Is this Really Road Legal?
Discussion
I got into a dispute with Quad drivers about the legality of a vehicle ( its not a car) supposedly registered for road use. They simply ignore the law IMO.
There are simply too many Construction and use failures on this thing for it to be registered properly as a car.
It may be registered as a bike wich had the engine in originally. It may have had the registration and VIN from another vehicle. It is never road legal.
Clearly it would be stopped by any traffic officer that saw it on the road.
And VOR'd and probably crushed.
Does it look road legal to you? Exactly.
Why would Kit Car owners bother with SVA if an abortion like this could be registered as a car. Its a try on. I do hope it is taken off Ebay.
There are simply too many Construction and use failures on this thing for it to be registered properly as a car.
It may be registered as a bike wich had the engine in originally. It may have had the registration and VIN from another vehicle. It is never road legal.
Clearly it would be stopped by any traffic officer that saw it on the road.
And VOR'd and probably crushed.
Does it look road legal to you? Exactly.
Why would Kit Car owners bother with SVA if an abortion like this could be registered as a car. Its a try on. I do hope it is taken off Ebay.
Steffan said:
Its not on the Insurance Database.
The DVLA think its a Fork Lift Truck See:
Vehicle Check for GN10GNU
The vehicle GN10GNU, a Jcb (Lift Truck), is on our database.
Its a try on. Avoid.
<ahem> gn10 DZU = not on the insurance database either.The DVLA think its a Fork Lift Truck See:
Vehicle Check for GN10GNU
The vehicle GN10GNU, a Jcb (Lift Truck), is on our database.
Its a try on. Avoid.
, but DVLA have it as a SMC
Date of Liability 01 07 2012
Date of First Registration 17 03 2010
Year of Manufacture 2010
Cylinder Capacity (cc) 163cc
CO2 Emissions 0g/Km
Fuel Type PETROL
Export Marker N
Vehicle Status Licence Not Due
Vehicle Colour BLACK
Vehicle Type Approval Not Available
Vehicle Excise Duty rate for vehicle
6 Months Rate £71.50
12 Months Rate £130.00
ETA - and here it is, in its native land : http://www.smc-motor.no/products/f-karton-road.asp...
Edited by marshalla on Tuesday 14th February 21:00
marshalla said:
Steffan said:
Its not on the Insurance Database.
The DVLA think its a Fork Lift Truck See:
Vehicle Check for GN10GNU
The vehicle GN10GNU, a Jcb (Lift Truck), is on our database.
Its a try on. Avoid.
<ahem> gn10 DZU = not on the insurance database either.The DVLA think its a Fork Lift Truck See:
Vehicle Check for GN10GNU
The vehicle GN10GNU, a Jcb (Lift Truck), is on our database.
Its a try on. Avoid.
, but DVLA have it as a SMC
Date of Liability 01 07 2012
Date of First Registration 17 03 2010
Year of Manufacture 2010
Cylinder Capacity (cc) 163cc
CO2 Emissions 0g/Km
Fuel Type PETROL
Export Marker N
Vehicle Status Licence Not Due
Vehicle Colour BLACK
Vehicle Type Approval Not Available
Vehicle Excise Duty rate for vehicle
6 Months Rate £71.50
12 Months Rate £130.00
ETA - and here it is, in its native land : http://www.smc-motor.no/products/f-karton-road.asp...
Edited by marshalla on Tuesday 14th February 21:00
I doubt if it could be without serious changes. Do you not agree?
C Lee Farquar said:
It's less than 400kg, by some margin, so is a quad for registration purposes. It wouldn't need an IVA, it may need an MSVA, unless it has European type approval.
The manufacturers website says it has type approval, but doesn't say whether that's purely Norwegian or EU.
Yes I did wonder if the thing was classed as a Bike. I would be interested to see the actual V5 even with MSVA, I can see several failure points, I believe as shown in the photos.The manufacturers website says it has type approval, but doesn't say whether that's purely Norwegian or EU.
Does a Quad require a helmet I wonder.
As a heavy quadricycle power is restricted to 15KW - which it would have been with the 163cc engine it was approved with.
However as a 250 engine has been fitted this would likely exceed the maximum power for a heavy quad thus invalidating the approval and the vehicles status/legality.
However as a 250 engine has been fitted this would likely exceed the maximum power for a heavy quad thus invalidating the approval and the vehicles status/legality.
minitici said:
As a heavy quadricycle power is restricted to 15KW - which it would have been with the 163cc engine it was approved with.
However as a 250 engine has been fitted this would likely exceed the maximum power for a heavy quad thus invalidating the approval and the vehicles status/legality.
There are also several obvious issues on the thing as it stands. However as a 250 engine has been fitted this would likely exceed the maximum power for a heavy quad thus invalidating the approval and the vehicles status/legality.
This is NOT road legal nor in my view could it readily be made road legal.
As minitici rightly says the engine is out apart from everything else.
minitici said:
As a heavy quadricycle power is restricted to 15KW - which it would have been with the 163cc engine it was approved with.
However as a 250 engine has been fitted this would likely exceed the maximum power for a heavy quad thus invalidating the approval and the vehicles status/legality.
No.However as a 250 engine has been fitted this would likely exceed the maximum power for a heavy quad thus invalidating the approval and the vehicles status/legality.
MSVA has two categories, below and above 15KW.
Mudguards must be fitted for MSVA. I'm not sure of the requirement to have them fitted for MOT. So he would have needed them to pass an MSVA, but may not have to keep them.
mikeveal said:
No.
MSVA has two categories, below and above 15KW.
Mudguards must be fitted for MSVA. I'm not sure of the requirement to have them fitted for MOT. So he would have needed them to pass an MSVA, but may not have to keep them.
There are two categories of Quadricycles:MSVA has two categories, below and above 15KW.
Mudguards must be fitted for MSVA. I'm not sure of the requirement to have them fitted for MOT. So he would have needed them to pass an MSVA, but may not have to keep them.
Light Quadricycle - Not exceeding 50cc or maximum of 4KW net power
Heavy Quadricycle - Not exceeding 15KW net power
If the 4 wheeled vehicle is greater than 15KW it would require IVA rather than MSVA.
As for mud guards - If the vehicle was a sit astride type quad I don't think full guards are required.
However with a 'bodied' (i.e. sitting on a conventional seat and with full floor and side bodywork) then I believe that the wheels would require guards.
Here are some of the relevant sections from the MSVA manual applicable to the heavy quadricycle.
Bodied vehicles
A bodied vehicle is defined as “a vehicle with a structure consisting/comprising of a
floor plan and panels which with a roof fully encloses the vehicle occupants and without
a roof encloses them other than where the roof would be”. No 2 wheeled vehicles will
be fitted with a body. As a guide if the driver sits on or astride the vehicle it would be
classed as unbodied. If the driver sits in the vehicle with surrounding structure which is
higher than the seat squab it would be classed as bodied.
Design and Construction
Check all aspects of the design and construction of the vehicle such that no
danger is caused or is likely to be caused to its driver, passengers or any other
road users or pedestrians.
Check that no part of the wheel, located above the horizontal plane passing
through the axis of rotation (other than in the case of tyres, wheel discs and
central wheel securing nuts which have separate requirements at 12 below),
projects outside the body plan form.
Body Plan Form
A projection of the complete body onto a horizontal surface including all bodywork and
wings but excluding wheels and suspension.
Precisely.
Well said: this is a first class illustration of the IVA essentials.
I also think this thing needs IVA and it would be both uneconomic and pointless trying to achieve it. Have done since I saw it.
Given the performance figures suggested in the Ad this would be a deathtrap on the road. It is unsafe and unfit for purpose.
I am pretty sure this thing has been on Ebay before and withdrawn.
Maybe others can confirm?
Well said: this is a first class illustration of the IVA essentials.
I also think this thing needs IVA and it would be both uneconomic and pointless trying to achieve it. Have done since I saw it.
Given the performance figures suggested in the Ad this would be a deathtrap on the road. It is unsafe and unfit for purpose.
I am pretty sure this thing has been on Ebay before and withdrawn.
Maybe others can confirm?
minitici said:
As a heavy quadricycle power is restricted to 15KW - which it would have been with the 163cc engine it was approved with.
However as a 250 engine has been fitted this would likely exceed the maximum power for a heavy quad thus invalidating the approval and the vehicles status/legality.
Yes, we can see it's correctly registered as an SMC but with a smaller engine. Presumably it must have been legal to the DVLA/VOSA's satisfaction to be registered. However as a 250 engine has been fitted this would likely exceed the maximum power for a heavy quad thus invalidating the approval and the vehicles status/legality.
As to whether fitting a bigger engine invalidates the registration, I don't know. Is it any different to people fitting different car engines for an SVA/IVA test to pass emissions tests. How many kit cars remain as presented?
C Lee Farquar said:
Yes, we can see it's correctly registered as an SMC but with a smaller engine. Presumably it must have been legal to the DVLA/VOSA's satisfaction to be registered.
As to whether fitting a bigger engine invalidates the registration, I don't know. Is it any different to people fitting different car engines for an SVA/IVA test to pass emissions tests. How many kit cars remain as presented?
It's no different to cutting an existing chassis or monocoque, as soon as you do you require IVA (despite the protestations of the ignorant!) - in this case as soon as you fit an engine over 15kW power (even by tuning the original engine) it ceases to be a heavy quadricycle & would require re-registering. So far as I can see it would require IVA & would be classed as a car? Must admit I thought there was a class of quads that could have up to 28kW or have I imagined that?As to whether fitting a bigger engine invalidates the registration, I don't know. Is it any different to people fitting different car engines for an SVA/IVA test to pass emissions tests. How many kit cars remain as presented?
Personally I think it would probably be best to let Darwinian forces do their stuff,it surely couldn't last for long on the road could it? Only unfortunate thing is of course it might take a bus queue with it!
Interesting, very interesting.
A few years ago I know someone who was going to try making a class 1 Go kart road legal. They had bought an ex racing Kart, with two engines and a little body work. The last I heard It had gained mudguards, lights and a roll cage. They planed to try and put it thought SVA, which show how long a go this was.
They claim another V4 powered kart had already past SVA. I don't know if this was true or not.
A few years ago I know someone who was going to try making a class 1 Go kart road legal. They had bought an ex racing Kart, with two engines and a little body work. The last I heard It had gained mudguards, lights and a roll cage. They planed to try and put it thought SVA, which show how long a go this was.
They claim another V4 powered kart had already past SVA. I don't know if this was true or not.
Gassing Station | Kit Cars | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff