The 'Maverick' Classic Porsche Forum and Classic Porsche Club for Porsche 356, Aircooled Porsche 911, Porsche 912, Porsche 914 & Porsche Replicas. 'We join for the cars but stay for the people'
Nick Moss wrote:So if one doesn't apply for VHI then pay the RFL and carry on regardless?
Not quite – the moment you make changes to your car that constitute radical modifications (modifying the monocoque, etc), you're running the risk of requiring the car to be subject to inspection, a scenario which is not solely related to with VHI status. It could result in any car that's had more than an engine swap being liable to re-registration.
Here's the word on Q-plates:
Get a ‘Q’ registration number
You won’t be able to keep your vehicle’s original registration number if one of the following applies:
it has fewer than 8 points
it has a second-hand or altered chassis, monocoque bodyshell or frame This is where that RSR conversion or a 'backdate' could fall foul
there’s evidence that 2 vehicles have been welded together to form one (ie ‘cut and shut’)
Your vehicle must pass the relevant type approval test to get a ‘Q’ prefix registration number.
This proposed legislation is an interesting prospect. My car, a 911 T 1972 MY, was imported into the UK around 2006 from South Africa. It was already modified with large rear arches and a Porsche replacement engine ( dated to 1974) with an AT prefix to the engine number. The engine was already modified on importation to twin plug with hotter cams. It is not known when these modifications took place as I have been unable to find any history on the car whilst in SA.The suspension remains largely standard being returned to this state from coil overs.
I also wonder how some STs will be viewed as some of these left the factory as unmodified "S" models and were either returned to the factory to receive ST mods or the factory provided the necessary parts for owner's to carry out the mods themselves. These modifications would have been done prior to the proposed cut off date of 1988 but that may be difficult to prove in some instances.
Then, as is the case with hot rods imported from the USA, it will be treated as a new build. DVLA will look at matters on a case by case basis but clearly they'd get swamped quickly – the outcome of that would be a long waiting list and longer time before a vehicle could be put on the road.
I find the point system weird though because I reckon my e30 would score 100%?!
Original engine, suspension (save springs dampers and bushes), gearbox, engine (modified internally), etc., etc..
/\ /\ /\ Nothing to worry about then, apart from the increase in power-to-weight ratio, which is a hard one to assess without recourse to a rolling road...
Regarding monocoque repair, as long as it's repaired to original standards/specification, then should be no problem – like any crash repair that's carried out currently in accordance with the 'Cat' system.
That is the crunch.
If we fir Koni dampers instead of Boge then the suspension is modified. (?)
If we fit turbo steering arms to a 73 911 then it has been modified.
If you fit a Momo wheel to the car, then you have modified the steering too!
Just how this will be measured will be interesting. I cannot see the DVLA coping with a mass of questions, they will simply say, is it different to original?
In all cases the answer will be yes.
Modern brake pads in stock callipers? Not original so loose 2 points.
Welded sills? The shell restoration question asked by Andy is a big issue as 5 points could or will be lost on almost EVERY classic.
The questions normal maintenance actions bring to this Number Count are far ranging.
Will the DVLA be issuing guidelines and FAQ?
All to be done by April 2018?
Last edited by 911hillclimber on Thu Sep 14, 2017 7:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
73T 911 Coupe, road/hillclimber 3.2L
Lola t 492 / 3.2 hillclimb racer
Boxster 987 Gen II 2.9
Normal repairs are not a problem simply fitting alternative dampers or brake pads is OK. It's unlikely to get into the minutiae of such things as alternative tie rods unless he owner wants to make an issue of it... The paper is due to go before parliament in November for approval – there has already been a consultation period which any member of the public could take part in, but that closed some time ago. I filled my questionnaire in, did anyone else on DDK?
From the DVLA site:
"Those that have been ‘substantially changed’ will still require yearly testing. We have prepared draft guidance as to what constitutes “substantial change” in the context of old vehicles. We plan to finalise the guidance during November 2017. If you have any questions or feedback about it please contact roadworthinesstesting@dft.gsi.gov.uk."
Incidentally, if asking questions, it's a good idea not to talk specific vehicles...
_____________________________
73 RS (Sold)
67 S
Mint T (Sold)
996 Turbo (Sold)
73 2.4E (home after 25 years) and Sold again
73T targa (signal yellow project)
1953 Vauxhall Velox
914/6
1963 356B https://www.mybespokeroom.com/
I filled in the protest form, but I do always wonder if such partitions do have any recognition by the Government
Iirc the classic car industry was against dropping the MoT on safety grounds and I'm sure on business grounds too, yet look at this decision.
It seems strange a 3 year old Golf needs an MoT but a 1960's classic saloon does not.
Classic cars will soon be tagged death traps, and will be banned or the annual MoT bought back in for all vehicles over 3 years old.
I look forward to seeing the DVLA guidelines in November.
73T 911 Coupe, road/hillclimber 3.2L
Lola t 492 / 3.2 hillclimb racer
Boxster 987 Gen II 2.9
