Wheels beyond bodywork - opinions please

[bigdavy]

Hi, I would like some opinions please especially from any traffic cops but all welcome.
Ok so I have a 1959 ford pop hotrod and due to various issues I may need to run it on the road with wide rear wheels protruding well beyond the rear arches,until I can afford / source new wheels.
Now I'm aware there are lots of rods running without any arches, I understand the rule is they should have adequate spray suppression in wet weather,ie fenders.
I'm also aware there are various vehicles on the road like quads which although there are arches of sorts, they're so far above the wheels they are useless.There are also a few supercar type things with wheels beyond arches.
So, I have arches fitted but the wheels stick out,plus due to the arches shape they are thinner at front than rear therfore giving an exaggerated view from front but look less from rear.
Protrusion at rear approx 2.5 to 3" at front of wheel around an inch more due to arch shape.
So bearing in mind points above, ie I do have 'spray suppression' but tbh it looks a bit mental!
I would like to hear opinions to whether I'm lining myself up for a load of grief and a possible s59 or could I explain my point of view and be okay?

[henrycrun]

Just don't go out in when wet.

[DocJock]

Hmm, let me think...

"Yes Officer, I know they're illegal but I am only driving it whilst saving up for some legal ones"

Yes, you'll be fine...

[AdeTuono]

You should worry....

[Martin4x4]

When viewed from above no tread must be visible.

[TooMany2cvs]

bigdavy said:

Hi, I would like some opinions please

A pic is worth a thousand words...

Gut feel is that it sounds like a tug-magnet.

[LukeDM]

Martin4x4 said:

When viewed from above no tread must be visible.

My friend was taken to court because his wheels were sticking out but as it had stretched tyres and the tread was inside the arch he won, so what he said!

[V8forweekends]

Not a direct comparison, but I've been reading up about the Jag XK (X100) lately. Apparently when they fitted wider rear wheels and tyres for the XKR, the standard body didn't cover the tyres enough, so there are two bits of black clip-on plastic around the rear arches - but that was for Type Approval - not the same as Construction and Use or even MOT.

[bigdavy]

DocJock said:

Hmm, let me think...

"Yes Officer, I know they're illegal but I am only driving it whilst saving up for some legal ones"

Yes, you'll be fine...

I'm asking what the legal POV is as i believe its not illegal, evidence given above. The vehicle's I've mentioned above, especially the road legal quads, have wheels sticking out well beyond bodywork. Jaguar xkr-rs has rear wheels sticking beyond arch, jags answer? A thin piece of plastic at rear of arch for spray suppression. The requirement for mudguards is a vosa type regulation for road use not an mot one for example.
So if its ok for quads & 100k Jags, why not for me? (Playing devils advocate, not looking to argue )

[bigdavy]

Rear view above

[aw51 121565]

A minimum of one third of the circumference of the tyre 'sticking out from the bodywork' should have a guard covering it (protecting the region of the tyre generally "above" the exposed tyre which gives some discretion as to where to fit it), from memory (I could be wrong ).

Good call re: the MoT requirement/VOSA requirements (much more thorough than an MoT)/ C&U Regs (the law) differences...

[Getragdogleg]

I am into Rods and Customs but that looks silly.

Ok to have a set of piecrust slicks stuck out wide but modern treads look daft.

[bigdavy]

Typical example of a road legal quad below.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Venom-250cc-Road-Legal-Q...

[bigdavy]

aw51 121565 said:

A minimum of one third of the circumference of the tyre 'sticking out from the bodywork' should have a guard covering it (protecting the region of the tyre generally "above" the exposed tyre which gives some discretion as to where to fit it), from memory (I could be wrong ).

Good call re: the MoT requirement/VOSA requirements (much more thorough than an MoT)/ C&U Regs (the law) differences...

Great info thanks

[bigdavy]

Getragdogleg said:

I am into Rods and Customs but that looks silly.

Ok to have a set of piecrust slicks stuck out wide but modern treads look daft.

I know,I know, I'm between a rock & a hard place mate. Its the only tyre that got the wheel below the arch.

I've axle pcd / wheel size & various other issues. Its a temporary thing to get moving.

[TooMany2cvs]

bigdavy said:

Rear view above

Tug-tastic.

[checkmate91]

My wife's fiesta has those plastic extensions behind the rear wheels so OP, don't risk it, get cycle guards or bodywork changes. I love seeing Pops on the road, wouldn't want you closed down because of a bit of width!

[andyiley]

For what it's worth here is my opinion.

I think you are in contravention of C & U regs, although I can't quote specifics.

I think the tyres look daft because they are too narrow for the wheels, but each to their own.

Why not just do it right the first time & avoid the potential hassle?

[Cat]

andyiley said:

I think you are in contravention of C & U regs, although I can't quote specifics.

How about:-

Road Vehicles Construction and Use Regulations 1986 Reg 63 said:

every vehicle to which this regulation applies shall be equipped with wings or other similar fittings to catch, so far as practicable, mud or water thrown up by the rotation of its wheels or tracks.

Cat

[TooMany2cvs]

bigdavy said:

Jaguar xkr-rs has rear wheels sticking beyond arch, jags answer? A thin piece of plastic at rear of arch for spray suppression.

And, just to compare those rear arches with the XKR...





Mmm. Similar. VERY similar...