Still a £$&£$ on the log book

[RazerSauber]

DodgyGeezer said:

daydotz said:

All the signs of a Quality conversion

Not sure if this has been posted still a 2.0 TDI according to the DVLA

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/2015-SKODA-YETI-2-5-TFS...

"...THE CAR IS LIKE BRAND NEW INSIDE AND OUT..."

Skoda must have made some major cut backs if that's in "as new" condition! I've seen smaller panel gaps on a picket fence!

[Fastdruid]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwXqQRichkQ

KPP 477Y. Still registered as a 1296cc while it should be 2616cc. Also blatantly illegally modified, should be on a Q.

[TonyRPH]

Fastdruid said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwXqQRichkQ

KPP 477Y. Still registered as a 1296cc while it should be 2616cc. Also blatantly illegally modified, should be on a Q.

Of all the engines to choose though? A Mazda RX8???

There were some RWD Escort shells around a few years back, not sure if they were on Q plates - however I doubt this is one of those shells.

[skwdenyer]

Fastdruid said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwXqQRichkQ

KPP 477Y. Still registered as a 1296cc while it should be 2616cc. Also blatantly illegally modified, should be on a Q.

Why 2616? Surely 1308?

In terms of modifications, do we really care? It’s not like anyone’s trying to pull the wool regarding the mods (which is really the point of Q plates).

[InitialDave]

skwdenyer said:

Why 2616? Surely 1308?

An RX8 engine is 1308cc.

So if you have two RX8 engines...?

Edit: no, you're right, it's only one, the "twin engined" is the channel name, sorry!


While it does seem to be the wrong displacement either way, whether the mods need a Q plate would depend on when it was originally done in terms of the RWD conversion, wouldn't it? People have been doing stuff like this for a long time, and I can well see it being built before the rules changed, which wouldn't have made it particularly fishy, and then the rotary engine came along later.

That may be where they did do it dodgily, there's no advantage to keeping it as 1296cc (1.3 CVH?) rather than 1308cc, but if it were originally built with a 2.0 Pinto or Zetec, not changing the capacity would save then a little bit on VED.

Edited by InitialDave on Saturday 2nd July 16:16

[Fastdruid]

skwdenyer said:

Fastdruid said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwXqQRichkQ

KPP 477Y. Still registered as a 1296cc while it should be 2616cc. Also blatantly illegally modified, should be on a Q.

Why 2616? Surely 1308?

In terms of modifications, do we really care? It’s not like anyone’s trying to pull the wool regarding the mods (which is really the point of Q plates).

2616cc because that's what RX-8's are registered as (used to have one, that's what it was)

I found this snippet somewhere:

Someone said:

If you were to write to Mazda UK for confirmation of engine capacity, the reply from the Homologation Manager will be as follows:

"I can confirm that the engine capacity of your Mazda RX-7 is 1308cc as determined by the manufacturer. However under a long standing agreement between Motor Manufacturers and the Department for Transport, Mazda UK has always registered new rotary engine cars declaring the engine capacity as 2 x swept volume.

When applying this rule, the effective engine capacity for your vehicle is 2616cc. This figure should appear on the V5 registration document and be used in any official correspondence concerning the vehicle."

As for "do we care?" well you may ask the same about if we care if it's "Still a £$&£$ on the log book"!

The build is new, last 3 years or so, few pictures are on the Facebook page For Stolton Engineering.

That car should have an IVA and be on a Q. Ignoring for a second that you can't legally cut the chassis and keep the reg, you need 8 points to keep the reg and 5 *must* come from the original or new and unmodified chassis.

If we utterly lie and ignore the chassis it scores 5 out of 14, if we include the chassis it gets 0 out of 14!

https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-registration/radically-...

That the engine hasn't been correctly registered is the least of it's worries, it's really nicely engineered but blatantly illegal, even more so than the Corsa with a 2.0 that says it's a 1.2 on the logbook!

[Slow]

Fastdruid said:

skwdenyer said:

Fastdruid said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwXqQRichkQ

KPP 477Y. Still registered as a 1296cc while it should be 2616cc. Also blatantly illegally modified, should be on a Q.

Why 2616? Surely 1308?

In terms of modifications, do we really care? It’s not like anyone’s trying to pull the wool regarding the mods (which is really the point of Q plates).

2616cc because that's what RX-8's are registered as (used to have one, that's what it was)

I found this snippet somewhere:

Someone said:

If you were to write to Mazda UK for confirmation of engine capacity, the reply from the Homologation Manager will be as follows:

"I can confirm that the engine capacity of your Mazda RX-7 is 1308cc as determined by the manufacturer. However under a long standing agreement between Motor Manufacturers and the Department for Transport, Mazda UK has always registered new rotary engine cars declaring the engine capacity as 2 x swept volume.

When applying this rule, the effective engine capacity for your vehicle is 2616cc. This figure should appear on the V5 registration document and be used in any official correspondence concerning the vehicle."

As for "do we care?" well you may ask the same about if we care if it's "Still a £$&£$ on the log book"!

The build is new, last 3 years or so, few pictures are on the Facebook page For Stolton Engineering.

That car should have an IVA and be on a Q. Ignoring for a second that you can't legally cut the chassis and keep the reg, you need 8 points to keep the reg and 5 *must* come from the original or new and unmodified chassis.

If we utterly lie and ignore the chassis it scores 5 out of 14, if we include the chassis it gets 0 out of 14!

https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-registration/radically-...

That the engine hasn't been correctly registered is the least of it's worries, it's really nicely engineered but blatantly illegal, even more so than the Corsa with a 2.0 that says it's a 1.2 on the logbook!

But if you declare it all to your insurance company no one is going to be negatively effected other than people who make up Q plates for sale.

[skwdenyer]

Fastdruid said:

skwdenyer said:

Fastdruid said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwXqQRichkQ

KPP 477Y. Still registered as a 1296cc while it should be 2616cc. Also blatantly illegally modified, should be on a Q.

Why 2616? Surely 1308?

In terms of modifications, do we really care? It’s not like anyone’s trying to pull the wool regarding the mods (which is really the point of Q plates).

2616cc because that's what RX-8's are registered as (used to have one, that's what it was)

I found this snippet somewhere:

Someone said:

If you were to write to Mazda UK for confirmation of engine capacity, the reply from the Homologation Manager will be as follows:

"I can confirm that the engine capacity of your Mazda RX-7 is 1308cc as determined by the manufacturer. However under a long standing agreement between Motor Manufacturers and the Department for Transport, Mazda UK has always registered new rotary engine cars declaring the engine capacity as 2 x swept volume.

When applying this rule, the effective engine capacity for your vehicle is 2616cc. This figure should appear on the V5 registration document and be used in any official correspondence concerning the vehicle."

As for "do we care?" well you may ask the same about if we care if it's "Still a £$&£$ on the log book"!

The build is new, last 3 years or so, few pictures are on the Facebook page For Stolton Engineering.

That car should have an IVA and be on a Q. Ignoring for a second that you can't legally cut the chassis and keep the reg, you need 8 points to keep the reg and 5 *must* come from the original or new and unmodified chassis.

If we utterly lie and ignore the chassis it scores 5 out of 14, if we include the chassis it gets 0 out of 14!

https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-registration/radically-...

That the engine hasn't been correctly registered is the least of it's worries, it's really nicely engineered but blatantly illegal, even more so than the Corsa with a 2.0 that says it's a 1.2 on the logbook!

To my mind (and I realise others think differently), declaring a 1.2 on a 2.0 with the deliberate intention of cutting costs is clearly not good for society - it will lead to more uninsured drivers, for a start. So I've no issue with calling that out - and don't understand why it isn't just routinely checked at MOT time (engine number databases are a thing).

In terms of stuff like turreting an Escort Mk2, converting a Mk3 to RWD, and so on, I'm really not at all fussed. The Q plate is meant (IMHO) to act as a signifier to a potential purchaser that a vehicle is a bitsa / can't be verified for age. That might be important if you're buying an otherwise-stock-appearing vehicle for your granny, but is clearly not the case for a vehicle like this.

Since Q plates only "penalise" those who actually obey the law, the reality is that most of the egregiously-dodgy bitsas simply won't be on Q plates and so will circulate with impunity. So in reality I see that nobody is benefited at all

As is so often the case, this whole thing seems to be an idea in search of a reason to be. I just can't get upset about bobtailed Range Rovers, RWD converted Mk3 Escorts, or twin-engined one-offs, especially not at the same time as we're saying that any old crap registered pre-1983 can run around with any MOT or other inspection ever - and there are a lot more of those than there are RWD Mk3 Escorts!

Frankly I'd rather have a more thorough MOT regime that didn't stop at some arbitrary point, with the aim of weeding out stuff that's actually dangerous.

But hey, I'm used to being an outlier

[InitialDave]

Fastdruid said:

2616cc because that's what RX-8's are registered as (used to have one, that's what it was)

I found this snippet somewhere:

Someone said:

If you were to write to Mazda UK for confirmation of engine capacity, the reply from the Homologation Manager will be as follows:

"I can confirm that the engine capacity of your Mazda RX-7 is 1308cc as determined by the manufacturer. However under a long standing agreement between Motor Manufacturers and the Department for Transport, Mazda UK has always registered new rotary engine cars declaring the engine capacity as 2 x swept volume.

When applying this rule, the effective engine capacity for your vehicle is 2616cc. This figure should appear on the V5 registration document and be used in any official correspondence concerning the vehicle."

Fascinating, never knew that.

[996Keef]

I presented a heavily modified car for IVA. (Modified monocoque, engine change, suspension changed, steering changed. and it passed on the 2nd attempt.

Once it was issued its certificate, it retained its original registration number.

They don't always go on a Q plate, it's a myth

[Fastdruid]

996Keef said:

I presented a heavily modified car for IVA. (Modified monocoque, engine change, suspension changed, steering changed. and it passed on the 2nd attempt.

Once it was issued its certificate, it retained its original registration number.

They don't always go on a Q plate, it's a myth

That is literally what the government page says on the subject though.

https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-registration/radically-altered-vehicles said:

You will not be able to keep your vehicle’s original registration number if one of the following applies:

• it has fewer than 8 points
• it has a second-hand or altered chassis, monocoque bodyshell or frame
• there’s evidence that 2 vehicles have been welded together to form one (ie ‘cut and shut’)

Your vehicle must pass the relevant type approval test to get a ‘Q’ prefix registration number.

[996Keef]

Beats me, I've done a couple over the years and one retained its original reg, and the other was a kit car built from used parts, donor engine box and front and rear axles from a 76 donor.

That one was issued a period 1976 plate - randomly assigned, no idea why, thought it would've been a Q. The v5c even says it was first registered 2018

[Slow]

996Keef said:

Beats me, I've done a couple over the years and one retained its original reg, and the other was a kit car built from used parts, donor engine box and front and rear axles from a 76 donor.

That one was issued a period 1976 plate - randomly assigned, no idea why, thought it would've been a Q. The v5c even says it was first registered 2018

Dvla are fools so doesnt surprise me. My 2008 ford diesel is a 2008 bedford petrol...

[AlexRS2782]

Been a few months so here's a new one - https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/385030636040

Started out life as a 2012 1.2 Polo Match TDI with a £20 tax rate - now converted into a 2016 1.8 GTI DSG, which would be around £165 odd tax rate, plus the obligatory decat, unsilenced exhaust, pop bang remap, etc.

Obviously undeclared and up to the new owner to sort out, but in the meantime cheap tax, insurance, etc.

[SimonTheSailor]

Fastdruid said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwXqQRichkQ

KPP 477Y. Still registered as a 1296cc while it should be 2616cc. Also blatantly illegally modified, should be on a Q.

Brakes lines inside the car ? Is that even legal ?

[Fastdruid]

SimonTheSailor said:

Fastdruid said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwXqQRichkQ

KPP 477Y. Still registered as a 1296cc while it should be 2616cc. Also blatantly illegally modified, should be on a Q.

Brakes lines inside the car ? Is that even legal ?

Yes. Nothing wrong with that. Most are run outside because it's cheaper and easier for manufacturers rather than any legal requirements... although from memory isn't that one the one with reservoirs in the car rather than lines?

[Pit Pony]

Fastdruid said:

SimonTheSailor said:

Fastdruid said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwXqQRichkQ

KPP 477Y. Still registered as a 1296cc while it should be 2616cc. Also blatantly illegally modified, should be on a Q.

Brakes lines inside the car ? Is that even legal ?

Yes. Nothing wrong with that. Most are run outside because it's cheaper and easier for manufacturers rather than any legal requirements... although from memory isn't that one the one with reservoirs in the car rather than lines?

Difficult to.set fire to.brake fluid, but once alight its difficult to put out.

[wpa1975]

AlexRS2782 said:

Been a few months so here's a new one - https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/385030636040

Started out life as a 2012 1.2 Polo Match TDI with a £20 tax rate - now converted into a 2016 1.8 GTI DSG, which would be around £165 odd tax rate, plus the obligatory decat, unsilenced exhaust, pop bang remap, etc.

Obviously undeclared and up to the new owner to sort out, but in the meantime cheap tax, insurance, etc.

Surely for £12k if you want a Polo GTI you would by a proper car, sadly nobody buying this will ever declare the mods will they.

[Driver101]

wpa1975 said:

AlexRS2782 said:

Been a few months so here's a new one - https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/385030636040

Started out life as a 2012 1.2 Polo Match TDI with a £20 tax rate - now converted into a 2016 1.8 GTI DSG, which would be around £165 odd tax rate, plus the obligatory decat, unsilenced exhaust, pop bang remap, etc.

Obviously undeclared and up to the new owner to sort out, but in the meantime cheap tax, insurance, etc.

Surely for £12k if you want a Polo GTI you would by a proper car, sadly nobody buying this will ever declare the mods will they.

I would be more concerned that the car is a ringer or made up of stolen parts.

[wpa1975]

Driver101 said:

wpa1975 said:

AlexRS2782 said:

Been a few months so here's a new one - https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/385030636040

Started out life as a 2012 1.2 Polo Match TDI with a £20 tax rate - now converted into a 2016 1.8 GTI DSG, which would be around £165 odd tax rate, plus the obligatory decat, unsilenced exhaust, pop bang remap, etc.

Obviously undeclared and up to the new owner to sort out, but in the meantime cheap tax, insurance, etc.

Surely for £12k if you want a Polo GTI you would by a proper car, sadly nobody buying this will ever declare the mods will they.

I would be more concerned that the car is a ringer or made up of stolen parts.

Valid point, mileage data on the mot history is interesting, in 2017 it has 135087, then in July 2018 it 7524 so I am guessing this is when the conversion happened.

Also surprising that a dealer is willing to sell it.