Wonder if that would wash.
At the end of the day, the Capri lights would have been used because they were cheap and available when the car was originally built, not because they were physically, dynamically or aesthetically the best ones for the job. If f they’re genuinely going to cost that much to replace the one missing lens, then I’d be looking to find something better looking, better performing and more easily replaced; and selling the originals on to someone with a Capri to offset the outlay. The main thing is to hold your horses until you can see exactly what’s been done to the tub to fit them, because ideally you want any replacements to be an easy fit rather than sparking a whole raft of unnecessary bodywork.
Agreed, I do like the look of them
Thanks for the PM’s PhilA and the offer.
Let’s see what we have to work with when this thing lands here.
Might be a case of luck. My Dutton has fixed seats and passed many MOTs like that. Only one it failed was due to "presented in a state that was too dangerous to test" or similar. Transpired the MOT tester was the size of a truck and couldn't fit. Not sure that was really fair to record as a fail.....
Made me chuckle
Could well be. It was a long time ago, and we weren't really experienced enough to argue with the tester. Looking at the current regs on the .Gov website, any adjusting mechanism must work, but it doesn't specifically state that there must actually be a mechanism. The Phaeton had a legs outstretched driving position and, to be fair, I couldn't drive it with the seat fixed in position for my mate. He just chucked a pair of Land-Rover runners under it and represented it the following day.
Often open to interpretation ehhhh.
Hope to see that sort of sensibility
I hope that between us, we can build a cool car here.
It sounds to me like the tester was in a state that was too dangerous to test
Testers are sometimes in a state, but they are the law.