of the reasons why classic car insurance is a bit cheaper than for moderns, and also why a nominal rate of motor tax, at €48 a year, is levied on all cars first registered before 1980.
Less well known is the fact that any car over 30 years old is exempt from the legal requirement to have an NCT.
Yet owners can put an exempt classic in for a test voluntarily if they want to (see panel). The car will be tested according to much the same standards as a modern car except for exhaust emissions, which are exempt (for cars registered before January 1980) because the car manufacturer information on which the testers base the standards only goes back as far as October 1986.
Some minor variations in older cars are also taken into account. For instance, cars registered before June 1971 are not legally required to have front safety belts, so if they are not fitted that will have no bearing on the test result.
But, as you might expect, few people put their classics in for the test. According to the Road Safety Authority (RSA), which is now responsible for setting vehicle testing policy, 125 vehicles over 30 years old were tested in 2009, but these were mainly limousines and hackneys, which are public service vehicles and required by law to have a certificate of roadworthiness anyway.
Now, changes to the NCT recently announced by the Minster for Transport, Noel Dempsey, include a requirement for annual (rather than bi-annual) testing for all cars over 10 years old but also a provision that all cars registered after January 1st 1980 will continue to be tested.
This means that all cars first registered before this date will continue to be NCT exempt.
An RSA spokesman said that the relevant EU directive on vehicle testing allows a derogation on the mandatory testing of historic vehicles. “The directive provides that vehicles may not be tested to a higher standard than that to which they were originally designed,” he said.
This means the standards of the NCT are deemed to be so stringent that many classic cars, even those in perfect working order, would be unlikely to pass – particularly those older than 50 years.
But while some other EU countries have also chosen to exempt classic cars from testing, the number may be falling. Roadworthiness testing for classic cars in France was optional until the beginning of 2009, when it became law for cars aged over 30 to be tested (albeit every five years as opposed to the normal two years).
In the UK, all cars over three years old, including classics, must have an MOT to be allowed on the road. Sweden tests classic cars (aged 30 years or over) every second year as opposed to every year for modern cars.
In the Netherlands there is a bi-annual test for cars aged 30-50 years, but cars aged over 50 are exempt.
For many, the exemption here is not difficult to justify. The NCT, after all, is designed to force those who wilfully neglect their cars to keep them in roadworthy shape – definitely not an accusation you could level at the average classic car enthusiast.
But what about those who don’t fit the usual profile of classic car owners? Paul Kanters, who runs Classic Cars Ireland, acknowledges that most of the cars found at classic car shows here are in very good condition, but says that a few of the “contraptions” rolled out at some shows are in a “dreadful and woeful condition due to lack of maintenance and neglect, that you wonder how on earth they made it to the show in the first place.
“These cars would then be driven back home on public roads, endangering other road users who have complied with the rules and regulations,” he says. “Luckily this is only a very small percentage of cars, but that’s not an excuse to not have an NCT in place.”
But the IVVCC (Irish Veteran and Vintage Car Club), a national organisation with over 40 affiliated clubs, sees no reason for the exemption to be stopped, pointing out that there is no evidence of any significant number of accidents involving classics. “There is certainly no evidence that mechanical failure in such cars has given rise to any appreciable number of accidents,” says the club’s president, Peadar Ward.
An informal survey of other opinions among those in classic car circles suggests a strong divide between those who would have no issue with mandatory testing on safety grounds, and those who view it as totally unnecessary and just another tax on their hobby.
Some of those on the no-NCT side also worry that some aspects of the test could be unduly harsh on their old cars, while testers unfamiliar with unusual models could inadvertently damage them.
One enthusiast relayed an apparently true story about one ham-fisted NCT tester who managed to drive a 1940s Rolls Royce into a wall. The tester had turned off a switch for a vacuum pump that pressurises the brake system in order to complete a suspension test, but forgot to switch it back on when he was finished.
According to the RSA spokesman, the possibility of mandatory testing for historic vehicles will be “kept under review”, although any decision will remain up to the Minister for Transport. For this to happen, it’s clear from the EU rules that standards would have to be adapted in terms of the physical testing procedure in order to make it fairer on older cars.
For example, the suspension and brakes may need to be tested to a lower set of tolerances depending on the year of manufacture.
The test: did my classic car pass?
IF YOU pass an NCT in a cheap old banger without giving it any prior attention, it often feels a bit like you’ve beaten the system. Today, I’m about to put my much-loved 34-year-old classic car in for a NCT, but as I drive into the test centre at Fonthill in Dublin on this cold and frosty morning, I realise I’ve no idea how I would feel if the car were to fail.
When I bought my BMW 2002Tii in 2005 it was in immaculate condition but, five years and 20,000-odd miles later, it’s a bit rougher round the edges. But I haven’t skimped on maintenance, servicing or repairs.
Naturally I would be delighted if it passed, but given that a “fail/refusal” would have no bearing on my right to obtain a new tax disc or renew my insurance, will I care?
Beyond a few basic checks, I haven’t given the car any prior attention, although I am aware of a couple of potential failure points, including a weak handbrake (the rear brake drums and brake shoes need replacing). I didn’t check headlamp alignment either.
Sure enough, the car failed on the handbrake test and an offside headlamp misalignment, but also a slight front wheel misalignment and a minor structural rust spot on one of the sills.
But I could console myself with the finding that none of the failure points were anywhere near serious enough to judge it unsafe to drive. This is particularly good to know given its occasional use as a family chariot.
We also asked for an emissions test out of interest, but given that the earliest emissions standard the NCT has in its testing equipment dates from 1986, my 1974 car’s carbon monoxide emissions were judged to be somewhat off the chart, not helped by the fact it probably needs a bit of a tune.
On the plus side, the hydrocarbon rating was very good at 299ppm (the limit is 1,000 for post-1986 cars)which I gather is a goodsign that the engine internals are in rude health.
So all I would need to do to pass is get the car tracked, re-align the offside headlamp, order some new rear brake drums and shoes, and maybe a small bit of welding. All easy fixes.
Once all that’s done (and which would be done anyway), I may take it in for the re-test. I don’t need a green disc, but it might just become a badge of honour.
