16v Mini Club Forums  

Go Back   16v Mini Club Forums > General Public Area > General 16v Mini Chat

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 18-09-2017, 09:06 AM   #16
mininut
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 4,453
Subframe: Other
CC: 1998
Make: Other
ECU: Trionic 5.5
Default

i looked here https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-registrat...tered-vehicles
and it took me to here http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1.../contents/made
which then took me here http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1...chapter/I/made

no mention of 15%... or am i missing something.
mininut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-09-2017, 09:07 AM   #17
mininut
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 4,453
Subframe: Other
CC: 1998
Make: Other
ECU: Trionic 5.5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeR33 View Post
can't see that page mate.

found this though. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reque...ch/2/INF26.pdf

Last edited by mininut; 18-09-2017 at 09:09 AM.
mininut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-09-2017, 09:11 AM   #18
MikeR33
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 1,102
Subframe: Other
CC: 3996
Make: Vauxhall
ECU: DTA \ PCS
Send a message via MSN to MikeR33
Default

Try again

https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...e-guidance.pdf
__________________
0-60mph 3.2sec, 0-100mph 7.8sec, 1/4mile 11.66@116mph (now about to be dismantled and sold)
http://www.twinenginemini.co.uk
MikeR33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-09-2017, 10:15 AM   #19
mininut
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 4,453
Subframe: Other
CC: 1998
Make: Other
ECU: Trionic 5.5
Default

Thanks mate.

So now it looks like if its been "radically changed" you must declare it when re-taxing and the same rules apply as per the MOT, so no more free tax for me. Saying that, its been off the road for 9 years!

doubt i'll ever finish the damn thing now unless i trailer it everywhere!

Frikin bureaucrats. screwed it for a lot of people i would say.
mininut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-09-2017, 10:20 AM   #20
MikeR33
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 1,102
Subframe: Other
CC: 3996
Make: Vauxhall
ECU: DTA \ PCS
Send a message via MSN to MikeR33
Default

Yep the end is nigh I think, going to try and see if there's any interest in buying the car as a whole from some overseas person otherwise it'll have to be broken for bits in the UK.
__________________
0-60mph 3.2sec, 0-100mph 7.8sec, 1/4mile 11.66@116mph (now about to be dismantled and sold)
http://www.twinenginemini.co.uk
MikeR33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-09-2017, 10:26 AM   #21
gazwad
Senior Member
 
gazwad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: northampton
Posts: 1,853
Subframe: Home Made
CC: 1796
Make: Rover
ECU: standard
Default

Ignoring all the online bullshit from people making their own interpretations from it, the way i understand it is that all cars registered before 1977 will become mot and tax exempt, if the vehicle has been substantially modified (including the 15% power to weigh increase) then you will still have to have an annual mot but BIVA test will only be required based on the existing 8 point rule. The only part that is unclear is if cars before 1977 that are substantially modified will also have to pay road tax - so will cars made before 1974 that are currently tax exempt but are substantially modified now need to pay tax?
If your pre 1977 vehicle is already modified then nothing should change, you will still need an mot and if the 8 point rule requires it then you will need to do a BIVA test as before. Most 16v minis which have un-modified monocoques, use mini hubs and suspension etc shouldn't have enough points to require a BIVA, those that are for instance are cut away for rear engines, use different platforms etc will most likely require a BIVA test - but this is not new and these cars should have been tested anyway. the fact is most are not and have 'got away with it' all this new system will do is make the DVLA aware that your vehicle is modified and you may be called out to have your vehicle inspected and if they decide it requires a BIVA due to the points system then you will have to have it done. Again this has not changed, just the chances of getting caught has increased.
gazwad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-09-2017, 10:52 AM   #22
MikeR33
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 1,102
Subframe: Other
CC: 3996
Make: Vauxhall
ECU: DTA \ PCS
Send a message via MSN to MikeR33
Default

The problem is that even cutting a small hole for the gearbox connector shaft or drilling some extra holes for shifter cables, tubbing the arches means an IVA as the 5 points means totally original monocoque so you admit to the power increase on the form then get sent for a review and then off for a BIVA which a stock mini can't pass.

In my case the front bulkhead is totally intact (apart from a hole for the shifter cable), it's only the boot floor in reality that has been removed and arches tubbed although a removable front of any type would also render the 5 points invalid according to the rules.

Admittedly had I been more up to speed on the build regs nearly 20years ago I wouldn't have started it in the first place, only SVA was around then and I (stupidly at the time) assumed it only applied to full kit cars, it was really only when all the BIVA stuff cropped up a few years ago that it all got dodgy but too late then.
__________________
0-60mph 3.2sec, 0-100mph 7.8sec, 1/4mile 11.66@116mph (now about to be dismantled and sold)
http://www.twinenginemini.co.uk

Last edited by MikeR33; 18-09-2017 at 10:58 AM.
MikeR33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-09-2017, 12:49 PM   #23
mininut
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 4,453
Subframe: Other
CC: 1998
Make: Other
ECU: Trionic 5.5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeR33 View Post
Admittedly had I been more up to speed on the build regs nearly 20years ago I wouldn't have started it in the first place, only SVA was around then and I (stupidly at the time) assumed it only applied to full kit cars, it was really only when all the BIVA stuff cropped up a few years ago that it all got dodgy but too late then.
this
mininut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-09-2017, 01:47 PM   #24
Oz
Senior Member
 
Oz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Jersey, Channel Islands
Posts: 4,049
Subframe: Other
CC: 1595
Make: Honda
ECU: DTA
Default

Ok, I'm from a different jurisdiction so forgive me if this sounds dumb but how can they test a car against standards that the bog standard car from the factory would not pass and then fail you on the fact the standard car doesn't pass rather than the mods you have made to it ? Sounds pretty messed up to me
__________________
New subframe fitting has begun - slowly

Build Thread - Standard Round Nose with K series subframe build begun
Oz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-09-2017, 02:39 PM   #25
edk83
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 503
Default

Because they are testing against 2017 standards, not 1977 standards.

If car is changed so much that it's not the original car so cannot be registered as such.

It's always been the case, since 1988 when the rule was brought in. Except they never directly asked you to declare if your car was modded or not, now they are.

It may only be when your car is over 40 years old though and you apply to tax without an mot. They have not said yet if the declaration will be demanded when taxing all cars yet.

From what I've read when the car is over 40 years old it will not require an mot, this is automatic.

But then when you attempt to tax it you are asked the questions about mods and if it has an mot or not. You tick has an mot and is modded with more than 15% extra power, they then tax you accordingly. No mot and you won't be able to tax until you have an mot. You may well also end up on a list, for example during the mot the tester could be asked to confirm the car scores enough points to keep the vin, or you could be sent a build up report request, at the cost of a stamp for them.

You tick it's not modded and has no mot, they then list it as tax not due and you pay nothing.

It does mention there will be safeguards, what these are they have not said yet, details to be released in November, but it could be something like what I've put above. Or that could just mean that the website will not let you tax it without ticking the mods box one way or another and having a valid mot or not.

At the end of the day they are saving money and co2 by not moting a good number of cars, also getting extra tax by a large section of them being modded and not qualifying for vhi. The added bonus of them being able to clear up a large number of radically modded cars at the same time could mean more inspections, they must have to pass this extra work off somewhere.

Its all self certification though, the original proposal had an option for a mandatory inspection!

At the end of the day we are all going to be driving electric cars, they are helping the historic vehicle owner out by making mot's optional. Who wants to take their mint classic out in the rain?
Then cars that are not considered of interest, as they are modded even a little are going to end up paying a lot of tax in the years to come as most people move away from fossil fuel.

Has anyone seen the drag racing Tesla? It is pretty awesome!

Last edited by edk83; 18-09-2017 at 03:07 PM.
edk83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-09-2017, 03:01 PM   #26
Oz
Senior Member
 
Oz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Jersey, Channel Islands
Posts: 4,049
Subframe: Other
CC: 1595
Make: Honda
ECU: DTA
Default

So basically you can put a 1000+bhp engine in a Skyline, say, and use it on the road and that's ok and safe because it would pass the test but modding a Mini so it produced a power to weight ratio of 15% more than standard is unsafe, but it is only because the standard car is old and can't pass the test anyway ?!?

Do you see where I'm coming from ? Basically it seems that these rules imply that modifying an old car is no longer possible but a new car is fine ?!?

Shouldn't these tests have age related regulations so that a standard car of the type tested would pass thus the test is simply on whether the modifications are safe, else you could have the safest, most well-modified old car that would be off the road yet some newer wreck of a car that just scrapes through a test is ok ?!?

There must be various modified historic cars such as road registered historic rally cars that have significant power upgrades (Mk1/2 Escorts jump to mind) that due to their physical age would mean they don't adhere to the modern standards ?!?

Aren't the classic car clubs and groups not petionning the Government to have some form of classic car age-related test else there is going to be a fair few cars suddenly declared unfit and unroadworthy

As I said, it just seems messed up
__________________
New subframe fitting has begun - slowly

Build Thread - Standard Round Nose with K series subframe build begun
Oz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-09-2017, 03:21 PM   #27
geachy87
Senior Member
 
geachy87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Campbeltown, Scotland
Posts: 427
Subframe: Watson
CC: 1.8t
Make: Rover
ECU: Kmaps
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oz View Post
So basically you can put a 1000+bhp engine in a Skyline, say, and use it on the road and that's ok and safe because it would pass the test but modding a Mini so it produced a power to weight ratio of 15% more than standard is unsafe, but it is only because the standard car is old and can't pass the test anyway ?!?

Do you see where I'm coming from ? Basically it seems that these rules imply that modifying an old car is no longer possible but a new car is fine ?!?

Shouldn't these tests have age related regulations so that a standard car of the type tested would pass thus the test is simply on whether the modifications are safe, else you could have the safest, most well-modified old car that would be off the road yet some newer wreck of a car that just scrapes through a test is ok ?!?

There must be various modified historic cars such as road registered historic rally cars that have significant power upgrades (Mk1/2 Escorts jump to mind) that due to their physical age would mean they don't adhere to the modern standards ?!?

Aren't the classic car clubs and groups not petionning the Government to have some form of classic car age-related test else there is going to be a fair few cars suddenly declared unfit and unroadworthy

As I said, it just seems messed up
Adding 15% power to weight won't mean you have to go for an iva test, it's just you won't be exempt from mot's on historic cars, it'll only be if you've altered the chassis etc to fit a big engine or whatever that you would then need to go for an iva.
So whether it's a skyline with 1000hp or if you could get 1000hp out of the a series in the mini(I know this isn't possible) you still wouldn't need to have an iva as none of the subframes or chassis would have been altered to achieve it.

Personally I think the 15% thing regarding mot exemption is a good thing, wouldn't want 300hp minis or whatever not needing mot's running about with people possibly not keeping on top of maintenance and having shoddy brakes etc,

Edit: I'm at work and only had a quick look at the rules etc so I could be speaking out my peach

Last edited by geachy87; 18-09-2017 at 03:39 PM.
geachy87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-09-2017, 04:39 PM   #28
Geehawk
Senior Member
 
Geehawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 3,426
Default

Funnily enough mine became Historic this year, and it's MOT is booked for next weekend.

An awful lot of non hybrid Minis will fall foul of these regs too, after all a 15% power increase must apply to the majority of Minis, and there's a huge number with flip fronts, or tubbed arches.

I'd happily pay TAX and keep taking it for an MOT, but unless they introduce an IVA test that old cars won't fail on original parts, the future looks bleak.

Guess come May 2018 I'll be breaking the car and selling up. A shame as it was my first car, owned for nearly 30 years
Geehawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-09-2017, 06:42 PM   #29
Pete649
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Isle of Man
Posts: 63
ECU: Empty Garage
Default

Having gone through it I'm with gazwad's interpretation above.
__________________
Pete
Pete649 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-09-2017, 06:58 PM   #30
mm man
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 174
Default

if the cars are already built and registered correctly and are over 40 years old you can't declare them as historic because they are modded so you can't get free tax and will still need an mot .( as now then ! )
If you have a car now that is pre 1960 it's up to you to get historic put on the v5c or you still get charged for tax they don't do it automatically.
You can still use a modded car it will just cost more than a standard car that will be free ?
And if you are about to build a heavily modded car now it will still go through the same tests as before or have I missed something ?
Any grp shell car / kit over 40 years will still need an mot and tax regardless of spec ?
Each time I read the gov stuff I seem to come up with a different interpretation but that could be just me .

Last edited by mm man; 18-09-2017 at 10:54 PM. Reason: Clarifying
mm man is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:29 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.