"Oily" <
[email protected]> wrote in message
news:
[email protected]...
>
> "Badger" <[email protected]> wrote
>
> <snip>
I'll say again
> > The ONLY (legal) way your vehicle will legally pass an MOT is if the
> > handbrake is tested in accordance with the MOT rules, nothing else.
> If the viscous coupling is not seized then I would say it's not going to
do
> any harm because the rollers are only moving slowly and you would get your
> necessary reading, but if it *is* seized it would only push the motor off
> the rollers, not do any harm either, and you would know the viscous
coupling
> *is* knackered.
If the rollers are modern enough to have a dedicated 4wd mode, then this
will work for the front and rear axles as it allows the wheels to rotate in
opposite directions whilst testing one at a time. However, some vehicle's
traction control and abs systems will kick in and make the thing climb out
of the rollers regardless. I still don't like applying the handbrake on a
viscous motor whilst doing the front brake imbalance test, it's not doing
the transmission any favours!
Policy in the place I do my MOT's is :- 2wd, rollers. 4wd, tapley/bowmonk.
> but if
> > any snatching occurs I stop. I always work out the brake force required
> for
> > a "pass" regardless (16% for dual-circuit brake system types) and stop
> when
> > (if!) I reach that figure. If a decelerometer test is required, again
the
> > handbrake is applied very slowly and only until the required force is
> > indicated, no further.
>
> I don't agree with this at all and wouldn't allow my handbrake to be
tested
> this way, though I've no objection to the rollers which are a controlled
> speed.
You may not agree, and for the record neither do I, BUT that's the rules and
if you don't like it then you don't get your MOT test. By working out the
minimum effort required for a pass and not exceeding it, I'm doing you a
favour!!
Another point to consider, the rollers will allow each wheel's speed to
change independantly, giving rise to a lot of backlash induced snatching.
The road doesn't - that actually helps to avoid snatch and clunking when
applying the parking brake during a decelerometer test, which is also a
controlled speed, 20mph and apply smoothly.
> The vehicle should be parked on a steep incline, the handbrake applied
> whilst stationary, and the vehicle should remain stationary.
Not a valid and legal test, m'Lord. Sorry. Even if I agree with you, which I
do, we are confined by the rules.
> The handbrake
> is a *parking* brake and should only be tested as such, the dual line
> braking system is fitted to deal with as a backup as I see it.
Yes, which is why the efficiency rating for a parking brake is 16% on a
dual-circuit vehicle and (I think) 25% on a single-circuit. The theory is
that with 2 service brake circuits the handbrake is no longer required to be
the secondary brakig device, BUT having said that, it is still homologated
as a device that *can* be used as an emergency brake.
As an MOT tester and mechanic with a lot of years experience on landy's, I
personally STRONGLY disagree with the methods for testing landrover parking
(hand) brakes, but these are the rules and they are unlikely to change.
There ought to be a "static pull test against the brake" for vehicles with
dual-circuit brakes (much the same as the original motorcycle brake
testers), BUT single-circuit landys (up to around earlyish SIII?) would
still have to be roller or decel. tested, as the handbrake IS the secondary
circuit!
Now, if the parking/hand brake has been designed to function as the
secondary system for emergency use, as it would have been by the
manufacturer, and it's design hasn't really altered since (other than cable
operation instead of rods), is it not reasonable to assume that it should
work correctly either by roller or decelerometer testing? Is that not *why*
we are testing the vehicle annualy in the first place, to sort out the badly
maintained and unsafe vehicles?
Badger.