Originality and registrations

[Mattcortes]

Seeing as I started the thread I thought I should throw my opinion in.

I have no problem with reshelling or re chassising (not sure if thats a word) or engine gearbox etc swaps. ANYTHING that keeps a classic on the road is fine with me. Far better that than scrapped. For my own cars the 2 Heralds will be kept with their standard engines, although the saloon does have a KN airfilter and will be getting electronic ignition shortly. I would even like a Series 3 Landy with later Disco 300Tdi power. If however I had a rare or historically significant car that a large part of its value is in the fact that it is a pre production or very early example I wouldn't change anything from factory spec that couldn't be fairly easily reversed.

The Series 2 and the Sierra in my eyes are very nice examples of the model but should not be valued as if its a truely special (no2 off the production line etc) when it clearly isn't.

Its like buying a painting and a copy of a painting. Yeah they look the same and do the same thing but the value should be completely different. Kinda like who would be happy learn their new girlfriend was actually born a guy? lol

[1960Zody]

In the case of the Sierra, a new shell counts as a replacement part and in a unitary, that doesn't lose you any points so, although it's less useful for the readers than seeing a rotten one restored, the legitimacy of the process isn't in doubt there, especially as once the new shell has been stamped, the engine swap and other mods don't take from the points total enough to cause the loss of the car's "original" identity, even though there may be precious little left of that original.
As for the Land Rover however, the chassis counts for fewer points than the shell of a unitary so, while that again can be classed (legally) as a replacement part, the other new bits - although not fraudulent - do take away the benefit that would otherwise have been available to readers hoping to learn how to fix what they'd got rather than shelling out fortunes on new stuff. Anyone can throw money at a car, at least PC's rebuilds do the job the hard way and are, IMHO, all the better at that.

It is a bit Trigger's Broom though, I get what you mean.

The chassis counts for the same 5 'Mandatory' points as a shell in a unibody vehicle.
This can be the 'original one, or a direct replacement from the manufacturer.
In the case of the Land Rover described, it not only is it not 'Original, it falls below the 8-point threshold for retaining it’s original 'Identity' according to DVLA.

At a maximum (Assuming that the chassis is a 'Direct Replacement' and unmodified, not a custom chassis), it gets 5 points for that and 2 points for the Original Steering, making a total of 8 points.
Therefore it should be submitted for BIVA before it is allowed back on the road.
After BIVA, it would be allocated a Q plate unless it contains at least two major components from one single donor vehicle, in which case it ‘May’ get an age related plate.

We, at ACE, conducted a Q&A session with VOSA/DVLA about what could and could not be done to a chassis and still be considered un-modified a while ago in an effort to clarify the rules.

http://www.the-ace.org.uk/Chassis-and-M ... dification

[1960Zody]

Seeing as I started the thread I thought I should throw my opinion in.

I have no problem with reshelling or re chassising (not sure if thats a word) or engine gearbox etc swaps. ANYTHING that keeps a classic on the road is fine with me. Far better that than scrapped. For my own cars the 2 Heralds will be kept with their standard engines, although the saloon does have a KN airfilter and will be getting electronic ignition shortly. I would even like a Series 3 Landy with later Disco 300Tdi power. If however I had a rare or historically significant car that a large part of its value is in the fact that it is a pre production or very early example I wouldn't change anything from factory spec that couldn't be fairly easily reversed.

The Series 2 and the Sierra in my eyes are very nice examples of the model but should not be valued as if its a truely special (no2 off the production line etc) when it clearly isn't.

Its like buying a painting and a copy of a painting. Yeah they look the same and do the same thing but the value should be completely different. Kinda like who would be happy learn their new girlfriend was actually born a guy? lol

Re-shelling to keep a vehicle on the road is one thing, Re-shelling and calling it something else is another.
As a previous poster says, putting all the running gear of a Cooper into an 850 Mini, does not make that a Cooper, it simply makes it a Modified 850.
There are those who are campaigning to get the rules changed to allow this to happen, by dint of putting something like an R into the VIN to denote the fact that the vehicle has been ‘Reshelled’ and get around the requirements that are laid down for modified vehicles.
The leading light in this campaign is one of PC’s rival publications.
When you have the minefield that already exists regarding the 8-Points rule, BIVA and the inaccurate DVLA vehicle records, this would only muddy the waters even further for all potential buyers of classic vehicles.

[3xpendable]

I agree its a fine line. I'm reshelling my MGB GT with a later rubber bumper shell because my shell is rotten and the newer shells are V8 ready but i'll never say its a genuine factory V8. However its a moot point as i'll never sell it

[arceye]

I'm under the impression we can only re chassis / re shell if using new heritage with certificate shell or chassis, anything else brings BIVA and possible Q plating. Can anyone clarify this.

The bit that gets my goat is if you have the cash for a new chassis / shell there is no problem with identity, but you can't use a good used original type shell / chassis without going BIVA which seems the wrong way round to me. Neither component is original to the car but the older one is actually correct from the original manufacturer.

In the case of re shelling with a used shell, I wouldn't be concerned if the car was registered to the year of the new shell.

[mr rusty]

On fleabay a few months ago someone was offering the V5 for one of the factory SD1 rally cars....assuming it got sold then somwhere there's a 'factory' SD1 complete with 'history' being created. On the Canley Classics website you can read about the history of works Vitesses-so....... does the history lie with the id rather than whatever it happens to be attached to http://www.canleyclassics.com/?xhtml=xh ... 0297763018

[1960Zody]

I'm under the impression we can only re chassis / re shell if using new heritage with certificate shell or chassis, anything else brings BIVA and possible Q plating. Can anyone clarify this.

The bit that gets my goat is if you have the cash for a new chassis / shell there is no problem with identity, but you can't use a good used original type shell / chassis without going BIVA which seems the wrong way round to me. Neither component is original to the car but the older one is actually correct from the original manufacturer.

In the case of re shelling with a used shell, I wouldn't be concerned if the car was registered to the year of the new shell.

That's correct, to a degree.
If you use a new chassis or shell from the manufacturer you retain the five points.
If you use a second hand shell or chassis you lose the points and cannot make them up elsewhere.
However, that doesn't necesarilly mean BIVA or Q.
If you have two major components from one doner vehicle (Engine, Axles etc) then you can be issued with an age related plate, but you would not keep the original plate.
This is all down to DVLA using the points systenm to decide whether the vehicle is 'Substantially changed' from the one that it was.

That was bvought in to try and stop people 'Ringing' vehicles after stealing them, which is not what this scenario covers...

[needstlc]

What do we think of this then, chaps? It's on sale at Hurst Park, and you'll see what I mean as the word "original" is definitely used as a selling point...but it isn't really, is it?

MERCEDES-BENZ 220SE CONVERTIBLE 1964. Medium blue with a black soft-top, new grey hide interior and grey hide hood cover. Automatic/P.A.S. This is an original British RHD example which has been totally restored by the UK's leading specialists. In the course of the restoration a 280 engine has been fitted, giving much enhanced performance to this luxury open tourer. Exquisite.
£79,995

http://www.hurstpark.co.uk/current.htm

[suffolkpete]

As it's worded there, I would take that to mean that it was originally a British spec RHD model, as opposed to one that's been converted.

[52classic]

IMHO the definition 'original' permits any number of service replacements along the way. A competition car which was reshelled during its career is still 'original.'

However in my book a car cannot be both 'original' and 'fully restored!' That's because of the increasing trend for restorers to strip the subject back to component parts and then re-manufacture it. Not a restoration at all then - It's a REBUILD and in the process it would have lost any claim on originality.