New MOT legislation and more...

[amallagh]

Does anyone have any specific advice or guidance on the specific questions I raised ?
I appreciate all the advice saying that they plan to continue to MOT their cars regardless, and that is fine, but I have good reasons to want to know if this is necessary in relation to the specific modification types described.

Specific modification I am looking for any advice regarding their status summaried below -

- If I have fitted a 2.8 twin plug engine in lieu of an original 2 litre in a 914/6. is it OK to assume that this is not considered a substantial modification ?

- This uprated engine is also mated to a matching 915 type gearbox. Is it OK to assume that this is not considered a substantial modification ? (the 915 gearbox was fitted to the low volume 916 variant of the 914 so was a period modification)

'Changes of a type that have been made when the type of vehicle was in production or in general use (within ten years of the end of production)' are not considered a substantial modification.
This statement seems to cover a multitude of things, but what it seem to say is that 'period modifications' (of a type made within 10 years after original manufacture) in general use at the time are OK.

- Does this statement allow for the modification of the exterior body panels from std 914 to 914/6GT specification ?

- Does this statement allow for the modification of the exterior body panels from a '74 911 to a '73 RSR wide body ?

- If any of the lightweight modified panels for the period modification are in carbon fibre composite rather than glass fibre composite, is that a problem ?

- I'm assuming electronic ignition and things like MSD or updated spark boxes do not constitute significant modifications. Is that correct ?

Cheers
Andrew

[hot66]

That's how I'd read it Andrew


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[911hillclimber]

The sentence in bold in your post above says it all.

If the 914-6 was in production at the time the original car was made all is ok.
That covers the big engine and box.

Bolt on panels are not considered whatever the material.

Back date panels are ok as within the 10 year window.

What I am not sure of is the GT spec rear wings. I do not know if the GT with large wings was a production model rather than a race mod for racing cars only, not road homologated. I know little about 914s.

That is my opinion on your cars to this subject Andrew.

[jwhillracer]

What I am not sure of is the GT spec rear wings. I do not know if the GT with large wings was a production model rather than a race mod for racing cars only, not road homologated.

The majority of 914/6 GT's were supplied in period as standard road cars and uprated by the dealer or owner using a factory supplied kit, therefore this should not be a problem.
JW

[Lightweight_911]

Andrew - I can't remember if it's the case but I assume your 914/6 GT started life as a 914/4 ?

The 'official' guidelines regarding engine changes state:

" ... alternative cubic capacities of the same basic engine and alternative original equipment engines are not considered a substantial change. If the number of cylinders in an engine is different from the original, it is likely to be, but not necessarily, the case that the current engine is not alternative original equipment"

As for your RSR, my reading of the regulations would be that cutting out the IB front latch panel & welding in the earlier latch panel constitutes a substantial change.

However, this is all pure conjecture & IMO each case will be open to interpretation whch effectively means there will not be a simple/universal answer !

.

[911hillclimber]

Thanks Jonathan, I learn something every day.

Isn't this a crazy piece of legislation.
That bold para that Andy has quoted takes some reading, but could put your car Andrew in the substantially modified class, hence MoT, not a bad price to pay for such a great spec.

Forgot about the front slam panel, but also the bumper mounts deleted? I don't know the details of your car though.

Good luck with your decision making, I really know how you feel.

[911hillclimber]

Taxed my substantially modified, historic vehicle tax exempt 911 this morning having received the usual reminder from the DVLA.

No question about is it modified etc and the MoT and all that bollox.
And bollox it all has been.

[Mick Cliff]

No question about is it modified etc and the MoT and all that bollox.
And bollox it all has been.

Did you actually NEED a current MOT to tax your car? I understand that to get rid of the MOT necessity you need to apply for the tax after the current MOT has expired. Could be wrong, but I'm about to SORN both my cars and wait a month before re-taxing them (when the MOT's will have expired)

[911hillclimber]

No idea tbh, I expected to be 'asked' if the car is modified, but to be honest fed up with trying to reason all the do's and don't.
Doing it on line there is no question if the car has an MoT at all.
Maybe it is all cross referenced to the data base for such info?

[amallagh]

The online car taxing system doesn't mention the MOT if it is recorded as having a valid one. It just does it automatically