Showing Ringers at Events

fivesixtwo

What do people think of the current trend of certain individuals that present their ringed cars at shows, ie 90s cars on ZV plates ,

This does not refer to the Landrover loophole

TrailerBob

Any kind of vehicle identity fraud is sickening to those of us who go to the rounds of the earth to ensure our classics/vintage machines are above board, and all legal. Any car that masquerades as an older one should be impounded and the owner fined, as with any motoring offence.

While the LR Discoveries on old Range Rover chassis can be legal, (and you can bet most of them just have the VIN switched - another disgrace), they shouldn't be presented at classic shows. It's a strange mentality to want to display a 2002 bodied vehicle alongside proper classics.

Testacalda

fivesixtwo wrote: »

What do people think of the current trend of certain individuals that present their ringed cars at shows, ie 90s cars on ZV plates ,

This does not refer to the Landrover loophole

Depends whether you are into 90s cars, I'm not, so I probably wouldn't be looking at them much anyway.

For me the cars registration number is a significant part of the history of the vehicle. Preserving old cars is all about history. A fradulant reg takes away from a vehicles historic value, the very reason people display them in the first place

It's not good for the classic car scene in general to have fraudulent cars involved. Personally it doesn't really bother me all that much. All my cars a legit so I have nothing to hide

I know people make arguments from an insurance point of view but in all reality once the owner has taken out a policy, in the event of a claim the insurance company will be obliged to pay the third party before perusing the car owner for the costs.

Titzon Toast

fivesixtwo wrote: »

What do people think of the current trend of certain individuals that present their ringed cars at shows, ie 90s cars on ZV plates ,

This does not refer to the Landrover loophole

I saw a Disco on ZV plates the other day in Balbriggan and couldn't for the life of me figure out what was going on with it.

How is this even a thing? If the reg belongs to the RR chassis underneath, how is it able to apply to a completely different model up on top?

TrailerBob

Once a chassis swap passes an engineers 'inspection' it's good to go. It happens that the disco body can be put on the older RR chassis without much modifications, mounting points, wheelbase etc all match. It's a complete tax dodge, and the worst is that many of them never actually had the chassis swapped at all

Silvera

Personally, I have no problem with Discovery bodies - or 'classic' RR bodies (1972-1993)' - displaying ZV plates (IF they have been correctly converted). This happens in other countries too, e.g. The Netherlands (as mentioned by Paul_CCI on other threads).

What I do have a problem with is blantant 'plate swopping' ...like the recent photo I was sent of a c.2008 Range Rover displaying an 'OZP nnn' plate ...while on display at a classic car show?!

PaulK_CCI

True, the Range Rover conversions are legal in other countries too, but in Holland they clamped it down somewhat to avoid too much loopholing.
They introduced the "2 thirds originality" rule: All vehicles have 3 core elements: Chassis - Body - Engine/drivetrain. For a car to be allowed modified and keep the original vintage, 2 of these core elements MUST be maintained. You can only change one element to retain the vintage status of the car. 

So let's say on a 2 door 1975 range rover with a 3.5 V8, if you change the engine to a 3.0 Tdi  and swap the body for a 4 door 1994 soft dash, you're in trouble, because you changed two elements instead of one. Engine is now a diesel automatic, and the 2 door body is now a 4 door body. If you want to upgrade that 1975 car to a later 4 door body, you can only do so by keeping the original 3.5 V configuration (you can of course fit another reconditioned engine, as long it stays a 3.5 V8 with a manual box).

But I think the crucial factor that would immediately wipe out this sort ringing, is to bring back some sort of modified/simplified NCT testing for pre-1980 cars. I know a lot of people would feel strongly against this, but I think with the current status, any car pre-1980 being totally exempt from NCT, automatically pulls them off the radar without anyone being able to check the car. The car could even be a total wreck, endangering other road users, for all we know!!!
If there would some sort of rudimentary anual or bi-annual "road-worthiness" test, not as strict as a standard NCT but checking the basic things, it would automatically pull any of these ringers off the road, because owners no longer can get away with it. Here is Holland cars keep being checked (bi-annually) until they are 50 years+

Silvera

Interesting to know how the rules work in Holland!

The way things are heading at the moment - with the amount of blantant 'plate swopping' taking place - I believe that compulsory testing will be implemented for all vehicles in the foreseeable future.

However, as you stated, this may be no bad thing if it gets such 'messed with' vehicles off the road!

duskyjoe

Yes , we could take a huge amount off our Dutch friends re their modus operandum re classic vechiles. Over there you are made take the vechile off the road I'm aware for three months minimum in the winter to avail of classic car tax.......over here our motor tax dept is screwing what's left of decent older cars on the road re rates and giving a lad who buys a 60k 520d a gift of car tax of sub €200. It's turned into a farce here and very unjust and unfair for those that run older cars.......the discovery cover ups are a disgrace with their owners giving a large two fingers to one and all

Tzar Chasm

duskyjoe wrote: »

Yes , we could take a huge amount off our Dutch friends re their modus operandum re classic vechiles. Over there you are made take the vechile off the road I'm aware for three months minimum in the winter to avail of classic car tax.......over here our motor tax dept is screwing what's left of decent older cars on the road re rates and giving a lad who buys a 60k 520d a gift of car tax of sub ?200. It's turned into a farce here and very unjust and unfair for those that run older cars.......the discovery cover ups are a disgrace with their owners giving a large two fingers to one and all

I agree with most of what you say, but this notion that someone who buys a 2.0 bmw should pay more road tax than an equivalent 2.0 hyundai is petty bollox.

Its that prevailing attitude that divides us into squabbling

duskyjoe

Tzar Chasm wrote: »

Its that prevailing attitude that divides us into squabbling

Agree, I just have a bee in my bonnet re our useless car tax system....I do about 2km p/a in a 23 yr old petrol 3 litre merc (my choice) and yet the 520 brigade and the likes who crawl all over the country pay a fraction of what I pay and expel more into the environment that I would re useage.....it just madness.....maybe just one leaf of common sense re how the Dutch do it would be no harm. I also am on for a very basic roadworthy mantadory test on pre 79 cars.....what's happening from where I stand is there's a pile of pre 79 Junkers on the road that are in the lap of the gods in that are they safe or not and their ability to stop in an emergency. .....and then we have back on thread the disco brigade and the likes who make my blood boil. I wish I was a chancer.....alas not

fivesixtwo

Question for the Disco conversion "experts" on here

How easy or difficult is it to fit a Disco 2 body on a SWB 88 inch Landrover chassis that were fitted with leaf springs.?

Real engineering or tax book engineering job ?

TrailerBob

That chassis would be too short for a disco 2 body. Add to that full leaf springs then it sounds like a nightmare

Mac 3

Saw an XJ-S convertible at a show recently. Wearing a 79-D Plate.

Conv XJ-S (Not the targa top one) didnt come a long till the late 80's. :eek:

Silvera

Mac 3 wrote: »

Saw an XJ-S convertible at a show recently. Wearing a 79-D Plate.

Conv XJ-S (Not the targa top one) didnt come a long till the late 80's. :eek:

The owner obviously got his hands on a taxbook for a '79-D'.. Make: Jaguar, Model: 'Unknown' :mad: