MOT Failure - Harnesses

Exige failed MOT today on safety harnesses. Apparently they are not legal (remember questioning this a few years ago) and tester advised that the police are now clamping down on this and issuing fixed penalty notices. I quickly fitted a set of std Elise seatbelts and got it passed. Refitting harnesses tonight.

Tester also said that Exiges.com sticker could also constitute a fail as it fell inside the swept area of the wiper blade - where’s Pesky? going to sue him for selling me something that is not fit for purpose

you need to find a more user freindly test center I think mate, Surly Harnesses are much more safer than standard belts?? is it for visabillity purposes?

Simon, I believe the requirement is for the harness buckle to have a red push-button release (with a PRESS marking) rather than the more common aircraft-style twist release or anything else. I have Schroth harnesses in my car that were specifically fitted in order to be road legal without belts. Malcolm Saunders at MSAR can supply the necessary bits:

http://www.msar-safety.com/

HTH

Thanks for the information Mike

Nath test station is v Exige friendly - its just that a couple of his customers have been recently pulled by the BIB for this

Simon

I believe that your man is technically correct vis the sunstrip.

Seeing as you fitted it, plus it is fit for purpose in that it keeps the sun out of your eyes, all I can say is “up yours!”

I also believe that Mike is correct vis harness release buttons

If this is the case how is it Lotus are selling me my 08 Exige S without road belts, just the Scroth harnesses?

On the 08 speccing belts deletes the road belts. I would be surprised if Lotus hadn’t checked this out. Well disappointed to say the least.

Damon

There is NOT a problem with the Lotus supplied harnesses - they have the appropriate road legal release buttons - fret not

Rob’s right. I’ve got a 2004 Performance Pack Exige with the harnesses fitted from new and deleted standard three point belts. With the red push button totally legal. Never had or know of an mot problem. I suggest a new mot man.

Yeah Simon, they were fitted as standard to S1’s and S2’s with the appropriate ‘pack’. So your Exige friendly MOT man, don’t sound so friendly in my book. Mine passed with flying colours yesterday!!!

Yeah Simon, they were fitted as standard to S1’s and S2’s with the appropriate ‘pack’. So your Exige friendly MOT man, don’t sound so friendly in my book. Mine passed with flying colours yesterday!!!

  • did you have the CAT on Sean - tester ok, I left him with his pipe shoved firmly up a BMW exhaust - ouch

There are 2 types of Schroth Harnesses. The twist buckle are not CE marked so technically can be failed the MOT. The push button buckle are CE marked and these are the ones sold by Lotus.

I looked into this when I bought mine. The MOT reg’s are a bit woolly but the SVA reg’s clearly specify they must be CE marked. I therefore went for the push button.

[quote- did you have the CAT on Sean [/quote]

Of course mate!!!

Damon

There is NOT a problem with the Lotus supplied harnesses - they have the appropriate road legal release buttons - fret not

Correct. The Schroth harnesses are factory type-approved for the car and hence are actually road legal. Not many cars are road legal with harnesses… in NZ I had the devil’s own job of convincing them to let it pass. Here if you have harnesses you need a motorsport licence/authority card etc which is a pain in the ass. Took 6 hours of arguing with them to get them to give in, even though I’d highlighted the relevant text from their manual which vindicated me!

The Schroth harnesses are factory type-approved for the car and hence are actually road legal.

I have always thought that this was the real issue NOT whether they were push button.

I did spent some time trying to bottom this out one way or the other but never found any documentation to substantiate either view. there is a requirement to be able to undo a belt/harness with one hand, but both methods meet that requirement.

It would be interesting to know if the MOT man could point to a particular reference for the failure?