An NCT for Classic Cars

ACProctor

As I'm sure everyone here knows, classic cars do not require any type of test in Ireland to ensure their roadworthiness.

This is wrong - VERY WRONG - and I've previously written to newspapers about this.

As the owner of 2 classics which cover quite long distances, I try hard to ensure they are fit for driving on modern roads. One of the reasons I prefer rallies abroad rather than in Ireland is that I have been parked next to dangerous vehicles here that should not be travelling anywhere at all (e.g. with crumbling tyre walls). The fact that these can also legally travel on UK roads for a holiday ought to raise some eyebrows over there.

One of my classics has just finished undergoing a restoration over in the UK. By accident, they also sent it for an MOT (their equivalent to our NCT) - which it passed of course. I just checked and the relevant UK government department (VOSA) said this is fine, although it would have to be MOT'd under its chassis number rather than number plate. They also confirmed I could take advantage of this on a yearly basis for both my classics.

I quickly contacted my insurers (Carole Nash) about whether they would offer any recognition of this (e.g. some small discount), and so persuade others to do the same. They rightly pointed out that not everyone would be in a position to do this, but would pass the message on all the same.

Does anyone know whether the Irish government has considered a variation of the NCT for classic cars? Obviously, the normal one would be inappropriate but a variation that checked basic roadworthiness in areas like brakes, steering, tyres, lights, etc., can only be good. Even if only voluntary, insurers actually have a lot of clout if they wanted to persuade people to do it

2 Espressi

Not sure if there's anything that says you can't NCT a pre-1980 car, it's just that you don't have to.

John Cradden wrote a pretty cool article a while back for the times:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/motors/2010/0106/1224261724660.html

While it certainly makes sense to have a roadworthiness check, the fact is that older cars can't compete in many of the areas tested by the NCTS (I'm thinking emissions mostly) so where do you draw the line?

Don't bother writing to the papers, write to the DoEHLG if want to see something done.

ACProctor

Thanks for that link. It was a good article, and reflected many of my own feelings in this area.

I certainly wasn't aware that a pre-1980 car could be NCT'd, and that it would be exempt from the emissions check if it was. However, I share John Cradden's fear of a hamfisted tester being unfamiliar with the car.

My own cars are 1964 and 1970 - one of which is very valuable. In all likelihood, the tester probably wasn't even born when that car was made.

Whereas test centres here are separate from garages, UK garages can be licensed to perform MOTs. This implicitly means that they will understand the models better, especially if they also happen to be the people that regularly service it for you, or are a recognised expert in the marque.

corktina

it also means that your car could be failed to drum up extra unnecessary work.

Sids Not

Well I for one do all my own maintenance on my cars, i dont need to send them to the UK to be restored, they would pass any test if needed..I think theres enough crap going on at the minute without bringing more attention to our scene ...just be careful when you park it next time , maybe there should be designated (banger-free) spaces for particular marques....:rolleyes:

MorrisCooper

I have regularly had pre-80 cars NCTed as they were PSV vehicles. Under NCT rules you are allowed accompany the car on the test line and you can show the tester where the idiosyncracies of your old car are.

I've always used the argument that when you are buying a car in the UK, you usually take the one WITH the MOT. Having an NCT on your car should increase its value. It would also reduce the amount of twits driving around with Escorts/Minis etc with Irish plates but originally UK imports. I know of at least one RS2000 with Irish plates and the UK reg still etched on all the windows.

Sids Not

MorrisCooper wrote: »

. I know of at least one RS2000 with Irish plates and the UK reg still etched on all the windows.

Doesnt that just mean he's paid his VRT....

Or are you talking about a Ringer..

macplaxton

....Or damaged because of incorrect test methods being applied to the vehicle presented if they are unfamiliar with the model.

I've no problems with testing, but I do wish to be near the vehicle under test so I can advise the tester of operation of unusual controls or shout at him (or her) if they are about to stick my car in the roller brake tester...

It is getting harder to find testers that know their classic stuff though.

Anyway, a car can be presented for NCT on a voluntary basis. Something which I will do in the very near future.

Now what about the other vehicle classes that aren't tested regardless of age?

ACProctor

Given that there apparently is a voluntary scheme which we could take advantage of here, and that it does "accommodate" the age and
idiosyncrasies or the car, why don't our insurers offer some financial recognition and so do something useful to make the roads safer?

I appreciate that the article quoted at the head of this thread suggests very few Irish classics do any significant miles. However, some do a lot of miles, and an accident can happen simply leaving your house one day.

macplaxton

MorrisCooper wrote: »

It would also reduce the amount of twits driving around with Escorts/Minis etc with Irish plates but originally UK imports. I know of at least one RS2000 with Irish plates and the UK reg still etched on all the windows.

What's the problem there? All three of my cars were from the UK, imported, VRT paid, Irish plates, and sometimes still have the UK reg still etched on all the windows. Do you suggest I change all the glass?

Go on, stop beating around the bush.

macplaxton

ACProctor wrote: »

why don't our insurers offer some financial recognition and so do something useful to make the roads safer?

Because they're money-grabbing bandits. Mechanical failure is but a small part of claims. Human error is the bulk.

landkeeper

errr no having stood bye whilst the numpty in the nct station pulled the handbrake on our discovery whilst on a rolling road which considering it's a transmission brake :eek:is not a wise thing to do
there is no way i'm going to allow them anywhere near my 1954 series 1 land rover than does maybe 100 miles a year
if you want to get your car mot'd then fine run along and pop over the border and get it done in newry or such like but please don't go kicking up a storm on a personal crusade that'll affect the rest of us
as posted earlier there is nothing stopping you testing your car if you wish

corktina

macplaxton wrote: »

What's the problem there? All three of my cars were from the UK, imported, VRT paid, Irish plates, and sometimes still have the UK reg still etched on all the windows. Do you suggest I change all the glass?

Go on, stop beating around the bush.

he meant to say ORIGINAL series Irish plates rather than ZV or the current series I imagine. We all know that there are hundreds of owners in this country doing just that. (my bet is that the Customs people know it to and sooner or later this abuse will spoil it for us all)

Mycroft H

LIGHTNING wrote: »

That transmission brake is of little or no use when you get to the real mucky stuff. That has caught a few clients of mine when we have been driving through mud/dirty water. I have seen some interesting things happen at NCT centres and I havent been to the NCT centre too often.

Transmission brakes are far far superior to the rear drum brake off road. Much better protected as it has much better ground clearance and its totally separate to the hydraulic braking systems in case things go wrong.


I have had some numpties putting land rovers on 2wd rolling roads and using the transmission brake aswell during a doe. They did get an earful off me :pac:


I'm pretty happy with the current system as it is. Making it mandatory could be a complete headache as there is a huge chance of a car being damaged by a tester who is not at all familiar with the vehicles systems

Sam Russell

I think that any changes to the NCT should be at the other end of the age spectrum. New cars are exempt untill they are 4 years old. In the first 4 years of a cars life it will travel maybe more than 50% of the miles it will ever travel. In those four years, how many sets of tyres, brakes, and suspension parts will it go through? Will it be properly serviced, or serviced at all?

NCT intervals should be annual until 4 years old, where proper service is checked, including certified invoices. After 4 years till 10 years, every two years would do, but annual would be better. Over ten years I am not sure, but I think the insurance companies should control it at that point. Maybe, they should control it from the start. In other words, if a 15 year old car is insured on a limited mileage, the insurance company may decide that annual NCT is inapropriate, and unnecessary.

If cars were NCTed every year, clocking would be a little harder, particularly in the full NCT information was available to current owner, or even published. The NCT would also keep a lot of motor dealers more honest, as the information could be checked.

Sids Not

LIGHTNING wrote: »

**This obviously doesnt inlcude new cars that have been crashed/damaged.

You mean Toyota's...........:D

TBH ..the next time youre in a supermarket car park ,look at the number of "new" cars that dont have NCT's....you might be suprised, i was..

carchaeologist

ACProctor wrote: »

As I'm sure everyone here knows, classic cars do not require any type of test in Ireland to ensure their roadworthiness.
This is wrong - VERY WRONG - and I've previously written to newspapers about this.

So if you have written to newspapers about this how come...

I certainly wasn't aware that a pre-1980 car could be NCT'd, and that it would be exempt from the emissions check if it was

Surely you would do your research properly before you start flying off letters to papers?

I appreciate that the article quoted at the head of this thread suggests very few Irish classics do any significant miles. However, some do a lot of miles, and an accident can happen simply leaving your house one day.

How many accidents do you hear happening to Classic cars? Most Classic owners have much more mechanical knowledge of their cars than the average Joe Soap on the street. Yes there is wrecks out there,but you will always get that. But what about the loophole for the small vans,i know of at least two vans local to me that do huge mileage and never have been tested.

Ali Babba

OP feel free to get you own cars NCT tested if you feel so strongly about it but don't expect the rest of us to jump through hoops just because you want to. The place is enough of a police state for my liking as it is besides dragging this on us, like some others on here have said the majority of classic car owners have an excellent mechanical back round and are well aware of maintaining and protecting their classic cars, allow for the age and handling, and don't drive like lunatics either.

Basil Fawlty

corktina wrote: »

he meant to say ORIGINAL series Irish plates rather than ZV or the current series I imagine. We all know that there are hundreds of owners in this country doing just that. (my bet is that the Customs people know it to and sooner or later this abuse will spoil it for us all)

100s?????? So everyone that still has a car using the old system of registration numbers is driving a ringer??? Not every car in Ireland was scrapped in the 90s! Some cars just survive. Please keep you consipiracy theorys to yourself. I really dont fancy having to show the chassis number on my Mk1 Fiesta everytime I go to a checkpoint.

All RS 2000s are over 30 years old now so the state would only be losing €48. Also if the car was imported before the 1st of Januaty 1987 it would have an old Irish number plate but could have been registered in England first.

Basil Fawlty

Back on topic. Ive had my MK1 83 Fiesta through the NCT 4 times and its passed first time every time. I really dont mind having to do it. I like the fact that there is no question of whether it should be on the road. But in saying that I dont see the need for pre 81 stuff to be NCT'd. Remember is not just 1970s cars in the vintage class. There are cars over 90 years old registered in this country. I really couldnt see someone testing a Model T!

f4fay

ACProctor wrote: »

Thanks for that link. It was a good article, and reflected many of my own feelings in this area.

I certainly wasn't aware that a pre-1980 car could be NCT'd, and that it would be exempt from the emissions check if it was. However, I share John Cradden's fear of a hamfisted tester being unfamiliar with the car.

My own cars are 1964 and 1970 - one of which is very valuable. In all likelihood, the tester probably wasn't even born when that car was made.

Whereas test centres here are separate from garages, UK garages can be licensed to perform MOTs. This implicitly means that they will understand the models better, especially if they also happen to be the people that regularly service it for you, or are a recognised expert in the marque.

Is your 1970 car Green with a very short Registration number ?

carchaeologist

ciarancapri wrote: »

100s??????

Im a word,yes. And well its known.

So everyone that still has a car using the old system of registration numbers is driving a ringer???

Not at all,theres hundreds of original cars out there too.

Not every car in Ireland was scrapped in the 90s! Some cars just survive. Please keep you consipiracy theorys to yourself.

Yes,some cars do,and they have done.Its not a conspiracy theory.

I really dont fancy having to show the chassis number on my Mk1 Fiesta everytime I go to a checkpoint.

I wouldnt have a problem with any of my cars having their paperwork and chassis numbers shown. There shouldnt be any issue,should there?

All RS 2000s are over 30 years old now so the state would only be losing €48.

You are missing the point entirely here.

Also if the car was imported before the 1st of Januaty 1987 it would have an old Irish number plate but could have been registered in England first.

Very true,but it would also have its taxes paid and it would have a registration thats correct for the car. Plus,the plate would probably not match the year of the car.

MorrisCooper

ciarancapri wrote: »

Back on topic. Ive had my MK1 83 Fiesta through the NCT 4 times and its passed first time every time. I really dont mind having to do it. I like the fact that there is no question of whether it should be on the road. But in saying that I dont see the need for pre 81 stuff to be NCT'd. Remember is not just 1970s cars in the vintage class. There are cars over 90 years old registered in this country. I really couldnt see someone testing a Model T!

I had my 1950 Triumph Renown tested every 12 months. There is a list of exceptions published by the NCT which include emissions, headlights, and the use of the shaker plate on cars which have a timber frame (as the Renown does). Anyone with a pre-1980 wedding car would be aware of this as we in the wedding business had discussions with both the NCT and the Taxi Regulator. It's not a big deal and will often show up faults in your car that the average owner mightn't have the equipment to check.

corktina

carchaeologist wrote: »

Im a word,yes. And well its known.

Not at all,theres hundreds of original cars out there too.


Yes,some cars do,and they have done.Its not a conspiracy theory.


I wouldnt have a problem with any of my cars having their paperwork and chassis numbers shown. There shouldnt be any issue,should there?


You are missing the point entirely here.


Very true,but it would also have its taxes paid and it would have a registration thats correct for the car. Plus,the plate would probably not match the year of the car.

very well put Carchie and saved me doing it!

I didnt mention RS2000s but to spell out the point, any car brought into the country and ringed using an old reg no and log book is avoiding VRT (and therefore costing us all in lost revenue) and is not insured as the car that IS covered was scrapped years before.

101sean

I'm trying to find a pre 1980 ex British Army Land Rover for a mate, seen 3 post 1980 ones south of the border either on number and chassis plates off a much older scrapped irish Land Rover or they've fiddled a ZV plate. Was offered one up north but all the paperwork is missing and has been to shows on a variety of plates :rolleyes:

Seen plenty of civvy Land Rovers fiddled the same way, 94ish soft dash Range Rover LSE on ZV plate at one show :eek: (although there are some genuine rebuilds on earlier chassis).

It's this sort of activity that will spoil it for the rest of us in the long run.

Sam Russell

LIGHTNING wrote: »

That in my opinion be a complete waste of time/resources, a 4 year old car shouldnt need any suspension work (or any other major work) and apart from consumbles and should be in decent condition. Most new cars these days come with some sort of free servicing so its should have had its first few services done on it by the time its first NCT rolls up.

**This obviously doesnt inlcude new cars that have been crashed/damaged.

Consumables include tyres, and for a car doing 25000 miles a year, would require a set a year. It would require major services at least once per year. If it was subject to a recall by the manufacturer, when would that be checked?

There are a lot of reasons to check a car for safety, most are mileage related. A 'new' car (under four years old) could have over 150,000 miles on it, while a car twenty years old may only do 2,000 miles or less in a year. If the concentration was on the first four years, it would cover the vast majority of cars actually on the road at any one time. It would also record the mileage logged on cars and cut down on clocking.

Sam Russell

LIGHTNING wrote: »

25k miles is over twice the average mileage for a car, you can get 25k out of set of tyres. A car doesnt need a major service every year unless its doing massive mileage or its running in harsh conditions. Recall issues arent covered by the NCT so thats a non-issue. Car safety isnt directly related to mileage, a car with 2k miles could have been crashed badly and poorly repaired, whereas a car with 200k could be in great condition.

I agree with all you say, but cars with massive mileage are a problem, as are cars that have been crashed. Also cars that have not been maintained, and cars that are clocked. Clocking has a serious long term safety implication, as many major safety issues come in to play at high mileage and if this high mileage is disguised, it could happen that items that should be replaced (like timing belts) are not.

All this would be reduced by an annual NCT for all cars. Most cars involved in accidents are less than ten years old, because nearly all cars on the road at any time are less than ten years old. Old cars do not do many miles in a year, while new cars tend to, and particularly those under four years old. I know that there are always cars that are hardly used no matter their age, and conversely there are cars that do high miles despite their age, but generally, cars do less miles per year as they age.

The point about recalls is that the NCT should be required to check this as a safety recall IS important for safety reasons. I thought that was the whole point of the recall and that safety was the justification for the NCT in the first place. It is just a coincidence that it is forcing good cars off the road and into scrap yards so that we have to buy new cars.

spooky donkey

one of the things im getting from this thread is regular people checks would do more to save lives than regular car checks.

Redrocket

was home in May 2010 and found my mums 2006 peugeot with 3 almost bald tyres on it and a 4th barely legal. Last time they were replaced was when I ordered two front ones the previous February 2009, the reason I noticed they were bald in February 2009 was because I crashed it in the wet which is somewhat down to the bald tyres it had on it.

Does that not kinda imply that some people dont check or dont care to check these things regardless of the age of car? Her bald tyres + my non attentive driving cost me a lot of money how-ever no harm done to anymore.

Every 2 years for *any* car would sound good to me, of course with some test exceptions for classics and even more for vintage cars.

Sam Russell

When the NCT was originally introduced, it was for the very old cars, which were then taken off the road because they failed. Most of these cars were dangerous, but weren't driven much more than into the local town for shopping. If it had been introduced on newish cars, they would have been maintained to a higher level and those are the cars now failing the NCT.

But another effect is to counter the habbit of motor dealers to clock cars and falsify records. I have bought 2 cars from reputable garages over the years which turned out to have been clocked such that the garages had to settle.

Safety is not just for old bangers, it effects new cars. Bald tyres, worn brakes all happen before a car is four years old. If the car is up to scratch, it will sail through, and €50 is cheap for a good quality, independant check.

Unfortunately the NCT system is overloaded as appointments are not readily available.

dtm

Sam Russell wrote: »

If the car is up to scratch, it will sail through, and €50 is cheap for a good quality, independant check.

very good point. you would easily spend more on a few pints

Basil Fawlty

carchaeologist wrote: »

Im a word,yes. And well its known.

Not at all,theres hundreds of original cars out there too.


Yes,some cars do,and they have done.Its not a conspiracy theory.


I wouldnt have a problem with any of my cars having their paperwork and chassis numbers shown. There shouldnt be any issue,should there?


You are missing the point entirely here.


Very true,but it would also have its taxes paid and it would have a registration thats correct for the car. Plus,the plate would probably not match the year of the car.

Is there actually any evidence to prove your theory? You cant just go accusing people of ringing cars.

My car is checked at NCT time, I just dont fancy wasting time at Garda / Customs check points proving that my car is what its meant to be because some people have a theory that hundreds of lads are ringing cars with old irish log books.

Id be all for cars over 1 year old being tested every year. A 3 year old car could have 90,000 miles on it and be a comeplete wreck. People in this country that own new cars have very little respect for them and barely do basic servicing when its due.

Also its up to the owner to make sure the car they are driving is roadworthy whether its meant to be tested or not. You have an accident and you car isnt up to scratch there is a good chance the insurance company wont pay out.

alpina

As mine is an '81, I no longer have a choice about NCTs & will have to go annually. Personally do not have a problem with this as even if it was exempt would bring along every 2 or 3 years anyway for IMO a pretty cheap way of getting a written analysis/report of condition, (can't harm value/resale value). The thing is if you know what you are doing why should you have to undergo an NCT with your classic, but what if you don't know what your doing or what to look out for...then it's possible such car is a danger on the road to all of us. At least once a month I find myself working on or replacing/updating something so I trust my car & NCT reports echo this, however I also know of someone with a pre '80 who is now exempt & has not got a notion about maintenance nor is interested. The car has no brakes worth talking about, has probably put it's own hole in the ozone, dangerously pulls to the right but wen I suggest getting the required bits & bobs & I'll sort out FOC for him he fobs it off... under the excuse of ah sure I hardly use it I'm sure there are more like him & there is the problem....:(

carchaeologist

ciarancapri wrote: »

Is there actually any evidence to prove your theory? You cant just go accusing people of ringing cars.

Im not accusing anyone in particular,but i dont think im too far out in my assumption...am i?

. A 3 year old car could have 90,000 miles on it and be a complete wreck. People in this country that own new cars have very little respect for them and barely do basic servicing when its due.

Yes,i agree,a very valid point. Cars are mostly treated like washing machines,worked untill they stop,then just buy a new one. Sure why not when you get such good deals on scrappage! At least the NCT will pick up on them on the 4th year.

Also its up to the owner to make sure the car they are driving is roadworthy whether its meant to be tested or not. You have an accident and you car isnt up to scratch there is a good chance the insurance company wont pay out.

I also agree fully with this point. I think most people on this forum would keep their cars in good shape?

Sam Russell

ciarancapri wrote: »

Is there actually any evidence to prove your theory? You cant just go accusing people of ringing cars.

If you read the thread about 'bargains I'm not buying' there are plenty of cars that are clearly not as described. I remember an XJS being described IIRC as a 79 'but its all 1993'. Another example, a mini shown as pre 1980 but with clear markers of a much later car. I know someone with a 1992 mini which is registered as a 1978.

Many cars hide under an older, false, identity to be vintage. That and clocking are clearly rife in Ireland.

corktina

"Hundreds " of ringed cars as in more than 200 would be accurate in my view. I know of dozens that I have seen. Have a close look at shows, quite common to see UK numbers etched in glass with original irish numbers on the plates. Check cartell or similar for engine and transmission on some top end "Irish" car you come across....often you will find what appears to be a 2 litre is registered as (for instance) a 1300 automatic.

AN example: A Cortina (cos thats what I know about) bought at a major show in the UK in concours condition and a prize winner and now on Irish plates.; for sale earlier this year and advertised as a prize winner at that show! (when it had UK plates and there are photos to prove it, I was at the show).

Beats me how anyone could cut the chassis number out of a concours car (which I assume they did) or is it still there for anyone to see?. One of many cars Ive seen arrive on UK plates and "disappear"...no VRT paid...lost revenue to the rest of us and genuine Irish devalued a bit more.

Possibly the recent changes in registering where you have to provide evidence of date of import are designed to catch the fall-out of a clampdown on the illegal vehicles already here.

MorrisCooper

I remember being at the Trim show some years back and seeing my own wedding car which I had sold some years previously. Everything was as I sold it except the reg. It had miraculously been transformed from a ZV reg to a Meath reg. When I tracked down the owner, he got a bit of a shock but told me "he did it right and got a new chassis number made up"!

landkeeper

i think you can change from a zv to a 67-mh-1234 type reg
if you want to see ringed vehicles you should study zv rangerovers there is a hive of activity on that one in wicklow amongst other places it's hilarious
a 1994 300tdi soft dash on a zv plate
a 4.2 lse 108" rangerover classic running on a 1975 reg are a couple iv'e seen
as per normal the few have spoilt it for the many

Sam Russell

Looking at the test results from the NCT, only 72% of 4 year old cars pass the test first time (2008, 2009) so a quarter of 4 year old cars are unroadworthy, 96% pass on retest. This would suggest that a significant number of 3 year old cars would fail the NCT, and presumable some two year olds as well.

That would suggest to me that a test for two year olds should be introduced, and proberbly one year old, and three year old while we are at it since these are the cars doing the most miles.

Ali Babba

corktina wrote: »

Possibly the recent changes in registering where you have to provide evidence of date of import are designed to catch the fall-out of a clampdown on the illegal vehicles already here.

How is this going to change anything? People are still going to ring cars, nothing stopping anyone from putting plates off an old car on an import.

gn3dr

Sam Russell wrote: »

Looking at the test results from the NCT, only 72% of 4 year old cars pass the test first time (2008, 2009) so a quarter of 4 year old cars are unroadworthy, 96% pass on retest. This would suggest that a significant number of 3 year old cars would fail the NCT, and presumable some two rearolds as well.

That would suggest to me that a test for two year olds should be introduced, and proberbly one year old, and three year old while we are at it since these are the cars doing the most miles.

I'd say that's fairly unreliable data though - I mean you will fail if you don't take off your hubcaps or have a rear seat belt stuck behind the seat cushion. It would be better to see a breadown of what the fails were.

gn3dr

Sam Russell wrote: »

If you read the thread about 'bargains I'm not buying' there are plenty of cars that are clearly not as described. I remember an XJS being described IIRC as a 79 'but its all 1993'. Another example, a mini shown as pre 1980 but with clear markers of a much later car. I know someone with a 1992 mini which is registered as a 1978.

Many cars hide under an older, false, identity to be vintage. That and clocking are clearly rife in Ireland.

landkeeper wrote: »

i think you can change from a zv to a 67-mh-1234 type reg
if you want to see ringed vehicles you should study zv rangerovers there is a hive of activity on that one in wicklow amongst other places it's hilarious
a 1994 300tdi soft dash on a zv plate
a 4.2 lse 108" rangerover classic running on a 1975 reg are a couple iv'e seen
as per normal the few have spoilt it for the many

I don't doubt that some of this ringing goes on but it is unfair to assume that the XJS mentioned above or the Range Rovers (bar perhaps the LSE) were ringed.

It is perfectly possible and legal to put running gear from a '93 XJS into a '79 bodyshell - as long as it is the original chassis / body. In fact it is an economical way to restore a car if teh old running gear is worn out - you can buy a newer XJS and use everything for cheaper than it would cost to refurb the old stuff.

Likewise with the Range Rovers - perfectly possible to bolt the whole body from a '94 soft dash and put it on a pre 1980 chassis. The registration is linked to the chassis number. Having said that s good way to tell with Range Rovers is to look at the rear shocks - there should be one facing forward and facing back either side of the back axle on a '70's chassis and I have seen a few ZV's that didn't have this.

corktina

Ali Babba wrote: »

How is this going to change anything? People are still going to ring cars, nothing stopping anyone from putting plates off an old car on an import.

"fallout of a clampdown" would (to my mind) allude to their being a purge of some kind on the cards, like perhaps an inspection of the chassis numbers of alll Classics. Were this to happen, lots of people might want to be re-registering their ringed cars to make them legal, but will find now there is an obstacle in their way in that they have to produce evidence of date of purchase and date of import. In other words, theyve shut a loophole.

MorrisCooper

landkeeper wrote: »

i think you can change from a zv to a 67-mh-1234 type reg
if you want to see ringed vehicles you should study zv rangerovers there is a hive of activity on that one in wicklow amongst other places it's hilarious
a 1994 300tdi soft dash on a zv plate
a 4.2 lse 108" rangerover classic running on a 1975 reg are a couple iv'e seen
as per normal the few have spoilt it for the many

True, but you can't legally change from a ZV to a ZN and that's what my old car became.

corktina

landkeeper wrote: »

i think you can change from a zv to a 67-mh-1234 type reg

other way round....

corktina

gn3dr wrote: »

I don't doubt that some of this ringing goes on but it is unfair to assume that the XJS mentioned above or the Range Rovers (bar perhaps the LSE) were ringed.

It is perfectly possible and legal to put running gear from a '93 XJS into a '79 bodyshell - as long as it is the original chassis / body. In fact it is an economical way to restore a car if teh old running gear is worn out - you can buy a newer XJS and use everything for cheaper than it would cost to refurb the old stuff.

Likewise with the Range Rovers - perfectly possible to bolt the whole body from a '94 soft dash and put it on a pre 1980 chassis. The registration is linked to the chassis number. Having said that s good way to tell with Range Rovers is to look at the rear shocks - there should be one facing forward and facing back either side of the back axle on a '70's chassis and I have seen a few ZV's that didn't have this.

Im no Landy expert, but its my understanding its usually the Chassis thats knackered rather than a body needing a new chassis.

corktina

MorrisCooper wrote: »

True, but you can't legally change from a ZV to a ZN and that's what my old car became.

you cant change froma ZV at all in fact

macplaxton

gn3dr wrote: »

It is perfectly possible and legal to put running gear from a '93 XJS into a '79 bodyshell - as long as it is the original chassis / body. In fact it is an economical way to restore a car if teh old running gear is worn out - you can buy a newer XJS and use everything for cheaper than it would cost to refurb the old stuff.

Aye, and in the real world that's extremely unlikely to happen as the '79 bodyshell is more than likely a pile of dust. BL ****e.

I'm sure there's a bit of ringing going on the UK too before they get here to get the right side of the line drawn for Historic Vehicle tax-exempt status.

Basil Fawlty

corktina wrote: »

Im no Landy expert, but its my understanding its usually the Chassis thats knackered rather than a body needing a new chassis.

Not really it just depends. On the car. Inner sills on the body and rear cross member usually go first. Plus its worth your while ( and you dont have to be as tidy ) to repair a chassis.

Its not hard to swap a Range Rover body. You dont even need a ramp. Remember just because you wouldn't / couldnt do it doesnt mean someone else cant.

In saying that it would be nice to get a rotten 190e Cosworth and transfer it all into a nice Irish shell. You'd save 1000s in VRT and have a nice car at the end of it. Granted it would never be worth as much as a genuine car.

landkeeper

theshock/ shock mount is not a give away as it's just bolted to the chassis and would have to be changed if the axle was replaced at the time of the rebuild
on a side note what happens if you replace an old knackered chassis with a nice new shiney galvanised one do you lose the id or can you keep it

gn3dr

corktina wrote: »

Im no Landy expert, but its my understanding its usually the Chassis thats knackered rather than a body needing a new chassis.

No not really always the case. I've a '73 chassis here and am putting an '89 body on it (and I really am doing the body swap) and the '89 chassis has rust in a few places where the '73 is sound. I also have a '73 2 door Range Rover and the chassis on that is perfect and was never restored.
There was an accountancy driven change in the quality of steel used in the late '70's / early '80's Land Rovers I believe which leads to much more rotten later cars in many cases.
EVen if an earlier chassis does have rust it easier to repair a chassis than a body.