An oil leak can be a MOT failure. Is there legislation around that ? Jules

IanMetro wrote:

Simon J wrote:

In other words, you have absolutely no idea of what the legal position is so you just throw out a lot of meaningless nonsense.

Thanks

Are you wasting our time?

OK so there may be no law that bans different wheels on the same axle, can't be bothered to argue the point.

You have an accident, different wheels on the same axle, the car isn't therefore roadworthy as it wouldn't pass the MOT - the definition of roadworthy in the UK.
You have now been involved in an accident with an un-roadworthy vehicle, so insurance is void, and plod is going to have a field day, doesn't matter anymore who was or wasn't at fault in his eyes.

Even if you do keep your license how much will the insurance be when they know that you have been found guilty of driving an uninsured un-roadworthy vehicle?

Not really worth the risk.

I have the definite feeling that Magistrates take a very dim view of clever people trying to use the letter of the law to their own advantage. Tangiers Orange - gone, missing her
Replaced by Ewok what a mistake - now a happy Disco Sport owner

IIRC it was made illegal to mix radial and crossply tyres. There used to be public information adverts on TV about when I was a kid. Jules

I think it's more of the question why put your hand in a fire to see if it's hot as there is no law saying a fire is hot  my PC is slightly to the right of Genghis
2012 HSE SD4 In Orkney Grey now gone, best car ever.

Interestingly, the only exemption I have been able to find for temporary use spare tyres is that the prohibition on mixing cross plies and radials on the same axle doesn’t apply to them provided the speed doesn’t exceed 50 mph.

But it’s clear that between us all we can’t find a specific legal prohibition on different tyre sizes on the same axle even though it’s an automatic MOT failure. Maybe one of our number is an MOT tester who could explain this?

Thanks all.

i wonder how the freelander would handle with a skinny temporary tyre,if you hit the brakes at 50 mph in slippery conditions?i think i know the answer,thats why ive got a full size chinese tyre spare

Andy131 wrote:

OK so there may be no law that bans different wheels on the same axle, can't be bothered to argue the point.

You have an accident, different wheels on the same axle, the car isn't therefore roadworthy as it wouldn't pass the MOT - the definition of roadworthy in the UK.
You have now been involved in an accident with an un-roadworthy vehicle, so insurance is void, and plod is going to have a field day, doesn't matter anymore who was or wasn't at fault in his eyes.

Even if you do keep your license how much will the insurance be when they know that you have been found guilty of driving an uninsured un-roadworthy vehicle?

Not really worth the risk.

I have the definite feeling that Magistrates take a very dim view of clever people trying to use the letter of the law to their own advantage.

Simon J wrote:

Interestingly, the only exemption I have been able to find for temporary use spare tyres is that the prohibition on mixing cross plies and radials on the same axle doesn’t apply to them provided the speed doesn’t exceed 50 mph.

But it’s clear that between us all we can’t find a specific legal prohibition on different tyre sizes on the same axle even though it’s an automatic MOT failure. Maybe one of our number is an MOT tester who could explain this?

Thanks all.

I’m in the process of acquiring a temporary use spare wheel and tyre (not for the FL2 I hasten to add) and I just became curious as to how such an odd device was permitted. But I could find nothing in UK legislation that referred to it other than the exemption I mention above about relating to tyres of different construction on the same axle. The fact that having such a wheel and tyre fitted to a car was an immediate MOT fail simply added to my curiosity.

At the end of the day it’s not really of any great consequence but I’m still curious about it, not to mention that I can find no reference in the regulations to the use of such wheels and tyres being restricted to 50 mph!

I’m sure it’s all set out somewhere, but where?

Ah well, another night's sleep lost tonight

Further reading and rereading of the Regulations would suggest that Article 27 (1) (a) and Article 27 (3) when read together may provide the answer to both the use of the temporary use spare tyre and wheel and the 50 mph limit.

I’ll sleep better tonight

If the wheel/tyre is supplied with the vehicle, but has an instruction like maximum speed, then you are obviously allowed to use it. However as its a temporary wheel, the vehicle won't pass the MOT, as already suggested.

The Freelander spare is pretty good, being a 17" tyre, with a slightly narrower 225 section width, but still restricted to 50.

My wife's VW Eos has 235/45/17 tyres all round, but the spare is a 135/50/18, so is basically a pram wheel.
With this fitted, you'd not want to exceed 50, actually 50 feels too fast for it, and the TPMS light is on permanently while it's fitted, so it really is only a temporary measure, designed to get the vehicle to a tyre retailer ASAP. Hyundai Ioniq 5 Ultimate. The family car.
2009 Rimini Red SE TD4. Gone.
2006 Tonga Green i6 HSE. Gone.
Audi A5 convertible, my daily driver.
1972 Hillman Avenger GT, the project.

Interestingly, breaching the 50 mph limit isn’t in itself an offence like breaking the 70 mph limit would be; but driving at over 50 mph removes the exemption that temporary use spare tyres (TUST) have from the requirement to be suitable for the vehicle, etc., etc. as set out in Regulation 27 (1) (a) of the 1986 C&U regs.

But part of the reason for trying to understand just what the law said about TUSTs was to establish what other constraints, if any, there were on their use. You will find no shortage of 'experts' online (many of them from the caravan fraternity!) who claim that ‘it’s for emergency use only' or 'you must only drive to the nearest tyre shop to get the puncture repaired/tyre replaced' or 'you can only drive them for 50 miles', none of which is true. The law is silent on what constitutes 'temporary' and makes no mention of emergency use nor does it place any limit on how far they can be driven. Land Rover simply say in the handbook to drive with caution and ensure that an original sized wheel and tyre are fitted as soon possible. I had to fit one some twenty years ago to my Volvo after wrecking both tyre and wheel in a pothole in rural County Kildare. We continued on our bank holiday weekend away and clocked up about 300 miles before getting home where we could get a new wheel from the local Volvo dealer, plus tyre.

It's not just the MOT
Son's a driving instructor, going to the test center this morning he got a blow out on the motorway, fitted the space saver spare but the pupil wasn't able to take the test as the test center will not accept cars with space savers fitted.

When it comes to mileage on space savers, the wife's Micra had a pram wheel at silly pressure (60 PSI ?) this was almost bald after only 100 miles. But the Disco Sport has made it back on a space saver from Cornwall with a caravan on the hitch with no noticeable wear. Tangiers Orange - gone, missing her
Replaced by Ewok what a mistake - now a happy Disco Sport owner

I still cannot understand why anyone would want to risk lives by driving a car with unbalanced handling, other than slowly and carefully, in emergency, for the shortest distance.

The safety of car occupants has come a long way in the last 50 years, why look for 'legal' ways of reversing this process?

PS Please check any 'work around' you find is still covered by your insurers, in case you slide sideways into me on a bend. FL2 XS SD4 Auto 2010 2012-2017 (21k - 91k miles) (MY2011)
FL2 Metropolis SD4 Auto 2014 2017- (16k - 77k+ miles) (MY2015)
Metro in its 11th Year of (Extended) LR Warranty / Full LR Service History
(Expensive, but Trouble/Worry free - hopefully?)