Driving a Caterham with the doors off - Illegal?

Driving a Caterham with the doors off - Illegal?

Author
Discussion

MikeGF

Original Poster:

740 posts

285 months

Wednesday 6th February 2008
quotequote all
Hi

Is driving a Caterham with the doors off on UK roads illegal as you technically have no wing mirrors fitted to the car?

Apologies if a dumb question, looking to get into Caterham ownership and was just wondering..

Cheers
MikeGF

SimonY

348 posts

209 months

Wednesday 6th February 2008
quotequote all
You can always fit mirrors to the windscreen stanchion instead. Although if you drive it on the road with a windscreen and no doors you wil find it a touch blustery...

will_

6,027 posts

204 months

Wednesday 6th February 2008
quotequote all
SimonY said:
You can always fit mirrors to the windscreen stanchion instead. Although if you drive it on the road with a windscreen and no doors you wil find it a touch blustery...
Quite!

You need 2 mirrors on a car to pass an MoT. I'm fitting an aeroscreen which I've heard is less blustery than a windscreen with no doors!

MikeGF

Original Poster:

740 posts

285 months

Wednesday 6th February 2008
quotequote all
I will have the normal windscreen on mine, can you get mirrors to simply attach to the existing windscreen?

rubystone

11,254 posts

260 months

Wednesday 6th February 2008
quotequote all
will_ said:
You need 2 mirrors on a car to pass an MoT. I'm fitting an aeroscreen which I've heard is less blustery than a windscreen with no doors!
That depends on whether you are counting the rear-view mirror as one....

Aside from it being blustery, you'll find that at certain speeds with the windscreen on and doors off you cannot breathe.

Finaly point - I drilled my stanchions and fitted Racetechs. Get the alignment right and you can still fit the doors on too. The result is vibration free views behind!...Also stops stoopid passengers throwing their door forward onto the bonnet and scratching the paint as a result.

derestrictor

18,764 posts

262 months

Wednesday 6th February 2008
quotequote all
The aeroscreens have side mirrors attatched although their effect whilst ostensibly serving up rearward vistas is essentially to keep lettuce munching trots gagged. The Goddam punks.

To quote the first rule of latin roadcraft from that fellow in the Daytona from The Canonball Run, "whatsa behind you, don't matter!"

Vipers

32,896 posts

229 months

Wednesday 6th February 2008
quotequote all
derestrictor said:
To quote the first rule of latin roadcraft from that fellow in the Daytona from The Canonball Run, "whatsa behind you, don't matter!"
Lots of vehicle drivers seem to be of the opinion..... especially the artic which had pulled off the slip road at Altens, nr Aberdeen, as he was slowing for the left hand sweep on the slip road, I was passing at 70 in L1, when the bugger decided it wanted to pull back out again, luckly I managed to break and pull to L2 to pass him. For gods sake Mirror, Signal, Manouevour, but I know we on here all know that, but apparantly he didnt.....

smile

will_

6,027 posts

204 months

Wednesday 6th February 2008
quotequote all
rubystone said:
will_ said:
You need 2 mirrors on a car to pass an MoT. I'm fitting an aeroscreen which I've heard is less blustery than a windscreen with no doors!
That depends on whether you are counting the rear-view mirror as one....

Aside from it being blustery, you'll find that at certain speeds with the windscreen on and doors off you cannot breathe.

Finaly point - I drilled my stanchions and fitted Racetechs. Get the alignment right and you can still fit the doors on too. The result is vibration free views behind!...Also stops stoopid passengers throwing their door forward onto the bonnet and scratching the paint as a result.
Yep, RVM counts as one, but for the moment I've gone for the two side mirrors on the aero as with the roll bar I don't think the RVM will be much use.

It's my understanding that for an MoT you need 2 mirrors of the three possible ones, so either 2 side mirrors or RVM and one side mirror (on either side). Either way if you have mirrors mounted on the doors and you take the doors off, you only have one mirror, which I think would be illegal.

rubystone

11,254 posts

260 months

Wednesday 6th February 2008
quotequote all
will_ said:
It's my understanding that for an MoT you need 2 mirrors of the three possible ones, so either 2 side mirrors or RVM and one side mirror (on either side). Either way if you have mirrors mounted on the doors and you take the doors off, you only have one mirror, which I think would be illegal.
I wouldn't worry too much about the Police pulling you over for it being illegal. I'd recommend the stanchion mount. Nifty Styles sells (or used to) a kit that enabled one to clip the side mirrors from a transit van to the (door) hinge mounts on the stanchions. No need then to drill any extra holes at all.

Noger

7,117 posts

250 months

Wednesday 6th February 2008
quotequote all
Depends on the age of the car.

workflowwarrior

4 posts

195 months

Wednesday 6th February 2008
quotequote all
interesting\!

Dazzled

266 posts

227 months

Wednesday 6th February 2008
quotequote all
It's not illegal to drive it without the doors.
The doors are not regarded as a crash structure. If the mirrors were mounted on them they would be, hence Caterham supply mounts to fit the standard mirrors to the windscreen to get the car through the SVA test. What owners do after that is up to them. Most mount themon the doors using the pre drilled holes.
If you do decide to drive with the doors off you must by law have two mirrors fitted and the RVM counts as one.
The SVA mirror fixing kit is available on the Caterham website if you want to go that route.
Driving with windscreen on and doors off is VERY blustery in the cabin. Much better to ditch the screen altogether and fit an aeroscreen. It transforms the car. The air in the cabin below the scuttle is spookily still, the acceleration improved and the whole sensation is tremendous.

Murph7355

37,760 posts

257 months

Wednesday 6th February 2008
quotequote all
Full windscreen and no doors is not an enjoyable experience. As ruby notes, breathing is quite hard and the turbulence is bad (very).

It is, however, perhaps even more scary than an aeroscreen (which is actually very mild). Particularly for passengers.



bikemonster

1,188 posts

242 months

Thursday 7th February 2008
quotequote all
Another vote for ditching the screen. As a recent convert to Sevenism, I found it the draughiest thing that I have ever driven, and I have driven a fair selection of roofless cars.

With the screen removed, and I have not gotten around to adding the aeroscreen yet, the buffeting is much reduced.

will_

6,027 posts

204 months

Thursday 7th February 2008
quotequote all
bikemonster said:
Another vote for ditching the screen. As a recent convert to Sevenism, I found it the draughiest thing that I have ever driven, and I have driven a fair selection of roofless cars.

With the screen removed, and I have not gotten around to adding the aeroscreen yet, the buffeting is much reduced.
So you're just tooling round with a 'naked scuttle'! Hadn't thought of that...

bikemonster

1,188 posts

242 months

Thursday 7th February 2008
quotequote all
Will: yes, naked scuttle it is!

My car (a replica 7) is used as a street-legal(ish) race car, so I needed to make a 'stand' for the RVM to allow me to be able to see what was going on behind me.

With goggles to keep insects, birds, small stones and other debris out of my eyes, the buffeting is bearable at speeds up to around 120 km/h. I haven't tracked the car since removing the screen, but I suspect that st speed it will feel like I am getting my helmet sucked right off.

(Crash helmet lads, crash helmet!)

derestrictor

18,764 posts

262 months

Thursday 7th February 2008
quotequote all
When I get an afternoon I'll be down at that racewear joint chez Silverstone for to buy please an helmet that resists said heed pullage above the frenzied upper reaches of pre-coital autogroanage.

The other benefit with hats like these is the maintenance of your hearing during protracted sessions: then again, I would love an in-helmet headphone system affording some appropriate metal to accompany suitable moorland stages: 'Stone Deaf Forever' whilst doughnutting, perhaps?



Sensible policies for a ludicrously high power to weight ratio'd Britain.











LRdriver II

1,936 posts

250 months

Friday 8th February 2008
quotequote all
Driving with no doors meant I couldnt breath above 40mph as the wind hit me from the side.. very uncomfortable.
Aeroscreen was a revelation, with the wind just hitting the top of my head, but did mean I bought a pair of bulletproof Oakley M-frames with changable lenses to use when driving around the lanes. M-way travel means wearing a helmet (nice warm dry).

I ended up removing my RVM as it alway sat in my eyesight for taking left hand bends and I couldnt see the damn wheel arch and put it on the apex. Besides, you only stared at the rollbar diagonal or your own shoulder...so fairly useless anyway. I didnt loose any view as my sidemirrors were convex jobbies. Fairly rare that anything sneaks up on you so only used to watch for plod

v6ter

692 posts

218 months

Friday 8th February 2008
quotequote all
Another thumbs up for naked scuttle, and yes on track at 110 your head does feel like its being torn off - still great fun!

Hunttheshunt

1,093 posts

241 months

Wednesday 13th February 2008
quotequote all
Aeroscreen all the way! Must admit I don't bother with a helmet.

I bought some sunglasses that Harley riders use apparently. These are foam backed so fit snugly to your face and don't allow any inrush of air. This means I can see quite easily well into 3 digits at which point breathing becomes a bit of an issue. They look like ordinary sunglasses so I don't look too much of a tit....well more than usual anyway hehe A also use my bike in-ear defenders which cut most of the harmful noise but still allows you to hear enough to make it fun.

I do wince when lorries pass by though. Just waiting for that stone......