Kyle67
Part of things
Posts: 554
|
|
|
Ah, so you've no doubt dealt with the boggle eyed, limped leg northern curse word Darryl? Piece of work if you catch him on the wrong day, he was the very first SVA tester in the UK and he knows it. Ian is ok though, he's one of us.
|
|
|
|
|
425ci
Part of things
Posts: 518
|
|
|
There was one bloke there who was really good. Sympathetic with the victims bringing their cars in and he knew his stuff too. Tall bloke with a beard. Into rugby I seem to remember, and also owned a trike of some description. This was going back about three years though.
Last time I was in there they all had fluorescent jackets on. I think there was an outbreak of Health and Safety disease or something. You won't believe this: The place was empty except for a couple of vehicles - certainly empty in the main HGV lane. They actually told me off for walking across the lane withouth going along to the zebra crossing bit and crossing there!
In the event I pretended I couldn't hear them as they started on me when I was half way across. I just carried on across and said 'pardon?' when I got up to them! I couldn't believe that they felt compelled to tell someone to walk along the side of an EMPTY lane in order to cross at the designated area! What a load of nonsense.
Mike
|
|
Current vehicle: Mountfield Mirage 3.5hp (18" cut)
|
|
Kyle67
Part of things
Posts: 554
|
|
|
Tall bloke, beard, trike, Alfa33... you've met Ian. They be a funny bunch there apart from him, although Adrian(curly watts lookalike)isn't so bad but he's quite new to it all.
|
|
|
|
425ci
Part of things
Posts: 518
|
|
|
Tall bloke, beard, trike, Alfa33... you've met Ian. They be a funny bunch there apart from him, although Adrian(curly watts lookalike)isn't so bad but he's quite new to it all. Nice girl in the office too, when I was last there. Pretty and brunette. Makes a change from the massive blonde one! Whoops Not sure if I should have said that!
|
|
Current vehicle: Mountfield Mirage 3.5hp (18" cut)
|
|
Kyle67
Part of things
Posts: 554
|
|
|
Careful! The manager Martin left his wife for that brunette! Her name is Viv. Amy is the blonde, slightly overweight one. Someone I worked with slipped her one, dunno if he thought it would help with SVA tests or he was just desperatly looking for somewhere to shoot his load.
|
|
|
|
425ci
Part of things
Posts: 518
|
|
|
Careful! The manager Martin left his wife for that brunette! Her name is Viv. Amy is the blonde, slightly overweight one. Someone I worked with slipped her one, dunno if he thought it would help with SVA tests or he was just desperatly looking for somewhere to shoot his load. I don't blame him! Whoops! Umm, not sure if were on about the same one with the other one. I hope he asked first! If we're talking about the same one I think an empty crisp packet would have been preferable. Whoops! I didn't say that. Mike
|
|
Current vehicle: Mountfield Mirage 3.5hp (18" cut)
|
|
Kyle67
Part of things
Posts: 554
|
|
|
I was being so amazingly polite, it is the same one. You'd have to be conscious what fold you put it in with her ;D Anyhow, I think we managed to take this wildly off topic! Sorry guys.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LoL cheered me up after the 7 pages of doom.
MOT's have never been retrospective with regards legislation (appart from the introduction of toughened glass in windscreens ... but that was years ago!) so why should an SVA test. They should be checking cars for sound engineering and stolen parts, not trying to make them pass type aproval they were never designed for.
Has the world lost its tolerance and the thought that people are quite capable to looking after themselves rather than needing a warning sign on everything. For F&^*s sake they put warning signs on every stair case at work saying "warning steps please hold hand rail" !!! oh right I wondered why I fell over when I walked down there before!
|
|
Last Edit: Feb 4, 2007 18:14:18 GMT by mikelmr
|
|
Kyle67
Part of things
Posts: 554
|
|
|
LoL cheered me up after the 7 pages of doom. MOT's have never been retrospective with regards legislation (appart from the introduction of toughened glass in windscreens ... but that was years ago!) so why should an SVA test. They should be checking cars for sound engineering and stolen parts, not trying to make them pass type aproval they were never designed for. Has the world lost its tolerance and the thought that people are quite capable to looking after themselves rather than needing a warning sign on everything. For F&^*s sake they put warning signs on every stair case at work saying "warning steps please hold hand rail" !!! oh right I wondered why I fell over when I walked down there before! I think I might have to do some research on this, there is a 10 year rule on having to SVA an import so that rule should count for modifications over 10 years old too.
|
|
|
|
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: 11,784
Club RR Member Number: 34
|
|
|
i agree there definately needs to be some age restrictions, as kyle has just said above, imports have age restrictions on SVA, so modified should too. for example, my '28 model A IS registered correctly, it was registered as a new build in 1968, made form used parts, when it was originally hot rodded. it is simply discribed as a ford saloon on the v5c, and has a chassis no and an engine no, but about the only stock part is the bodyshell(but its roof chopped)and some of the front suspension. it has a big CC v8 and appropriate gearbox and rear axle, and modernised (for 1968) steering and brakes.so if it was legally registered as a new car back then and is subject to the MOT test of a 1968 car and not a 1928 car, why the curse word should i now have to have it SVA'd? its like trying to get a '50s car to comply to 2007 mot regs, its never gunna happen. there should be no backdating of this policy AT ALL. if the laws were passed until '97, everything pre 97 should be exempt, end of.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You won't need to get it SVA'd.
Anything built and correctly registered prior to 1997 is covered by the old regs and none of this is retrospective. IE if you swapped the engine and wrote of to DVLA with the change of details the motor swap is only "1 point" and thats no issue.
If someone has a car and can prove it was built prior to 1997 even if its not correctly registered now or is changed slightly again now then you will probably be OK.
Interesting that a few people still saying "this will never happen" and this is just BS can't be done when it is actually happening NOW, ALREADY.
If you reshell a car using a used shell (like my Mondeo example) you do not get to keep the original registration and it has to be Q plated. Cars rebuilt from "multiple donor sources" have been getting Q plates for years. No different with classic restorations to cut & shuts. I once had a mint 1971 Victor 1600 and a rotten 1972 Ventora. Same car, same shell. I enquired what the best registration process was - and whcih V5 it should go on and I was told neither V5, it would be a Q plate. Thats a simple reshell using the greasy bits from one donor car of the same model series and only a year apart. Now as its all stock parts I could have gone through a "reconsiututed classic" test which means no SVA but ACPO are trying to get that avenue closed.
BTW In the end I restored the 1600 Victor to stock, made a nice job and sold it. I broke the Ventora and sold the spares on.
Now Mr B makes a good point, how is anyone to know, if its all stock parts? Well, in that case you can probably still get away with it. But if you shove a Capri axle under a Dolomite with a Rover V8 in it etc etc then mr DVLA inspector isnt going to take long to spot it is he? If they spotted that a Zodiac was runing an 8" Ford Mustang axle not the stock Zodiac piece then they are getting good at this.
Cases I've heard of which I know to be true and accurate have come from either being reffered by an MOT tester or being stopped by the cops. I have also heard stories I don't know if are true or not about the VOSA inspection vans stopping people and checking them out. I also know a guy who has had a visit from the DVLA to his home because he wanted to transfer a new registration number onto the car he was building. They gave him the full check over and VIC process and for 1920s/1930s/1940s stuff its a ball ache as some of them they were a bit hap hazard with stamping a chassis number and sometimes seem not to have bothered...
The DVLA has been training inspectors since last summer on how to spot modified or non-authentic components on older cars.
Its not the end of hot riodding. Its not the end of modifying. Its an issue about how you go about it to stay within the rules or understanding the risks to you if you go outside them.
|
|
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
|
|
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: 11,784
Club RR Member Number: 34
|
|
|
i feel the current legislation leaves me wide open to persecution because my car is registered correctly because my A is registered as it is, what constitutes stock is what it was built with in 1968, and NO ONE except me and any previous owners know what that is....its a unique vehicle. so do i have free reign to do what the hell i like to it cos no one can prove anything about it, or have i got to return the thing to stock it fit in with the rules??? if i now want to modify this car, if apply the current rules to my car going by the current points system, the body is worth 0points so i can do what i like to that. the chassis is 5, but its not a stock manufacturers chassis, its boxed and Z-ed, re enforced, different engine mounts, etc. so it would be impossible to prove anything had or hadnt been done anyway. the motor and transmission have been changed 2 or 3 times since it was built in '68 due to failures, and its currently got a rover v8 with 4 speed box probably out of an early SD1. no idea exactly when this was done, but surely if it was done pre '97 then its fine and it classes as stock? i may loose a point there, but it means i can actually stick a proper motor in it. the rear axles also been changed at least once as the diff was grenaded, but i think i can prove that was done pre 97, so does that make it stock? front end is stockish A though, so i retain 2 there, along with my steering which i get antoher 2 for. basically, what I'm saying is, is the state the car was in in '97 considered 'stock' as they cant make this stuff retrospective, like MOTs(or can they?), or is it how it actually rolled out of the factory that makes it stock. cos if its the former, i own a 1928 rover v8 powered ford model a sedan thats totally stock!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As it was built prior to 1997 the way I understand it is that all parts count as full points because they were the parts which were on it when the law came in so from the point of the law all the parts on there are "original" to the car regardless of their origin.
Thats my understanding.
Thats why you will see rods for sale advertised as being built prior to 1997 as a good selling point...
Kev Rooney is the man to ask (Kapri on the NSRA forum) as he knows this stuff for sure.
|
|
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
|
|
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: 11,784
Club RR Member Number: 34
|
|
|
its also obvious these points system rules were written by someone whos never swung a spanner in their life. by their rules, if you fit a new motor and gearbox and have to weld in new mounts to the chassis, its SVA time.
I don't disagree with using a point scheme to select whatneeds sva, but whoevers written the system has tried to make something very complicated and wide ranging very simple, which just doesnt work.
for example, generally speaking, in your typical front engined rwd car, youd gunna change the motor and box, and even the rear axle all in one go, as people swapping motors are only really gunna be sticking bigger more powerful lumps in there, and the stock gearbox would generally become a boat anchor rather quickly, as would the diff. so I think the gearbox getting 2 points is way out of balance. I think it should be 1 point or even 0points, as a gearbox modification does little on its own.
also, splitting it up into 'axles' and 'suspension' doesnt work either. for this take the example of fitting an uprated/stronger rear axle along with your new big motor and gearbox. why should you loose 2 points if you only change the rear axle? surely one point each end is fairer? and, if youve now fitted a big v8 with gearbox and a beefy rear axle, surely youre gunna want to hang it off a 4 link or ladder bars rather than some knackered old cars springs, as it would make the car far safer? if you do that you loose 2 more points.... its not uncommon in the hot rod world to get a car dones like this, but the fornt suspension be stock.
maybe a positive points system is also required? for example, stick a big motor in, loose a point, upgrade your brakes, gain a point. upgrade your axle, loose a point, upgrade your rear suspension (improving roadholding and the ability to handle horsepower), gain a point. this would keep the modified cars in question safe and still legal. insurance for modified cars could then be graded on your points score, making safer modified cars cheaper to insure....
|
|
Last Edit: Feb 5, 2007 10:13:42 GMT by Dez
|
|
|
|
|
Has the world lost its tolerance and the thought that people are quite capable to looking after themselves rather than needing a warning sign on everything. For F&^*s sake they put warning signs on every stair case at work saying "warning steps please hold hand rail" !!! oh right I wondered why I fell over when I walked down there before! I was watching childrens Saturday morning ITV (with my 5 year old, honest!) and was wondering why one of the presenters was wearing saftey goggles. Obvious really, he was being lined up for a pie in the face! FFS! Graham PS Apols for the OT...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
dez - that would make sense if it was about safety, but its not, its about vehicle IDs and complying with standards.
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
Cool. Mine was built in 1992/94 ;D
|
|
|
|
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: 11,784
Club RR Member Number: 34
|
|
|
complying with what standards though? EU plums?
and if its about identity, why not do what they do in the states and make the way the licence plate ties to the owner the key to vehicle identity, surely it would be easier to prosecute that way anyway?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe we aught to have a coup d'etat (make a change from a Coupe De Ville) and then you can I can run the DVLA and VOSA between us. According to the NSRA site VOSA can't understand why the DVLA are reffering so many "almost standard" cars over to them for SVA? ?
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
. According to the NSRA site VOSA can't understand why the DVLA are reffering so many "almost standard" cars over to them for SVA? ? Now thats VERY interesting !
|
|
|
|
|