|
|
Post by Kentishphil on Oct 27, 2014 21:02:11 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by beachcomber on Oct 28, 2014 12:01:07 GMT 1
Personally I can't imagine anyone - modified or not - that would have an objection to bi-annual testing. I saw an ad recently for a "Classic Car" - the advertiser blatantly stating that the floor was rotted and brakes "needing attention", but that would not stop the car from being used on the road as it was MOT exempt and had a current "tax disc" for 9 months ! ALL of the modified cars I've been involved with have been built / modified to a very high standard, and certainly all the ones I've seen. As stated - it's a discussion paper and certainly all the relevant clubs for modified cars are getting their views in. The "anti-tampering" discussion paper was a far more sinister piece of work ....... essentially that would mean only OEM parts could be used for repair / replacement - 5.60 x 16" crossplies anyone ? This type of discussion has been going on for many years with Brussels trying to impose Europe wide regulations upon us. The two year testing is de-riguer in Germany [ TUV ]. I've been [ am ] actively involved with the Replica Sports car [ Kit Car ] industry both here and in Germany, where the regulations have become tighter and tighter year on year. HOWEVER, the serious manufacturers welcomed this as it meant the end product would have credibility backed by Government regulations. That said some of the more stupid suggestions from Brussels have been defeated by concerted efforts from the industry. Come on Nigel, get us out of this club ................................ |
|
|
|
Post by markaren76 on Oct 28, 2014 22:51:37 GMT 1
I've only renovated one car. In recent years As far as I could it seemed totally logical to ensure everything, especially the safety stuff was totally up to spec. Once completed I also felt it was logical to have my own work checked and validated by an independant body. Hence I had an MOt done despite exception. I don't think I'm the only one to do this. I want to be safe & I want other road users to be as well. that way I can have more confidence the roads are safer for all.
I do appreciate older cars cannot fit modern levels of checks. Brakes are the obvious point. But we should still ensure they are as road safe as we can make them, even without modifications. I really don't have an issue with being required to have the car checked , provided the checks are relevant and realistic given the build of the car.
If older cars are customised, making them perform differently than was originally intended then it is my view they should as any updated vehicle meet all necessary standards applied to the intended performance rating.
Not sure if these are exactly the right words but I hope you get my drift
Mark
|
|
|
|
Post by Darrell publicity SMC on Oct 30, 2014 9:29:08 GMT 1
I totally agree with you ALL Classic owners should have their cars checked anyway. We are only human and can be blind to some faults that build up unnoticed.
We all love to drive our Classics . How many of us mechanics !!! have had things pointed out to us in the past that we had missed. Come on own up. I will kick off I forgot to grease the King Pins and did not notice a worn part on inside edge of a tire!!
|
|
