The title says it all: Would I pass MOT in the UK with Nameless Cats? In other words would the mod be legal here? There's so many threads about Nameless Cats but I wasn't able to find an answer to this.

I've got a bad O2 sensor so work in this area is needed anyway. Thought of replacing the original (probably 10 year old) cats together with four new O2 sensors. Thought being that if one is gone now, the others will probably follow soon...

 

There's three considerations:

a) component change from OE
b) noise
c) emissions

Section 7 of the current UK MoT Inspection Manual covers Exhaust, Fuel & Emissions requirements.

Physical condition and noise levels are detailed in Section 7.1:



From what I've seen on Nameless, there is little doubt they are well made so physical condition is unlikely to be a reason for fail. If you were to remove the centre silencer boxes, noise could become contentious.


Emissions are detailed in Section 7.3:





Perhaps worth checking the manufacturer guarantees their product will fall within the permitted upper limits of:

Natural Idle Test
CO : max 0.30%

Fast Idle Test
CO : max 0.20%
HC : max 200 ppm
Lambda: 0.97 - 1.03

Graham

 

Thanks for the thorough answer! Very informative.

While googling for alternatives I ran into this:
Jaguar XK and XKR 4.2 Catalytic Converters (Pair) - High Performance Jaguar Catalytic Converters

Sounds very similar to Nameless (if not the same?). These people claim the emission levels remain fully road and MOT legal.

 

Cars registered after March 2001 are not allowed to have different type of catalyst in the uk I'm afraid:
http://www.r103.info/ANNEXC.pdf

 

Just out of curiosity would your twin screw kit be legal here?

 

The UK Catalyst Type Approval Regulations require fitting of R103 Type Approved Cats to vehicles registered on or after 1st March 2001. The regulations came into force on 13th August 2009.

R103 is a statutory requirement covering the supply, sale and installation of replacement Catalytic Converters and affects Manufacturers, Importers and Distributors of this product.

This does NOT mean you can only fit OE Cats as a replacement.

All type approved catalysts are marked with a code showing the country of origin followed by 103R which is the UN regulation 103, and finally the homologation guideline and number.

Graham

 

You actually read it ;-)

The costs to get a type approval is pretty high, and the product needs to about the same as the original part, so I don't expect to see sport catalysts at reasonable prices.

 

Of course I did - facts and details every time for me!

Agreed about costs and effects of Type Approval. I'm sure aftermarket manufacturers for 'our' types of cars will see an opportunity for big profits. The products will be marketed as 'performance' with a high price tag.

Graham

 

Regarding the Cats I mentioned before (link in previous message): I sent an enquiry about them and got this interesting answer:

"Thank you for your mail, the 200cell cats we provide are hand made in the UK, they are of a very high quality and will pass the UK MOT and emission tests. As a small scale production of custom parts they are not subjected to TUV or type approval – as this is not a legal requirement for aftermarket fitment. The cats do not come with new o2 sensors, they are build and designed to use the standard O2 sensors without adjustment or modification"

Then there's the price factor. At £1095.00 they're not exactly cheap. Then again I have no idea how these compare to others. Nameless is cheaper but I guess I'd have to pay customs/tax and delivery?

 

Have you pointed PP to the directive? It its also illegal for them to sell you a catalyst for your car for normal road use, so their claims you posted here could get them in trouble (especially if you bought them with this text). Or did they mention you where only allowed to use it on a track?

 

Yes I did send them the link to the r103 website in my enquiry. I guess they just ignored it. There's been no mention on track only use either anywhere.

 

I keep encountering reference to MOT from you guys across the pond and it sounds like this agency is as onerous as the DMV we have in California. We need to get "smog" inspections every 2 years here once your car is 5 years old. This whole process has primarily become a revenue-generating bureaucratic boondoggle but it is virtually illegal to do almost anything in terms of engine or exhaust modifications in California. I have heard of cases where folks did some modification such as install higher performance exhaust headers and passed the measured emissions portion of the smog test with flying colors. But they would still FAIL merely because of the modification itself (assuming that it was discovered by the smog inspector). To be strictly legal in California a modification has to have a CARB number (California Air Resources Board) and this is apparently costly enough that some manufacturers don't bother to apply. So if you install something in California without a CARB number it is basically at your own risk and, if caught, you can be forced to remove the item.

Doug

 

Yes, MOT is similar:

"The Ministry of Transport test (usually abbreviated to MOT test) is an annual test of automobile safety, roadworthiness aspects and exhaust emissions required for most vehicles over three years old used on public roads in the United Kingdom." - MOT test - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

+1

I went back to re-read their website and they appear oblivious (or to be deliberately ignoring) the directive.

Their product will almost certainly pass an MoT but is not legal for UK road use without Type Approval.

The regulations are enforced by VOSA and not by MoT Testing Stations. The chances of being inspected are therefore very small. The risk comes in the event of an accident. Insurance companies look for every reason to reject a claim and non-compliance with R103 could be sufficient.

Graham

 

Doug,

Our MoT vehicle testing (the acronym derives from Ministry of Transport) used to be every three years for vehicles over ten years old and consisted of little more than kicking the tyres and making sure the lights worked.

UK Government tightened things up a bit and it became an annual requirement for vehicles over three years old.

RANT STARTS >>>

Then the CARB in California decided to change the World and we all had to have an obsession with emissions and all kinds of electronic gizmos to ensure the exhaust gases coming out the back were cleaner than the air sucked into the inlet manifold at the front. Either these CARB guys are on fantastic salaries to dream these things up or Los Angeles must have the sweetest and cleanest air on the Planet as a result.

<<< RANT ENDS

Graham

 

Thanks! I think I will just save the money and replace the bad O2 sensor I have for now. She passed the MOT with these cats just fine and gaining a few horsies or "better" sound with performance cats somehow feels not so important now

 

Totally agree with your rant. Much of this started in California in the "old days" when cars spewed bunches of emissions and the air was thick with smog. After years of catalytic converters and tightening emissions standards, the air has become much cleaner, which is a good thing. But the cars themselves run much cleaner and stay in better tune with the advent of computer controlled engine management. In the old days cars would lose tune after even 6 months and folks that didn't care would end up spewing all sorts of crap. Hence the bi-yearly smog check requirements.

But cars since the 1990s can go much longer without tuneups and still run reasonably clean. My 1995 Corvette had as good emissions readings on my last smog check (in 2008) as the first day I bought the car and, other than a few mods, all I did was standard minor maintenance. CARB finally realized this and waived testing for any car less than 5 years old. But what they should do is also waive testing for older cars (as long as they are mid-1990s or later) if you can show a receipt for having performed basic maintenance. Requiring even bi-yearly smog checks of modern vehicles is merely now a revenue raising measure and a humongous waste of time. But once a program is instituted by the bureaucrats it NEVER goes away, even if not really needed.

Doug

 

Trusting that people will voluntarily do the right thing where money or personal convenience is involved is a recipe for disaster.

 

You know, I used to dread driving in Los Angeles in the 70s and 80s because of the bad air on the freeways. Its easy to forget how bad it was, until you end up behind an old carburetted classic and smell the fumes. Now in LA it's very much different, and you can sometimes see the mountains even! I'm all for the emission controls, and agree with the sentiment that they are also the cause for our cars staying in tune for years and years (until sonething breaks)

Peace,
Steve

 

In other words we are too stupid to do the right thing but smart enough to elect bureaucrats to decide what the right thing is. It would make more sense to cause extreme inconvenience and penalty for the few percent of those who do not do the right thing than impose a massive bureaucracy, inconvenience, and expense on the 90% or more that do. But I digress.

Doug