How is the hand break tested in other Countries. Here in Ireland, the
last time I went, they drove the Range Rover and pulled it on. If the
contraption they had installed on the floor registered the correct
reading all was ok. If not it failed. No mention of the transmission
and damage it might have caused.

I have to go for another test in the near future and I am seriously
hoping they have changed the test methods.

Hugh

Hugh Hogan wrote:
> How is the hand break tested in other Countries. Here in Ireland, the
> last time I went, they drove the Range Rover and pulled it on. If the
> contraption they had installed on the floor registered the correct
> reading all was ok. If not it failed. No mention of the transmission
> and damage it might have caused.
>
> I have to go for another test in the near future and I am seriously
> hoping they have changed the test methods.

The last ****wit vehicle tester who applied a cardan shaft handbrake
like that on one of my vehicles was unemployed shortly thereafter.

It is NOT an acceptable practice - I've seen the backing plate torn off
the back of the gearbox after somebody tried this. The only safe
methods of testing this type of handbrake are either statically by
checking it will hold the vehicle on a slope of the required grade, or
loading the brake by engaging first gear and GENTLY releasing the clutch
to ensure that the vehicle does not move.


--
EMB

EMB wrote:

> Hugh Hogan wrote:
>
>> How is the hand break tested in other Countries. Here in Ireland, the
>> last time I went, they drove the Range Rover and pulled it on. If the
>> contraption they had installed on the floor registered the correct
>> reading all was ok. If not it failed. No mention of the transmission
>> and damage it might have caused.
>>
>> I have to go for another test in the near future and I am seriously
>> hoping they have changed the test methods.
>
>
> The last ****wit vehicle tester who applied a cardan shaft handbrake
> like that on one of my vehicles was unemployed shortly thereafter.
>
> It is NOT an acceptable practice - I've seen the backing plate torn off
> the back of the gearbox after somebody tried this. The only safe
> methods of testing this type of handbrake are either statically by
> checking it will hold the vehicle on a slope of the required grade, or
> loading the brake by engaging first gear and GENTLY releasing the clutch
> to ensure that the vehicle does not move.

You could start by nicely explaining the hazards with reference to the
owner's manual (I think that there's something there).

There is this document on the website of the Irish Department of
Transport (effectively the testers' manual)- no guarantee that this is
the appropriate document but it looks right:
http://www.transport.ie/viewitem.asp?id=6480&lang=ENG&loc=1865

You should look at Item 23 on page 32.

It doesn't make very comforting reading as they mention only a roller
test (apply the parking brake slowly...) or if a roller test cannot be
used a decelerometer test. Transmission brakes are acknowledged but if
the roller test cannot be used there is no official 'get out' to save
your driveline.

"Dougal" <DougalAThiskennel.free-online.co.uk> wrote in message
news:zdCdnRy-0c_kEqPYRVnyrQ@eclipse.net.uk...
> EMB wrote:
>
> > Hugh Hogan wrote:
> >
> >> How is the hand break tested in other Countries. Here in Ireland, the
> >> last time I went, they drove the Range Rover and pulled it on. If the
> >> contraption they had installed on the floor registered the correct
> >> reading all was ok. If not it failed. No mention of the transmission
> >> and damage it might have caused.
> >>
> >> I have to go for another test in the near future and I am seriously
> >> hoping they have changed the test methods.
> >
> >
> > The last ****wit vehicle tester who applied a cardan shaft handbrake
> > like that on one of my vehicles was unemployed shortly thereafter.
> >
> > It is NOT an acceptable practice - I've seen the backing plate torn off
> > the back of the gearbox after somebody tried this. The only safe
> > methods of testing this type of handbrake are either statically by
> > checking it will hold the vehicle on a slope of the required grade, or
> > loading the brake by engaging first gear and GENTLY releasing the clutch
> > to ensure that the vehicle does not move.
>
> You could start by nicely explaining the hazards with reference to the
> owner's manual (I think that there's something there).
>
> There is this document on the website of the Irish Department of
> Transport (effectively the testers' manual)- no guarantee that this is
> the appropriate document but it looks right:
> http://www.transport.ie/viewitem.asp?id=6480&lang=ENG&loc=1865
>
> You should look at Item 23 on page 32.
>
> It doesn't make very comforting reading as they mention only a roller
> test (apply the parking brake slowly...) or if a roller test cannot be
> used a decelerometer test. Transmission brakes are acknowledged but if
> the roller test cannot be used there is no official 'get out' to save
> your driveline.
>

Bottom line for a landrover in the UK (Areas covered by VOSA rules):- You
basically have 2 choices;
1. Roller brake test if vehicle is of a design that allows, i.e. not viscous
centre coupling;
2..Decelerometer test.

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. On
series and pre-viscous centre diff motors, I tend to try the rollers 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.
Personally, I strongly disagree with having to test landrover transmission
handbrakes in this fashion, however, the handbrake has passed type-approval
for the vehicle which means that it must be suitable/safe to be applied in
an emergency if a total brake failure occurs, and there is no other
procedure open to the tester within the limits of the tester's manual.
Another point I would add - as long as there is no excessive free-play in
drive members, diff, prop u/j's and splines, and the handbrake is operating
correctly, then they don't snatch and judder and are therefore safe to test
by either of the 2 above methods. From experience, there are only problems
if there is a fault or wear somewhere. I still don't agree with it however,
but there is no other way of (legally) getting an MOT pass.
Before I was an MOT tester myself, my "local" tester would try to gently
pull away with the parking brake applied, if it didn't move it passed.
However, this isn't "legal" for VOSA, and if the vehicle subsequently has an
issue requiring VOSA's involvement (post-R.T.A. investigation, appeal, etc
etc) and they test it "correctly" and it fails, it's the tester that gets it
in the neck big-style! (Unless he/she can prove that they tested it
correctly and it was ok at the time of testing) I've been a witness at a
VOSA investigation, and believe me when I say I wouldn't want to be the one
getting investigated!!
Badger.

Badger wrote:
> "Dougal" <DougalAThiskennel.free-online.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:zdCdnRy-0c_kEqPYRVnyrQ@eclipse.net.uk...
>> EMB wrote:
>>
>>> Hugh Hogan wrote:
>>>
>>>> How is the hand break tested in other Countries. Here in Ireland, the
>>>> last time I went, they drove the Range Rover and pulled it on. If the
>>>> contraption they had installed on the floor registered the correct
>>>> reading all was ok. If not it failed. No mention of the transmission
>>>> and damage it might have caused.
>>>>
>>>> I have to go for another test in the near future and I am seriously
>>>> hoping they have changed the test methods.
>>>
>>> The last ****wit vehicle tester who applied a cardan shaft handbrake
>>> like that on one of my vehicles was unemployed shortly thereafter.
>>>
>>> It is NOT an acceptable practice - I've seen the backing plate torn off
>>> the back of the gearbox after somebody tried this. The only safe
>>> methods of testing this type of handbrake are either statically by
>>> checking it will hold the vehicle on a slope of the required grade, or
>>> loading the brake by engaging first gear and GENTLY releasing the clutch
>>> to ensure that the vehicle does not move.
>> You could start by nicely explaining the hazards with reference to the
>> owner's manual (I think that there's something there).
>>
>> There is this document on the website of the Irish Department of
>> Transport (effectively the testers' manual)- no guarantee that this is
>> the appropriate document but it looks right:
>> http://www.transport.ie/viewitem.asp?id=6480&lang=ENG&loc=1865
>>
>> You should look at Item 23 on page 32.
>>
>> It doesn't make very comforting reading as they mention only a roller
>> test (apply the parking brake slowly...) or if a roller test cannot be
>> used a decelerometer test. Transmission brakes are acknowledged but if
>> the roller test cannot be used there is no official 'get out' to save
>> your driveline.
>>
>
> Bottom line for a landrover in the UK (Areas covered by VOSA rules):- You
> basically have 2 choices;
> 1. Roller brake test if vehicle is of a design that allows, i.e. not viscous
> centre coupling;
> 2..Decelerometer test.
>
> 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. On
> series and pre-viscous centre diff motors, I tend to try the rollers 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.
> Personally, I strongly disagree with having to test landrover transmission
> handbrakes in this fashion, however, the handbrake has passed type-approval
> for the vehicle which means that it must be suitable/safe to be applied in
> an emergency if a total brake failure occurs, and there is no other
> procedure open to the tester within the limits of the tester's manual.
> Another point I would add - as long as there is no excessive free-play in
> drive members, diff, prop u/j's and splines, and the handbrake is operating
> correctly, then they don't snatch and judder and are therefore safe to test
> by either of the 2 above methods. From experience, there are only problems
> if there is a fault or wear somewhere. I still don't agree with it however,
> but there is no other way of (legally) getting an MOT pass.
> Before I was an MOT tester myself, my "local" tester would try to gently
> pull away with the parking brake applied, if it didn't move it passed.
> However, this isn't "legal" for VOSA, and if the vehicle subsequently has an
> issue requiring VOSA's involvement (post-R.T.A. investigation, appeal, etc
> etc) and they test it "correctly" and it fails, it's the tester that gets it
> in the neck big-style! (Unless he/she can prove that they tested it
> correctly and it was ok at the time of testing) I've been a witness at a
> VOSA investigation, and believe me when I say I wouldn't want to be the one
> getting investigated!!
> Badger.
>
>
They still use Tapley meters on a 4wd in this day & age???

--
Karen

If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to be a horrible warning.'
Catherine Aird

On or around Wed, 25 Oct 2006 10:22:56 +0100, "Badger"
<brianhatton@btinternet.com> enlightened us thusly:

>Another point I would add - as long as there is no excessive free-play in
>drive members, diff, prop u/j's and splines, and the handbrake is operating
>correctly, then they don't snatch and judder and are therefore safe to test
>by either of the 2 above methods. From experience, there are only problems
>if there is a fault or wear somewhere.

Hmmm. Ought to check the latest disco for driveline play... That exhibits
lots of snatch and judder.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"Quos deus vult perdere, prius dementat" Euripedes, quoted in
Boswell's "Johnson".

"Badger" <brianhatton@btinternet.com> wrote

<snip>

> Bottom line for a landrover in the UK (Areas covered by VOSA rules):- You
> basically have 2 choices;
> 1. Roller brake test if vehicle is of a design that allows, i.e. not
viscous
> centre coupling;
> 2..Decelerometer test.
>
> 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. On
> series and pre-viscous centre diff motors, I tend to try the rollers

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.

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.

> Personally, I strongly disagree with having to test landrover transmission
> handbrakes in this fashion, however, the handbrake has passed
type-approval
> for the vehicle which means that it must be suitable/safe to be applied in
> an emergency if a total brake failure occurs,

The vehicle should be parked on a steep incline, the handbrake applied
whilst stationary, and the vehicle should remain stationary. 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.

Martin

and there is no other
> procedure open to the tester within the limits of the tester's manual.
> Another point I would add - as long as there is no excessive free-play in
> drive members, diff, prop u/j's and splines, and the handbrake is
operating
> correctly, then they don't snatch and judder and are therefore safe to
test
> by either of the 2 above methods. From experience, there are only problems
> if there is a fault or wear somewhere. I still don't agree with it
however,
> but there is no other way of (legally) getting an MOT pass.
>

"Oily" <martinhill100@nospambtconnect.com> wrote in message
news:KYqdnTkAr-XHqKLYnZ2dnUVZ8tSdnZ2d@bt.com...
>
> "Badger" <brianhatton@btinternet.com> 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.

"Duracell Bunny" <karen_oz@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:453f30c1$0$15657$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> >
> >
> They still use Tapley meters on a 4wd in this day & age???
>

Indeed they do, Karen. As the vehicles have become more and more
sophisticated with all their ABS, Active differentials, Traction Control,
Electronic Brake Distribution etc etc, there are now a lot of vehicles that
"chuck the teddy" if placed on rollers that do anything other than turn all
4 wheels at the same speed! Some will light up their dashboards like
Blackpool Illuminations, some will attempt to "leave" the rollers. For this
reason, we still use Tapley and Bowmonk type decelerometer testers. In all
honesty, they are good, reliable and accurate devices.
They also give the tester the oppertunity to assess the brakes whilst
actually driving, possibly allowing a sensible tester a bit of leeway in
deciding that something is actually ok???

Badger.

Badger wrote:
> "Dougal" <DougalAThiskennel.free-online.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:zdCdnRy-0c_kEqPYRVnyrQ@eclipse.net.uk...
>> EMB wrote:
>>
>>> Hugh Hogan wrote:
>>>
>>>> How is the hand break tested in other Countries. Here in
>>>> Ireland, the last time I went, they drove the Range Rover and
>>>> pulled it on. If the contraption they had installed on the floor
>>>> registered the correct reading all was ok. If not it failed. No
>>>> mention of the transmission and damage it might have caused.
>>>>
>>>> I have to go for another test in the near future and I am seriously
>>>> hoping they have changed the test methods.
>>>
>>>
>>> The last ****wit vehicle tester who applied a cardan shaft handbrake
>>> like that on one of my vehicles was unemployed shortly thereafter.
>>>
>>> It is NOT an acceptable practice - I've seen the backing plate torn
>>> off the back of the gearbox after somebody tried this. The only
>>> safe methods of testing this type of handbrake are either
>>> statically by checking it will hold the vehicle on a slope of the
>>> required grade, or loading the brake by engaging first gear and
>>> GENTLY releasing the clutch to ensure that the vehicle does not
>>> move.
>>
>> You could start by nicely explaining the hazards with reference to
>> the owner's manual (I think that there's something there).
>>
>> There is this document on the website of the Irish Department of
>> Transport (effectively the testers' manual)- no guarantee that this
>> is the appropriate document but it looks right:
>> http://www.transport.ie/viewitem.asp?id=6480&lang=ENG&loc=1865
>>
>> You should look at Item 23 on page 32.
>>
>> It doesn't make very comforting reading as they mention only a roller
>> test (apply the parking brake slowly...) or if a roller test cannot
>> be used a decelerometer test. Transmission brakes are acknowledged
>> but if the roller test cannot be used there is no official 'get out'
>> to save your driveline.
>>
>
> Bottom line for a landrover in the UK (Areas covered by VOSA rules):-
> You basically have 2 choices;
> 1. Roller brake test if vehicle is of a design that allows, i.e. not
> viscous centre coupling;
> 2..Decelerometer test.
>
> 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. On
> series and pre-viscous centre diff motors, I tend to try the rollers
> 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.
> Personally, I strongly disagree with having to test landrover
> transmission handbrakes in this fashion, however, the handbrake has
> passed type-approval for the vehicle which means that it must be
> suitable/safe to be applied in an emergency if a total brake failure
> occurs, and there is no other procedure open to the tester within the
> limits of the tester's manual.

But after such an 'Emergency' stop the vehicle does not have to be driveable.
Slapping an auto into 'P'ark (if it will go) will meet that requirement, but is
exceedingly unlikely to perform thereafter!

I have asked here in the North how they do it and was told on the rollers, quite
simple, one wheel at a time reversing direction of axel pairs.


Another point I would add - as long as
> there is no excessive free-play in drive members, diff, prop u/j's
> and splines, and the handbrake is operating correctly, then they
> don't snatch and judder and are therefore safe to test by either of
> the 2 above methods. From experience, there are only problems if
> there is a fault or wear somewhere. I still don't agree with it
> however, but there is no other way of (legally) getting an MOT pass.
> Before I was an MOT tester myself, my "local" tester would try to
> gently pull away with the parking brake applied, if it didn't move it
> passed. However, this isn't "legal" for VOSA, and if the vehicle
> subsequently has an issue requiring VOSA's involvement (post-R.T.A.
> investigation, appeal, etc etc) and they test it "correctly" and it
> fails, it's the tester that gets it in the neck big-style! (Unless
> he/she can prove that they tested it correctly and it was ok at the
> time of testing) I've been a witness at a VOSA investigation, and
> believe me when I say I wouldn't want to be the one getting
> investigated!!
> Badger.



--
Don't say it cannot be done, rather what is needed to do it!

If the answer is offensive maybe the question was inappropriate

The fiend of my fiend is my enema!

"GbH" <Geoff_Hannington@IEE.ORGasm> wrote in message
news:ehnfpp$uf1$1@localhost.localdomain...
> >
> > Bottom line for a landrover in the UK (Areas covered by VOSA rules):-
> > You basically have 2 choices;
> > 1. Roller brake test if vehicle is of a design that allows, i.e. not
> > viscous centre coupling;
> > 2..Decelerometer test.
> >
> > 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. On
> > series and pre-viscous centre diff motors, I tend to try the rollers
> > 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.
> > Personally, I strongly disagree with having to test landrover
> > transmission handbrakes in this fashion, however, the handbrake has
> > passed type-approval for the vehicle which means that it must be
> > suitable/safe to be applied in an emergency if a total brake failure
> > occurs, and there is no other procedure open to the tester within the
> > limits of the tester's manual.
>
> But after such an 'Emergency' stop the vehicle does not have to be
driveable.
> Slapping an auto into 'P'ark (if it will go) will meet that requirement,
but is
> exceedingly unlikely to perform thereafter!

The "Park" facility on an auto IS NOT an emergency brake however, it is a
safety device to prevent the vehicle moving and crushing a mechanic/owner/
innocent bystander should an internal hydraulic fault cause a gear to be
engaged whilst the vehicle is being worked on with the engine running.
Applying it whilst in motion is a sure-fire way to shear the operating pawl
within the 'box, making it a one-shot system!

> I have asked here in the North how they do it and was told on the rollers,
quite
> simple, one wheel at a time reversing direction of axel pairs.

Doesn't work on a landrover though, the brake drum is at the output of the
gearbox, on the rear propshaft. If the wheels are allowed to turn in
opposite directions then the wheels will continue to rotate with NO brake
force being registered as the parking brake is applied. A basic function of
how a differential operates

Something else to consider, roughly on-topic, how many MOT testers bother to
put the transfer box in neutral and autobox in Drive when doing the
emissions testing? It's a well-known and well documented failure mode for
the ZF4 autobox, revving the engine in P or N can cause premature wear of
the input shaft oil sealing rings - closely followed by "A" clutch failure
and loss of all drive!

Badger.

On or around Wed, 25 Oct 2006 11:01:57 +0100, "Oily"
<martinhill100@nospambtconnect.com> enlightened us thusly:

>The vehicle should be parked on a steep incline, the handbrake applied
>whilst stationary, and the vehicle should remain stationary. 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.

The law says otherwise, though, I suspect. And there are credible failures
of a dual-line system which can disable both lines.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"Brevis esse laboro, Obscurus fio" (it is when I struggle to be
brief that I become obscure) Horace (65 - 8 BC) Ars Poetica, 25

On or around Wed, 25 Oct 2006 12:00:43 +0100, "Badger"
<brianhatton@btinternet.com> enlightened us thusly:

>The "Park" facility on an auto IS NOT an emergency brake however, it is a
>safety device to prevent the vehicle moving and crushing a mechanic/owner/
>innocent bystander should an internal hydraulic fault cause a gear to be
>engaged whilst the vehicle is being worked on with the engine running.
>Applying it whilst in motion is a sure-fire way to shear the operating pawl
>within the 'box, making it a one-shot system!

I recall hearing a possibly-apocryphal tale about testing the strength of
the parking pawl in the Borg-Warner factory and inadvertently finding a very
fast way of removing the engine and gearbox from a Ford.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"Brevis esse laboro, Obscurus fio" (it is when I struggle to be
brief that I become obscure) Horace (65 - 8 BC) Ars Poetica, 25

Does anybody remember when the MOT first started, and the tester used a full
house brick standing on end.
If it fell over when handbrake applied it passed.

In message <NeKdnUIayuZH2aLYnZ2dnUVZ8tadnZ2d@bt.com>, Badger
<brianhatton@btinternet.com> writes
>
>"GbH" <Geoff_Hannington@IEE.ORGasm> wrote in message
>news:ehnfpp$uf1$1@localhost.localdomain...
>> >
>> > Bottom line for a landrover in the UK (Areas covered by VOSA rules):-
>> > You basically have 2 choices;
>> > 1. Roller brake test if vehicle is of a design that allows, i.e. not
>> > viscous centre coupling;
>> > 2..Decelerometer test.
>> >
>> > 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. On
>> > series and pre-viscous centre diff motors, I tend to try the rollers
>> > 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.
>> > Personally, I strongly disagree with having to test landrover
>> > transmission handbrakes in this fashion, however, the handbrake has
>> > passed type-approval for the vehicle which means that it must be
>> > suitable/safe to be applied in an emergency if a total brake failure
>> > occurs, and there is no other procedure open to the tester within the
>> > limits of the tester's manual.
>>
>> But after such an 'Emergency' stop the vehicle does not have to be
>driveable.
>> Slapping an auto into 'P'ark (if it will go) will meet that requirement,
>but is
>> exceedingly unlikely to perform thereafter!
>
>The "Park" facility on an auto IS NOT an emergency brake however, it is a
>safety device to prevent the vehicle moving and crushing a mechanic/owner/
>innocent bystander should an internal hydraulic fault cause a gear to be
>engaged whilst the vehicle is being worked on with the engine running.
>Applying it whilst in motion is a sure-fire way to shear the operating pawl
>within the 'box, making it a one-shot system!
>
>> I have asked here in the North how they do it and was told on the rollers,
>quite
>> simple, one wheel at a time reversing direction of axel pairs.
>
>Doesn't work on a landrover though, the brake drum is at the output of the
>gearbox, on the rear propshaft. If the wheels are allowed to turn in
>opposite directions then the wheels will continue to rotate with NO brake
>force being registered as the parking brake is applied. A basic function of
>how a differential operates
>
>Something else to consider, roughly on-topic, how many MOT testers bother to
>put the transfer box in neutral and autobox in Drive when doing the
>emissions testing? It's a well-known and well documented failure mode for
>the ZF4 autobox, revving the engine in P or N can cause premature wear of
>the input shaft oil sealing rings - closely followed by "A" clutch failure
>and loss of all drive!
>
>Badger.
>
>
That's an interesting one. Don't think they've ever done that on my
defender auto - or any of my other autos.

Does it apply to all auto boxes or just this particular one?
--
hugh
Reply to address is valid at the time of posting

Badger wrote:

> Not a valid and legal test, m'Lord. Sorry. Even if I agree with you, which I
> do, we are confined by the rules.

It's valid and legal at this end of the world - on of the few MOT type
things they've got right.


--
EMB

"EMB" <embtwo@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ehoais$9e5$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> Badger wrote:
>
> > Not a valid and legal test, m'Lord. Sorry. Even if I agree with you,
which I
> > do, we are confined by the rules.
>
> It's valid and legal at this end of the world - on of the few MOT type
> things they've got right.

Wish VOSA would take heed and ammend things this end, but somehow I doubt
it!
Badger.

"hugh" <hugh@[127.0.0.1]> wrote in message
news52z9dLhC5PFFAxV@raefell.demon.co.uk...
> In message <NeKdnUIayuZH2aLYnZ2dnUVZ8tadnZ2d@bt.com>, Badger
> <brianhatton@btinternet.com> writes
> >
> >Something else to consider, roughly on-topic, how many MOT testers bother
to
> >put the transfer box in neutral and autobox in Drive when doing the
> >emissions testing? It's a well-known and well documented failure mode for
> >the ZF4 autobox, revving the engine in P or N can cause premature wear of
> >the input shaft oil sealing rings - closely followed by "A" clutch
failure
> >and loss of all drive!
> >
> That's an interesting one. Don't think they've ever done that on my
> defender auto - or any of my other autos.
>
> Does it apply to all auto boxes or just this particular one?

Just the ZF4 series, as far as I am aware. Used in various BMW's, Jaguars,
Volvo's and Landrover products.
Very well documented in the USofA, lots of issues with BMW's having 'box
failures after smog-testing, just do a google and you'll find some more info
on that. I've had the fault on one of my own boxes, and sure enough when I
stripped it the steel piston-ring type seals had eaten 2 grooves into the
stator shaft (support shaft for the stator part of the torque convertor) and
the main "A" clutch had considerable wear, caused by the resulting pressure
leak past the seals.
Quick test, get the box and oil hot, place in neutral on flat surface, hand
(sorry, parking!) brake off, rev to 3000 and if it tries to creep forwards
then the seals are worn and "A" clutch failure is probably imminent. Don't
hold at 3000 waiting for something to happen, just get there then straight
back down.
Badger.

"Badger" <brianhatton@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:-_OdneiJpaU0oKLYRVnyjg@bt.com...
>
> "Oily" <martinhill100@nospambtconnect.com> wrote in message
> news:KYqdnTkAr-XHqKLYnZ2dnUVZ8tSdnZ2d@bt.com...
> >
> > "Badger" <brianhatton@btinternet.com> 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.
>

Yes, I was forgetting about the RULES ;-)

<snip>

> applying the parking brake during a decelerometer test, which is also a
> controlled speed, 20mph and apply smoothly.
>

It's a good job most Landrover handbrakes are full of oil and gunge or your
forehead would look like it had mumps. ;-)

> > 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.
>

Yep them goddam rules again. ;-)

> 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.
>
>
I don't honestly think Landrover gave a s**t about an emergency backup when
they designed the handbrake on the old series, or they had a funny sense of
humour. Bloody lethal as a secondary brake if they are clean and kept
adjusted.

Martin

"Austin Shackles" <austinNOSPAM@ddol-las.net> wrote in message
news:lajuj299880fa5q8arvd1ilqdvnj5lomlg@4ax.com...
> On or around Wed, 25 Oct 2006 11:01:57 +0100, "Oily"
> <martinhill100@nospambtconnect.com> enlightened us thusly:
>
> >The vehicle should be parked on a steep incline, the handbrake applied
> >whilst stationary, and the vehicle should remain stationary. 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.
>
> The law says otherwise, though, I suspect. And there are credible
failures
> of a dual-line system which can disable both lines.
>
Poor maintenance?

Martin