MrSpeedy
East Midlands
www.vintagediesels.co.uk
Posts: 4,789
|
|
|
The way I see it is we have a major problem in that the rules are being set out by people who have no clue how stiff works and are only interested in generating monster so what ever we think we will never be in a winning situation. If the rules were that you could do whatever within certain paramiters as long as it were to remain safe then I don't see it being a problem ie any mods are ok as long as they tech inspected for safety ect. But we all know rank well that will never happen in the land blanket banning unless it earns revanue This is exactly what I was thinking whilst reading the rest of this thread. IF the rules were written by a 'normal' engineer and not some clown behind a desk who likes to use big words and write in the style of a solicitor, then we might stand a chance of getting a clear, concise rule book, that can be understood and followed without mis-interpretation. However, knowing that this is to be implemented by the aforementioned bureaucratic halfwits, it's unlikely to happen. Clear simple rules which are actually based on safety related items should be a good thing.
|
|
|
|
|
stealthstylz
Club Retro Rides Member
Posts: 14,950
Club RR Member Number: 174
|
The Future of Car Modificationstealthstylz
@stealthstylz
Club Retro Rides Member 174
|
|
There is a full review of the INF26 procedure starting shortly to close any loopholes in the system and discuss changes wanted/needed. These regulations cover the 8 points system/what is deemed to be stock/radically altered etc). Currently the committee has members from the FBHVC and Gary Stretton from Classics Monthly - both representatives for the "untouched history" side of the argument. The ACE team are trying to get onto this committee to make known our point of view - that the current DVLA definitions of originality are unworkable, and try to improve the system for others. This will all be carried out at our own costs to try and help you. We have been made aware of how vehicle identities are being checked but cannot say how as we have not been formally notified of this so cannot provice official proof to back it up. It is a very simple system.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
IF the rules were written by a 'normal' engineer and not some clown behind a desk who likes to use big words and write in the style of a solicitor Laws have to be written in the style of a solicitor for reasons which should be obvious! Build manuals and explanatory texts can and should be written in plain English. Problem comes when trying to take a point in law and make it understandable in plain English without leaving it open to too much interpretation, and we are back to square 1.
|
|
1941 Wolseley Not Rod - 1956 Humber Hawk - 1957 Daimler Conquest - 1966 Buick LeSabre - 1968 Plymouth Sport Fury - 1968 Ford Galaxie - 1969 Ford Country Squire - 1969 Mercury Marquis - 1970 Morris Minor - 1970 Buick Skylark - 1970 Ford Galaxie - 1971 Ford Galaxie - 1976 Continental Mark IV - 1976 Ford Capri - 1994 Ford Fiesta
|
|
|
|
|
The build manual would be written by the ACE team. In which case I have far more faith in that then
|
|
1941 Wolseley Not Rod - 1956 Humber Hawk - 1957 Daimler Conquest - 1966 Buick LeSabre - 1968 Plymouth Sport Fury - 1968 Ford Galaxie - 1969 Ford Country Squire - 1969 Mercury Marquis - 1970 Morris Minor - 1970 Buick Skylark - 1970 Ford Galaxie - 1971 Ford Galaxie - 1976 Continental Mark IV - 1976 Ford Capri - 1994 Ford Fiesta
|
|
|
|
|
|
Definitely having a manual containing a list of things your car will FAIL on if modified and a list of things that it will PASS on would be very useful. There will always be grey areas, I think that's probably why they set up the whole BIVA thing.
Trouble is, you get such a mixed bag of opinion within the modifying circuit that it's difficult to make any hard and fast rules, especially since there is an element that decide that if the rules don't work for their build they'll just ignore the rules.
For me as a novice modifier, I vote #2, simply because having a point of reference of legal do's and don'ts would be very useful indeed.
|
|
|
|
will
Posted a lot
Posts: 4,023
|
|
|
No.2 all the way. The system sounds quite complex to my simple mind, having a book to read and reread would be a valuable resource.
|
|
|
|
stealthstylz
Club Retro Rides Member
Posts: 14,950
Club RR Member Number: 174
|
The Future of Car Modificationstealthstylz
@stealthstylz
Club Retro Rides Member 174
|
|
A quick rundown of what we're trying to achieve
Current definition of "originality" is the components that the vehicle left the factory with. This is obviously not possible, as the vast majority of cars on the road would be losing points for originality because components were replaced due to wear and tear. Cars are judged on their individual merits when inspected (i.e down to tester discretion), so 2 identical "borderline" 8 point cars could pass and fail the test because one tester decided that the aftermarket lowering springs removed the originality of the suspension, and another tester decided that the same suspension could keep it's originality and therefore pass the test.
Obviously this makes informing people on the system pretty much impossible. As things are we cannot say to somebody "your car will pass an 8 points test" if there are any grey areas of modification on the car that could go both ways.
By consulting with the agencies involved we will be able to give accurate definitions of what you can and can't do to keep the originality of the component, with paper trail evidence to back each definition up. As I said in an ideal situation we would get the definition changed to
"To retain originality the component must be original or of the original type"
So for instance if you have a Ford Capri and wish to change the rear axle you'd have 3 options:
1. Fit a different live rear axle onto the leaf springs = Axles - 2 points + Suspension - 2 points = 4 points overall (so you've got 9 and pass the test - you can modify engine/gearbox/steering)
2. Fit a different live axle using a 4 bar locating system - Axles - 2 points = 2 points overall (so you've got 7 - will need to keep either engine/gearbox/steering "as original" to pass test.
3. Fit a different type of axle I.e IRS - 0 points so you've got 5. Would then need to leave a combination of 2 of the engine/gearbox/steering "as original" to pass test.
I'm not 100% sure what we can achieve yet. The bare minimum we need to acheive is as AK says - that service and wear and tear parts are allowed to pass as original.
Matt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can see the benefit from having clear rules on what you can do to modify your cars as there are a lot of clueless people building very dangerous cars out there that just make the wrong people stop and take notice and tar the decent builders with there brush. BUT the whole idea of a modified car is so its different from the rest what is the point if you can only do it with a selected few parts we may as well all drive round in identical car just with different paint jobs the only part of this that annoys me is the fact there is real thought given to this system that they are proposing other than how much money can be made for them from it . the word safety is used to get away with loads of aspects of it but in reality there is very little that actually gives regards to safety . i'm all for a system that has stricter regulation on how stuff is done but it shouldn't have any say in what is done they don't have any right to tell us that just in how safely what ever it is is done . For example the 8 points rule is a stupid idea it shouldn't matter what running gear a car has under it just as long as what ever it is is fitted properly and safely .something was said earlier about a car with tubular A arms would loose its points if it had originally had stamped steel arms that is just a rule for the sake of a rule it has no point other than to make things awkward for people who wish to upgrade and to tell people well unless its as it left the factory bar a few minor bits you will loose you reg is just beyond stupid . Cars are given a registration number when new what does it matter if very little of the original car is left. In a lot of cases that is normally a good thing just as long as what ever has been replaced has been done properly and that is what they should be push for change on not some stupid rule book telling people they can't do stuff that's just a good way to get peoples goats up. why don't they just let the car keep in reg but put the word modified on the documents that way it has disclosure as long as the mods have been given the ok by a qualified engineer to say they are safe for use (a warrant of fitness if you like) who would care . The daft thing is if they did do it on an anything goes as long as its done properly way there would be a lot more money to be made, I for one would be happy to pay a nominal amount to have a proper engineer cast an eye over any modifications i do on any of my cars knowing that when it passes it will be safe to use rather than building a car only to be told you can't do that because its not what the car left the factory with oh and we'll take a load of money off you for telling you that . sorry if that seems like a bit of a rant but i really can't stand the way all this curse word is heading and all for no realistic reason
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think I would like to see more common sense used in these situations, particularly with regards to biva et all, take my mini for example, has a turbo conversion, for that, ive had to cut the bulkhead, technically this now has a modified monacoque (sp) and needs a biva....
Why? I understand that i have modified the shell, and would happily have it inspected by a certified engineer or similar to state its done to a good standard and is safe. As things stand, i understand i would have to pass the biva, then end up on a q plate?!?!? I mean seriously, there is very little original shell left in real terms, most of the panels have been replaced, and thats fine, but one little box in the bulkhead and nope, screwed.
Similarly the split, the steering box grounds out occasionally and i would like to raise it, again, i am more than happy to have this inspected to ensure it has been done properly, but the moment i weld the box mounts back in a non-original position, then again, its biva time....
Surely some sort of common sense wouldnt go amiss? I have absolutly no idea how on earth these things would be policed, and i understand that what I'm suggesting is, very much open to abuse, but i just strongly dissagree that small modifications to the body means i should have to go through all the hassle of updating everything to modern regs!
|
|
Current fleet: '58 A35 (half mine) '67 11 window splitscreen vw (half mine) '77 mini 1000 (not quite 1000 any more!!) '86 Armstrong MT500 '89 XR4X4 '94 Corrado VR6 Some sort of sevenesque kit car (no age yet!!) '01 Mondeo estate 2.0 (engine eventually destined for kit car!) - scrapped, engine only left! '98 E300 estate, rusty but seemingly reliable, fast-ish tat hauler. eventual engine donor A35 van, or whats left of it after it lived in a field for many years
|
|
|
|
|
If I could just point out a few facts that are teh background to our current regs.
There are no new laws ,nor have their been for the past 27 years. The current points system has been in place for that long. The change is in 'their' ability ,and willingness, to enforce them correctly.
BIVA is the upgraded form of SVA. SVA is an exemption from full Type Approval regs that were due to come in 1977. These were fought against by rodders and the kit car industry we means we have what freedom we have currently as opposed to the rest of Europe.
The current DVLA system , primarily aimed at consumer protection NOT safety ,works thus...
Modify the car within 8 points system it is considered to be the same car.
Modify outside the 8 points system and it has no right to registration and it's logbook is recalled...
Here it changes to EU laws ,in place since 1998. DVLA has no say in this ...
To obtain a new registration you must produce type approval proof or Ministers approval certificate.
MAC is issued after passing BIVA.
We have BIVA and Europes HATES us having it. If they had their way there would be NO modifying allowed.
We can all see better ways of doing this BUT it is NOT going to change . The system we have ( BIVA) is what is allowed under EU law, no other version is acceptable .
The 8 points system operates under UK law and ,if used correctly ( as is ) allows modifications to be done without having to register as new, via BIVA.
A review is underway this year that could see changes to the 8 point system .
|
|
Last Edit: Jul 1, 2011 13:35:26 GMT by kapri
|
|
|
|
|
the EU law thing is just another in a very very long list of why we shouldn't be part of and never should have been part of the EU . that aside though the 8 point system i know has been around for a long time but any mods that involve a bigger engine would (or should) involve upgrading other parts to cope with it purely on a safety aspect let alone a common sense one but in doing so renders your car with the need to be re-registered if the rules were to be enforced that's why a more common sense approach should be taken when considering it IE if a car had live type rear axle and you replace it with another live axle but a stronger one from another car its still a live axle so there is technically no change same goes for suspension and engine and box if it had ifs and you swap in a better stronger ifs from something else its still ifs if it has an inline engine and you fit a bigger inline engine its still an inline engine. configuration has not changed but yet we still stand to fall foul of the rules as its no longer fitted with the feeble out dated and dangerous stuff it left the factory with . it just don't make any sense to me
|
|
|
|
stealthstylz
Club Retro Rides Member
Posts: 14,950
Club RR Member Number: 174
|
The Future of Car Modificationstealthstylz
@stealthstylz
Club Retro Rides Member 174
|
|
As Kev says these laws are not new. We cannot change the IVA. However hopefully we will be able to have a say on how the 8 points system is run. We may not get anywhere and the definitions will be left as they are. We may only be able to add that non OEM/2nd hand replacement parts will be accepted as original aslong as they are exactly the same type (i.e. replacing worn out shocks with standard replacement).
We need to get into an open committee and can add our input. With the current definitions clarified against modification, combined with the new ways of detecting modified vehicles building modified cars could become much more difficult in future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As Kev says these laws are not new. We cannot change the IVA. However hopefully we will be able to have a say on how the 8 points system is run. We may not get anywhere and the definitions will be left as they are. We may only be able to add that non OEM/2nd hand replacement parts will be accepted as original aslong as they are exactly the same type (i.e. replacing worn out shocks with standard replacement). We need to get into an open committee and can add our input. With the current definitions clarified against modification, combined with the new ways of detecting modified vehicles building modified cars could become much more difficult in future. it won't be any more difficult there will just be a lot more cars towing trailers with modified cars on them and government will cease to get as much revenue from them plus the added environmental impact of cars towing trailers with other cars on them ect. i for one won't stop building them i'll just stop using them on the road
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The build manual would be written by the ACE team. Oh come farking on, Matt. I mean really. ACE gone from a few good-hearted blokes to the very epicenter of British vehicle policy-making? I think you have a few steps between the present state of affairs and to when ACE will write up the "Queen's Own Holy Handgrenade Bible of Car Modification". Right after I am elected POTUS, ACE will write the government manual, unedited, unopposed, unfiltered, highly practical, with all the gray areas in favor of the private owner. Please. I love you. But please. Paraphrasing de Tocqueville, "Less enthusiasm, always with less enthusiasm...."
|
|
Team Blitz Ford Capri parts worldwide: Restoration, Road, or Race. Used, Repro, and NOS, ranging from scabby to perfect. Itching your Capri jones since 1979! Buy, sell, trade. www.teamblitz.com blitz@teamblitz.com
|
|
stealthstylz
Club Retro Rides Member
Posts: 14,950
Club RR Member Number: 174
|
The Future of Car Modificationstealthstylz
@stealthstylz
Club Retro Rides Member 174
|
|
I think you're getting the wrong end of the stick Norm. The build manual would simply state what modifications you can and cannot "get away with" and retain the originality of the car.
IF we can get onto the committee that are discussing the INF26 changes we will try and get the definitions made clearer.
As I mentioned an ACE member has already ascertained that changing lever arm shocks to telescopic shocks will not affect the originality of the suspension. In my eyes thats a fairly major change but obviously not in the eyes of the DfT. If we can get similar results for different modifications we can then put together a manual on what you can/can't do.
Matt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In my advanced years, I am often debilitated. But, let me ask for clarity: Is the manual concept you polled to be a manual with the full force of law, in other words, a government-printed manual? Or is it to be ACE's interpretations put into manual form? Because you could do the latter right now, nothing stopping you.
|
|
Team Blitz Ford Capri parts worldwide: Restoration, Road, or Race. Used, Repro, and NOS, ranging from scabby to perfect. Itching your Capri jones since 1979! Buy, sell, trade. www.teamblitz.com blitz@teamblitz.com
|
|
froggy
Posted a lot
Posts: 1,099
|
|
|
at present this is a lot of hot air as it cant be enforced and relies on a builder deciding to get invloved in the biva process and relieving themselves of several hundred pounds .
the only way to enforce this is someting i heard recently from vosa is a check box on the vt40 which would flag up a quiery with vosa /dvla to have the vehicle checked to determine if it need a iva or not ,something like a vic check .
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
you could do the latter right now, nothing stopping you. You can't do this now because there is too much "open to interpretation". The ACE guys are seeking to have sufficient clarity put into the regs that a manual is possible
|
|
Last Edit: Jul 1, 2011 18:19:11 GMT by akku
1941 Wolseley Not Rod - 1956 Humber Hawk - 1957 Daimler Conquest - 1966 Buick LeSabre - 1968 Plymouth Sport Fury - 1968 Ford Galaxie - 1969 Ford Country Squire - 1969 Mercury Marquis - 1970 Morris Minor - 1970 Buick Skylark - 1970 Ford Galaxie - 1971 Ford Galaxie - 1976 Continental Mark IV - 1976 Ford Capri - 1994 Ford Fiesta
|
|
|