Traveller wood

[tysonn]

LOL didnt spot that!So we've all been wasting our time

[nwxh]

Sorry to hijack the OP's thread.

Just today, after a long chat, a shopkeeper suggested a veneer to fool the MOT testers, however I wouldn't do this. I'd leave it to the tester to decided whether or not the repairs are effective.

I was hoping to finish my studies and find a job before getting woodwork repairs, but a family member is willing to help me out until then.

[The vast minority]

Taupe[/quote]
Total wrong am afraid[/quote]
Yes indeed,if so every morgan,(ash framed) would have no checks made on chassis.Wood filler is what it is Filler,not heard of wood that can be welded,[/quote]

Actually Morgan use steel chassis, only the body frame is wood. The floor sections in the steel chassis are marine plywood, this just lifts out and is replaced in seconds. Perhaps that is what you are thinking of but the chassis most certainly isn't made of wood. And I should know!
Just saying

Al

[bmcecosse]

Have a good look at a saloon/convertible at the rear....there is a flanged diaphragm joining the two sides of the car together - and a structure running across above the boot opening - which is itself sturdy, and flanged around the edge to make it very strong... The Trav has nothing in that area - only the timber structure - which is weak enough even when in good order! Rear wheels off the ground? The max stress will come when they touch down again - potentially folding the flappy platform upwards.... the Trav and the Conv have (at least did have when they left the factory) double skin sills to try to help with all this - but the Conv is still going to be more rigid than a Trav. We haven't seen the extent of the filler on the Trav in question - but the idea that stick on veneer would be needed suggests quite large patches !!

[nwxh]

Hijacking the thread again, but I'm guessing this is considered a "get it replaced within 6 months" situation. Yet some people will say they drove for a few years with it like this?

[panky]

I guess many people have, many have also driven round with filler holding metal door posts and chassis rails together. The choice is theirs but I wouldn't be happy even if it did have a nice shiny coat of paint on it.

[nwxh]

The filler is stronger than wood in compression, but perhaps not in tension. No filler is going to beat steel.

[panky]

Yes maybe not the best comparison by me but think about how an impact would act on filler then how a proper wood frame would cope, a bit like comparing a vase with a gate post, again not a great analogy but you get my drift.

[kennatt]

LOL didnt spot that!So we've all been wasting our time

Looks like his first post has been his last,Don't think I will look at this one again.

[tysonn]

Yeah I'm getting bored with it now also.

[millerman]

Negativity reigns

[millerman]

Negativity reigns

[tysonn]

On Thurday nativity will reign.

[tim_jnv]

I am told that boxing section in a traveller is double skinned like the convertible?

[scubaman]

Its structural to the effect that it will fail its MOT if unsound.Its part of the structure of the car!

I might be wrong but Im sure I read that timber parts are no longer assessed in the MOT test...

Taupe

Total wrong am afraid

sorry to burst your bubble but absolutely no part of a minor woodwork or indeed any car part constructed in wood comes into an MOT it is all a myth.

I should know being an MOT tester if it is not on the computer you can not fail it and there is nothing on there about rotten wood!!!!

If anyone has one fails on wood appeal!!!!!

[nwxh]

I believe they argue that the wings or otherwise are insecure? So people arguing both sides are partially right?

I was advised by a Morris Minor restoration garage that their local MOT garage has a "common sense" approach that they'll pass it if rotten in places if they think it'll be some time before anything falls off.

[scubaman]

I believe they argue that the wings or otherwise are insecure? So people arguing both sides are partially right?

I was advised by a Morris Minor restoration garage that their local MOT garage has a "common sense" approach that they'll pass it if rotten in places if they think it'll be some time before anything falls off.

again there is no provision for insecure bodywork the inspection manual is available to view online only sharp edges can be failed on non structural (within 30 cm's of steering brakes suspension) area's a loose wing can only be advised.

the mot is just a minimum standard you would be horrified at what can pass an mot!

[taupe]

[tim_jnv]

badly rotten wood isn't all that nice to look though, so would get rid of it! I thought the wood formed part of the chassis, or is this not examined unless its holding the suspension on? I n which case is an MOT checking to see if; a driver can see where he's going, others can see him and where he wants to go, all for wheels are attached something holding them together, and on latter cars that emissions aren't going to kill a bloke sucking on the end of the exhaust?! oh and nobody is going to cut them selves on it?

[SteveClem]

So is it right that despite Traveller wood being structural it is not checked at the MOT ? If so it's not only contrary to everything I've ever been told but also a disgrace! Without a solid ash frame the car is a death trap.