Technical To Cat Or Not To Cat......

[Palio]

Ok I lost the thread where I suggested my reading of the MOT tester's manual meant that a 16V Panda didn't need a Cat to pass the MOT.

Having taken a 127 for its MOT yesterday (pass, of course! ) I asked my MOT chap for his opinion.

Initially he said a 1998 16V engine in a 1993 Panda meant it needed a Cat test based on the older of the 2 (ie the 1993 bit). I pointed out my reading of the flow charts and we then followed them carefully.......

1993 car gets tested as though Cat fitted - fails emissions. Falls into the interim category as its 1992-1995 then go to find EXACT match in the appendix. It presumably won't be there because the Panda with that engine never existed. Flowchart then says carry out non-cat test. Result should be a pass without a cat needed. Mot tester agreed with my view but only after looking at the flowcharts carefully - may be useful for anyone else with a similar car - certainly it means I will not have a cat on the project Panda looking Panda to see how we get on

I would be really interested in someone else checking this with their MOT tester, to make sure we're not missing something. :worship:

 

[Most Easterly Pandas]

Interesting that they use flow charts. So basically only applicable to Standard UK models, not imports, or modified motors by the sounds of it then.

 

[VmanC]

Will double check with my Guys, as they'llbe the ones testing it.

 

[lewey]

Evening all. A cat converter has to be fitted to a car that had one fitted originally if car was made after July 1992. It's a new MOT rule from Jan this year. It then forces the kind of emissions test the car will receive into being the stricter advanced type (<0.3% CO, etc.).

Became a problem for my 16v Panda this year and has resulted in it being on my drive for months undriven due to it having a poor lamdba reading at the exhaust which went undetected with the old school test. Fitting a new engine this weekend!

 

[kolza]

Is that then the best way around all that emissions level crap?

Get pre-cat carbed panda ( up to early 1992? is that right?), replace intake manifold , fit brake servo, pedal box, re-do brake pipes, hi pressure fuel pump, after all that do the16V engine convertion. The only one bad point which i can come up with is the the gear box would be still rod driven one.

Did anybody here tried to go this way already?

 

[lewey]

I would recommend a pre-1992 car, yes. All pandas have rod-driven gear selection, it's just that the later ones have a cable as well and have a better feel.

I nearly did buy an older car a couple of months back, but I have done so much work to mine that it would be a long job to transplant my stuff into another car. The other thing is that a new 1.4 16v engine (approx 1000 miles old) is a third of the price of a non-rusty Panda now.

 

[Palio]

Evening all. A cat converter has to be fitted to a car that had one fitted originally if car was made after July 1992. It's a new MOT rule from Jan this year. It then forces the kind of emissions test the car will receive into being the stricter advanced type (<0.3% CO, etc.).

Became a problem for my 16v Panda this year and has resulted in it being on my drive for months undriven due to it having a poor lamdba reading at the exhaust which went undetected with the old school test. Fitting a new engine this weekend!

Thanks for the update - bad news on yours

But, you see this is where there's confusion - this isn't really how the rules are reading unless someone has something to the contrary. This is because some of the early Cats didn't meet the standards being tested I understand. I'm certainly not disputing that the MOT chap told you that, but had he understood it correctly and double checked it?

If you look at S7 of the MOT testers' guide you have flow charts to follow. These are supported by the latest emissions guidance which the testers have to follow. The debate is on the transition period which these Panda's happen to fall into - if there's no exact match to the annex link below it gets the non-cat test.

The Panda's specifically listed are:

Panda With Engine Codes 156A2.246, 156C.046, 141C2.000 and 176B2.000 What if you have a Panda with a different engine code?

http://www.dft.gov.uk/vosa/repository/Emissions 17th Edition.pdf

As I said I'd really like some other opinions from MOT testers specifically asked to follow the guidance, as mine changed his answer when he did.

 

[leonsdada]

...... Fitting a new engine this weekend!

:yum: Sticking with the 1.4 or moving on to something else?

 

[lewey]

Thanks for the update - bad news on yours

But, you see this is where there's confusion - this isn't really how the rules are reading unless someone has something to the contrary. This is because some of the early Cats didn't meet the standards being tested I understand. I'm certainly not disputing that the MOT chap told you that, but had he understood it correctly and double checked it?

If you look at S7 of the MOT testers' guide you have flow charts to follow. These are supported by the latest emissions guidance which the testers have to follow. The debate is on the transition period which these Panda's happen to fall into - if there's no exact match to the annex link below it gets the non-cat test.

The Panda's specifically listed are:

Panda With Engine Codes 156A2.246, 156C.046, 141C2.000 and 176B2.000 What if you have a Panda with a different engine code?

http://www.dft.gov.uk/vosa/repository/Emissions 17th Edition.pdf

As I said I'd really like some other opinions from MOT testers specifically asked to follow the guidance, as mine changed his answer when he did.

I do see what you're saying. I just found the flow charts in question in the latest MOT manuals online, with the most important one being http://www.motinfo.gov.uk/htdocs/m4s07000309.htm.

It is down to how you define finding an exact match when an alternative engine is used. It would certainly be a loophole if you can just put a slightly different iteration engine n a car and then it has an easy emissions test. This flow chart has been around for a long while, but I've never had an MOT tester tell me "I couldn't find it in the database" on any of my modded cars. I'm halfway though my engine swap now, so it's too late for me, but I'll be a bit gutted if this ends up being a case of MOT tester error since the old engine was still excellent and passed old tests easy.

:yum: Sticking with the 1.4 or moving on to something else?

Sticking with same engine, it's just so good. Still T-jetting a Mk1 Uno as it's long term replacement though.

 

[Palio]

I do see what you're saying. I just found the flow charts in question in the latest MOT manuals online, with the most important one being http://www.motinfo.gov.uk/htdocs/m4s07000309.htm.

It is down to how you define finding an exact match when an alternative engine is used. It would certainly be a loophole if you can just put a slightly different iteration engine n a car and then it has an easy emissions test. This flow chart has been around for a long while, but I've never had an MOT tester tell me "I couldn't find it in the database" on any of my modded cars. I'm halfway though my engine swap now, so it's too late for me, but I'll be a bit gutted if this ends up being a case of MOT tester error since the old engine was still excellent and passed old tests easy.



Sticking with same engine, it's just so good. Still T-jetting a Mk1 Uno as it's long term replacement though.

Yes I agree.

We'll keep this updated. Btw this isn't about looking for loopholes just trying to check whether a cat is needed before committing to it.

 

[Palio]

Yes I agree.

We'll keep this updated. Btw this isn't about looking for loopholes just trying to check whether a cat is needed before committing to it.

Just a quick update on this. We now have 2 separate MOT testers who have been presented with the flowcharts and agree with our logic.

It's definitely not straightforward, but worth pursuing if you are in a similar situation. Of course the MOT hasn't actually taken place yet, but as it will take place at one of the garages who agreed, my fingers are firmly crossed........

 

[Numptey]

Well that's certainly made me think, not that I have a Panda, but my Rover 1991 does have a cat and I've not had it long enough to MOT it yet and it certainly smells different to newer cars. I'm wondering if I shouldn't get the cat changed anyway as I don't think they are very expensive on these. Is it not possible to add or take one away if even the testers are not sure. If it doesn't have a cat surely they use the non cat figures and how hard is it to add one if this is even possible?

 

[Palio]

Well that's certainly made me think, not that I have a Panda, but my Rover 1991 does have a cat and I've not had it long enough to MOT it yet and it certainly smells different to newer cars. I'm wondering if I shouldn't get the cat changed anyway as I don't think they are very expensive on these. Is it not possible to add or take one away if even the testers are not sure. If it doesn't have a cat surely they use the non cat figures and how hard is it to add one if this is even possible?

Unfortunately there is only doubt when the engine has been changed. There is no exact match with the VOSA list in the Panda case, as they never came with a Punto engine. If yours has an original engine, or a replacement which was ever fitted to that model, this won't apply.

Sorry - you could fit a Panda engine I suppose though! :idea:

 

[Numptey]

Unfortunately there is only doubt when the engine has been changed. There is no exact match with the VOSA list in the Panda case, as they never came with a Punto engine. If yours has an original engine, or a replacement which was ever fitted to that model, this won't apply.

Sorry - you could fit a Panda engine I suppose though! :idea:

Do you think the Panda engine would improve the performance of my (original) m series 2 litre 0-60 in 8 secs or less engine then as it may be worth looking into

I have found some similarities between the Panda and the Rover mind, I have a rusty mounting on my hinge I didn't see when I picked it up doh

 

[Didge3]

Do you think the Panda engine would improve the performance of my (original) m series 2 litre 0-60 in 8 secs or less engine then as it may be worth looking into

I'm sure a 750 would slot in fine. It'll propel a Panda to 60 in about 20 seconds so I'm sure it'll heave your fat Rover up to about 45 in around a minute

 

[Palio]

Do you think the Panda engine would improve the performance of my (original) m series 2 litre 0-60 in 8 secs or less engine then as it may be worth looking into

I have found some similarities between the Panda and the Rover mind, I have a rusty mounting on my hinge I didn't see when I picked it up doh

Almost certainly

Is this the M16 engine which debuted to the headline "England expects, but Austin Rover struggles to deliver"?

 

[Numptey]

Almost certainly

Is this the M16 engine which debuted to the headline "England expects, but Austin Rover struggles to deliver"?

Oh no this must be the M16.1 which was followed closer by the very fine T series engine that is easy to work on and much more refined. Which strangely replaced the M series engine after just a short time in production. Which is why there are only 34 of them left. I think if pushed it might just keep up with the 750 Didge was suggesting

 

[Palio]

I think if pushed it might just keep up with the 750 Didge was suggesting

Its a bit heavy to push to be honest. Still there are some nice cliffs in Dover where we could achieve that sub 8s 0-60 time if we got it close enough to the edge..... :idea:

 

[onemanmade]

sub 8s 0-60 time

better throw the reins over some ponys that ran away a few years back

I kid I kid Although I wonder how much of my 45bhp is left??

 

[Palio]

better throw the reins over some ponys that ran away a few years back

I kid I kid Although I wonder how much of my 45bhp is left??

As it's a Rover he's got, they presumably sailed away on that longboat? :idea:

I've often wondered how each of mine are too. I get put off these rolling road events as they seem to be populated by idiots! I'd be particularly interested in the Sisley at its mileage (it can't have lost too many of the 50 or it wouldn't move!), the 127 Palio as it feels like much more than the 45 it was meant to have 30 odd years ago, and the Coupe as it's been properly maintained and I'd like to know if that means it's kept most of the horses.