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: 11,743
Club RR Member Number: 34
|
|
Dec 13, 2010 10:09:39 GMT
|
as soon as you cut a monocoque bodied car about you enter into BIVA territory and there is no longer a class for modified commercial. the only way as far as know that you could get that so it could be tested would be to weld another saxo roof back on it . as said the pickups are no longer testable unless you can prove its not a commercial vehicle (bit difficult when its a pickup ) you could do it as a coupe but you would still need BIVA sooo thinking laterally a bit here, say you built a full-on 'bodydropped' minitruck pickup, and ran it with only rear arch tubs and no bed floor as is quite often the trend, would that be provable as 'not a commercial vehicle' as it has no effective load space?? and so become BIVA-able? i wonder....... ![???](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/huh.png)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 13, 2010 10:25:29 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 13, 2010 10:27:55 GMT
|
how does that beetle get away with no arches?
|
|
|
|
stueyt
Posted a lot
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png)
Saving cars from the scrapyard.
Posts: 1,682
|
|
Dec 13, 2010 10:44:11 GMT
|
iirc the Beetles arches are bolt on and do not constitute part of the structure of the body. If you are talking about driving fenderless, then it is all down to how your local police look at it, it is advisable to carry around bolt on cycle fenders. Arches/fenders are not reuired for mot purposes ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png) Cheers, Stu.
|
|
Always looking for the next project!
|
|
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: 11,743
Club RR Member Number: 34
|
|
Dec 13, 2010 11:22:06 GMT
|
the bug based rpu above is totally legal. I beleive gary janes had something to do with that one, maybe not the full build though. be warned though, the VW based 'jalopee' kits he sells are NOT legal, even though he sells them as such- they will require a BIVA as the 'chassis rail' assembly welds to the beetle floorpan. the bolt on beam extenders are fine though. but a stock chassis but with heavily modified bodywork is fine too.. it will probably get flagged for a VIC check as mentioned above when you change the body type, and may also end up being renamed as something one off at this point, although as its clearly recognisable as a beetle they may not require this.
I will have to do this with the budget hotrod pickup at first MOT/when body type is changed, as it now bears no resemblance to the donor rover P2, even though the chassis and running gear are stock. so itll get renamed 'Dezmade special pickup' or something like that. ile just take it for MOT, get the body type changed from saloon to pickup when its tested, and no doubt the dvla will be in touch before ive even sent the docs off.
|
|
Last Edit: Dec 13, 2010 11:24:37 GMT by Dez
|
|
|
|
Dec 13, 2010 14:34:45 GMT
|
i understand the bug pick up is legal, in fact i got those pics from a for sale ad, i felt kinda sorry for the seller because all people were interested in was the V5 details etc etc. turns out that the car was still registered as a stock beetle. guess you just have to do a hell of a lot of research before you drag the grinder out now, it a minefield! luckily there an awful lot of knowledge and advice on this forum
i can understand the changes in the law though, i seen some seriously nasty stuff on the road and "legal" and some peoples idea of an MOT'd vehicle....forget it!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 13, 2010 14:50:50 GMT
|
as soon as you cut a monocoque bodied car about you enter into BIVA territory and there is no longer a class for modified commercial. the only way as far as know that you could get that so it could be tested would be to weld another saxo roof back on it . as said the pickups are no longer testable unless you can prove its not a commercial vehicle (bit difficult when its a pickup ) you could do it as a coupe but you would still need BIVA sooo thinking laterally a bit here, say you built a full-on 'bodydropped' minitruck pickup, and ran it with only rear arch tubs and no bed floor as is quite often the trend, would that be provable as 'not a commercial vehicle' as it has no effective load space?? and so become BIVA-able? I wonder....... ![???](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/huh.png) Depends how much has chagged? If within 8 points system and body only channelled ( body drop ? HAHA !!) then still the same vehicle. Without enough points , especially modified chassis then it requires BIVA ( or SVA Good until October 2011)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 13, 2010 14:56:56 GMT
|
the bug based rpu above is totally legal. I beleive gary janes had something to do with that one, maybe not the full build though. be warned though, the VW based 'jalopee' kits he sells are NOT legal, even though he sells them as such- they will require a BIVA as the 'chassis rail' assembly welds to the beetle floorpan. the bolt on beam extenders are fine though. but a stock chassis but with heavily modified bodywork is fine too.. it will probably get flagged for a VIC check as mentioned above when you change the body type, and may also end up being renamed as something one off at this point, although as its clearly recognisable as a beetle they may not require this. I will have to do this with the budget hotrod pickup at first MOT/when body type is changed, as it now bears no resemblance to the donor rover P2, even though the chassis and running gear are stock. so itll get renamed 'Dezmade special pickup' or something like that. ile just take it for MOT, get the body type changed from saloon to pickup when its tested, and no doubt the dvla will be in touch before ive even sent the docs off. Beetle based kits must now retain floorpans even though they do not form part of teh vehicles identity ie you can fit new ones but they MUST be there to still be a Beetle. Extending the parameters of a chassis is NOT acceptable be that by welding or bolting on items. Any body subframes must be part of the body and modified to fit the chassis not the other way round. Beam extender is currently a grey area, some LOs regard it as extending the chassis .Personally I'd weld the beam extender to the beam so it became a suspension modification:) Body type must be changed before MOT or the difference will flag DVLA at MOT .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 13, 2010 15:01:46 GMT
|
I understand the bug pick up is legal, in fact I got those pics from a for sale ad, I felt kinda sorry for the seller because all people were interested in was the V5 details etc etc. turns out that the car was still registered as a stock beetle. guess you just have to do a hell of a lot of research before you drag the grinder out now, it a minefield! luckily there an awful lot of knowledge and advice on this forum I can understand the changes in the law though, I seen some seriously nasty stuff on the road and "legal" and some peoples idea of an MOT'd vehicle....forget it! DVLA are to blame for most of this!! They are not advised in any way on the V5C or accompanying documents that you can only modify within certain regulations. They used to but stopped over 25 years ago. The details are on the 'net but not in enough details ( something we at ACE have been attempting to sort slowly) and why wouldl you go looking if you have no idea there were regs ? Unfortunately ignorance of the law is no excuse and you still end up being sent for test IF /WHEN caught . You can make any vehicle ( that has a suitable section in BIVA ) pass IF you build it to pass.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 13, 2010 15:23:04 GMT
|
aceadvice i totally understand. if i hadnt come onto this forum and checked out all the info you guy put up i would have been totally oblivious to what was happening, even last month custom car "special" feature barely touched on the subject. the mags should really get onto this and inform us what the deal is, I'm not a member of every forum and as I'm mainly involved with the VW scene its only really through this forum ive heard about all this happening ive still got friends building stuff that basically seems unusable under the new guidelines but as they also don't have the info they are working "blind" of course you can always make the point that the info is out there but as you said the DVLA arent making it "known" so a lot of people are in the dark through no fault of there own.
just want to say a big thank you to the guys who keep an eye on whats happening and make the information easy to understand and accessable to guys like me. without guys like you we would all be screwed so thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 13, 2010 15:51:38 GMT
|
aceadvice, as always your feedback is invaluable, and very much appreciated!
Regarding the registering with a non trademarked name after a bodystyle change on separate chassis vehicles, is that compulsory for all body changes? The reason I ask is in relation to pre-war cars in particular - would changing just the body (e.g. saloon to tourer) whilst retaining the radiator grille & thus the marque identity on a completely unmodified chassis still result in that sort of DVLA hassle?
|
|
Last Edit: Dec 13, 2010 15:55:08 GMT by Paul H
|
|
|
|
Dec 13, 2010 15:55:27 GMT
|
Regarding the registering with a non trademarked name after a bodystyle change on separate chassis vehicles, is that compulsory for all body changes? The reason I ask is in relation to pre-war cars in particular - would changing just the body (e.g. saloon to tourer) whilst retaining the radiator grille & thus the marque identity on a completely unmodified chassis still result in that sort of DVLA hassle? I don't think thats much of an issues really, if your changing body styles you cant be that interested in originality so a name change wont really matter.
|
|
Volvo back as my main squeeze, more boost and some interior goodies on the way.
|
|
|
|
Dec 13, 2010 16:34:21 GMT
|
Regarding the registering with a non trademarked name after a bodystyle change on separate chassis vehicles, is that compulsory for all body changes? The reason I ask is in relation to pre-war cars in particular - would changing just the body (e.g. saloon to tourer) whilst retaining the radiator grille & thus the marque identity on a completely unmodified chassis still result in that sort of DVLA hassle? I don't think thats much of an issues really, if your changing body styles you cant be that interested in originality so a name change wont really matter. It is very much an issue, and a name change will definitely matter.
|
|
|
|
stealthstylz
Club Retro Rides Member
Posts: 14,874
Club RR Member Number: 174
Member is Online
|
|
Dec 13, 2010 16:57:13 GMT
|
The problem with mags bringing the IVA etc to the attention of the readers is that a lot of the cars they feature are basically illegal according to the law. Most hot rods are still driving round on at the best the logbook for the base car, and in a lot of cases a logbook for a car with no link to the modified vehicle in question.
I'm tempted to chop the Polo just to see how long I can get away with not having it inspected. I reckon it'd be years before it was noticed (and the car was free so if called for inspection i'd just frag it).
Me and KFW were saying it'd be fun to build "show" cars for weekends. Buy a very cheap banger, do all sorts of crazy mods (chop the roof off or whatever). Send the logbook off with the body change on the Friday, drive to show then drive round till they send a letter for inspection, then frag it.
Matt
|
|
|
|
a73uk
Part of things
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png)
Posts: 181
|
|
Dec 13, 2010 17:01:43 GMT
|
Does this mean if we make a hatch into a convertible we`re stuffed as well?
|
|
Currently got.. 88 Panda 750L, 88 Uno 45 Spire, 90 Uno 60S, 97 Jaguar XJ, 99 Jaguar XJR, 01 Porsche Boxster, 88 Daimler 3.6 (breaking) , 96 Punto 1.6 Sporting (breaking). 99 Seicento Sporting, 01 Seicento Sporting... The Uno 60S is the most fun!
|
|
|
|
Dec 13, 2010 17:46:00 GMT
|
The problem with mags bringing the IVA etc to the attention of the readers is that a lot of the cars they feature are basically illegal according to the law. Most hot rods are still driving round on at the best the logbook for the base car, and in a lot of cases a logbook for a car with no link to the modified vehicle in question. Matt i do agree with your comments but id like to see more info in the magazines, rather than just a filler section in the editorial or on the first couple of pages they should keep us informed. if it wasnt for guys like ACE then we could all easily build vehicles that are totally illegal without knowing it, DVLA should be letting us know whats what rather than us chasing them or at worse getting pulled for illegal/ undeclared mods etc without knowing we are in the wrong. how many of us look at a vehicle and think "yeah ill turn it into a pick up " without realising we are opening a can of worms. its all a bit scary to be honest!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 13, 2010 18:18:00 GMT
|
aceadvice, as always your feedback is invaluable, and very much appreciated! Regarding the registering with a non trademarked name after a bodystyle change on separate chassis vehicles, is that compulsory for all body changes? The reason I ask is in relation to pre-war cars in particular - would changing just the body (e.g. saloon to tourer) whilst retaining the radiator grille & thus the marque identity on a completely unmodified chassis still result in that sort of DVLA hassle? Strangely got involved in clarifying this recently. The renaming process is for where the visual aspect radicaly changes from its original identity. They would allow a bodyswap within a marque and allow you to retain the marques identity ,possibly requiring confirmation from an owners club on the authorides V765 list . However they have stated they would not allow a spec change say from SL to GTXLR or whatever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 13, 2010 18:25:26 GMT
|
The problem with mags bringing the IVA etc to the attention of the readers is that a lot of the cars they feature are basically illegal according to the law. Most hot rods are still driving round on at the best the logbook for the base car, and in a lot of cases a logbook for a car with no link to the modified vehicle in question. Matt I do agree with your comments but id like to see more info in the magazines, rather than just a filler section in the editorial or on the first couple of pages they should keep us informed. if it wasnt for guys like ACE then we could all easily build vehicles that are totally illegal without knowing it, DVLA should be letting us know whats what rather than us chasing them or at worse getting pulled for illegal/ undeclared mods etc without knowing we are in the wrong. how many of us look at a vehicle and think "yeah ill turn it into a pick up " without realising we are opening a can of worms. its all a bit scary to be honest! It's all down to what the readership want ,if they show interest to the Editor then we will supply info as required. Lots of people are still totally unaware or want to pretend it's not happening though. Matt, when there's a 'public hanging' attitudes may change , I honestly thought that Andy saunders Bentley ( being so high profile) would have opened peoples eyes. Some will be caught up come 2012 when more emphasis will be placed on checking vehicles identities .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 13, 2010 18:28:13 GMT
|
Does this mean if we make a hatch into a convertible we`re stuffed as well? Not stuffed but it would require BIVA most cars since 1978ish would only require minor mods to pass ( providing the glass is EC43 spec ) as most requirements woudl have been incorporated by OEM. It would however definitely end on a Q plate ( due to modified /secondhand monococque) which is the end of the world for some ![::)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/eyesroll.png) .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 13, 2010 18:41:06 GMT
|
I suppose the way to go is as the Citroen Plurial or Skoda Fun. Have rear seats that are detachable and also a clip in bulkhead. That way it's a proper convertible for registering / MOT but can be a pick-up for trips to DIY store , tip etc.
Paul H
|
|
|
|
|