Wrongly registered Kit Cars
MKing91953
I have come across a few people who like myself drive Kit cars who have them
incorrectly registered. Due to proposed changes in the law, this could prove a
problem to owners of such cars in the future.
If you drive a Kit Car in the UK and the V5 (log-book) describes the name of
the donor vehicle and not the kit type you are driving then you may be
affected.
It is proposed in the future that you will need to take your V5 to the MOT
station. The examiner would be following correct procedure if an MOT would not
be awarded due to the description of the vehicle being incorrect.
Unfortunately, as from 1st May 1998 a new test for newly registered 'kit type'
vehicles is to be introduced, commonly known as the SVA (Single Vehicle
Approval). This test costs GBP165 and is only available at certain testing
stations in the UK. This test has to be undertaken on newly registered Kit cars
and on completion a MAC certificate will be issued. It is a fairly stringent
test and from early attempts by manufacturers to get there unmodified kits
through - difficult to pass. New kits being sold are now mostly SVA compliant.
Basically the message is - If you have a kit wrongly registered register it
correctly before 1st May 1998 to avoid future problems. I think I am right in
saying that if the application is made before 1st May then you are OK.
Ke...@flibble.org
>the description of the vehicle being incorrect. Unfortunately, as from 1st
>May 1998 a new test for newly registered 'kit type' vehicles is to be
>introduced, commonly known as the SVA (Single Vehicle Approval). This test
>costs GBP165 and is only available at certain testing stations in the UK.
>This test has to be undertaken on newly registered Kit cars and on completion
>a MAC certificate will be issued. It is a fairly stringent test and from
>early attempts by manufacturers to get there unmodified kits through -
Have you any more details about this?
Thanks,
Keith.
Hartwell
This is generally a good thing it is about time regulations were put on
were put on a proper footing. As for some kit car manufacturers having
trouble getting vehicles through inspections I can't say I am that
surprised, the expertise of kit car manufacturers varies greatly some are
excellent producing vehicles a multi-national would be proud of others show
absolutely no knowledge of vehicle engineering and little of welding and
produce dangerous lash ups.
About 12 years back I can remember looking at a Rover V8 engined "T Bucket"
street rod with a Ford Pop 93e transverse sprung "A" frame front axle to
which had been grafted a a Mini steering rack. Apart from the fact the
geometry of this suspension is totally incompatible with a rack and pinnion
to get it to fit the builder had followed the chassis manufacturers
instruction and mounted the rack about 9 inches off centre and extended one
(only !!) track rod to match. The effects on bump, roll steer and akerman
angles must have been odd to say the least and remember this was in a car
that had at least 135 bhp and weighs less than a ton. I have also seen
Lotus Seven clones with chassis that weren't designed but simply happened
on the workshop floor with brackets bearing suspension loads welded onto
the middle unsupported tubes, with coil spring/damper units mounted on
lower wishbones and connected to the upright by ball joints that were never
designed to take spring loads. Cortina MK3 based MG TF clones with 12
inches of vertical suspension movement on the front suspension and about 2
inches on the rear axle and no bump stops.
Having said all that I have also admired the quailty of many home built
kits, the Westfield has a well thought out and produced chassis, the Midas
was a real "quality job" and Adrain Evans' epertise in chassis engineering
on the Davrian produced roadholding only surpassed by single seater racing
cars. I can think of many other examples of both good and bad.
Andrew
MKing91953 <mking...@aol.com> wrote in article
<199804051531...@ladder03.news.aol.com>...
> I have come across a few people who like myself drive Kit cars who have
them
> incorrectly registered. Due to proposed changes in the law, this could
prove a
> problem to owners of such cars in the future.
> If you drive a Kit Car in the UK and the V5 (log-book) describes the name
of
> the donor vehicle and not the kit type you are driving then you may be
> affected.
> It is proposed in the future that you will need to take your V5 to the
MOT
> station. The examiner would be following correct procedure if an MOT
would not
> be awarded due to the description of the vehicle being incorrect.
Keith R Baker
PJ wrote in message ...
>In article <01bd61fa$d21742e0$LocalHost@remmus>, Hartwell
><URL:mailto:hart...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> This is generally a good thing
>
> [snip]
>
>> the expertise of kit car manufacturers varies greatly some are excellent
>> producing vehicles a multi-national would be proud of others show
>> absolutely no knowledge of vehicle engineering and little of welding and
>> produce dangerous lash ups.
>
> Although I think you'll find the emphasis of the SVA test is more on the
>way the kit has been put together than on the engineering of the components
>themselves. That a manufacturer manages to get one of it's cars passed,
>serves only to demonstrate that it is possible to do so if you build yours
in
From what I have seen, most of the SVA regs are to do with easily measured
things such as projections and positions of seat belt anchorages / steering
wheel
shape and position. Manufaucturers have to re-engineer parts not because of
previous poor quality but to alter the shape / position of things. So the
manufacturers demonstration that their car passes shows the punter that
they have the correct parts to build the kit to meet the SVA regs. Of coarse
it does
not mean your kit will pass if you put the parts together wrong but then its
up to you to follow the instruction manual :) It also means that you are
more
likely to buy their parts as the change is greater that you will pass the
SVA test,
a nice reason (from the manufactures point of view) for "improving kit
cars".
Keith
MKing91953
To answer the two replies to my SVA comments.
1) I totally agree with the comments of <hart...@hotmail.com> that the SVA is
a good thing in principle and that the Kit car market has in past years
suffered in reputation due to the poor and in some cases dangerous kits that
have seen the light of day.
My eagerness at avoiding the SVA is not however due to safety. My kit is
probably one of the most prolific in the marketplace at the moment and was
simply not designed to pass some of the criteria that the SVA has imposed.
Indeed Westfield who produce one of the finest Kit Cars on the market with full
TUV approval had to modify a number of features on their cars to pass the SVA.
I have been informed by Email today that the SVA test has been put back again
to July 1st 1998, this being the second 'shift' that I know about.
The pressure that is forcing the government to put back the SVA test is not
however due to the Kit Car fraternity and has more to do with bigger business
(surprise surprise !!). A substantial lobby of manufacturers of 'production'
cars wanting to import their vehicles for sale in the UK were finding that
their cars do not meet the requirements and demanded more time to reach
compliance.
2) I have a rough guide as to the areas that the SVA covers which I will post
if required. Suffice it to say that it covers all items that will be covered on
the MOT and Construction and use Regulations.
The rules are very specific although open to interpretation. Some that I
consider the most common likely to cause concern are
1) External projections - (not to be contactable by a 100mm diameter sphere)
radiused to at least 2.5mm
2) Mascots - Must be considered as an external projection and if retained must
be detachable under the specified load.
3) All lighting equipment must be E marked.
4) Internal Projections - affecting toggle switches (that you classic car types
love)
5) Deformable centre boss on the steering wheel
6) No holes in the Steering wheel spokes as they are considered dangerous
7) Collapsable steering column
8) Dual Circuit Braking required
9) Glass must be correctly marked.
10) Noise controls on exhausts
etc. etc..
Mark Nickson
Hi All,...
My beloved Marlin Kit car has been neglected for the last year or so, and
so all this fuss about the SVA? test has passed me by. Iam in the prosess
of getting the car back on the road but a few things are worrying me:-
My Marlin is based on a 1968 GT6 Mk II. It was built in the early '70's, to
be used as a Hill racer (as far as I can find out). The registration
document describes it as a 'Marlin Two seater Fixed Chassis Sports Car',
but the car still retains it original number plate.
When I put this car through the MOT in a few weeks time, will I have to
bother with the SVA test as well. I was under the impresion that if the car
was registerd as what it is i.e. 'Marlin' instead of 'GT6' then you where
OK??
Can anyone help?
Cheers
Mark (worried)
MKing91953
Don't worry,
I originally posted the the article about wrongly registered Kit Cars to alert
people whose cars are registered incorrectly. As yours is described as a Marlin
then you have no problem. It must have passed the 'points' test when it was
originally registered due to a high percentage of one vehicle donor parts being
used and that is why it retains the original registration.
If anbody knows whether the SVA has been put back again from 1st May 1998 I
would be very interested to hear. The VLO website is not very up to date.