205 1.9 Mot Failure - Advice Please

[stufarri 98 3 Cars]

My GTI failed it's MOT a few weeks ago on 2 issues:

 

Rear hand brake not effective enough

 

Emissions too high - 0.54% actual v 0.3% pass on CO

 

The car is a late 93K with a cat (should have one but some tool has poked it put with a stick??!) and passed for the last 4 years but must have been tested non CAT, which is wrong apparently.

 

With the brakes the cables are fine but it seems the rear of the discs are more pitted that the fronts - are the calipers goosed or will new discs/pads solve it?

 

With the emissions willl tweaking the AFM (not by me of course) solve the issue or will fitting a CAT make the biggest difference and get it to pass?

 

Can I have some views please, thanks.

[Anthony 1,003]

Those emissions are roughly what I'd expect with the CAT missing - a working CAT should being the emissions comfortably under the limit.

 

Difficult to say what the low effort on the handbrake is without seeing it, as it could be disks/pads (although if they're that bad I'd expect it to fail on the service brake too), could be the handbrake mechanism on the calipers is duff, or it could be the cables even though they subjectively look fine - if they've never been done I'd replace them regardless personally.

 

Did you get a copy of the brake test results? What was the effort for the service brake on both sides front and back, and what was the effort for the handbrake on both sides?

[Miles 331 1 Cars]

Get them to go on the Chassis number as hopefully it will be before the Switch over date, I know the last CAT car I stuck thru I was surprized it passed as it was a pattern CAT and had been standing for 7 years, New Lambda fitted and it flew thru but again it was only tested like this as it was OK as above the chassis number was pre CAT

[stufarri 98 3 Cars]

Cheers gents.

 

Checked re the cat MOT - tester is adamant that it needs this test but says the cat will not bring the emissions down (?) - he says tweaking the AFM will lower it.

 

The scribble on the fail sheets says 110 on both sides rear but not sure of this hand brake or foot brake. Seems it only failed on the hand brake force - it does work and having tightened the cables near the gear/handbrake lever the cables are taught - but clearly not enough force to pass.

[Anthony 1,003]

...having tightened the cables near the gear/handbrake lever the cables are taught - but clearly not enough force to pass.

That doesn't mean that the cables are good though - what usually happens is the outer metal section starts to fall apart, and means that when you pull the handbrake, only a limited amount of your effort actually pulls the inner cable and acts on the caliper. If there's any obvious splits or metal showing on the cables then replace the pair.

[monkee87 2]

Do you know what's the most stupid thing? The limit for a CAT test is 3.5% co2 and a non CAT test is also 3.5% co2.. So what's the point in having a CAT if they're meant to bring down emissions?

 

Tweak the AFM, that should solve your emissions.

 

Out of interest, does anyone know the cut off date for Non CAT 205's? Mines a '92 and iirc, isn't that when they swapped to CAT equipped cars?

[Anthony 1,003]

Do you know what's the most stupid thing? The limit for a CAT test is 3.5% co2 and a non CAT test is also 3.5% co2.. So what's the point in having a CAT if they're meant to bring down emissions?

No it isn't.

 

Non-CAT test is 3.5% CO and 1200ppm HC

 

CAT-test is 0.3% CO (fast idle) / 0.5% CO (idle) and 200ppm HC, and lambda between 0.97-1.03

[Anthony 1,003]

Out of interest, does anyone know the cut off date for Non CAT 205's? Mines a '92 and iirc, isn't that when they swapped to CAT equipped cars?

It's done on the date the car was *manufactured*, not the date it was *registered* - hence there's plenty of K-reg 205's that don't need a CAT, because they were made prior to the cut off and stood around for a period of time prior to being registered. It's even more noticeable on 309's, as there's L-reg Goodwood's out there that don't need a CAT despite the registration seemingly being well past the cut-off.

 

AFAIK it's anything manufactured after 1st August 1992 that needs a CAT test.

 

The only time that isn't true is for either pre-1995 cars where there isn't a match on the database (usually imports) which are then still tested as a non-CAT despite having been manufactured after the cut off date, and for cars that have a replacement engine fitted that is from a pre-CAT car as the test is done on the oldest of the car and engine.

[monkee87 2]

No it isn't.

 

Non-CAT test is 3.5% CO and 1200ppm HC

 

CAT-test is 0.3% CO (fast idle) / 0.5% CO (idle) and 200ppm HC, and lambda between 0.97-1.03

 

I remember reading on here that they were the same. Maybe they were wrong.

[monkee87 2]

It's done on the date the car was *manufactured*, not the date it was *registered* - hence there's plenty of K-reg 205's that don't need a CAT, because they were made prior to the cut off and stood around for a period of time prior to being registered. It's even more noticeable on 309's, as there's L-reg Goodwood's out there that don't need a CAT despite the registration seemingly being well past the cut-off.

 

How do you find out when the car was manufactured then??

[Anthony 1,003]

How do you find out when the car was manufactured then??

Chassis number, hence Miles's comment above.

[monkee87 2]

Lol, mine fits none of that criteria..

Registered on 26/08/92. Might of had the phase 2.5 stuff at one point but doesn't anymore and it's got an engine from a ph 1.5 running jetronic as it used to have an Mi16 in it... Ha. Always been a 1.9 though.

 

Sorry for the questions Anthony! Never MOTd the car I've got ATM as haven't had it long...

 

Also sorry for the off topic thread steal!

[stufarri 98 3 Cars]

No it isn't.

 

Non-CAT test is 3.5% CO and 1200ppm HC

 

CAT-test is 0.3% CO (fast idle) / 0.5% CO (idle) and 200ppm HC, and lambda between 0.97-1.03

 

100% correct - according to my cat fail sheet

[robnic 0]

Hi,

 

You will need a CAT to get below the 0.3% limit even if altering the AFM would bring it down low enough which I doubt you would risk running too lean as Anthony said the figure you have is what you would expect with no CAT, if your cables are def ok you will have to strip the pads out and decide by the condition of them and the discs what needs replacing, when refitting slacken the cables right off pump the brake pedal a few times to get a good pedal check the rear discs are not binding (you should be able to turn them easily) then manually apply the hand brake lever on the caliper (you might need to use mole grips for extra leverage) and see if it you can rotate them if it seems ok then adjust the cables equally and try again with the wheels on to give you some more leverage finally when sat back on its wheels see how it stops when slightly rolling forward, if all seems ok back the the testing station...

 

hth

 

Rob

[stufarri 98 3 Cars]

Hi,

 

You will need a CAT to get below the 0.3% limit even if altering the AFM would bring it down low enough which I doubt you would risk running too lean as Anthony said the figure you have is what you would expect with no CAT, if your cables are def ok you will have to strip the pads out and decide by the condition of them and the discs what needs replacing, when refitting slacken the cables right off pump the brake pedal a few times to get a good pedal check the rear discs are not binding (you should be able to turn them easily) then manually apply the hand brake lever on the caliper (you might need to use mole grips for extra leverage) and see if it you can rotate them if it seems ok then adjust the cables equally and try again with the wheels on to give you some more leverage finally when sat back on its wheels see how it stops when slightly rolling forward, if all seems ok back the the testing station...

 

hth

 

Rob

 

Cheers for this.

 

I was hoping not to have to buy a CAT - but looks like I will have to stump up £70 for a new one (off ebay). I'll see what the local tuner says when he looks at it.

 

I have bought discs/pads all round (fronts have slight wobble) and new genuine hand brake cables tonight too - £120 easily spent!

 

When these things go wrong, the cost soon adds up, the joy of 205 GTI ownership.

 

Having said that just had a lambda sensor replaced on the Z4M (it has 4 apparently) and this cost £320 but thankfully is under warranty - to think I paid that much for a tatty phase 1 CTI 2 years ago!

Edited March 20, 2011 by stufarri

[M_R_205 5 1 Cars]

When these things go wrong, the cost soon adds up, the joy of 205 GTI ownership.

 

The joy of owning any car....

[stufarri 98 3 Cars]

Bit the bullet and ordered a new cat off Ebay - cheaper than any motor factors I found. £70 delivered with 2 year guarantee.

 

Hope the bloody thing passes next week, after spending £200! My Speedline refurb will have to wait a few months now as a result.

[stufarri 98 3 Cars]

Fitted a cat, new rear discs/pads and new hand brake cables and after freeing up the siezed rear calipers it's in for an MOT tomorrow.

 

The cat brought the emissions down from 0.54% CO to a superb 0.02% CO and the HC from 54ppm to 6ppm (nearly same measures as my wife's 2007 Mini).

 

I'm no spanner chimp, so thanks to marksorrento205 for doing the business - a thoroughly decent chap!

 

Thanks to all those that helped me out with words of wisdom too.

 

Fingers crossed for tomorrow!

[stufarri 98 3 Cars]

Success at last!

[marksorrento205 80]

The gti lives for another day

[backroadpug 12]

I thought you can pass it with no cat. Cars registered befor august 1995 when it fails its bet test you can put it through a non cat test so I though.

never mind tho at least its got another year on it now.

Edited March 30, 2011 by backroadpug

[lukesaddy 0]

not a bad fail sheet really, especially to say disc handbrakes are always known to be sh!t.

 

good to hear its passed now