Keeping old number plate when reshelling car
#1
Posted 28 June 2005 - 12:04 AM
#2
Posted 28 June 2005 - 08:06 AM
So you have to either repair the shell you have now or keep the '80. Yo could use a heritage shell but it won't be quite the same spec as your '72 so you'll be on slightly dodgy ground, and it won't take the '72 subframes.
Oh and also the shell from the 80 won't be compatibale with the subframes from the 72 either.
#3
Posted 28 June 2005 - 10:44 AM
#4
Posted 28 June 2005 - 11:04 AM
#5
Posted 28 June 2005 - 11:09 AM
It's like an MOT on steriods... If anyone is considering going through this I strongly suggest you pay the 30 od quid for the book which will tell you what you can and can't have...
And this will be in the FAQ shorty.... ( I'm writing it now ! )
Edited by GuessWorks, 28 June 2005 - 11:10 AM.
#7
Posted 28 June 2005 - 07:01 PM
#8
Posted 29 June 2005 - 12:37 AM
#9
Posted 29 June 2005 - 04:54 AM
#10
Posted 29 June 2005 - 10:07 AM
#11
Posted 29 June 2005 - 12:36 PM
shouldn't the mags take a stance and not include features on these sorts of cars?
I actually wrote to Mini World a couple of Months ago and got absolutely no reply...
Hi,
In recent months on many forums, and within your magazine, I have seen mention of the "Reshelling" of minis. Normally this takes the form of discarding a rot ridden shell, and replacing it with a brand new shell, but it seems to be more common than not that a second hand shell of less severe rust is used, but still retaining the original identity of the first vehicle.
I think it would be prudent of a magazine of your standing and circulation to run an article on this subject, and especially highlighting that this practice should be frowned upon, and it technically illegal ( aka ringing )
Quoted from DVLA guidance on rebuilt vehicles. http://www.dvla.gov....es/regrebil.htm
"If a second-hand chassis/monocoque bodyshell is used, the vehicle must pass a ESVA/SVA test after which a "Q" prefix registration number will be allocated."
I'm not against the preservation on the Mini Marque, quite the opposite, but I feel that the history is being tainted by Frankensteined vehicles pretending to be something they are not.
Regards,
John.
And until the vehicle is involved in an accident and the police take a special interest in the fac that the etched VIN number is different to the VIN plate and/or has been ground off or replaced...
A new shell will not have an etched VIN number...
#12
Posted 29 June 2005 - 12:40 PM
Could I use the 998 engine in the later car and still keep the 80 plate then?
Ohh.. sorry back to original question...
The 998 from your 72 can be used in ANY vehicle, and if you can prove that the engine is a 1972, any car it is in will be exempted from the emissions test... bonus !
#13
Posted 29 June 2005 - 11:07 PM
I sold a restored shell not so long ago which had the scuttle panel replaced but I know for a fact that it wont be registered as the car I sold but does it really matter as long as its from the same mark?
#14
Posted 30 June 2005 - 05:43 PM
You can replicate numbers if you like but if you ever get found out then it's your fault. If they suspect the shell isn't origninal they will ask for proof that it is or is brand new. If you don't have the proof then you're in trouble. And uninsured. I have said this before but if you go out and kill someone on the road then your insurance company are going to find any way they can to get out of paying. Insurance mechanics are very good and know their stuff. If they find out your car's a ringer then you are paying the mortgage of the guy you killed for the rest of your life, 'because they won't.
#15
Posted 30 June 2005 - 06:13 PM
Its got me thinking about the stamped number on the scuttle. Mine is due for replacement (just like the one i've sold) so what would happen if I crashed, had my car inspected and then the insurance company couldn't prove that its the original shell? (which it is original)
I dare say there is alot of mini's on this forum that can't be garanteed to be original!
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users