Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
Buying anything on Amazon? Please use the Geekzone Amazon aff link.


View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7
816 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 80


  Reply # 689788 22-Sep-2012 08:58 Send private message

Maybe they should consider adding a mileage limit to the WOF expiry. E.g. the car with 75,000km on the odo gets checked today (assuming it passes) the new WOF will expire 22/09/13 or when the car has done, say, 90,000km, whichever comes first.
(Obviously requires a lot more thinking and systems changes in how you would enforce and police it, but just thought I'd throw it out there.)





924 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 35
Inactive user


  Reply # 689791 22-Sep-2012 09:07 Send private message

Mileage is a much better way to do it I think.

p.s your sig pic cracks me up!


2631 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 65

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 689795 22-Sep-2012 10:04 Send private message

D1023319: Theres been mention in the paper that mechanics fear New Zealand roads could be flooded with unfit cars if the Government extends warrant-of-fitness inspections to one year.


http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/7701971/One-year-WOF-raises-spectre-of-unsafe-cars


I think the mechanics are only worried about loss of business.
The problem is not the frequency that vehicles get warrants - rather it is the number of vehicles that do not have uptodate WOF's or insurance.

I frequently see vehicles with tickets and even unsafe stickers on the side of the road and it doesnt stop the owners driving them.

To improve the safety of vehicles, I think the government should:
- make third party insurance compulsory
- turn expired WOFs / unsafe designations into a towable offence.

Agree / disagree?


I'd rather leave it as it is. I see enough unfit cars on the road as it is....wihtout giving them another 6 months. 

As for compulsory 3rd-party insurance, I'd rather see a single government-run, non-profit universal car insurer. These are the cheapest anywhere and everywhere they are able to be implemented. Private insurers can't be trusted...as people in Christchurch have learned the very hard way. But we knew that 70 years ago when State Insurance was set up. We just forgot. 




____________________________________________________
If you're not curious, your brain is already dying...if not dead.



11503 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 663

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 689805 22-Sep-2012 10:36 Send private message

IMO there should be more policing of cars on the road that are obviously unsafe.

Have seen cops many times do nothing even when following a car with 2 brake lights out. IMO one should be a warning and 2 should be a green sticker.




Richard rich.ms

139 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 54


  Reply # 689880 22-Sep-2012 14:39 Send private message

TheUngeek: More has to be checked keeping in mind it won't be inspected for another 12 months.
So things with 8 months life will get you a fail. There's more costs right there.


More what? Surely if you check a car every six months or every twelve months - you're still checking the same components... The implication that there is more to check if it changes to twelve months means that we're not checking cars properly now.

924 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 35
Inactive user


  Reply # 689881 22-Sep-2012 14:42 Send private message

Maybe I should have said more in-depth. The test will take longer.

gzt

4751 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 278


  Reply # 689883 22-Sep-2012 14:54 Send private message

Regardless of the other merits of the proposal - the check cost will increase significantly if the check was set at 12 months for all cars regardless of age.

For many check items it is very quick to pass an item.

In a 12 month cycle there will be a larger number of item failures leading to increased cost. Reasons:
  1. It takes a lot longer to fail an item
  2. If the item is borderline it is often inspected more closely to be sure of the fault and cause
  3. A failed item is often tested more than once on the same visit or requires opinion from other team members
  4. Often times each failure needs to be explained in detail to customers
  5. There will be a higher proportion of vehicles requiring a fix/recheck than in a six month cycle



262 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 13

Subscriber

  Reply # 689889 22-Sep-2012 15:19 Send private message

TheUngeek: More has to be checked keeping in mind it won't be inspected for another 12 months.
So things with 8 months life will get you a fail. There's more costs right there.

Having worked in the industry for quite some time, the thought of NZ cars switching to 12 month test scares the crap out of me.

It is not uncommon for a car to come into a work shop with a "funny noise" and apon inspection this is found: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v77/bentoy/Brake/severely_worn_brake_rotor.jpg

The above should look more like: http://www.trustmymechanic.com/pics/rotor.jpg



What % of cars that would fail a WOF for anything dangerous?
I would have thought the % to be small and mostly on vehicles that were old and risk anyway.


FYI this is why I agree with longer WOF gaps.

  • The average new vehicle can cover 110,000km before it starts to require regular maintenance.
  • Which at average distance travelled per year of 12,000km, makes 10 years old the risk point for vehicles




11503 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 663

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 689890 22-Sep-2012 15:19 Send private message

a wof is an inspection at that given time, it is not meant to fail on things that might fail before the next one, those are warnings.

I only see that the prices will go up as a majority of their customers will now be coming half as often. Remember that only a minority of vehicles get 12 month WOFs now - have the be NZ new and not very old.




Richard rich.ms

688 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 31


  Reply # 689892 22-Sep-2012 15:26 Send private message

richms: a wof is an inspection at that given time, it is not meant to fail on things that might fail before the next one, those are warnings.

I only see that the prices will go up as a majority of their customers will now be coming half as often. Remember that only a minority of vehicles get 12 month WOFs now - have the be NZ new and not very old.


You first paragraph is exactly right.

Your second is partly wrong - any vehicle, NZ new or imported under 6 years old gets a 12 month WOF - if it passes the inspection of course.




                                           

11503 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 663

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 689893 22-Sep-2012 15:28 Send private message

clevedon:
Your second is partly wrong - any vehicle, NZ new or imported under 6 years old gets a 12 month WOF - if it passes the inspection of course.


Hmm, that must have changed since I had a young japp import, it was on 6 months from the get go.

Not really an issue now as I dont really want to own a newish vehicle now.




Richard rich.ms

gzt

4751 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 278


  Reply # 689896 22-Sep-2012 15:36 Send private message

 D1023319:
  • The average new vehicle can cover 110,000km before it starts to require regular maintenance.
  • Which at average distance travelled per year of 12,000km, makes 10 years old the risk point for vehicles

What is the source of those figures? Even in the best case brakes will be replaced at least once during that period. Tyres multiple times.

11503 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 663

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 689898 22-Sep-2012 15:40 Send private message

Brakes and tires will be gotten at service time, which will happen many times during that timeframe.

Just because they are not inspected as often doesnt excuse not maintaining them.




Richard rich.ms



262 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 13

Subscriber

  Reply # 689947 22-Sep-2012 17:45 Send private message

gzt:
 D1023319:
  • The average new vehicle can cover 110,000km before it starts to require regular maintenance.
  • Which at average distance travelled per year of 12,000km, makes 10 years old the risk point for vehicles

What is the source of those figures? Even in the best case brakes will be replaced at least once during that period. Tyres multiple times.


Source of these figures are"

Re 12,000 distance heres a MOT link
http://www.transport.govt.nz/research/Documents/Driver%20travel%20-%20March%202012.pdf

Re 110,000k - experience from vehicle procurement in govt agencies and discussions with GSB pers over the years.


FYI - wasnt saying wait 10y until for first WOF on a vehicle - rather I was stating why yearly WOF's would be ok for first 10y of vehicles life.



221 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 3


  Reply # 690087 23-Sep-2012 09:33 Send private message

I think the WOF every six months for cars more than six years old is really ridiculous. My feeling is that the quality of cars and the safety of cars has dramatically improved since the 1990s. My 2002 Honda CRV runs like a champ only has 78k on it and yet I have to get a WOF every 6 months and it passes every single time.

I'd be OK with modifying the 6 month WOF condition from 6 years to saying that cars made after 2000 only require an annual WOF and cars pre-2000 require it every 6 months.

However, that being said, my backup 1996 honda crv has to get WOF'ed every six months and it passes just fine. I only put about 1500k on it a year and yet I have to get it WOFd every 6 months. It is the most expensive maintenance condition on that car......

Perhaps WOFs should be based on mileage rather than time....

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic




Twitter »
Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





Trending now »

Hot discussions in our forums right now:

Crew Drinking on Flights - Why!?
Created by networkn, last reply by Dratsab on 21-Dec-2014 22:04 (27 replies)
Pages... 2


Police Camera Van Disguise
Created by Reanalyse, last reply by Dratsab on 21-Dec-2014 21:59 (74 replies)
Pages... 3 4 5


Do I have the right to return this?
Created by corksta, last reply by alasta on 21-Dec-2014 12:59 (44 replies)
Pages... 2 3


Slaughter of Innocents
Created by networkn, last reply by networkn on 19-Dec-2014 17:46 (64 replies)
Pages... 3 4 5


Spray Foam Insulation
Created by AACTech, last reply by timbosan on 19-Dec-2014 16:58 (36 replies)
Pages... 2 3


Couriers starting to charge for redelivery
Created by mattwnz, last reply by rendezvous on 19-Dec-2014 11:45 (78 replies)
Pages... 4 5 6


Google Chromecast now available in New Zealand
Created by freitasm, last reply by michelangelonz on 20-Dec-2014 10:38 (155 replies)
Pages... 9 10 11


forgot how to unlock a car door
Created by joker97, last reply by joker97 on 21-Dec-2014 07:34 (53 replies)
Pages... 2 3 4



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.

Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.