Change to Vehicle WOF's

Forums › Off topic › Change to Vehicle WOF's

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7

6229 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#690159 23-Sep-2012 14:33

spacedog: 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.

<snip>

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

There is another factor which in my view is more important that time and mileage, and that's the general standard of maintenance. In my view a modern vehicle maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications should never require a WOF, so the WOF process really only exists to protect road users against the likes of boy racers and the mechanically ignorant.

Mighty Ape

Shop Mighty Ape for electronics, games, computers books and more (affiliate link).

mattwnz

19378 posts

Uber Geek

#690178 23-Sep-2012 15:25

If you buy a new toyota, there is no way that should need a WOF check after just 1 year. Not unless it has been thrashed to death or used as a rental. Both of which would be measured by milage. So perhaps mileage based WOF system could be an idea. But as I have said previously, the main wear when milage is involved, is with consumables such as tyres, brakepads , light bulbs etc. And many people, if not most people, rely on the WOF to pick up these problems. I mean how many people check their tyre wear, lights and brakes each time they go out to drive. Tyres are difficult to judge if they aren't wearing evenly.

spacedog

436 posts

Ultimate Geek

#690187 23-Sep-2012 16:30

Yeah, don't get me wrong. I totally don't buy into the WOF thing. I'm originally from California and aside from getting a smog check every 2 years, that's all you have to do. Police will pull you over and issue tickets if you car looks unsafe on the road (bald tires, busted lights, sagging suspension).

I'd be a bigger fan of the WOFs here if they did a better job of dealing with noisy cars, but considering the amount of noisy cars I hear, it doesn't seem to do much.

lxsw20

3192 posts

Uber Geek

#690205 23-Sep-2012 17:29

IMO a car with 78k on it does need 6 month checks. 10 year old suspension components etc. are going to start wearing out . Unfortunately in NZ you need to allow for the lowest common denominator, which are people that are either too lazy to look after their cars or people that just don't know any better.

TheUngeek

924 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#690212 23-Sep-2012 17:51

I think a lot of people commenting here would have a different opinion if they had actually worked on/with/around cars for a decent amount of time.

D1023319

498 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

#690247 23-Sep-2012 19:12

TheUngeek: I think a lot of people commenting here would have a different opinion if they had actually worked on/with/around cars for a decent amount of time.

From your experience, at what age / mileage of vehicles does WOF issues start to cause a safety risk

In regards to your previous post re example of a worn brake rotor - what was the age / type of vehicle?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v77/bentoy/Brake/severely_worn_brake_rotor.jpg

spacedog

436 posts

Ultimate Geek

#690248 23-Sep-2012 19:26

lxsw20: IMO a car with 78k on it does need 6 month checks. 10 year old suspension components etc. are going to start wearing out . Unfortunately in NZ you need to allow for the lowest common denominator, which are people that are either too lazy to look after their cars or people that just don't know any better.

Well, just to put it in perspective...there are 37 million people in California and I would hazard that the lowest common denominator there is equal to here if not far worse. If the WOF system really is crucial, and they have no WOF system there, you'd think their would be a big problem over there because of the large population. There doesn't seem to be any evidence of a problem or a need for a WOF system from when I was living there.

TheUngeek

924 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#690260 23-Sep-2012 19:57

D1023319:
TheUngeek: I think a lot of people commenting here would have a different opinion if they had actually worked on/with/around cars for a decent amount of time.

From your experience, at what age / mileage of vehicles does WOF issues start to cause a safety risk

In regards to your previous post re example of a worn brake rotor - what was the age / type of vehicle?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v77/bentoy/Brake/severely_worn_brake_rotor.jpg

In reality, the first time it's driven. So much depends on the use, where it's used. Random stuff happens to cars.
Imo I think it should be yearly to a certain mileage, and then 6 monthly. And a stricter test.
It needs to be less subjective in some areas.

Technofreak

6102 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#690270 23-Sep-2012 20:38

I think doing a WOF annually is a good time frame.

While mileage is also a factor, another factor is the type of driving, i.e. all city stop start, all open road, back country dirt and gravel roads etc. These differing types of driving all have their own unique wear and "abuse" factors independent to some extent of mileage.

I think it would be hard to come up with a fair mileage figure so I think a time figure is the way to go.

While a case could be made for doing away with the WOF it's something that we've become used to and I think our general psychy is to use it as a back up to the general maintenance we do with our vehicles. I think my vehicles is well maintained but come warrant time it makes me take a good look at the car to double check everything.

Taking the WOF away could have some very negative consequences in my opinion.

I do wish there was more done at WOF time about all the dirt diesel cars, utes, and people movers we see on the roads. The smog pollution has increased markedly since the introduction of Jap import second hand diesels as many owners buy them for the cheap diesel fuel costs but don't or cannot afford to maintain them properly.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

lxsw20

3192 posts

Uber Geek

#690307 23-Sep-2012 21:47

spacedog:
lxsw20: IMO a car with 78k on it does need 6 month checks. 10 year old suspension components etc. are going to start wearing out . Unfortunately in NZ you need to allow for the lowest common denominator, which are people that are either too lazy to look after their cars or people that just don't know any better.

Well, just to put it in perspective...there are 37 million people in California and I would hazard that the lowest common denominator there is equal to here if not far worse. If the WOF system really is crucial, and they have no WOF system there, you'd think their would be a big problem over there because of the large population. There doesn't seem to be any evidence of a problem or a need for a WOF system from when I was living there.

What would the average age of the car fleet be over there? The road quality compared to NZ? Climate? Who knows (It's certainly not because American cars are better built), the fact is components can fail in a 6 month period.

My last Honda had just over 100k on it and I replaced the rear engine mount and trailing arm bushes because they had failed. My 3 year old Mazda 3 failed its last WOF before I picked it up on headlight alignment and front tyres, it's the current model, and only has 40k on the clock doesn't mean it's not going to have issues.

spacedog

436 posts

Ultimate Geek

#690345 23-Sep-2012 23:05

lxsw20:
spacedog:
lxsw20: IMO a car with 78k on it does need 6 month checks. 10 year old suspension components etc. are going to start wearing out . Unfortunately in NZ you need to allow for the lowest common denominator, which are people that are either too lazy to look after their cars or people that just don't know any better.

Well, just to put it in perspective...there are 37 million people in California and I would hazard that the lowest common denominator there is equal to here if not far worse. If the WOF system really is crucial, and they have no WOF system there, you'd think their would be a big problem over there because of the large population. There doesn't seem to be any evidence of a problem or a need for a WOF system from when I was living there.

What would the average age of the car fleet be over there? The road quality compared to NZ? Climate? Who knows (It's certainly not because American cars are better built), the fact is components can fail in a 6 month period.

My last Honda had just over 100k on it and I replaced the rear engine mount and trailing arm bushes because they had failed. My 3 year old Mazda 3 failed its last WOF before I picked it up on headlight alignment and front tyres, it's the current model, and only has 40k on the clock doesn't mean it's not going to have issues.

Average age is ~11 years (http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jan/17/business/la-fi-mo-aging-autos-20120117)

As for road quality, it's equal to here and in some cases worse as the infrastructure in the USA is crumbling (along with the economy) at an alarming rate. I personally clocked over 200,000 driving miles across the USA.

Most people in the USA clock more miles and drive longer daily distances than here. As such people quickly burn through tyres and have to get at least an oil change every 5,000-7,500 miles. Whenever you go in to even get an oil change most shops take a look at the brakes, suspension, tyres without having to ask. They do this because if they see something wrong they see it as an opportunity to earn money for repairs.

Anyways, not trying to stir the pot too much, I just thought I'd add a non-WOF system to contrast in this discussion.

I'd be plenty happy if I just didn't have to get my 78k 2002 Honda CRV WOFd every six months...but I know I'm the exception. I have worked on cars before and I know how to look after a vehicle.

DonGould

3892 posts

Uber Geek

#690350 23-Sep-2012 23:34

Yes I think education could end up being a bit issue.

I've told people in the past that they have a break light out and the attitude is "pffft... I'll do it next time I get a warrant".

Changing the WOF rules will mean we have to change national culture.

Promote New Zealand - Get yourself a .kiwi.nz domain name!!!

Check out mine - i.am.a.can.do.kiwi.nz - don@i.am.a.can.do.kiwi.nz

nova

144 posts

Master Geek

Trusted

#690536 24-Sep-2012 11:42

blakamin: In South Aussie we dont have WoFs... but if you get caught driving a vehicle thats unroadworthy, you're up a creek with no paddle...
Rego includes third party and costs $827 per year for my BMW...

It looks like that third party in SA only covers medical costs, and not damage to other vehicles:

http://www.sa.gov.au/subject/Transport,+travel+and+motoring/Motoring/Vehicles+and+registration/Vehicle+insurance/Compulsory+third+party+insurance

I think this is true of a lot of compulsory third party regimes around the world, and we already have a very similar level of cover through the ACC scheme, which makes up the bulk of our registration fee.

mattwnz

19378 posts

Uber Geek

#690612 24-Sep-2012 13:31

spacedog: Yeah, don't get me wrong. I totally don't buy into the WOF thing. I'm originally from California and aside from getting a smog check every 2 years, that's all you have to do. Police will pull you over and issue tickets if you car looks unsafe on the road (bald tires, busted lights, sagging suspension).

I'd be a bigger fan of the WOFs here if they did a better job of dealing with noisy cars, but considering the amount of noisy cars I hear, it doesn't seem to do much.

People modify them to make them louder. I am more of a fan of not allowing noisy modified cars like that on the roads. They probably don't conform to council noise guidelines anyway.

TheUngeek

924 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#690667 24-Sep-2012 15:17

Council had nothing to do with car noise.
Unless you have the stereo too loud when stationary

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7