Classic cars forum & vehicle restoration.

[peter scott]

http://www.the-ace.org.uk/armageddon/
_________________
https://www.nostalgiatech.co.uk
1939 SS Jaguar 2 1/2 litre saloon

[clan chieftain]

Never noticed that section of it Peter. Maybe if we get independence we could tell the EU to get stuffed.
_________________
The Clan Chieftain

[peter scott]

When I posted it I hadn't spotted that you had already posted the issue in the watering hole. I don't think I want to live in a province of the new German empire. I'm sticking with the UK.

Peter
_________________
https://www.nostalgiatech.co.uk
1939 SS Jaguar 2 1/2 litre saloon

[Jim.Walker]

So! My Gentry, which is essentially an un-modified 2 litre Triumph Vitesse, but does not look like one may be scrap? Do modifications such as servos to uprate brakes for safety outlaw the vehicle?
Where do coach built vehicles fit into this? A Rolls Royce fitted with a coachbuilt body (by Park Ward or any one else) has a very different appearance to the product supplied by Rolls Royce. And "appearance" seems to be a relevent factor. I believe that many years ago it was not unusual to buy a rolling Rolls Royce chassis from the factory and build, or have built, your own body. So the "appearance" was far from standard.
The whole thing seems very poorly thought out.
Jim.
_________________
Quote from my late Dad:- You only need a woman and a car and you have all the problems you
are ever likely to want". Computers had not been invented then!

[clan chieftain]

Very true Jim..same with motorhomes. I entirely agree with you on the uprating of brakes. Anything to make something more efficient should not go against the owner.
Funny isnt it .I think the 10year test came inabout 1960 now anything pre 1960 might be non mot.
_________________
The Clan Chieftain

[Jason]

if it was passed how many people would be out of work? with all the company's that make aftermarket alloys, exhausts etc etc.
It'd be a disaster for the economy, I can't see it being passed.
_________________
"people with money buy a Rolls Royce, people with taste buy an Alvis".

[poodge]

To be honest,I think this issue is directed at "boy racers",but as usual,not enough thought has been given to the bigger picture.Elections coming up somewhere?

[bob2]

Aren't we supposed to live in free countries!!!!
Not so free me thinks if all this rubbish from the EU parliament continues!!!

[bob2]

A link to another forum with a lot more contributors re this subject;

http://retrorides.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=135328

[PAUL BEAUMONT]

Over the years previous generations of bureaucrats have insisted that I modify my vehicle by fitting 2 rear lights, 2 red rear reflectors, 2 dipping headlights, screen washers etc. Further it was supplied with 500x16tyres as oem. These have been unavailable since the 1960s, replaced by 525x16s. Further, it was originally supplied as a van. Sometime in history someone fitted side windows. Does my vehicle now class as modified under the terms of this?
I reckon it could keep Cherie Blair and her politically correct lawyer friends in income for ever!!

[Popular Norton]

Somebody (not me) has started a new Government e-petition regarding this...

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/37784

Please give consideration to signing this e-petition.

[V8 Nutter]

Signed it.

[Polskifiat]

Signed it too! This is definitely not the way forward, however I do think we need more rules on modifications. The other week I saw an impreza that had been converted to a pick up with plywood and expanding foam. I have also seen roll cages made from drain pipe.

[Popular Norton]

A quote from the FBHVC website...

The draft of the new Directive has implications for all motorists, not just historic vehicle owners. Amongst other things, the draft requires tests to make reference to a vehicle’s original ‘technical characteristics’. The meaning of this expression is not defined. National governments are granted the right to make their own testing arrangements for ‘vehicles of historic interest’.
A vehicle of historic interest is then defined as one that: Was manufactured more than 30 years ago, is maintained by use of replacement parts which reproduce the historic components of the vehicle, has not sustained any change in the technical characteristics of its main components such as engine, brakes, steering or suspension; and has not been changed in its appearance.
FBHVC considers this definition to be unworkable and completely unacceptable. FBHVC also rejects the suggestion that Roadworthiness Testing should relate to a vehicle’s ‘technical characteristics’, whatever the age of the vehicle. Modifications, alterations and improvements are all part of the history of motor vehicles and the older the vehicle, the more likely it is that it will have been altered at some stage.

Please sign - http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/37784

I cant say as i was a big fan of the European Union anyway but this kind of interference only strengthens that opinion.

[smiffy220]

Yep, signed it. Will check all other forums I use to see if everyone has the link!
_________________
Born to rally, forced to work!

1980 Opel Manta 2.0 SR Berlinetta
1934 Morris Cowley Four (my late fathers)