New MOT legislation and more...

[KS]

Just received the results of the government discussion paper of Vehicles of Historic Interest (VHI), the points raised due for implementation in April 2018.

To summarise: Vehicles over 40 years old to be exempt from MOT unless they are 'substantially altered' with in the 8-point DVLA ruling or have the power-to-weight ratio increased by more than 15 per cent over original, in which case they will no longer be deemed a VHI. In the case of the power to weight ratio, if the modifications can be proved to have been implemented before 1988, then nothing changes. If you've built a hot-rod Porsche based on an early car since 1988, then you'll lose the rights to Historic status it would appear.

If you have a few minutes (hours) to spend, here are the papers as released today:

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultat ... c-interest

[KS]

EDIT: See update 11/10/2017

[hot66]

That power to weight ratio ..... in theory an odd one as in theoretically if you've just lightened your you could fall foul

[Lightweight_911]

Where does the 1988 cut-off date come from ? - a 40 yr exemption from an annual MOT would be applicable to cars built before 1978.

How will they (MOT testers ?) know the power output of a non-original engine (or what components have been changed) especially if the engine is of the same type/configuration & looks visually similar (eg Porsche 911, Alfa twin-cam, etc) ?

[KS]

The 1988 comes, I believe, from the original paper that suggested a 30-year rolling exemption. Very arbitrary but they needed to come up with some date, I guess.

As for the engine output, this is not an MOT matter, per se – it will rear its head when you come to tax your car on line (sort of self certification, if you like). If your car is currently tax and MOT exempt, you will come to a part in the on-line application that asks if the vehicle has been substantially modified. If you say 'Yes' then you won't be able to proceed with a tax-exempt application. If you say 'No' then you're breaking the law from that point on. So what? Well, if your car is spotted out on the road by a Police vehicle, or VOSA check, using an NPR camera, it will flag up that it is an unmodified VHI – a hot-rod or loud, noisy Porsche 911 will pretty obviously have been modified. You get pulled. Book thrown at you. Made to put car through correct test procedures before it can be taken out on the road again. Q-plate issued...

1984 looms.

[hot66]

How will any non expert be able to tell the difference between a 73cis motor and a 3.8lt 993 RS spec motor ?

[smallspeed]

hopefully the '88 thing comes about - my e30 fits the bill (just) and is visually as standard as you want (even has crap SE seats) although somewhat warmed over in a way that would require spanners and a set of calipers to figure out

[KS]

As I say, it's down to self-certification in some respects, meaning that if you are not 100 per cent truthful, then you risk of the truth coming to light in the event of an accident or roadside pull. Checking engine numbers is happening already, by the way, so they don't have to know the visual difference between a 73cis motor and a 993 RS... Yes, building a monster engine on a year-correct case is one answer...

[Lightweight_911]

So I can foresee a glut of replica C & D-Types, 904's, Lotus XI's, Alfa GTA's, etc hitting the market in the next few months ...

[KS]

It's already happening within the hot-rod scene.

[smallspeed]

original 2.0 litre m20 engine in my e30..
this will be the problem I think - on cars like mine, without pulling it apart and really knowing what you're looking at, you'd literally never know:

The throttle body is about 50% larger (area) but its exactly the same design as the stock one, just been bored out and has a different butterfly and cross shaft from a different model BMW - you wouldn't know without pulling the intake boot/airbox out and measuring it, BUT you'd have to suspect it was wrong to start with and visually it looks 100% stock from the outside (and the inside really)
The cams are uprated but look stock (reground stock cams so hard to tell without removing and measuring them properly as the profile isn't visually that different)
The crank is from a 2.8 - you'd pretty much have to remove it or a lot of other stuff to measure it, OR know your BMW part numbers and where to find them to figure it out
The rods and pistons are from a 2.5 M20 - you'd have to remove the head to measure the bore and figure that out, but even then you'll find most references for M20s are to the B25, so it would be correct unless you knew your stuff
The head is 100% bone stock.. ..except the valve sizes and springs - again you'd have to remove the head and measure to know really as the stems are 2mm smaller, the valves are only 1.5mm bigger, and the springs are from a different BMW (so look 100% stock)
The ECU is from an M50 and it runs a MAF but this is built inside the old barn-door air meter - if you didn't know you'd never spot it because its using the stock harness and all the original M20 sensors just with a few wires re-purposed and the pin-out changed to suit on the big ECU connector
Higher comp. ratio - again need the engine in bits to work this out because the block and head are skimmed very-very slightly but not that you'd notice (0.1mm max, each, and the timing chain case was done at the same time to keep it all flat) - the higher compression ratio is achieved through the crank/pistons/rods combo

I guess its the same as say a "1776" beetle engine or a "2056" 914 built using the standard original case - could be very hard to tell without pulling it apart, even if you were an expert! Obviously a massive stroke increase leads to a wider engine, but you'd still have to know exactly what you were looking at to know the difference because there are probably stock engines out there of larger widths too..

As someone else already said, its all going to come down to how honest people want to be, but if they're going to play silly buggers with issuing Q Plates to ANYTHING that's not 100% stock then people are going to play silly buggers back with leaving things out or being more ingenious.. ..I can't see my neighbour listing his alloy bodied (Lynx?) C and D type "replica's" as modified XJ6's or whatever they were part-based on when they were built, and then driving them around on Q plates! God only knows what that would do to the value of such cars..

[RichardBTek]

When I got my first Bike (Honda XL 125) I fitted a XL 185 barrel and top end to the 125 bottom end and you would never have known unless I when flying past you! Passed my test on it too

[Mr Pharmacist]

So my car was originally manufactured as a 1.7, but when I registered it in the UK I declared it as a 2056cc. So How do i stand with the increase in power there (bearing in mind its also a 'performance' engine so is more that 15% more powerful than the 1.7 engine)?

[Nick Moss]

So if one doesn't apply for VHI then pay the RFL and carry on regardless?

[KS]

As someone else already said, its all going to come down to how honest people want to be, but if they're going to play silly buggers with issuing Q Plates to ANYTHING that's not 100% stock then people are going to play silly buggers back with leaving things out or being more ingenious.. ..I can't see my neighbour listing his alloy bodied (Lynx?) C and D type "replica's" as modified XJ6's or whatever they were part-based on when they were built, and then driving them around on Q plates! God only knows what that would do to the value of such cars..

In real terms, other than snobbishness, what would be their problem running a Q-plate? The hot rod scene has had to embrace them (well, those who choose to run legally).

There's no point in forever going on about this will never happen, or they won't catch me. It is happening and they are already catching people.

For those who are unaware, to be able to run your vehicle on the original registration, it needs to fall within the eight-point rule (which has been in place since 1988, by the way – only now are things hotting up). Look at the table below

Chassis, monocoque bodyshell (body and chassis as one unit) or frame
- original or new and unmodified (direct from manufacturer) 5
Suspension (front and back) - original 2
Axles (both) - original 2
Transmission - original 2
Steering assembly - original 2
Engine - original 1

If you add up the points and the total comes to 8 or more, you're OK and can run the original registration. Outside that, you'll be required to put your car through BIVA and almost certainly run a Q-plate. Clearly no Lynx or whatever can pass that as without the original monocoque there can be no original suspension, steering etc. So either the full SVA (which an accurate replica could never pass) or a Q-plate.

Engine swap? OK but will almost certainly mean loss of historic status – no MOT exemption, and road tax to pay. You can of course lie, but that's at the owner's risk. If you're caught lying (accident, VOSA pull etc), then you're on your own.

Incidentally, if you fancy building a Beach Buggy, a long-wheelbase Buggy will be OK, being classified as a rebodied car on an unmodified chassis. But a traditional SWB Buggy will need BIVA and get a Q-plate. The times are a-changing.

I'm guessing that no-one on here will believe any of this will have an effect. That's up to you. But once upon a time nobody ever believed you'd be forced to fit padded steering wheels, side repeaters etc to a Chesil Speedster to get it registered – there are changes ahead.