Front brake back plate

Post by **blancowesty** » 28 Nov 2007, 15:48

My local garage has inspected underneath my camper (1990 Westfalia Atlantic) and is about to change the badly corroded brake pipe spltter valve located at the front of the camper between the two front wheels, which seems fair enough, or is it?
They also showed me that the front brake back plates are very thin and unstable so they were torn off, like a piece of paper.
They tell me that they are not essential to the camper as they only catch stones etc which get trapped under the back plate. Is this so? or should I have new replacement front brake back plates sourced and fitted?

Post by **andysimpson** » 28 Nov 2007, 19:51

Leave them off, they cause more problems than they prevent.

Post by **..lee..** » 28 Nov 2007, 20:57

missing or excessivly corroded/damaged back plates are an mot fail.

HOWEVER the phrase is intended to mean drum brake back plates as they hold the shoes ect and are not a (stone guard/dust guard) that the fronts are.

i have no problem with passing cars without them but some testers may interpret the rule another way.

Post by **andysimpson** » 28 Nov 2007, 21:40

..lee.. wrote:missing or excessivly corroded/damaged back plates are an mot fail.

HOWEVER the phrase is intended to mean drum brake back plates as they hold the shoes ect and are not a (stone guard/dust guard) that the fronts are.

i have no problem with passing cars without them but some testers may interpret the rule another way.

Lots of cars do not have them from new and vw have gone towards tiny ones over last ten years. Any tester that fails on these wants a good kicking.

Post by **Martin** » 29 Nov 2007, 00:03

if the back plates or stone guards are rusty and falling off then you may get an advise on the mot

if they are not there then not test able so can't fail.

nearly all kits cars don't have them and passed the SVA test

so take them off i have mine.

Post by **..lee..** » 29 Nov 2007, 08:02

presence and security of brake back plates, wheel cylinders and callipers i. a brake back plate, wheel cylinder or calliper securing device loose, missing or excessively deteriorated

this is from the mot testers manual and it is this statement that we base our pass / fail / advise decision on.

as i said if the steel plates behind the discs are backplates then interpret it as you wish.

i like to think they are not backplates and are infact only guards.

Post by **Tex Ritter** » 30 Nov 2007, 20:39

I seem to recall some years back a member making galvanised replacements...was it Mocki?

Post by **andysimpson** » 30 Nov 2007, 20:45

..lee.. wrote:presence and security of brake back plates, wheel cylinders and callipers i. a brake back plate, wheel cylinder or calliper securing device loose, missing or excessively deteriorated

this is from the mot testers manual and it is this statement that we base our pass / fail / advise decision on.

as i said if the steel plates behind the discs are backplates then interpret it as you wish.

i like to think they are not backplates and are infact only guards.

To me there is no ifs or maybes they are a pass and i would not even bother to advise.

Post by **..lee..** » 30 Nov 2007, 21:14

andy i totally agree mate, i`d pass them every time too, and that is the correct decision but it clearly states in the testers manual that backplates are a fail if missing we cant get away from that.

the fact that people refer to these items as backplates confuses the issue as i said previously i deem them to be no more than guards or shields or anything you`d like to call them but not backplates.

i know some testers that deem them to be backplates and fail them and i know some that deem them to be backplates but pass them as they think failing them is unfair to the vehicle presenter.both wrong.

my original suggestion was no more than to check with the local tester as to how he/she percives the guards we discuss just to avoid an argument come test time.

what to buy the syncro for xmas

lee.

.