Armageddon for modified car owners
Discussion
e8_pack said:
I bet this was how the fox Hunters felt, in the end it didn't amount to much, just a few thousand people, think how many people don't mod their cars, will we be enough?
850,000 classic car owners not enough for you? Double that figure including modern cars with some form of modification = 1.7million cars in the UK alone. Do the figures and this policy will upset a lot of people in many countries.I don't think the UK industry will take this lying down & wouldn't for one moment expect Halfords accept their annual turnover of £771M to be ripped to shreds.
We of course expect you to be a the head of the protest with your truck supporting your PH buddies...
Are any of you going to explain what bit of the proposal backs up your panic?
Clue: it is already done here: http://pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&f...
Clue: it is already done here: http://pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&f...
v8250 said:
850,000 classic car owners not enough for you? Double that figure including modern cars with some form of modification = 1.7million cars in the UK alone. Do the figures and this policy will upset a lot of people in many countries.
I don't think the UK industry will take this lying down & wouldn't for one moment expect Halfords accept their annual turnover of £771M to be ripped to shreds.
We of course expect you to be a the head of the protest with your truck supporting your PH buddies...
Whilst i'm right with you every step of the way, going by many of the replies on this very site we'll be lucky of getting 20% of that number. I don't think the UK industry will take this lying down & wouldn't for one moment expect Halfords accept their annual turnover of £771M to be ripped to shreds.
We of course expect you to be a the head of the protest with your truck supporting your PH buddies...
Google [bot] said:
Without wishing to be alarmist,
Agreed, but here are the prevalent points and the ambuguity is of much concern.Here is a link to the original consultaion questionare.
ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety/pdf/c...ti_questionnaire.pdf
On face value the survey looks harmless, but of course the danger becomes apparent in how the data is interpreted.
(5)
There is a clear correlation between the level of road safety and the number of
technical deficiencies of vehicles. In 2009, 35,000 fatalities have been reported on European
roads. Assuming that technical deficiencies contribute to fatalities proportionately to their
contribution to accidents, more than 2,000 fatalities per year in the Union may be linked to
technical deficiencies of vehicles. Based on available studies, between 900 and 1,100 of these
could be avoided if adequate improvements
to the roadworthiness testing system were put in place.
(9) Vehicles of historic interest are supposed to conserve heritage of the époque they
have been built and considered to be hardly used on public roads, it should be left to
Member States to extend the period of periodic roadworthiness testing for such
vehicles. It should also be for Member States to regulate roadworthiness testing of
other types of specialised vehicles.
2. This Regulation shall not apply to:
– vehicles of historic interest,
– vehicles belonging to armed forces, fire services, civil protection, emergency or rescue
services,
– vehicles used by agricultural, horticultural, forestry, farming or fishery undertakings with
a maximum design speed not exceeding 40 km/h,
– specialised vehicles transporting circus and funfair equipment with a maximum design speed
not exceeding 40 km/h and only operating on the territory of the Member State.
3. Member States may introduce national requirements concerning roadworthiness tests for
vehicles listed in paragraph 2 registered in their territory.
(7) ‘vehicle of historic interest’ means any vehicle which fulfils all the
following
conditions :
– It was manufactured at least 30 years ago,
– [b]_It is maintained by use of replacement parts which reproduce the historic
components of the vehicle;_[/b]
– [b]_It has not sustained any change in the technical characteristics of its main components
such as engine, brakes, steering or suspension and_[/b]
– [/b]_It has not been changed in its appearance;_[/b]
Google [bot] said:
Not sure if we're misunderstanding each other, but my point is that if it goes the way of Australia it is ridiculous nannystateness. It's a joke, only not victimless . I enjoy confidence that the rest of the world isn't like this. If it is...
Precisely this. We are in absolute agreement. Any/all nanny state control is abhorent. The main difference for Australia is that the Australian voting public elected the politicians and therefore can de-elect at next election. Within the EU, MEP's have voting rights on an unelected basis whereby they vote on EU-wide policy that is rarely publicly forum'd, not debated within the individual states, and never at local level. Successive UK Govt's continuously fail to act/resist EU policy, nor interperet policy for the betterment of the UK. Within the current debate, UK Govt'/DfT will simply say yes to whatever EU presuure they receive. The DfT may not issue all changes at once but they will arrive, which is why I am so concerned on this issue. In the same way as FIVA and some FBHVC officers, we can not allow this policy to become legislative in its' current form. The wording has been composed by the very good [read expensive] EU employed lawyers to give maximum flexibilty and postioning to the EU policy makers.
What people forget is that it is us who pay these f
kers wages and I'm damned if these bds are being paid from my taxes to fk up an activity I'm passionate about. Even worse is the uneducated apathy seen in the UK. People simply roll-over like trained puppy-dogs living with the perception of all is okay, it won't effect me...with the sod others/I'm all right Jack approach to life. People have no balls nowadays...they're much happier living in their cocooned world watching soap opera's and mind numbingly useless tosh of the I'm A Celebrity Get Me In The X-Factored Jungle variety. Quite simply they're dumbed-down from birth without realising what's going on around them. In the same way we read comments from those on this thread with a calm down nothing will happen approach.Google Bot, what's needed is some good manned-up Aussie Grit as there's huge a shortage here in Blighty. Feel free to send as much as you guys can spare. Next Aussie election, fire the Nanny and vote for Mick Dundee
So if the EU consider a classic to be more than 30 years old, does that mean the British Government will update the free/historic tax disc cut off date? IIRC originally that was originally a rolling cut-off date.
This may also go some way to explain that idea that came from nowhere about really old cars not needing an MOT any more. Just a thought.
This may also go some way to explain that idea that came from nowhere about really old cars not needing an MOT any more. Just a thought.
v8250 said:
Johnnytheboy said:
What about dealer-fitted mods?
What about manufacturer approved packages (e.g. what Mountune do to Fords?)
What about old cars? I've just bought one the last available 'pattern' exhausts for my old Fiesta; shortly ALL I will be able to buy are non-standard spec exhausts.
Idiocy.
Precisely. You've struck the enormity of this legislation; it's huge. 99% of folk who have some interest in classic and modern cars upgrade them in some way. I'm a simple car user, having my company car and an MGB for weekend fun. The B' has some modifications which are non-standard but are specified for better running & greater fuel efficiency. Inversely, I have friends with extensive car collections, the majority of which have some level of associated modification and non-original parts. This legislation will force ALL of us to revert ALL cars to the original manufacturers specification OR to complete an IVA. This is absolute madness! What about manufacturer approved packages (e.g. what Mountune do to Fords?)
What about old cars? I've just bought one the last available 'pattern' exhausts for my old Fiesta; shortly ALL I will be able to buy are non-standard spec exhausts.
Idiocy.
What about cars that have had aftermarket heads fitted so that they can run on unleaded?
More idiocy.
suffolk009 said:
So if the EU consider a classic to be more than 30 years old, does that mean the British Government will update the free/historic tax disc cut off date? IIRC originally that was originally a rolling cut-off date.
What, the Blair-Brown styled ConDem Boys relinquishing an easily accessible tax revenue stream that's backed by 'law' and further endorsed by DVLA regulation [ala SORN] ?? Not a chance.This will only happen once a UK Govt' has worked out where else they can secure equivalent OR greater tax revenue. Look out ladies of the W.I., your cakes and jams are about to become VAT-able, Girl Guides and Boy Scouts are about to be charged a public licence performance levy for sining ging-gang-gooley around the camp fires...
It says:
"... introduce a definition for a roadworthiness test that components of the vehicle must comply with characteristics at the time of first registration. ..................."
As I read it, it doesn't say that a vehicle can't be modified, it says that components must comply with the CHARACTERISTICS at the time of first registration. So if you fit higher rate coil springs, or dampers with increased stiffness, the characteristics are the same in terms of how the parts operate and it's unlikely that the spring rates or damping rates could or would be measured. It doesn't say SPECIFICATIONS, it says CHARACTERISTICS. There is a big difference.
Of course, if you lower the car till it's almost on the bump stops, fit extra-wide wheels with ultra-low-profile tyres, a huge rear spoiler, 'mega-noise-booster' exhaust system, etc, expect problems.
With modifications like suspension up-rating at standard ride height, subtle engine mods (chipping?), better brake pads, improved suspension bushes, better lights (Cibie, for example), better seats, and so on it it doubtful that the characteristics could be deemed to have changed or even that the MoT station would take any interest so long as the emissions were OK and the rest of the car looked safe and met tyre and suspension limits for wear.
With Historic cars so long as they are to the homologation standards of the original cars, e.g. only have the optional extras as specified by the original manufacturer there should not be a problem. So 'period modifications using O.E.M parts' should be fine IMHO..
"... introduce a definition for a roadworthiness test that components of the vehicle must comply with characteristics at the time of first registration. ..................."
As I read it, it doesn't say that a vehicle can't be modified, it says that components must comply with the CHARACTERISTICS at the time of first registration. So if you fit higher rate coil springs, or dampers with increased stiffness, the characteristics are the same in terms of how the parts operate and it's unlikely that the spring rates or damping rates could or would be measured. It doesn't say SPECIFICATIONS, it says CHARACTERISTICS. There is a big difference.
Of course, if you lower the car till it's almost on the bump stops, fit extra-wide wheels with ultra-low-profile tyres, a huge rear spoiler, 'mega-noise-booster' exhaust system, etc, expect problems.
With modifications like suspension up-rating at standard ride height, subtle engine mods (chipping?), better brake pads, improved suspension bushes, better lights (Cibie, for example), better seats, and so on it it doubtful that the characteristics could be deemed to have changed or even that the MoT station would take any interest so long as the emissions were OK and the rest of the car looked safe and met tyre and suspension limits for wear.
With Historic cars so long as they are to the homologation standards of the original cars, e.g. only have the optional extras as specified by the original manufacturer there should not be a problem. So 'period modifications using O.E.M parts' should be fine IMHO..
Cooperman said:
Of course, if you lower the car till it's almost on the bump stops, expect problems.
With modifications like suspension up-rating at standard ride height, better brake pads, improved suspension bushes, better lights (Cibie, for example), better seats, and so on it it doubtful that the characteristics could be deemed to have changed.
But, that's a DIRECT contradiction. You can fit a suspension to improve a car's handling but at the same time you can't lower that same suspension 20mm to give it desired affect it was created for?With modifications like suspension up-rating at standard ride height, better brake pads, improved suspension bushes, better lights (Cibie, for example), better seats, and so on it it doubtful that the characteristics could be deemed to have changed.
lol.
Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff