NO MORE MODIFIED CLASSICS (or any other modifieds either)

[dbdb]

T0nup said:

...It remains true, that without the so called scare story very little if any fuss would have been made over this or anything else the EU tries to slip through as a 'proposal' Regardless of what the commission says, I am of the opinion that if they could impose their will, they would. There are precious few in the EU who give a rats what the UK thinks (Until they want our money that is) and nothing anyone here says would make a difference to the slow marching of time towards the day when legislation will make a dramatic difference to what we can and can't do to our own cars. The only thing that would stave it off is the kind of fuss that has been made recently by interested parties.

"Saving" the public from something which was never going to happen is a classic trick of political activists. It works.

[a8hex]

T0nup said:

but who here can honestly say - hand on heart - that legislation in one form or another, be it from the EU or the UK, has not already at some time changed what they can and can't legally get away with on their own vehicles?

edited because I'd meant to include this too

Riley Blue said:

I can't think of any legislation in the past ten years that has affected how I enjoy my Rileys. Perhaps you could advise me of something I may have missed? In the meantime, like Breadvan, I'm going out for a drive.

I have a lovely letter in the filing cabinet from the Minister for Transport saying that I can legally carry my kids in the back of my car if they aren't wearing seat belts, but I'd be breaking the law if they had seat belts on. Go figure.

PS, I had a lovely drive in my XK150 which currently has a later 4.2 version of the engine and the wrong gear box.
Other modifications include:
four pot front callipers
and the aforementioned all round seat belts.

Edited by a8hex on Saturday 27th October 19:07

[onomatopoeia]

a8hex said:

I have a lovely letter in the filing cabinet from the Minister for Transport saying that I can legally carry my kids in the back of my car if they aren't wearing seat belts, but I'd be breaking the law if they had seat belts on. Go figure.

I know you can carry children over 3 in the rear of a car without seatbelts if none are fitted. I'd be interested to know why it would be illegal for them to have seatbelts on though.

[Humper]

Breadvan72 said:

What is your point?

My posts don't matter, but read what the Commission says.

My point? Just trolling, must be, cos the government would never allow the EU to bring any stupid laws into force now would they? Let's all stop for a moment and think really hard now......

And actually, i'd reckon your posts seem to have some sway with some on here.

[anonymous-user]

Well, unlike some, I did actually bother to read and understand the proposal, I have practical experience of how EU law works in practice, and I am not a conspiracy theorist. I don't know if any of that helps.

[Humper]

I have practical experience of EU laws too, lets bring in the WTD, how about the farce that is driver CPC? These kind of things start with a wee consultation doc, and we all go, "nah, that's too stupid to bother with". Then, surprise, it's law. Sense has rarely played a part. (the fact that i can do 5 identical first aid courses and attain my drivers CPC proves that)
Scrappage? Lets help all the other countries carmakers by giving them money? That was well thought out....

But, lets not concern ourselves, you're probably right. And if you're not we can all just bend over and get fked up the arse once again.

[anonymous-user]

Well, given the current Government's avowed opposition to further Euro burdens, given the absence of any budget to change the MOT system, and given the statement by the Commission, I think that we are unlikely to see significant change to the current MOT regime.

An MEP reports "Commissioner Kallas was quite clear about this at a recent Transport Committee meeting in Brussels - if you take a Citroen 2cv and put in a new high powered engine in it and modern brakes, the car is no longer historic. But it would not then be banned as some press reports say, it would simply have to pass the MoT or equivalent to be driven on public roads."

That seems sensible enough.

Edited by anonymous-user on Monday 29th October 21:32

[kbigtim]

An MEP reports "Commissioner Kallas was quite clear about this at a recent Transport Committee meeting in Brussels - if you take a Citroen 2cv and put in a new high powered engine in it and modern brakes, the car is no longer historic. But it would not then be banned as some press reports say, it would simply have to pass the MoT or equivalent to be driven on public roads."

I read this as mot or equivalent = IVA test which a 2cv with a big engine and modern brakes would not have the slightest chance of passing.

[anonymous-user]

[Riley Blue]

kbigtim said:

I read this as mot or equivalent = IVA test which a 2cv with a big engine and modern brakes would not have the slightest chance of passing.

I read this as MoT or equivalent because it has a different name in other countries.

[refoman2]

so what do you do with a car that is nigh on impossible to buy original parts for?

[anonymous-user]

Buy replacements, and relax. There's no plan to stop you doing that.

[paulrussell]

Why is this still being talked about? It was never meant to outlaw modified cars. People must be blind if they thought so, as it clearly meant MOT type tests in all EU countries.

[anonymous-user]

Eeyore Syndrome, or something.

[900T-R]

Riley Blue said:

kbigtim said:

I read this as mot or equivalent = IVA test which a 2cv with a big engine and modern brakes would not have the slightest chance of passing.

I read this as MoT or equivalent because it has a different name in other countries.

Exactly. The only thing the quote further above says is that if you basically build a new vehicle on the identity of an old one that was exempt from regular MOTs, it should be treated like a newer one that's not MOT exempt - which sounds fair enough to me as a 2cv with a V8 and associated modifications isn't really a 2cv anymore...

[woodytype S]

900T-R said:

Exactly. The only thing the quote further above says is that if you basically build a new vehicle on the identity of an old one that was exempt from regular MOTs, it should be treated like a newer one that's not MOT exempt - which sounds fair enough to me as a 2cv with a V8 and associated modifications isn't really a 2cv anymore...

I will have to ask a member of our classic car club that has a 2CV with a 3.9 v8 in it what he thinks.