S2C Forum Archives
Main Section => Workshop Wisdom => 602's Musings => Topic started by: w3526602 on February 01, 2020, 09:18:08 AM
-
Hi,
Subject to Wittsends approval, I'd like to document my adventures in IVA land, with others free to but-in. Subject to Barbara's approval, I'm prepared to be the guinea-pig ... unless somebody has already been there before me. ???
Some matters that will probably interest others ....
VED exemption.
MOT exemption.
Retaining registration mark ... and colour of plates.
Starting with the last of those ...
You cannot MOT an MOT Exempt vehicle. So ... can you insure it, and demand Zero VED for a box of bits in your shed, thereby establishing a right to retain that registration? Doh! My brain hurts already.
602
-
I know quite a lot of people who MOt their exempt Series 1's , and I'm sure a lot of Series 2 owners also MOT their MOT exempt vehicles ???
-
These days any vehicle on the DVLA database should be either worked or taxed.
(With my VRO hat on). Peter
-
I suspect you are over-complicating things.. This "box of bits in the shed" - If its on the DVLA database, surely you just SORN it ? It then sits on SORN till you decide to put it back on the road at which point you declare it MOT exempt (or not) and insure it. I have several such ultra long-term projects.
This does raise the issue that has worried me throughout about MOT exemption, that the most cack-handed owner could build up that box of bits into something that moves at considerable speed, decide in his own head that its safe, declare it MOT exempt and launch it onto the roads towards an unsuspecting public..... Our Lords and Masters obviously think this is a risk worth taking, we classic car owners all take great care of our vehicles etc etc.... ( See "...saving Motorway construction costs by turning the hard shoulder into an active lane". 38 dead so far...)
-
If you have a box of bits with the relevant paperwork, i.e. a V5C registration document then you can do as Gene suggests :shakeinghead
If you start messing with the vehicle's chassis and other major parts it will no longer be MoT exempt, you will have to tax it and declare the modifications to your potential insurers.
Is it really worth the effort ???
It's going to cost a shed load of money (and time, and facilities) to make it legal, when there are other options available straight off the dealers forecourt.
:-\ Judging by some of the questions we get on here, our best advice would be to get your vehicles MoT tested.
:RHD
-
... and colour of plates.
The colour of plates question is interesting, as it has changed (without me having noticed). I quote from DVLA's current INF104 leaflet:
Vehicles made before 1 January 1973 may display traditional
‘black and white’ number plates (for example, white, silver or
grey characters on a black plate). From April 2019 vehicles
manufactured before 1 January 1979 are also able to display
traditional ‘black and white’ number plates. You must:
• have applied to DVLA
• be registered within the ‘historic vehicles’ tax class.
The 40-year exemption date rolls forward automatically each
year on 1 April.
Also:
Vehicles with new or replacement number plates fitted
from 1 September 2001, cannot be shown over three
lines (unless the vehicle was first registered before 1
January 1973) or if a vehicle is constructed before 1
January 1978 and is registered in the historic tax class
and is exempt from vehicle tax. The characters on a
number plate need to be a certain height and size:
• characters must be 79mm tall
• characters (except the number 1 or letter I) must be
50mm wide
• the character stroke (the thickness of the black print)
must be 14mm
• the space between characters must be 11mm
• the space between the age identifier and the random
letters must be 33mm
• the margins at the top, bottom and side of the plate
must be 11mm
• vertical space between the age identifier and the
random letters must be 19mm.
My interpretation of the above would be that for all S2 and most S3 it is now possible to display a 'black and white' plate (including in most cases over 3 rows if you particularly want to) but if it is a newly made plate it must conform to the above dimensions whereas if you are retaining an older plate (inc. painted on) then that is fine.
If you have a vehicle which does not meet the above requirements then the plates must have black letters on reflective backgrounds, yellow at the back, white at the front, although it has been explicitly clarified that 3D plates are acceptable, so that would include the pressed type so long as the background is reflective.
The only category of commonly used plate which it appears should not be replaced like-for-like is the 1970s style pressed plates with a yellow and white painted, non-reflective backgrounds.
Alec
-
I currently have a BSA Bantam project that’s taxed, insured and in a considerable number of pieces. Has been for all the years I’ve owned it.
-
If you want any IVA help, just ask, I know a little about it.
-
If you want any IVA help, just ask, I know a little about it.
Hi Andy,
Put the kettle on while I find my sleeping bag.
Hi Alan,
"When you reach my age, son, it helps to pass the time!" Name that song!
How much would membership of my local gym cost? Cable TV? Elbow bending at my local pub? Smoking? Alimoney? Barbara's car has been costing her about £5 a mile in depreciation, since she bought it, excluding fuel and overheads. We can afford to be silly, provided WE decide how to be silly.
602
-
You can definitely MOT an MOT-optional vehicle. I did in the first year of the new system as I would have been among the first to ‘risk it’ (I.e. the exemption system) and I preferred to let it settle down before exercising my option to self-declare.
-
We all know how keen insurers are to avoid paying out. It seems likely to me that if I were involved in an accident in my un-MOT'd classic the insurers would jump on this lack of paperwork and be keen to arrange a thorough examination of my vehicle in the hope of finding any reason not to cough up. For the price of an MOT it is not worth the risk, plus I get to stroll about under my LR in comfort to check out the chassis etc.
-
Why would the insurer take that attitude?
MOT not required, end of story. Even if it had been tested, who’s to say what faults would have developed 11 months later?
-
You clearly have a higher opinion/better experience of insurers than me. In my own experience they will make every effort to avoid paying out.
-
Why would the insurer take that attitude?
MOT not required, end of story. Even if it had been tested, who’s to say what faults would have developed 11 months later?
I agree, speaking as an ex MOT tester, the MOT is the minimum standard of roadworthiness at the time of test, any doubt, pass and advise, 16 years since I last did an MOT though, standards might have changed?
-
Fair enough, but I will continue to MOT mine.
-
Fair enough, but I will continue to MOT mine.
I don’t think that’s a bad idea, if it gives you peace of mind then there’s no reason not to do it, despite my earlier comment, I think anyone who isn’t 100 percent confident in maintaining there vehicle should get an MOT, at least it’s an extra pair of eyes looking over it once a year.
-
We all know how keen insurers are to avoid paying out.
Hi,
Google road Traffic Acts Insurance. I think it's in Para 148, but don't trust my memory.
Provided you hold, or have held, a valid driving licence to drive what you were driving, and are not disqualified, the insurers find it very difficult to avoid paying Third Party claims. Imagine the public eruption if the insurers could just dismiss claims that they didn't like.
Having said that, early in the 1960s, I was waiting at traffic lights in the middle of Lincoln, when a Renault Dauphine (sp?)parked itself, hard, into the back of my Mini van, shoved me forward about 6 feet into a Squadron Leader's brand new car. I had to salute him.
His insurers refused my claim, saying that "our client suffered a heart attack, for which he had no prior warning, therefore we not accept any claim against him" I barged into his office (he worked for the insurance company), spoke to his secretary. She told me there had been a recent similar case, where a bus ran down the bus queue. Doh! My insurers agreed, and paid sufficient for my van to be fitted with a car front (chrome radiator grill), plus a respray in black with a bronze roof. Oh ... and I dated his secretary for a few months.
Note, by my reckoning, if you tow a trailer with an MGW over the limits of your driving licence, you are driving without a licence, and therefore not insured.
The RTAs also allow you to insure yourself. All you have top do is deposit £1,000,000 with the Attorney General. Barbara came a cropper on that ... her SAAB was side-swiped by the tail lift on an HGV "curtain sider" belonging to a super market, on the M4. She was doing 50mph at the time. She phoned me, told me to write down the registration of the lorry she was chasing. The supermarket ignored our letters. We were very glad that we had taken out Legal Protection insurance. It took two years to get the supermarket to court. They settled before the hearing.
602
-
Sheesh, this thread reminds me of a song from the musical Hair;
"LBJ took the IRT down to 4th St USA, and when he got there what did he see but the youth of America on LSD.
LBJ, IRT, USA, LSD."
What is IVA?
-
IVA stands for this Individual Vehicle Approval test (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/iva-manual-for-vehicle-category-m1)
It's like a really stringent MoT test but they are looking for compliance to the C&U regulations as they apply today.
(A 50 year old Land Rover has only to comply with the regulations relating to the date it was made. Very few regulations are retrospective. One that springs to mind is the requirement for windscreen washers.)
Why would the insurer take that attitude?
MOT not required, end of story. Even if it had been tested, who’s to say what faults would have developed 11 months later?
When the MoT exemption was being discussed about introducing it - a top/head insurance whaller told me as a group of other classic car club reps that insurers can NOT insist upon something that is "against" the law of the land.
It is NOT a legal requirement to MoT a Vehicle of Historic Interest - therefore insurers will not insist upon it.
However - should your vehicle be involved in an accident, as has been pointed out ^^^ the assessor(s) will go over it with a fine toothed comb.
If in doubt, get it MoT'd (http://www.series2club.co.uk/new_forum/Smileys/wittsends/mot.gif)
(I don't, but that's me)
-
Hi Alan,
I agree with your principle, but would be wary of antogonising our car insurers, whom also insure our house. The were very helpfull when we claimed for damage following a burst central heating pipe ... new floors over more than half the floor area of the bungalow, and a complete new kitchen.
When Barbara's SAAB "ran amok", writtng off itself, my Disco, and the Transit lookalike on the other side of the road ... they phoned to say that their reference booksdid not cover cars as old as hers. Their books indicated £250 for a younger model. Would we like to make a case for a higher sum?
I produced similar cars on Ebay, copied the Guide Values from Classic Car, and got our Saab bloke, who was familiar with the car, to make a written valuation. Our insurers sent a cheque for £750 by return of post.
If your "classic" spends it's night in a garage, and you do less than 5,000 miles per annum, do a Google for "LV CLASSIC CAR POLICY"
602
-
I insure my new/modern cars with LV through the CSMA civil service scheme.
We also have house insurance with LV - because that was the best deal at the time.
I do NOT think LV to be the best insurers for classic cars.
My/our best advice would be to use one of the many classic car insurers, where a Series 2 Land Rover policy can be got for around £100 to £150 per year - depending what "extras" you have etc. etc.
And I don't think they link car claims to house claims - unless you are a constant claimant ???
Shop around for insurance ...
-
IVA stands for this Individual Vehicle Approval test (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/iva-manual-for-vehicle-category-m1)
It's like a really stringent MoT test but they are looking for compliance to the C&U regulations as they apply today.
(A 50 year old Land Rover has only to comply with the regulations relating to the date it was made.
The IVA is nothing like the MOT test, specifically it's not a road worthiness test, however, obvious safety defects would prevent the issue of an IAC.
It's about design and construction and not condition, it's from the Road Vehicle Approval Regulations 2009 and nothing to do with C&U.
Interestingly, a 50 year old Land Rover would be examined to the full requirements, the only age related exemption would be on the provable age of the engine for emissions standards.
Why anyone would voluntarily have an IVA on a Land Rover is a little beyond me.
I've seen a Gigglepin and an Ibex, I think the Gigglepin was an SVA, but both were inspected to N1 which has some significant benefits.
-
I was trying to keep the explanation simple.
Details are in the link l provided.
-
There is nothing simple about IVA. :flying pigs
-
Andy is right
We had a VRO case (not a club member) last year where someone had submiited a land rover to DVLA for an age related plate and SGS did an inspection, no number was found on the chassis and it was rejected. Their advice was to put it through an IVA, according to the DVLA operative there is a special IVA for classic vehicles, (not so) and then they could go for a Q registration. At that point they contacted me. I spoke at length to the department at DVSA about IVAs and we both came to the conclusion that a series land rover would not pass an IVA without very serious modification.
Anothe case of someone going about things the wrong way.
Peter
-
And I don't think they link car claims to house claims - unless you are a constant claimant ???
Hi Alan,
The proposal says something to the effect of "Have you any claims or losses within the last five years?" ... my italics.
It doesn't say " Have you had any motoring claims or losses within the last five years?" ... my italics.
I too, have always assumed that my car's proposal did not refer to any other type of claim. But in recent years, there has been publicity about insurers cracking down on repeat claimants.
As LV insure both our house and cars, I would argue that they "already knew" when accepting our proposal. Our "water damage" has been our only claim for many yonks.
OT, bur should make you smile. One of the "evening mass exodus" buses, in DVLA's Visitor's Car Park, ran amok, and wrote of about half-a-dozen cars, including my mate's Spridget. The bus company's insurers accepted the claim. My mate hammered his car straight, and soon after ran into the side of a car, with misted up windows, that pulled out from between two other parked cars. Again, he clasimed.
It was the same assessor who rolled up to inspect his car.
"I wrote this car off only a couple of weeks ago!" ... got back in his car ... and departed.
Be aware that an assessor will arrive, and climb out of his car clutching a tyre-tread depth gauge. Less than 3mm of tread, and they will reject your claim. I once had to find four SAAB wheels and tyres in a hurry ... cost me £50. Yes, the tyres on the car would have passed an MOT (I asked my Tester), but even he said they would fail an "own damage" assessment) I no longer "mess" with tyres. If they are not chunky, I replace them.
602
-
Hi,
The IVA are particularly interested in the strength of the seat belt location.
IF I get round to presenting a rebuilt Series for an IVA, I will have asked the chassis manufacturer to have welded plates to the tops of rhe chassis rail (possibly with U-bolt "back-up") and fix the roll-over to those plates.
The upper seat belt mounts will be bolted to "acceptable" (eg, pipes for the bolts welded thru' the hoop).
I will also investigate the roll-over bar being chassis width, with the driver's (in UK) seat belt passing over the driver's LEFT shoulder, and opposite hand for the passenger. The buckle/receiver will be by the driver's right hip, on a long stalk, which will be bolted to the sill-bar. But the sill bar will an integral part of the chassis, welded to usual body outriggers, at each end.
Do a Google search for Jago Geep roll-over bar images.
602
-
Hi,
A little light reading ... http://westfield-world.com/sva_manual_draft.pdf
I'm not sure if this is an HMSO publication, or produced by the manufacture's of "SEVENS".
Whichever, it looks an interesting bedtime read.
602
-
PS.
I wonder if "Carden" brakes are acceptable for an SVA. They have been advised, by a KIWI friend, that "carden brakes" are not allowed in New Zealand.
I looked up CARDEN SHAFT in, I think, Pears encylopaedia some 60+ years ago. A carden shaft is any shaft that transmits power, eg, the rear prop-shaft on a Series Land Rover, which of course connects the hand brake to the rear wheels.
Not an insurmountable problem ... the Aunt's original rear 11" brake cylinders were fitted with a wedge between the tops of the piston. Unfortunately, the wedge was minus any means of attaching it to the non-existent hand brake ilinkage.. A couple of hoursv with a hacksaw and file should produce a suitable wedge, after which you would need to cobble up a rod and whipple/swingle-tree arrangement.
Such an arragement could also facilitate double parking brake systems, and/or "fiddle stick" braking to each rear wheels ... useful in mud.
I think Rover P5s used a similar hand-brake system, but with only 15mm (?) rear wheel cylinders.
I wont suggest individual hand operation of your front brakes, but it shouldn't be difficult using early S2 11" SLS rear brakes. :stars
602
-
Be aware that an assessor will arrive, and climb out of his car clutching a tyre-tread depth gauge. Less than 3mm of tread, and they will reject your claim. I once had to find four SAAB wheels and tyres in a hurry ... cost me £50. Yes, the tyres on the car would have passed an MOT (I asked my Tester), but even he said they would fail an "own damage" assessment) I no longer "mess" with tyres. If they are not chunky, I replace them.
Really - how could they reject a claim when the tyres are still legal?
The legal limit is 1.6mm - I can't find anything on Goooooogle to say insurance claims wil be rejected unles the tyres are illegal ???
-
John instead of all this faffing about take a trip across the channel and buy yourself a Berlingo converted to 4wd by Dangel then you can enjoy driving it.
Peter
-
I may have missed this but what exactly are you intending to put through an IVA test?
I have done an IVA test on a Cobra kit car and there is no way a series Land Rover will pass it. It will fail on the front bumper sharp edges not to mention the window wipers, bonnet hinges, windscreen frame, vent hinges etc. and that is before you even move inside to the dashboard.
You need high back seats as well and seatbelts at the correct height for them.
If you are assembling a vehicle from parts then it should be able to be registered as indeterminate parts and given a Q-plate. The DVLA may ask for an inspection to make sure it is a Land Rover but not an IVA.
Craig.
-
Really - how could they reject a claim when the tyres are still legal?
The legal limit is 1.6mm - I can't find anything on Goooooogle to say insurance claims will be rejected unless the tyres are illegal ???
Quite so - urban myth
Besides
Tyre condition doesn't come into it if you are rear-ended or T-boned at a junction if the other party is at fault.
All this talk of IVA is just "pie in the sky"
:cactus
-
Hi,
Circa 1961, I replaced the 6-pot engine and gear box in my 1931 MG Magna (cost me £35) with an 4-pot engine from a 1936 Vauxhall 10 which cost me £6, coz it had failed it's MOT. I drove that car from my home in South Croydon to RAF Barnham (Thetford) ... about 100miles each way, for two years, virtually every weekend ... including snow, black ice, and fog ... ho heater, no side screens.
Circa 1972, I replaced the engine of an Austin Champ (4 litre B60?) engine and gearbox with a BMC 2.2LD (dieslel) engine and gearbox, taken from a scrap Bread van using little more than hand tools. I did have to pay a body shop to chop a lump out of the sump, and ask Dad to make me a new "valve block" or the oil pump. The oil pump wanted to occupy the same point in space as the front differential. It was a lovely truck to drive, adequate performance even when pulling a caravan, and cheaper to run than Barbara's Hillman Imp. I have already posted a picture on this forum. The original has disappeared into the bowels of Photobucket. Please Mr Wittsend, Sir, Do you have a copy?
I've done three galv-chassis Series rebuilds (One Marsland and two Richards) Please let me do one more before the Grim Groper comes to get me. I'm not looking for a means of transport... I need something to pass the time, keep the ZZZs at bay. Anything else is a bonus.
602.
Be warned. If provoked I know where to find the dregs of the first Scimitar GT convertible (not a factory job).The chassis is rotten, but I'm sure the GRP body could be made to fit a Landy chassis. Hmmmmm?
-
Hi Alan,,
Thry this link for size ... 1.6mm or 2mm.
https://www.ala.co.uk/pdfs/TYI-sample.pdf (fingers crossed it works)
602
PS. For my first MOT (1961 test and 1931 MG L-type Magna) I was told that my "baby's bum smooth tyres" would pass provided no canvas was showing. Did that make them legal?
-
PS. For my first MOT (1961 test and 1931 MG L-type Magna) I was told that my "baby's bum smooth tyres" would pass provided no canvas was showing. Did that make them legal?
Yes, perfectly legal then. Barbara Castle was the minister who introduced the 1mm minimum tread limit.
-
Hi,
A little light reading ... http://westfield-world.com/sva_manual_draft.pdf
I'm not sure if this is an HMSO publication, or produced by the manufacture's of "SEVENS".
Whichever, it looks an interesting bedtime read.
602
This link is to the older SVA (Single Vehicle Approval) which has now been superceded by the IVA (Individual Vehicle Approval). IVA is significantly tougher to pass than SVA was. As has been previously said, IVAs (and the old SVAs) are done by appointment at a VOSA test centre (vehicle to be tested has to be trailered there), typically take 3-4 hours, and are testing only construction and use regulations. You can have tyres with the canvas showing through, they don't test condition - but they will need to be 'E' marked. A Series Land Rover wouldn't get within a country mile of passing an IVA test. There is a minimum radius for all corners, edges etc., all to protect pedestrians in a collision etc. and as Craggle has said the interior is just as problematic.
You'd need to look up the regs for the various degrees of modification - built-up vehicle, modified vehicle, kit-car etc. - to see what testing might be needed.
-
^^^^^^^^^
All of which - was or is the reason why the traditional Defender (née Series 2/3 ) shape and running bits had to be dropped by Land Rover ???
The Defender was no longer able to pass current safety standards.
It's been posted a million times over the years on the forum - a Series Land Rover built from bits will never pass the tests and never be legal to use on the public highway.
No amount of postulating on how to "dodge" the rules will change things, it can't be done.
:wooly-jumper
-
Is interesting however that companies like Morgan are still producing their cars.
So long as they don't change the design and make a new model which would be subject to a new type approval, they can continue to produce the car designed in the 60's / 70's
Not really a model that can be used by a major car manufacturer pushing out thousands of them per year but the Defender could have continued one way or the other if they were interested in doing it, they just weren't profitable vehicles to make here in the UK and couldn't be updated any further.
Still think it's a shame the production hardware didn't end up in India or somewhere like that where they could continue to make them?
Craig.
-
Hi Alan,,
Thry this link for size ... 1.6mm or 2mm.
https://www.ala.co.uk/pdfs/TYI-sample.pdf (fingers crossed it works)
That is for tyre insurance - not motor vehicle insurance!
They are saying they will not replace a damaged tyre if there is less than 2mm tread left.
Robin.
-
Hi,
Everybody above KNOWS that they are right.
I THINK I am not wrong.
Red rag v Bull time.
602
PS ... Put your index finger on the extreme edge of Euro-box's road wheel, right wheel the sidewall of the tyre disappears. I'm guessing that it is square edged ??? Check the hole in far end of your exhaust's tail pipe ... OK, I admit that I have seen tail-pipes that ended in a 3mm thick ring ... but I can't remember when ??? My screen wiper arms are not made out of 6mm dia bar, though I understand that spokes of wire wheels must not be touchable by hand .... if it's the spare. Yes, square edges are not permitted in designated places.
Front bumper? So make it from 80 or 100mm dia steel , with a hemisphere welded on each end. Or even plastic drain pipe painted silver.
Whatever, it appears the whether I'm right or wrong, I'm onto "a hiding to nothing", so I'll withdraw from the discussion, and let somebody else "push the boundaries".
602
PS ... Barbara seems to be on my side ... subject to cost ... so that's the biggest hurdle out of the way.
PPS ... I consider fitting a V8, or changing to diesel to be short sighted, but I'd fight for your right to do so.
-
John,
I'm not sure whether you are speculating around what can be done as a thought exercise in itself, in which case great, speculate away, or whether you are actively seeking a way to create a vehicle which meets your current and near-term future needs.
If the latter, perhaps there is another way round to address the question. It appears that you want certain aspects of a S2, but there are some constraints which make it impractical. If you list out the above, is there a way to achieve what you want within the constraints of legitimately retaining the identity of a starting vehicle?
For example, if you want the look of a S2 and the engine and transmission are acceptable, that plus basing it on an original specification chassis and axles gives you almost everything functional staying the same. Is there anything forward of the bulkhead you need to change? Do you need servo brakes (maybe disk while you are at it), power-assisted steering? Both of these can be done easily enough.
If access is the issue, are there some creative solutions around moveable seats? Do electrically driven hydraulics give you options to address this? If you don't need the middle seat that gives quite a lot of space to play with. Not sure on rules re. the rear tub bulkhead (is it regarded as structural?) but I am aware of people removing most or all of it, so that gives more flexibility, perhaps to make custom doors of a different shape.
In summary, can you get where you want to be starting from a S2 and changing only that which you need to to meet your requirements and in doing so avoid the IVA question completely?
Alec
-
Hi Alec,
At last, somebody who ....... :cheers
My constraints, both rigid and flexible.
I've been involved in Land Rovers for ... er ... 60 years. And 63 years with "jalopies". and "mechanically impure" thoughts for 59 years (Vauxhall engine into vintage MG sports, etc.)
My "ideal" would be an "apparent" 80" S1 "Traffic Light Racer", but I do know how to behave myself. Full NCD and clean licence since 1964 (40mph over the limit, fined £2).
And I'd like to stay in the S2 "school". Sensibly, that means not much under an 88" wheel-base. Shorter would be nice, but the rear tyre will want to grind it's was into the petrol tank. I have impure thoughts about how to overcome that.
I also want the seat cushions to be the same height as our mutual inside legs (29.5").More impure thoughts about how to lower the cushions.
I'd want to fit "reverse" seat belts .... buckling below drivers right hip, not in middle of cab. That would mean two things ....
1). Seat belt reel bolted to a plate welded to the chassis rail, and ....
2) Substantial hoop bolted to plates welded to the chassis, with diagonal struts ties
3). Substantial "sill rail" to be integral with the chassis outriggers, giving a stronger location for the seat belts .
Spare wheel on bonnet, with a pair of "snow tyres" in the tub.
Steel conduit inside the chassis rails, with wiring wrapped in spiral binding.
Pair of "dip-left central head lamps, for UK driving, with a pair of "dip-right" spot lamps in front of the wings, for continental driving (might need to be "dip-left" for the SVA).
Another impure thought might make power steering unnecessary. Similarly servo brakes.
Rock sliders,
Exterior mirrors hung on shorty roof rack.
Second 7- pin socket mounted on front. Both 7 and 13-pin sockets mounted on rear. & 7-pin socket mounted in cab. Work lamp to plug into any of the 7-pin sockets.
Aim for 500kg (unbraked) and 1000kg braked, towing capacity..
Enough for now.
Those of you who have read the above asre obviously my friends ... so be advised that CAR SOS is restoring an S2 at 21.00 hrs on tonight, which I think is Monday. ???
602
-
PS,
Can ???? the word escapes ... but it's not epicyclic ... you know, the single leaf thingies ....
Whatever, can they be ordered with a reduced camber? The extra 1.5" inches put The Aunts seat cushion way to high for Barbara.
602
-
:wiki
Semi Elliptic Springs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leaf_spring)
:wooly-jumper
-
So here are some thoughts on how you might get what you want, without needing an IVA.
And I'd like to stay in the S2 "school". Sensibly, that means not much under an 88" wheel-base.
OK, so the starting vehicle is a pre-1969 lights-in-grille S2a Bitsa. Might as well use a Bitsa if you are going to cut it about. Something with a legitimate identity and either a decent chassis and bulkhead or getting them fitted as part of the process.
I'd want to fit "reverse" seat belts .... buckling below drivers right hip, not in middle of cab.
Steel conduit inside the chassis rails, with wiring wrapped in spiral binding.
Rock sliders,
Exterior mirrors hung on shorty roof rack.
Second 7- pin socket mounted on front. Both 7 and 13-pin sockets mounted on rear. & 7-pin socket mounted in cab. Work lamp to plug into any of the 7-pin sockets.
Aim for 500kg (unbraked) and 1000kg braked, towing capacity.
Can't see anything there which would cause any issues - these are things you could just go ahead and do if you want to any vehicle. You already have more than that towing capacity.
Pair of "dip-left central head lamps, for UK driving, with a pair of "dip-right" spot lamps in front of the wings, for continental driving (might need to be "dip-left" for the SVA).
Something to this effect could be achieved by installing post-1969 wings complete with lights and either setting it up with independent switches or, probably better, fitting an 'A or B' type switch to select between them. I don't know if this is legal, but I have seen it done to other vehicles and both were legal options at the time of construction of the vehicle, so it may be acceptable without constituting a change which requires any form of vehicle assessment.
I also want the seat cushions to be the same height as our mutual inside legs (29.5").More impure thoughts about how to lower the cushions.
Spare wheel on bonnet, with a pair of "snow tyres" in the tub.
This is where it gets trickier. What is the current height of the seat cushion? Assuming you need to lower it, you need to consider the following:
1. Does it need to drop below the height of the seat box? If so, you would need to fabricate a new top. This may be straight across or may be only on the sides, depending on whether you are going low enough to hit gearbox components. Hypothetically, it may be possible to make the seatboard slide in and out so you just sit down on it, press the button and it slides you in to the vehicle. There are things a bit like this in some adapted vehicles.
2. If the seat is lower, do you need the floor to be lower too? A custom sill rail could be fabricated to achieve this - there are no outriggers in the way. You would also need to marry up to the front of the seatbox (easy) and the bulkhead (trickier to get right). On an earlier vehicle the sill covers are 5" deep so dropping that far would not take you outside the existing bodywork envelope.
3. How do you deal with moving the foot controls? They could be slid down the bulkhead panel but that moves them further away from the seating position. You could move the seat forward to address this but the compartment would then be smaller so shuffling yourself in would get more difficult. The brake and clutch have hose connections so moving them has no impact on their performance. The accelerator pedal has a rod linkage as standard, but some carburettor options require installing a bowden cable anyway which would make that independent of position.
4. How tiring does it get using the steering wheel that much higher up? It is difficult to lower the wheel as it uses simple mechanical linkages, however if you go for a suitable power steering option you would be more flexible on positioning.
None of the above appears to be particularly radical alteration. You are remaining within the envelope of the vehicle and you are not modifying any of the components which relate to safety of either yourself or other road users. As such, I would be interested to know whether you would actually need an IVA to achieve it - on the face of it, it looks like you may not, in which case you could just go ahead and do it, retaining the original identify of the vehicle. You are retaining the original (or type) chassis, engine, transmission, axles and suspension so the only two points you may lose are for the steering.
One thing though, I don't think you would get away with leaving the wheel on the bonnet if you lower the seat. You simply won't see over it!
Alec
-
Hi Alec,
Thanks for your reply and suggestions.
Lowering a Series is very very easy, but not cheap. But it's probably a stoning offence, so I won't go into details just yet.
Sensibly, that means not much under an 88" wheel-base.
I reckon I could get away with an 80", but again, I'll save the "how" for another occasion.
Might as well use a Bitsa if you are going to cut it about. Something with a legitimate identity and either a decent chassis and bulkhead or getting them fitted as part of the process.
I agree ... all I really need is a V5, but advertising for such might raise a few eyebrows, and anyway, I prefer to stay very legal if at all possible. A box of bits would give me lots of "odds and sods", including a lump of chassis with a number.
Quote from: w3526602 on Yesterday at 08:14:22 PM
I'd want to fit "reverse" seat belts .... buckling below drivers right hip, not in middle of cab.
Steel conduit inside the chassis rails, with wiring wrapped in spiral binding.
Rock sliders,
Exterior mirrors hung on shorty roof rack.
Second 7- pin socket mounted on front. Both 7 and 13-pin sockets mounted on rear. & 7-pin socket mounted in cab. Work lamp to plug into any of the 7-pin sockets.
Aim for 500kg (unbraked) and 1000kg braked, towing capacity.
you already have more than that towing capacity.
An 88" Series does not weigh in at 1500kg, so unbraked trailer will need to weigh appreciably less than 750kg. I haven't told you what engine and gearbox I'll be using, but it is unlikey to be towing friendly.
Something to this effect could be achieved by installing post-1969 wings complete with lights and either setting it up with independent switches or, probably better,
Personal taste, but I don't like the appearance of the usual "4 Lamp " set-ups. If head lamps are fitted, they must meet the MOT regs ... something I'd rather not argue about in a French lay-by.
This is where it gets trickier. What is the current height of the seat cushion?
My current plans will not provoke any of the other problems you raise, but I don't want to discuss those particular plans at this stage, just in case Crucifiction makes a come back. Lets get a project into my front garden first.
I would rather not start with a "viable " vehicle, although it would make life easier.
602
.
This is where it gets trickier. What is the current height of the seat cushion? Assuming you need to lower it, you need to consider the following:
1. Does it need to drop below the height of the seat box? If so, you would need to fabricate a new top. This may be straight across or may be only on the sides, depending on whether you are going low enough to hit gearbox components. Hypothetically, it may be possible to make the seatboard slide in and out so you just sit down on it, press the button and it slides you in to the vehicle. There are things a bit like this in some adapted vehicles.
2. If the seat is lower, do you need the floor to be lower too? A custom sill rail could be fabricated to achieve this - there are no outriggers in the way. You would also need to marry up to the front of the seatbox (easy) and the bulkhead (trickier to get right). On an earlier vehicle the sill covers are 5" deep so dropping that far would not take you outside the existing bodywork envelope.
3. How do you deal with moving the foot controls? They could be slid down the bulkhead panel but that moves them further away from the seating position. You could move the seat forward to address this but the compartment would then be smaller so shuffling yourself in would get more difficult. The brake and clutch have hose connections so moving them has no impact on their performance. The accelerator pedal has a rod linkage as standard, but some carburettor options require installing a Bowden cable anyway which would make that independent of position.
4. How tiring does it get using the steering wheel that much higher up? It is difficult to lower the wheel as it uses simple mechanical linkages, however if you go for a suitable power steering option you would be more flexible on positioning.
None of the above appears to be particularly radical alteration. You are remaining within the envelope of the vehicle and you are not modifying any of the components which relate to safety of either yourself or other road users. As such, I would be interested to know whether you would actually need an IVA to achieve it - on the face of it, it looks like you may not, in which case you could just go ahead and do it, retaining the original identify of the vehicle. You are retaining the original (or type) chassis, engine, transmission, axles and suspension so the only two points you may lose are for the steering.
One thing though, I don't think you would get away with leaving the wheel on the bonnet if you lower the seat. You simply won't see over it!
Alec
« Last Edit: Yesterday at 10:35:24 PM by agg221 »Report to moderator Logged
REPLY
ADD BOOKMARK
ADD POLL
NOTIFY
MARK UNREAD
SEND THIS TOPIC
PRINT
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] Go Up