Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Feb 23, 2012 21:16:27 GMT
He doesn't mention bet test on the DVD only full cat test Dave I'll have to watch it again lol ;D Dave
|
|
nitros44
Nominated Tester
esto es un negocio serio
Posts: 741
|
Post by nitros44 on Feb 23, 2012 21:19:57 GMT
But the confusion seems to be whether a BET test is a full cat test or not? The manual does not give a reason for rejection for a vehicle which does not meet the requirements of the BET, but says the test continues to a FULL CAT TEST, so to me as the flow charts state, if the emissions are met at the end of the BET Test, then the vehicle has passed, so no continuation to a FULL CAT TEST is required. However, the only addition to the program seems to be that the second fast idle test is extended for up to three minutes to ensure the cat is lit, so both BET and CAT Test are the same reading the manual, so it is still a bit confusing why VOSA's trainer is saying that a CAT is not required if the BET limits are met, but the manual says a cat missing is a fail for a full cat test? I think they really do need to clarify the issue what they mean to put this topic to bed once and for all! Dave Dave Can't you get it round your head that the BET test is still a full cat test? Any petrol (forget LPG, diesel, chip oil, electric, hot air, etc etc) vehicle that passes a BET test will meet the current minimum/lowest requirements on emissions for any petrol driven vehicle of testable age and therefore we don't have to go down the long winded and time wasting route of finding and entering vehicle specific information. Just out of interest, how many BET tests have been carried out by anyone have passed with no cat fitted? All this discussion over something that probably will never happen........ This is were you are wrong Baz saying " something that probably will never happen" HAS ;as I've failed 2 since 1st Jan 2012 and as its shown in this thread that it needs some clarification so we can all sing off the same hymn sheet and for all members to have an understanding of the new reason for rejection and applying it. We cant not just have a discussion on something that might never happen which is true to some people and they might never come across the issue of a cat missing or other issues raised by the mot scheme that might never happen.but members may still want to know and improve there understanding of the issue or need clarification. But at the end of the day the eventuality will happen to testers were a vehicle passes the emissions part of a test and the cat is found missing which is something that does get a mention all be it a small mention on the recent DVD were not all vehicles will fail an emissions test without a cat. The possibilities are small of the cat missing i agree,however its in the manual and needs clarification and if it helps members to understand the issue then in my opinion it deserves a discussion
|
|
phaetonott
Nominated Tester
I may not be right but at least I am trying!
Posts: 376
|
Post by phaetonott on Feb 23, 2012 23:06:02 GMT
Just out of interest, how many BET tests have been carried out by anyone have passed with no cat fitted? All this discussion over something that probably will never happen........ I've tested a Mitsubishi Evo rally car with straight through cat replacement kit fitted and it HAS passed BET test for the last three years. It might fail this year though, depends whether I can be sure that cat shaped canister is a straight through pipe and not a cat. I suppose I'll have to ask the presenter and take his word for it.
|
|
Tom
Nominated Tester
Posts: 227
|
Post by Tom on Feb 23, 2012 23:25:20 GMT
Dave Can't you get it round your head that the BET test is still a full cat test? Any petrol (forget LPG, diesel, chip oil, electric, hot air, etc etc) vehicle that passes a BET test will meet the current minimum/lowest requirements on emissions for any petrol driven vehicle of testable age and therefore we don't have to go down the long winded and time wasting route of finding and entering vehicle specific information. Just out of interest, how many BET tests have been carried out by anyone have passed with no cat fitted? All this discussion over something that probably will never happen........ Baz: 7.1 Exhaust Systems, MoI 3 On vehicles that qualify for a full cat emissions test, check the presence of the catalytic converter Look at: 7.3 Exhaust Emissions - Spark Ignition 7.3.C is BET test. 7.3.D is FULL CAT test - they are not the same. A vehicle that passes the BET test DOES NOT qualify for a FULL CAT test. End of. If VOSA want it any different, they should have someone intelligent to both write and proof-read the manual.
|
|
nitros44
Nominated Tester
esto es un negocio serio
Posts: 741
|
Post by nitros44 on Feb 23, 2012 23:28:04 GMT
Note: To ascertain whether a vehicle qualifies for a full catalyst test, use the flow charts in Section 7.3.C disregarding the result of the Basic Emissions Test." Following on from this statement above from another thread which is a reply from vosa kindly supplied by our member off road,which is a bit of an update with regards information relating on full catalysts tests and what qualifies, Here is another example in my interpretation EXAMPLE2008 Subaru impreza 2000 cc Turbo presented for test Bet test performed and it passes On inspection of the exhaust i discover that it has a DE-CAT front pipe fitted,hence no cat Reading what it will says in the inspection manual when its updated in the spring which instructs me now to study the flow charts not to carryout a another test which leads me to the following; Due to the cat converter missing i have to establish that the vehicle would qualify for a cat test(the flow charts only state CAT TESTS and not FULL CAT tests) The flow chart asks me IS IT A Passenger petrol vehicle 1st used on or after 1 st Sept 2002,=YES Can i find an exact match on data base or in service emissions booklet=YES. The flow chart then says that this vehicle would require a cat test using specific limits in other words it QUALIFIES for a cat test,it does not mean that a another emissions test needs to be carried out,its only confirming that the vehicle would qualify for a cat test. I then disregard the bet test pass result and fail the vehicle for cat converter missing as i have now established that the vehicle does qualify for a cat test There is no mention of a FULL cat test in the flow charts only CAT test meaning a bet test test is the same as full test Which still goes back to the issue if the petrol driven vehicle is of the standard where a cat converter is required ;no matter what the outcome of the metered test; if its missing it will fail, If the same vehicle fails the bet test and then went on to a cat test as the flow charts say,which it then passes it still remains for the vehicle to fail for its cat converter missing as it still qualifies according to the flow charts for a cat emissions test and the requirement is for the cat converter to be present, To conclude; The use of the word QUALIFY by VOSA means to follow the flow charts to establish which vehicles will fail the test for a cat converter missing. I don't think it means where a full cat test is physically carried out The defense rests its case lol
|
|
nitros44
Nominated Tester
esto es un negocio serio
Posts: 741
|
Post by nitros44 on Feb 23, 2012 23:31:51 GMT
Dave Can't you get it round your head that the BET test is still a full cat test? Any petrol (forget LPG, diesel, chip oil, electric, hot air, etc etc) vehicle that passes a BET test will meet the current minimum/lowest requirements on emissions for any petrol driven vehicle of testable age and therefore we don't have to go down the long winded and time wasting route of finding and entering vehicle specific information. Just out of interest, how many BET tests have been carried out by anyone have passed with no cat fitted? All this discussion over something that probably will never happen........ Baz: 7.1 Exhaust Systems, MoI 3 On vehicles that qualify for a full cat emissions test, check the presence of the catalytic converter Look at: 7.3 Exhaust Emissions - Spark Ignition 7.3.C is BET test. 7.3.D is FULL CAT test - they are not the same. A vehicle that passes the BET test DOES NOT qualify for a FULL CAT test. End of. If VOSA want it any different, they should have someone intelligent to both write and proof-read the manual. OK Tom In your opinion what is the difference bet :)ween the BET test and FULL CAT test?apart from being on different pages lol PS i think BAZ is aware of the contents of the manual ;D I like your comment on the people who wright the inspection manual;
|
|
Tom
Nominated Tester
Posts: 227
|
Post by Tom on Feb 23, 2012 23:51:10 GMT
A BET test is a Basic Emissions Test to see if vehicle meets minimum requirements.
A FULL CAT test is an extended test, used where a vehicle can't meet the minimum requirements. It is then subject to either 1, a non CAT test, 2. a test using vehicle specific limits, or 3. a default cat test. None of which are as strict as the BET limits (for the majority of vehicles).
So if a vehicle passes the BET test with a CAT removed, why should it then fail for no CAT if, for instance, it would have ended up doing a lesser FULL CAT test on default limits (which it also would have passed)...
|
|
|
Post by offroad on Feb 23, 2012 23:57:54 GMT
the BET test method of inspection 7.3.c is different to the full cat test method of inspection 7.3.d
i see that as being NOT the same.
that cutting of the e-mail is word for word what vosa said in their reply. i have e-mailed them again expressing my concerns that if the BET results ignored then the flow chart ceases to flow. in this case no vehicle would require a full cat test.
i will await their second reply with hope.
lee.
|
|
nitros44
Nominated Tester
esto es un negocio serio
Posts: 741
|
Post by nitros44 on Feb 24, 2012 0:47:33 GMT
A BET test is a Basic Emissions Test to see if vehicle meets minimum requirements. A FULL CAT test is an extended test, used where a vehicle can't meet the minimum requirements. It is then subject to either 1, a non CAT test, 2. a test using vehicle specific limits, or 3. a default cat test. None of which are as strict as the BET limits (for the majority of vehicles). So if a vehicle passes the BET test with a CAT removed, why should it then fail for no CAT if, for instance, it would have ended up doing a lesser FULL CAT test on default limits (which it also would have passed)... I would have to disagree when you say that other cat tests are not as strict as the bet test,in most cases the gas limits are the same in bet and full cat tests,the main difference is that the engine needs to be revved within a certain" rev band"to achieve its goal ;D What you have to remember here regards a BET TEST AND A FULL CAT TEST is what are the tests aimed at; Let me explain; The BET test measures 3 things carbon monoxide.hydrocarbons and lambda where the cat converter is within its operating conditions, The FULL test measures 3 things.carbon monoxide,hydrocarbons and lambda,so its the same as the bet test as your your testing for the same 3 things.Once again in most cases the limits are the same, IN order for the cat converter to get itself up to operating temp,or operating conditions the bet test is extended for 3 Min's for this to take place,meaning you have to get the cat from its colder operating condition up to its hotter operating condition for it to function correctly,Some cat converters need more time to get up to there operating conditions such as cheaply manufactured cats. At the end of both tests the 3 things you are looking at are still the same as what you where looking at before the test began.The only difference in most cases is the time to light the cat.THE TESTS ARE THE SAME BUT THE METHOD OF INSPECTION DIFFERS TO ALLOW THE TESTER TO WARM THE CAT UP in most cases. If the vehicle is warmed up and is within operating conditions,then because the warm up process has already been met then a bet test is all that's needed you will not require the extra 3 Min's to warm it up,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.Saves time and money
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 24, 2012 17:15:54 GMT
So if both tests "are the same", why should a car with cat missing fail the MOT test if it passes the Basic Emissions Test ?
|
|
Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Feb 24, 2012 18:20:52 GMT
The thing about Admins post , is that it is straight to the point and short ;D, no messing around, and if at the end of all this discussion it turns out that a CAT is not required if the BET limits are met, then I will say that I told you all so many threads ago ;D and somebody might say yeah he's right again Dave ;D
|
|
nitros44
Nominated Tester
esto es un negocio serio
Posts: 741
|
Post by nitros44 on Feb 24, 2012 21:32:39 GMT
If both tests are different,why is there no reasons for rejection for a bet test then,
|
|
Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Feb 24, 2012 21:53:46 GMT
Because the BET limit is 0.20% and the full cat limit defaults to 0.30% ;D Dave
|
|
|
Post by offroad on Feb 24, 2012 23:55:28 GMT
and i thought i complicated things.
|
|
nitros44
Nominated Tester
esto es un negocio serio
Posts: 741
|
Post by nitros44 on Feb 25, 2012 0:50:58 GMT
So if both tests "are the same", why should a car with cat missing fail the MOT test if it passes the Basic Emissions Test ? Because it relates to EMISSION CONTROL EQUIPMENT rather then the emissions result itself.
|
|
Tom
Nominated Tester
Posts: 227
|
Post by Tom on Feb 25, 2012 7:47:03 GMT
So if both tests "are the same", why should a car with cat missing fail the MOT test if it passes the Basic Emissions Test ? Because it relates to EMISSION CONTROL EQUIPMENT rather then the emissions result itself. And the MOT is all about a vehicle meeting a minimum standard for use on the road? The minimum standard should be meeting the BET limits -- not making sure the CAT is present.
|
|
|
Post by aylesburyjock on Feb 25, 2012 14:29:59 GMT
As I said at the top of page three, you can forget minimum standards in several different areas of the test now Tom, so we might as well get used to it.
|
|
Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Feb 25, 2012 15:05:25 GMT
Special Notice September 2011 section - 7 - advises; New reason for rejection where a catalyst converters are not fitted to vehicles subject to a full cat test. Notice what it says; New reason for rejection where a catalyst converters are not fitted to vehicles subject to a FULL CAT TESTHow do we test exhaust emissions post 1 August 1992 onwards; We put all vehicles through the BET Test. What does BET stand for? Basic emissions test. What does FULL CAT TEST mean? If there is no difference then why if a vehicle does not meet the BET test does the gas tester continue on to the FULL CAT TEST? If the BET is a FULL CAT TEST why then is there no reason for rejection for it? Why continue on to the FULL CAT TEST? Answer because if you follow the flow charts you will find that the emissions limits are relaxed, so if the BET test passes then no improvement can be made by having an extended exhaust emissions test, and if the CAT is not fitted and passed the BET, then there is no justification to fail a CAT missing. You just can't have an omelette without breaking some eggs LOL ;D Dave Dave
|
|
nitros44
Nominated Tester
esto es un negocio serio
Posts: 741
|
Post by nitros44 on Feb 25, 2012 20:00:02 GMT
part of my reply from vosa. so disregarding the bet results will sureally stall you on the flow chart and no car would ever get to have a full cat test. not what they want to happen but i guess there`s no change there. Q1. MoI 7.1.3 has been amended to try to avoid this confusion. The amended Manual will be released in the spring at the same time as the new components become testable. The amended wording states: "On petrol engine vehicles that qualify for a full catalyst emissions test, check the presence of the catalytic converter. Note: To ascertain whether a vehicle qualifies for a full catalyst test, use the flow charts in Section 7.3.C disregarding the result of the Basic Emissions Test." Reading the NOTE above its asking us to disregard the result of Basic Emissions Test; So i carryout out the emission test and the vehicle passes the BET TEST,the vehicle has passed this part of the test, but i have to disregard the result as its going to say this in the manual soon . I now have to ASCERTAIN (which means to FIND OUT DEFINITELY ) whether the vehicle qualifies(would be ELIGIBLE) for a cat test using the flow charts. All the flowcharts do is to distinguish those vehicles which would be eligible for a cat test and those that don't. If a vehicle passes the bet test and the cat is missing,why are we being instructed to disregard the bet test result? Because the emission result has no bearing on the fact that the part of the emission control equipment is missing were one was fitted as standard
|
|
phaetonott
Nominated Tester
I may not be right but at least I am trying!
Posts: 376
|
Post by phaetonott on Feb 25, 2012 20:46:58 GMT
HISTORICLY!!!
For those of us with grey hair and failing eyesight.
When we tested emissions years ago we checked CO and HC. Then God invented Catastrophic converters and somebody at the ministry decided that a four gas analyser should be used and they called that test a full cat test to distinguish it from the PRE+cat test
The BET checks four gases and the specific vehicle test checks four gases. Both are "Full cat Tests" .The pre Jreg tests are not considered Full Cat texts.
Well that's how I've always understood it anyway
|
|