kenb
Part of things
Posts: 604
|
|
Dec 18, 2017 12:24:24 GMT
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
voodoo57
Club Retro Rides Member
That's not 2 metres! come a little...Closer!
Posts: 2,753 
Club RR Member Number: 137
|
|
Dec 18, 2017 13:23:23 GMT
|
|
I can handle simplicity!
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 18, 2017 14:11:13 GMT
|
|
""This guidance is only intended to determine the testing position of a
substantially changed vehicle, not its registration.""
|
| |
|
|
MrSpeedy
East Midlands
www.vintagediesels.co.uk
Posts: 4,786
|
|
Dec 18, 2017 14:23:49 GMT
|
Well, that clears things up a bit  |
| |
|
|
Seth
South East
MorrisOxford TriumphMirald HillmanMinx BorgwardIsabellaCombi
Posts: 15,513
|
|
Dec 18, 2017 14:31:59 GMT
|
|
It would appear as though period appropriate modifications are all OK then, within reason. Which makes sense for something trying to define a 'historic' standpoint. And also that there is no issue regarding modern made replacements of like for like parts, nor with modification should original parts be unobtainable.
It would be interesting should someone have a discussion regarding the period modification precedence of cars built for/in other markets eg. putting a small block Ford V8 in a Sierra (XR8) or a BMC straight six in a Cambridge (Austin Freeway)
|
| |
Follow your dreams or you might as well be a vegetable. |
|
Badger
Part of things
Posts: 250
|
|
Dec 18, 2017 16:41:34 GMT
|
|
There's a few holes in there, like how do you determine the reasonable availability of parts? Is it that they'd have to be made or just really expensive?
Barring that it would, at first glance at least, appear to be much more straightforward and thought out than the initial offering.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 18, 2017 17:04:30 GMT
|
I'm only posting once on a few threads just to point out that all this is purely to do with MOT NOT IDENTITY. I'm sure by the end of the day on Facebook and most the 8 points rule will be no more and BIVA scheme scrapped in some peoples interpretations.  |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 18, 2017 17:21:35 GMT
|
|
Reasonable availability of parts? answer to that I'd say does the owners club spares department stock them ?
Seems quite simple to control, an 850 mini can get a 1275,likewise an Imp 875 can go 998 but put in a bike engine and it needs an MOT. Disc brakes in place of drums ok as safety related
|
| |
retired with too many projects!
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 18, 2017 20:12:58 GMT
|
|
All seems fair enough to me. Glad they dropped the 15% power to weight ratio increase thing.
Clear and simple language from a government department... who'd have thunk it?
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 18, 2017 21:16:04 GMT
|
Reasonable availability of parts? answer to that I'd say does the owners club spares department stock them ? Some clubs don't stock items because they are readily available elsewhere. |
| |
|
|
|
|
Dez
Club Retro Rides Member
And I won't sit down. And I won't shut up. And most of all I will not grow up.
Posts: 11,712
Club RR Member Number: 34
|
|
Dec 18, 2017 22:51:35 GMT
|
This is so comically vague it's amazing. I'm pretty sure I could manage to get them to sign this off as a VHI, just because it doesn't not fit their criteria thanks to the stated loopholes. http://instagram.com/p/Bc3Giu6n5Xe |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 19, 2017 11:50:58 GMT
|
As has been said, it is so vague! I believe a Beetle running a Subaru engine would also be classed as VHI. The rebuilt old engines are very expensive, worse for the environment etc etc.. And the Subaru engine has the same layout. Also, who is going to be policing this? I doubt there are any Police officers out there who would A) DEFINITELY be able to tell that it isn't exempted. B) Have the time to go over all the facts to make sure whether it is or isn't allowed. IF you were to be caught having lied, what would the consequence be? Take it for an MOT or have the car confiscated or something? It all just seems like one of those ideas you put together at the pub with your mates, but don't bother working out the finer details (not that i'm complaining  ) |
| |
|
|
Wilk
Part of things
Posts: 528
|
|
Dec 19, 2017 12:15:51 GMT
|
|
I'm sure the insurance companies will police it as it'll be just another route for them to get out of coughing up
|
| |
If it can be fixed with a hammer, then it must be an electrical fault
|
|
Seth
South East
MorrisOxford TriumphMirald HillmanMinx BorgwardIsabellaCombi
Posts: 15,513
|
|
Dec 19, 2017 13:06:16 GMT
|
I believe a Beetle running a Subaru engine would also be classed as VHI. The rebuilt old engines are very expensive, worse for the environment etc etc.. And the Subaru engine has the same layout. I think arguing that you cannot reasonably get a replacement original type engine for one of the most numerous vehicles ever produced will probably leave you on thin ice. That clause is I imagine really intended for vintage and veterans where you really can't get the parts unless you have them remanufactured which is beyond the realms of 'reasonable' for all but the most valuable cars. I'm hoping people don't try and abuse these guidance notes given their flexibility for the sake of avoiding an MOT test. |
| |
Follow your dreams or you might as well be a vegetable.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 19, 2017 15:41:40 GMT
|
|
No but is the "same basic engine "
Ie flat 4
|
| |
Last Edit: Dec 19, 2017 15:42:35 GMT by avengertec
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 19, 2017 16:27:48 GMT
|
I believe a Beetle running a Subaru engine would also be classed as VHI. The rebuilt old engines are very expensive, worse for the environment etc etc.. And the Subaru engine has the same layout. I think arguing that you cannot reasonably get a replacement original type engine for one of the most numerous vehicles ever produced will probably leave you on thin ice. That clause is I imagine really intended for vintage and veterans where you really can't get the parts unless you have them remanufactured which is beyond the realms of 'reasonable' for all but the most valuable cars. I'm hoping people don't try and abuse these guidance notes given their flexibility for the sake of avoiding an MOT test. I fully agree with you. But it is the same type of engine. I don't think it will be as tightly policed as people think it will be, otherwise the guidelines would be much tighter, more like an IVA test. Instead it's completely left open to the owners discretion basically. I'll personally carry on getting mot's but only because I prefer an extra set of eyes over my car. |
| |
|
|
Seth
South East
MorrisOxford TriumphMirald HillmanMinx BorgwardIsabellaCombi
Posts: 15,513
|
|
Dec 19, 2017 16:32:11 GMT
|
|
I don't think "alternative cubic capacities of the same basic engine" means it is allowing engines of the same layout by other manufacturers when it then goes on to specify "alternative original equipment engines"
Also the comment "in respect of axles and running gear changes made to improve efficiency, safety or environmental performance;" is not, I think, referring to engine swaps because Engines are distinct from Axles and Running Gear in the preceding part of the criteria.
The general feel I get is that the original manufacturer's engines are required to meet the VHI criterea and this makes sense since they are age and type appropriate to the car and will not have required major alterations/home made parts in order to fit them. The whole point of this guidance is to ensure some historic continuation and to misread it is unhelpful.
|
| |
Follow your dreams or you might as well be a vegetable.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 19, 2017 17:17:31 GMT
|
|
If you are currently in the Historic class why would you want to declare it as a VHI?
If the only reason is to save the cost of an MOT you are in the wrong hobby.
It seems from my reading of the document that you can continue as you were unless you volunteer to declare it as a VHI.
Keep calm and carry on Testing!
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 19, 2017 17:34:15 GMT
|
If you are currently in the Historic class why would you want to declare it as a VHI? If the only reason is to save the cost of an MOT you are in the wrong hobby. It seems from my reading of the document that you can continue as you were unless you volunteer to declare it as a VHI. Keep calm and carry on Testing! Absolutely but once you've incriminated yourself by declaring What will they do in the future Will they use this info to bung you back in the tax bracket I've no problem with the goal posts as long as they don't keep moving them The idea of no mot is ridiculous tbh |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 19, 2017 17:37:07 GMT
|
I don't think "alternative cubic capacities of the same basic engine" means it is allowing engines of the same layout by other manufacturers when it then goes on to specify "alternative original equipment engines" Also the comment "in respect of axles and running gear changes made to improve efficiency, safety or environmental performance;" is not, I think, referring to engine swaps because Engines are distinct from Axles and Running Gear in the preceding part of the criteria. The general feel I get is that the original manufacturer's engines are required to meet the VHI criterea and this makes sense since they are age and type appropriate to the car and will not have required major alterations/home made parts in order to fit them. The whole point of this guidance is to ensure some historic continuation and to misread it is unhelpful. All down to interpretation "Same basic engine" could mean rebored cross flow swapped for a 1300 cross flow or inline 4 swapped for inline 4 |
| |
|
|
|
|
[*]
)