Print

[Peter Holden]

It is on a S2 chassis look at the photo that shows the bulkhead dumb iron.

It is a bitsa on a S1 chassis number.  I will pass it on to my friend at DVLA.

Peter

[w3526602]

Hi,

I have rebuilt a couple of 88" Series Ones, onto new galvanised chassis.

As far as I am aware, I complied with the REBUILT VEHICLE POINTS SYSTEM .... NEW CHASSIS, NEW SPRINGS AND DAMPERS. ORIGINAL STEERING with NEW TRE's. ORIGINAL STEERING BOX. How many of the required 13 (I think) points is that? The chassis alone is worth 8 points (I think).

I think I used S2 engines (losing just 1 point) S2 transmissions (losing 2? points), and both S2 axles (losing 2 points). Feel free to check my memory and maths.

The  detachable body keeps/loses no points. I didn't need to claim VED nor MOT exemption, the  Post Office just gave it to me.

There is (or was) a concession allowing one to fit non-original parts, without penalty, IF NEW PARTS are not available. Does a reconditioned, or "After Market" component count as NEW? I guess that Rovers would be stumped if I ordered a NEW axle casing for any Series. I'm thinking of the little (2" long?) re-enforcing bits, underneath the ends of the axle case, between the spring plate and the hub flange. (Hmmm! There may be a market for somebody to offer EXCHANGE bare, "reconditioned" axle cases), although my MOT garage were prepared to weld the axle case in situ.
They later told me that they would have passed the axle ... if there had not been an "Observer" from Big Brother's HQ, in "observance".

Maybe OT ... there is a firm in the Midlands who quoted me £600 (then) to dunk a BMC Spridget body shell in acid, to remove all grot (dry) and gunge (moist), and paint, from an Spridget bodyshell, then inhibit, and then, if I was willing to pay, replace any necessary panels with new, and respray, the shell. I pondered about asking their price to treat a Landy axle case in the same way. It would save a lot of miserable scraping, and wire brushing.

602

[Mycroft]

Very glad to see that nobody put a bid in for this ringer. Wonder what the seller will resort to next.

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/165971696906

[Ratty2A]

He’s changed the advert twice since it was listed:

The first change was an addendum saying it had been pointed out that there were some visual similarities to a series 2 but he dismissed these saying that the only difference was that the tub and doors had been changed and that this was easy to do. The second and current addendum he deleted his initial comment and plays dumb and says all he knows is that he has the certificates to say it’s a series 1 and that he has a knowledgable friend who is looking into it being a prototype.

It’s the “amazing history” and fictitious backstory that belongs to another vehicle that’s really quite nasty as a less knowledgable buyer could take it at face value.

It’s a bitsa SIIA with no ID and he should sell it as such.

[Mycroft]

Spot on Ratty.

I suspect we'll see it again soon enough, with mildly modified language. He clearly fell for it and is determined that someone else will make the same mistake. This would seem to be outright, knowing fraud, but eBay doesn't seem that bothered about such things.

[Porkscratching]

Pity it's an obvious ringer as it looks a nice old knockabout LR.. He should have just advertised it an an old Series Land Rover and not tried to elaborate and be "clever "  hey ho...

[richardhula]

Registered with 2500cc engine 

[w3526602]

Hi,

I was around, and interested, when the REBUILT AND RADICALLY ALTERED VEHICLE legislation was introduced, which meant that the vehicle had to retain the required number of points. I do not remember any penalties for changing the fuel, but that almost certainly meant changing the engine, there may have been a loss of ONE point for the engine. On the other hand, changes were permitted if they improved SAFETY or EFFICIENCY.

There was also a concession that permitted the use of non-original components, if they improved safety and/or efficiency.

If you present a vehicle for testing (MOT and/or IVA) and it is fitted with a different engine, the emissions should be tested against the requirements applicable to the age of that engine, and not the age of the vehicle.

My understanding is that if an alternative engine was fitted in a car, it had to comply with the emission standards applicable to that engine, at the time it was manufactured.

From 1962 (I think) MOTOR CARS had to be fitted with seat-belt mounting points, with GOODS VEHICLES joining the club in 1965. I could find no reference to DUAL PURPOSE VEHICLES (eg: Estate cars and (all?) 4x4s). There is something in my mind about GOODS VEHICLES OVER 30cwt (unladen or MGW?) also being exempt, but suspect that changed with later legislation.(Plating?)

I have a vague memory of a picture of a Jago Geep kit car being tested on the factory  test rig. It was a photo of a heavy weight, on rollers, applying the necessary momentum to a Jago's roll-over frame, that would put the Series seat belt fittings to shame.

Dare I suggest that NOT doing something, in order to avoid an MOT, would imply that you would expect your car to fail.

602

[Mycroft]

I believe it was late 1964 when seat belt mounting points became a legal requirement, 602.

[w3526602]

Hi,

Click here ...  http://www.earlycj5.com/xf_cj5/index.php?threads/118781/

This picture is of the "proper" truck's roll-over bar, but the GRP Jago's bar is similar.

602

[Larry S.]

I believe it was late 1964 when seat belt mounting points became a legal requirement, 602.

Here in the States Seat belts didn't become a required piece of equipment until 1968.  Enforcement of wearing them was left up to each State; Kansas didn't pass a law requiring them to be worn until 1981 for children) and 1986 for adult DRIVERS.  It didn't become a primary law for passengers in the front seat in Kansas until 2010.  Back seat seat belt laws are secondary laws here in Kansas except for children.

AFAIK there are no mandated seat belt laws in New Hampshire, but I could be wrong.

 

Larry

[Larry S.]

Hi,

Click here ...  http://www.earlycj5.com/xf_cj5/index.php?threads/118781/

This picture is of the "proper" truck's roll-over bar, but the GRP Jago's bar is similar.

602

My brother's Willys had one of those attached when he had it as a teenager in in the late '78 or '79.