391 replies to this topic

[Ethel]

There's a HRA Article 7 argument there if you can prove your modded car was legally on the Belgian roads before they changed the rules.

I've yet to see the will by the authorities to attack the alternative vehicle community in the UK, still worth keeping an eye on them though.

[dave21478]

besides, I live in France, what do I care? if I so wished, I could tack-weld some thin sheet over rotten sills and be "roadworthy"

[CMcB]

Actually, I think it is correct

"If the vehicle is accompanied by satisfactory evidence of compliance with interior fittings and the vehicle does not appear to be modified such that it would affect the evidence, the requirements of this section may be considered to be met."
and
"Interior fittings:
Required Standards 1+2 (edge curvatures) will NOT apply to any part of the internal surfaces of a mass produced vehicle provided it is as originally manufactured."

Dave I enquired specifically on this point:

The actual text from the IVA manual is (and is used in multiple sections.)

"In the case of unmodified Mass Produced vehicles the standards in this section shall be considered to be met.
Where evidence suggests that the vehicle has been modified, the examiner shall assess whether the modification would be likely to
materially affect the performance of the relevant component or System."



"Approvals
Testing and Support Services (TaSS)
VOSA,
Ellipse,
Padley Road,
Swansea,
SA1 8AN.


Hi Craig,

Once again, the devil is in the detail !

The critical part is "In the case of unmodified Mass Produced vehicles" .
What the text is referring to, is standard production vehicles that are
being tested against a previous approval document, where the original
approval has been lost or superseded due to time or detail constraints. It
does not refer to modified production vehicles or vehicles with prior
approvals that have since been modified. A good example of this would be a
Japanese import that had been presented against the original Japanese
registration document. We would accept that the vehicle had achieved
Japanese Type Approval and unless the vehicle had been modified, all areas
covered by this document would not require further examination.

However, I have to admire your tenacity here. I don't think that I have
ever answered so many detailed technical questions in such a short period
of time from the same person ! Keep up the good work.

Best regards,

Mark

Mark Vickers Eng Tech MSOE MIRTE
Technical Officer
Approvals
Passenger Cars & Light Goods Vehicles
Vehicle & Operator Services Agency
Department for Transport."

Edited by CMcB, 15 July 2009 - 01:45 PM.

[Ethel]

"However, I have to admire your tenacity here. I don't think that I have
ever answered so many detailed technical questions in such a short period
of time from the same person ! Keep up the good work."

Should we read that as "please go away"


No answer on the "modified monocoque" definition then? It would be ridiculous if it included fitting a sunroof, for example - but quite entertaining as it would apply to brand new cars with some options packages.

It would also exempt you from 3 years worth of MoT's, which doesn't seem sensible if all you did was fit a flip front.


As a suggestion, should "structural" have the same meaning as it does for an MoT test: wings etc are ok but sills etc aren't.

[CMcB]

I doubt if he'd put Keep up the good work on if he wanted us to go away.

He seems happy to help and a nice chap.


What was modified monocoque question? Whether it's classed as a body mod? That's a question to the DVLA which I am awaiting an answer to/ as with flip fronts too.

[Jackman]

Question...

If you replace panels with ones you made yourself, ie, rear arches (tubbing) or changing the bulkhead to a single sheet, what would that be classed as? Id say they are repairs rather than mods in a way.

[CMcB]

Question...

If you replace panels with ones you made yourself, ie, rear arches (tubbing) or changing the bulkhead to a single sheet, what would that be classed as? Id say they are repairs rather than mods in a way.

This is one of those grey areas, but I think you are treading on bodyshell/chassis territory as soon as you touch the bulkheads, especially if they are not pattern part replacements.

[Ethel]

Same question really,

"A vehicle is an amateur built vehicle if the vehicle was, constructed, assembled or having previously been registered under the 1994 Act, structurally modified, for the personal use of a person ® who is a relevant individual,"

is what it says in the IVA manual. DVLA are even more vague "The original unmodified chassis or unaltered bodyshell (i.e. body and chassis as one unit – monocoque)" in their Inf 26 leaflet, which still refers to SVA.

The gist is an alterantive to a chassis. It would seem stupid that you could chop up a Landrover bulkhead as you please without needing an IVA purely because it's attached with nut 'n bolts.

Craig, I agree you've found a decent adviser who understands the term public servant. I sadly predict the DVLA won't be so forthcoming.

[Jackman]

Question...

If you replace panels with ones you made yourself, ie, rear arches (tubbing) or changing the bulkhead to a single sheet, what would that be classed as? Id say they are repairs rather than mods in a way.

This is one of those grey areas, but I think you are treading on bodyshell/chassis territory as soon as you touch the bulkheads, especially if they are not pattern part replacements.

Thank you, i had the same though.

Bugger, why did mine have to be rusty

[CharlieBrown]

Yikes this is one hell of a topic and some very interesting points have been raised!

Firstly thanks to garrett3 for instigating the topic (I feel some of the comments he received for just trying to help were rather rude) and secondly thanks to Craig (CMcB) for assisting with getting some answers.


As I am building a fibreglass mini from scratch then as I understand it an IVA is the only way I can go. I will therefore be going for an amateur build. As far as I am aware the only major issue was the steering column which I intend to replace with a collapsible column, dons’t seem to hard to do to me. I was not aware of the fuel tank issue so I will be looking into that.

Phaeton and help with the fuel tank issue will be greatly appreciated.

So this topic is very useful to me and when I eventually get the mini ready (mind you by the time that happens it may have changed again! ) I will of course keep everyone up to date on the progress/issues. [I may be calling on a few people with IVA experience to assist me!  ]

Charlie

[Ethel]

I think Pheaton's tank issue is that it needs to located within the vehicle structure to protect it in a crash, it also can't be where it can leak on the exhaust. I guess you could try and rely on the Mini's type approval to justify copying it but it would be useful to seal up any holes between the boot and passenger bit.

[CMcB]

Seriously Charlie, feel free to speak to Mark at VOSA, he seems more than happy to answer questions and queries. And if you get an answer in writing then it's something they cant argue with at IVA time. 01792 454 256

Link to IVA manual

Edited by CMcB, 15 July 2009 - 02:39 PM.

[CMcB]

I thought these might be possible issues because of the battery in the rear


8. Fuel Tanks must not be positioned near a heat source (similar in installation to that of a type approved vehicle), so that a leak could cause a fire hazard.
9. Fuel Tanks must be positioned so as not to be vulnerable to damage from protruding parts or sharp edges in the event of a front or rear impact.

[Ethel]

There's loads that's open to interpretation but I don't see why a battery in the boot is any worse than one under the bonnet where there's also fuel system bits or that electrical components in the boot don't constitute as much of a spark hazard. you could always use a competition style battery box with an underfloor vent and some chunky fuses would be good.

[ferrit]

Question...

If you replace panels with ones you made yourself, ie, rear arches (tubbing) or changing the bulkhead to a single sheet, what would that be classed as? Id say they are repairs rather than mods in a way.

This is one of those grey areas, but I think you are treading on bodyshell/chassis territory as soon as you touch the bulkheads, especially if they are not pattern part replacements.

Now that leads us into the realms of bulkhead boxes for webers and turbos, your cutting into the structural element

Edited by ferrit, 15 July 2009 - 03:48 PM.