Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
MOT, then handbrake cable snaps two weeks later - should it have been spotted as likely to fail?
25 views
Skip to first unread message
NY
Jan 2, 2024, 9:05:56 AM1/2/24
to
Would you expect that a car which was MOTed in early December would have a
handbrake cable snap two weeks later? What is actually tested in the MOT -
is it just a visual check of the cables? Is there any check apart from "yes,
the handbrake holds the car"?
I heard a loud ping when I parked on our drive and the handbrake lever came
up further than normal, though it still made it more difficult to set off
when it was on, so there was *some* braking. I diagnosed one cable had
snapped and the other one was OK, so I only had a brake on one rear wheel.
And that is exactly what the garage have said it is! They are changing both
cables because the other looks to be on its last legs - probably with a much
more through visual check than for the MOT. I took the precaution of leaving
the car in reverse when I parked on the garage's sloping forecourt (and
telling the garage man in case he didn't do a gearlever-waggle (*) test
before starting) because I didn't trust the handbrake to hold it, and it
would be embarrassing if the car had rolled into the road...
I'm always surprised at the things that fail just after an MOT and I think
"should they have spotted that was about to happen?".
(*) A little trick I was taught: if the gear lever can be waggled from side
to side, it really is in neutral; if it cant be waggled, it's in one gear or
another. Saves starting engine in gear, or letting clutch up with engine
still running when stopping - and the car lurching forwards. BTDTGTTS (but
only did it once!)
handbrake cable snap two weeks later? What is actually tested in the MOT -
is it just a visual check of the cables? Is there any check apart from "yes,
the handbrake holds the car"?
I heard a loud ping when I parked on our drive and the handbrake lever came
up further than normal, though it still made it more difficult to set off
when it was on, so there was *some* braking. I diagnosed one cable had
snapped and the other one was OK, so I only had a brake on one rear wheel.
And that is exactly what the garage have said it is! They are changing both
cables because the other looks to be on its last legs - probably with a much
more through visual check than for the MOT. I took the precaution of leaving
the car in reverse when I parked on the garage's sloping forecourt (and
telling the garage man in case he didn't do a gearlever-waggle (*) test
before starting) because I didn't trust the handbrake to hold it, and it
would be embarrassing if the car had rolled into the road...
I'm always surprised at the things that fail just after an MOT and I think
"should they have spotted that was about to happen?".
(*) A little trick I was taught: if the gear lever can be waggled from side
to side, it really is in neutral; if it cant be waggled, it's in one gear or
another. Saves starting engine in gear, or letting clutch up with engine
still running when stopping - and the car lurching forwards. BTDTGTTS (but
only did it once!)
JNugent
Jan 2, 2024, 10:13:58 AM1/2/24
to
On 02/01/2024 02:04 pm, NY wrote:
> Would you expect that a car which was MOTed in early December would have
> a handbrake cable snap two weeks later? What is actually tested in the
> MOT - is it just a visual check of the cables? Is there any check apart
> from "yes, the handbrake holds the car"?
>
> I heard a loud ping when I parked on our drive and the handbrake lever
> came up further than normal, though it still made it more difficult to
> set off when it was on, so there was *some* braking. I diagnosed one
> cable had snapped and the other one was OK, so I only had a brake on one
> rear wheel. And that is exactly what the garage have said it is! They
> are changing both cables because the other looks to be on its last legs
> - probably with a much more through visual check than for the MOT. I
> took the precaution of leaving the car in reverse when I parked on the
> garage's sloping forecourt (and telling the garage man in case he didn't
> do a gearlever-waggle (*) test before starting) because I didn't trust
> the handbrake to hold it, and it would be embarrassing if the car had
> rolled into the road...
>
> I'm always surprised at the things that fail just after an MOT and I
> think "should they have spotted that was about to happen?".
If a deterioration in a safety-relevant component is visually or
> Would you expect that a car which was MOTed in early December would have
> a handbrake cable snap two weeks later? What is actually tested in the
> MOT - is it just a visual check of the cables? Is there any check apart
> from "yes, the handbrake holds the car"?
>
> I heard a loud ping when I parked on our drive and the handbrake lever
> came up further than normal, though it still made it more difficult to
> set off when it was on, so there was *some* braking. I diagnosed one
> cable had snapped and the other one was OK, so I only had a brake on one
> rear wheel. And that is exactly what the garage have said it is! They
> are changing both cables because the other looks to be on its last legs
> - probably with a much more through visual check than for the MOT. I
> took the precaution of leaving the car in reverse when I parked on the
> garage's sloping forecourt (and telling the garage man in case he didn't
> do a gearlever-waggle (*) test before starting) because I didn't trust
> the handbrake to hold it, and it would be embarrassing if the car had
> rolled into the road...
>
> I'm always surprised at the things that fail just after an MOT and I
> think "should they have spotted that was about to happen?".
physically obvious, the tester would usually include that in the MOT
certificate's notes as an "advisory". It might even be bad enough for a
fail.
> (*) A little trick I was taught: if the gear lever can be waggled from
> side to side, it really is in neutral; if it cant be waggled, it's in
> one gear or another. Saves starting engine in gear, or letting clutch up
> with engine still running when stopping - and the car lurching forwards.
> BTDTGTTS (but only did it once!)
The worst "ping" I ever had was in late 1975 when I was heading out of
London (late at night) along Western Avenue. Stopped at traffic lights,
the clutch cable snapped when I depressed the pedal. We pushed the car
(a 1973 model, not old enough to need an MOT) to the side of the road
and I called the AA. The patrolman had a spare cable in his Transit van
and fitted it for me straightaway. The price was about £3.50. He was
delighted when I handed him a fiver and told him to keep the change*. As
far as I was concerned, it was well worth the £5 and the cost of
membership. Just imagine if I'd had to sleep in the car and try to find
a local garage the next morning!
[* £5 was still a lot of money in 1975!]
Colin Bignell
Jan 2, 2024, 12:49:33 PM1/2/24
to
On 02/01/2024 14:04, NY wrote:
> Would you expect that a car which was MOTed in early December would have
> a handbrake cable snap two weeks later?
An MOT is only a statement of the condition the car at the time of the test.
> Would you expect that a car which was MOTed in early December would have
> a handbrake cable snap two weeks later?
> What is actually tested in the
> MOT - is it just a visual check of the cables? Is there any check apart
> from "yes, the handbrake holds the car"?
braking capacity from the handbrake.
>
> I heard a loud ping when I parked on our drive and the handbrake lever
> came up further than normal, though it still made it more difficult to
> set off when it was on, so there was *some* braking. I diagnosed one
> cable had snapped and the other one was OK, so I only had a brake on one
> rear wheel. And that is exactly what the garage have said it is!
> They
> are changing both cables because the other looks to be on its last legs
> - probably with a much more through visual check than for the MOT. I
> took the precaution of leaving the car in reverse when I parked on the
> garage's sloping forecourt (and telling the garage man in case he didn't
> do a gearlever-waggle (*) test before starting) because I didn't trust
> the handbrake to hold it, and it would be embarrassing if the car had
> rolled into the road...
>
> I'm always surprised at the things that fail just after an MOT and I
> think "should they have spotted that was about to happen?".
>
>
>
> (*) A little trick I was taught: if the gear lever can be waggled from
> side to side, it really is in neutral; if it cant be waggled, it's in
> one gear or another.
Pushing the lever left or right is the way to change up or down a gear.
Saves starting engine in gear, or letting clutch up
> with engine still running when stopping - and the car lurching forwards.
> BTDTGTTS (but only did it once!)
Colin Bignell
NY
Jan 2, 2024, 5:13:08 PM1/2/24
to
On 02/01/2024 15:13, JNugent wrote:
> The worst "ping" I ever had was in late 1975 when I was heading out of
> London (late at night) along Western Avenue. Stopped at traffic lights,
> the clutch cable snapped when I depressed the pedal. We pushed the car
> (a 1973 model, not old enough to need an MOT) to the side of the road
> and I called the AA. The patrolman had a spare cable in his Transit van
> and fitted it for me straightaway. The price was about £3.50. He was
> delighted when I handed him a fiver and told him to keep the change*. As
> far as I was concerned, it was well worth the £5 and the cost of
> membership. Just imagine if I'd had to sleep in the car and try to find
> a local garage the next morning!
I've never yet had an RAC callout for a fault that could be fixed at the
> The worst "ping" I ever had was in late 1975 when I was heading out of
> London (late at night) along Western Avenue. Stopped at traffic lights,
> the clutch cable snapped when I depressed the pedal. We pushed the car
> (a 1973 model, not old enough to need an MOT) to the side of the road
> and I called the AA. The patrolman had a spare cable in his Transit van
> and fitted it for me straightaway. The price was about £3.50. He was
> delighted when I handed him a fiver and told him to keep the change*. As
> far as I was concerned, it was well worth the £5 and the cost of
> membership. Just imagine if I'd had to sleep in the car and try to find
> a local garage the next morning!
roadside.
The first time I called for help was when my "fanbelt" broke as I was
about to come off the motorway. I lost power steering (it took a lot of
effort to turn onto the roundabout, hold the right turn on the
roundabout and then turn left off it) and alternator. But not cooling
since the car had an electric fan. I debated whether I'd have enough
battery to get me back home - another 25 miles - and wimped out: it was
at night and I didn't want to risk losing my headlights or the car dying
with very little notice. The RAC man couldn't change the belt - it was a
long, expensive job even at a garage - so all he could do was tow me
home, from which I could drive the next morning to the garage nearby.
The other time was when my hydraulic clutch actuator failed. Apparently
the pedal on my car operates a cable which in turn moves the clutch
plate by hydraulics. Again, a tow to a garage (and then a lift home) was
all he could offer. That was a nasty failure, because I was lead car at
a set of traffic lights and I was facing uphill, when the clutch stopped
working as I let it in to set off. So the car was already in first.
Because the clutch let itself in very quickly (even though my foot was
on the pedal) it stalled then engine. I was blocking all four ways at
the lights, with no way to disengage the transmission because it was
jammed in gear - not even possible for anyone to push the car to release
the pressure on the selector mechanism. I wasn't very popular! After a
lot of working of the pedal, I managed to get to it work so it let me
disengage the clutch and hence come out of gear. Then I had to roll back
to the side of the road and wait for Mr RAC.
I wonder how many AA and RAC callouts these days are fixable at the
roadside. I suppose some of them are, for things that I'd be able to fix
myself, and so I only called for help for the difficult things.
Actually, the RAC did fix one problem. I was run off the road into a
kerb when a car overtook a stream of parked cars on the wrong side of
the road and I had to take avoiding action - not surprisingly he didn't
even stop and just blared his horn as if the car on the right side of
the road should give way to the one on the wrong side of the road. The
impact with the kerb gashed the sidewall of one of the tyres. (Somehow
it didn't affect the tracking - I got the garage to check that later.)
Bit of a nuisance - drive a hundred yards to a convenient layby and
change the wheel. Wrong! On my Peugeot 306, the spare was held in a wire
cage below the boot, and this was released by undoing a long bolt
through the floor of the boot that moved a nut on the cage. And the
cretins at Peugeot had designed this bolt to have a circular (not hex)
head, with a wide half-cylindrical notch across the diameter. Curved
sides, not vertical sides. You were supposed to insert the flattened end
of the wheelbrace into the notch on the bolt head and use it like a
crude screwdriver. The thread on the bolt had seized so I couldn't shift
the bolt: the "screwdriver blade" just climbed out of the notch. The
head was circular so I couldn't get any purchase on it with Mole grips.
Mr RAC took about half an hour to free it - using a blowtorch on the
cage nut to expand it off the bolt thread, and then angle-grinding a
couple of flats on the head so the Mole grip would turn. And spray the
thread/nut liberally with penetrating oil. I got into the habit after
that of loosening and retightening the bolt every month or so, and
smearing the thread around the nut with grease.
I think that is the crappest of all crap designs I've ever seen. Why on
earth didn't they fit the bolt with a hex head the same size as the
wheel bolts, so the wheelbrace could be used properly, allowing a lot of
force to be exerted if need be because of a seized bolt?
NY
Jan 2, 2024, 5:30:37 PM1/2/24
to
On 02/01/2024 17:49, Colin Bignell wrote:
> On 02/01/2024 14:04, NY wrote:
>> Would you expect that a car which was MOTed in early December would
>> have a handbrake cable snap two weeks later?
>
> An MOT is only a statement of the condition the car at the time of the
> test.
But in many cases they can offer advice about things that are only just
> On 02/01/2024 14:04, NY wrote:
>> Would you expect that a car which was MOTed in early December would
>> have a handbrake cable snap two weeks later?
>
> An MOT is only a statement of the condition the car at the time of the
> test.
serviceable, and give you advisories about them. Not in this case. The
garage said that handbrake cables are not bare wire any more, but are in
a sheath like a bicycle brake cable - makes sense, to shield it! But
this means that a visual check, even if one was done, wouldn't be able
to see the cable inside the sheath. Ah well!
>> What is actually tested in the MOT - is it just a visual check of the
>> cables? Is there any check apart from "yes, the handbrake holds the car"?
>
> It has to be able to decelerate the car. IIRC the requirement is 25%
> braking capacity from the handbrake.
any noticeable retardation if you pulled it on while moving (**), even
though the handbrake would hold the car on a 1:3 hill. I assumed that it
was a myth that a handbrake could stop a moving car - difference between
coefficients of static and dynamic friction, coupled with stretchiness
of the cable imposing an upper limit on braking force, even if the
handbrake is adjusted so the lever is nowhere near the end-stop of its
travel when it stops moving because the handbrake is (apparently) on as
far as it will go. Maybe you have to tug with both hands, far beyond
normal what you'd do for a normal application - which is not practical
when you also have to steer an out-of-control car whose footbrake has
just failed. Given puny handbrakes, handbrake turns also appear (in my
experience) to be an unachievable myth ;-)
I'm sure if the car moving, the handbrake will slow it marginally
quicker than no handbrake, but nowhere near 25% of the rate that the
footbrake could achieve. 1% perhaps? Surely not every one of my cars has
had a defective handbrake...
(*) 2x Renault 5, 2x VW Golf, 2x Peugeot 306, 1x Peugeot 308
(**) Testing it on a straight road with no other traffic around.
Colin Bignell
Jan 2, 2024, 7:11:01 PM1/2/24
to
On 02/01/2024 22:30, NY wrote:
> On 02/01/2024 17:49, Colin Bignell wrote:
>> On 02/01/2024 14:04, NY wrote:
>>> Would you expect that a car which was MOTed in early December would
>>> have a handbrake cable snap two weeks later?
>>
>> An MOT is only a statement of the condition the car at the time of the
>> test.
>
> But in many cases they can offer advice about things that are only just
> serviceable, and give you advisories about them. Not in this case. The
> garage said that handbrake cables are not bare wire any more, but are in
> a sheath like a bicycle brake cable - makes sense, to shield it! But
> this means that a visual check, even if one was done, wouldn't be able
> to see the cable inside the sheath. Ah well!
I don't think I have seen bare handbrake cable in over 50 years.
> On 02/01/2024 17:49, Colin Bignell wrote:
>> On 02/01/2024 14:04, NY wrote:
>>> Would you expect that a car which was MOTed in early December would
>>> have a handbrake cable snap two weeks later?
>>
>> An MOT is only a statement of the condition the car at the time of the
>> test.
>
> But in many cases they can offer advice about things that are only just
> serviceable, and give you advisories about them. Not in this case. The
> garage said that handbrake cables are not bare wire any more, but are in
> a sheath like a bicycle brake cable - makes sense, to shield it! But
> this means that a visual check, even if one was done, wouldn't be able
> to see the cable inside the sheath. Ah well!
>
>>> What is actually tested in the MOT - is it just a visual check of the
>>> cables? Is there any check apart from "yes, the handbrake holds the
>>> car"?
>>
>> It has to be able to decelerate the car. IIRC the requirement is 25%
>> braking capacity from the handbrake.
>
> I've heard this, but I've yet to own any car (*) where the handbrake had
> any noticeable retardation if you pulled it on while moving (**), even
> though the handbrake would hold the car on a 1:3 hill. I assumed that it
> was a myth that a handbrake could stop a moving car - difference between
> coefficients of static and dynamic friction, coupled with stretchiness
> of the cable imposing an upper limit on braking force, even if the
> handbrake is adjusted so the lever is nowhere near the end-stop of its
> travel when it stops moving because the handbrake is (apparently) on as
> far as it will go. Maybe you have to tug with both hands, far beyond
> normal what you'd do for a normal application - which is not practical
> when you also have to steer an out-of-control car whose footbrake has
> just failed. Given puny handbrakes, handbrake turns also appear (in my
> experience) to be an unachievable myth ;-)
amateur motor sport. Of course, back then everybody had cross-ply tyres,
which lost grip quite easily.
>
> I'm sure if the car moving, the handbrake will slow it marginally
> quicker than no handbrake, but nowhere near 25% of the rate that the
> footbrake could achieve. 1% perhaps? Surely not every one of my cars has
> had a defective handbrake...
>
>
> (*) 2x Renault 5, 2x VW Golf, 2x Peugeot 306, 1x Peugeot 308
>
> (**) Testing it on a straight road with no other traffic around.
Colin Bignell
Nick Finnigan
Jan 4, 2024, 10:41:04 AM1/4/24
to
On 02/01/2024 17:49, Colin Bignell wrote:
> On 02/01/2024 14:04, NY wrote:
>> Would you expect that a car which was MOTed in early December would have
>> a handbrake cable snap two weeks later?
>
> An MOT is only a statement of the condition the car at the time of the test.
>
>> What is actually tested in the MOT - is it just a visual check of the
>> cables? Is there any check apart from "yes, the handbrake holds the car"?
>
> It has to be able to decelerate the car. IIRC the requirement is 25%
> braking capacity from the handbrake.
... and the braking has to be fairly balanced across the axle. Possibly
>> Would you expect that a car which was MOTed in early December would have
>> a handbrake cable snap two weeks later?
>
> An MOT is only a statement of the condition the car at the time of the test.
>
>> What is actually tested in the MOT - is it just a visual check of the
>> cables? Is there any check apart from "yes, the handbrake holds the car"?
>
> It has to be able to decelerate the car. IIRC the requirement is 25%
> braking capacity from the handbrake.
you only had one side working properly, not noticable in normal use, but on
the rolling road the mechanic had to pull very hard to get sufficient
retardation. Which might have strained the cable, which was checked
visually before the efficiency test.
NY
Jan 8, 2024, 7:28:21 AM1/8/24
to
"Nick Finnigan" <n...@genie.co.uk> wrote in message
news:un6jie$3mt87$1...@dont-email.me...
It's a little while since I've seen a car being MOTed. I can't remember: do
all four wheels have separate rollers or is the one set for both front
wheels and another set for both back wheels? I can imagine that it is
important, especially for the footbrake, to know that the brakes are
balanced side to side (to avoid a car swerving during heavy braking) as well
as being balanced front to back. If the wheels that are braked by the
handbrake are separately monitored, that would have shown up a one-sided
cable failure (or cable stretching) which would have necessitated the
handbrake to be pulled on harder to brake a combined roller.
My present garage in my village doesn't have its own MOT equipment but
drives cars to another of its sites about 10 miles away and returns them
after testing, so I don't get to see cars being MOTed now. Which reminds me,
I should be getting a phone call anytime now with news about our other car
which is in for a test today.
news:un6jie$3mt87$1...@dont-email.me...
all four wheels have separate rollers or is the one set for both front
wheels and another set for both back wheels? I can imagine that it is
important, especially for the footbrake, to know that the brakes are
balanced side to side (to avoid a car swerving during heavy braking) as well
as being balanced front to back. If the wheels that are braked by the
handbrake are separately monitored, that would have shown up a one-sided
cable failure (or cable stretching) which would have necessitated the
handbrake to be pulled on harder to brake a combined roller.
My present garage in my village doesn't have its own MOT equipment but
drives cars to another of its sites about 10 miles away and returns them
after testing, so I don't get to see cars being MOTed now. Which reminds me,
I should be getting a phone call anytime now with news about our other car
which is in for a test today.
Andy Burns
Jan 8, 2024, 8:12:10 AM1/8/24
to
NY wrote:
> It's a little while since I've seen a car being MOTed. I can't remember:
> do all four wheels have separate rollers or is the one set for both
> front wheels and another set for both back wheels?
I think the test centre I use has a only one (set?) of rollers, for 4WD
> It's a little while since I've seen a car being MOTed. I can't remember:
> do all four wheels have separate rollers or is the one set for both
> front wheels and another set for both back wheels?
cars he has to take them out for a road test with some sort of
brake-force meter in the passenger footwell, once he left it in there
after the test was done ...
nib
Jan 8, 2024, 8:27:06 AM1/8/24
to
force in kgf for each wheel separately, including for each side on the
handbrake.
nib
Nick Finnigan
Jan 8, 2024, 9:42:26 AM1/8/24
to
On 08/01/2024 12:28, NY wrote:
> It's a little while since I've seen a car being MOTed. I can't remember: do
> all four wheels have separate rollers or is the one set for both front
> wheels and another set for both back wheels?
Usually one set and reverse the car; the rollers being wide enough to
> It's a little while since I've seen a car being MOTed. I can't remember: do
> all four wheels have separate rollers or is the one set for both front
> wheels and another set for both back wheels?
handle differing track widths. Not sure if you can get 4 rollers to cope
with varying wheelbases, but 4wd are usually tested on road.
> after testing, so I don't get to see cars being MOTed now. Which reminds
> me, I should be getting a phone call anytime now with news about our other
> car which is in for a test today.
NY
Jan 8, 2024, 5:18:08 PM1/8/24
to
On 08/01/2024 14:42, Nick Finnigan wrote:
> On 08/01/2024 12:28, NY wrote:
>> It's a little while since I've seen a car being MOTed. I can't
>> remember: do all four wheels have separate rollers or is the one set
>> for both front wheels and another set for both back wheels?
>
> Usually one set and reverse the car; the rollers being wide enough to
> handle differing track widths. Not sure if you can get 4 rollers to cope
> with varying wheelbases, but 4wd are usually tested on road.
Come to think of it, yes, there was one set of rollers which were used
> On 08/01/2024 12:28, NY wrote:
>> It's a little while since I've seen a car being MOTed. I can't
>> remember: do all four wheels have separate rollers or is the one set
>> for both front wheels and another set for both back wheels?
>
> Usually one set and reverse the car; the rollers being wide enough to
> handle differing track widths. Not sure if you can get 4 rollers to cope
> with varying wheelbases, but 4wd are usually tested on road.
first on the front axle of the car then the car was reversed and they
were used on the rear axle (I'm using "axle" loosely).
But I can't remember whether there was one roller for both wheels or two
separate rollers, measuring braking force separate for the two wheels.
0 new messages