|
|
Sept 24, 2018 19:02:13 GMT
|
Ok, I wonder if any one has the answer I'm looking for. I need to fix new engine mounts to the chassis rails of a 1950's chevy pickup. I need to know if I can drill holes and bolt through the chassis rails or can I weld new mounts directly to them. I am trying to avoid a BIVA inspection Thanks, Steve.
|
|
|
|
|
colnerov
Posted a lot
Posts: 2,830
Member is Online
|
|
Sept 24, 2018 23:34:54 GMT
|
Hi, You can add brackets and mounts to a chassis, you just can't remove them. If it's a 'U' channel chassis you do know you can't drill holes in the top and bottom flanges because they are the stressed part of the members?
Colin
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 25, 2018 8:06:47 GMT
|
Thank you for your reply. So from your reply I'm assuming it's OK to weld new brackets for engine mountings also OK to drill holes and bolt on brackets but avoiding drilling the top and bottom of the chassis rails. These will not be classed as changes to a chassis when relating to "substantial change" rules and regs. ?
|
|
|
|
colnerov
Posted a lot
Posts: 2,830
Member is Online
|
|
Sept 25, 2018 9:42:08 GMT
|
Hi, Yes that's as I understood it, add but not remove. You have me doubting it now and I don't want to mislead, perhaps kapri can confirm or deny in the light of recent tightening up of regs. The drilling of the top and bottom flanges is bad engineering practice. Colin
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 25, 2018 10:55:24 GMT
|
The relevant bits (monocoque stuff omitted)
VOSA have provided the following response to your questions;
Chassis.
Q) What is classed as chassis? Is it purely the outer longitudinal rails or are the crossmembers between these also a part of the chassis?
A) Chassis should be taken to include crossmembers.
Q) We know that cutting or shortening a chassis is classed as modification but is this relative to the vehicle wheelbase i.e. the chassis must remain uncut between the 2 axles but anything forward of front or aft of rear suspension mounts can be removed?
A) Chassis includes the full original length of the longitudinal members including to the front of the front axle and to the rear of the rear axle.
Q) Is it acceptable to remove bodymounts, which contribute no strength to the chassis when changing a body to a different style /make?
A) Yes, providing they are additional to and are not an integral part of the chassis structure.
Q) Is it acceptable to strengthen a chassis by the addition of boxing plates a process that involves turning a 3-sided open chassis rail into a fully enclosed 'box' chassis?
A) Yes, providing the original structure remains unchanged.
The answers to our chassied vehicle rules queries seem mainly straightforward, However, we have further questions based on the answers supplied.
Q) As chassis strengthening is allowed, are we correct in assuming that additional crossmembers would also be allowed?
A) It is important that the original chassis structure is retained unmodified, and while it is acceptable to strengthen areas and include additional brackets or crossmembers, It would be limited to additions within the existing chassis frame structure. Additional chassis structures, i.e. extending the outward parameters of the original chassis structure would be considered a modification.
So, to summarise the above information:
Chassis
It is acceptable to box original chassis and also to add additional crossmembers but not to alter the existing chassis in any way to allow for their installation.
It is acceptable to remove NON STRUCTURAL body mounts and engine / gearbox mounts.
It is NOT acceptable to shorten, or lengthen the chassis, either in between standard suspension points or fore and aft of these.
Any additional items welded creating a longer overall chassis are classed as modifications. It would however be acceptable to bolt a reasonably sized additional subframe to existing mounting holes.
Any outriggers (as opposed to continuous chassis frame) fore or aft from the chassis would need clarification from VOSA as to their purpose before removal or alteration was accepted. This would be based on their purpose and whether they formed part of the vehicles original Type Approval.
|
|
Proton Jumbuck-deceased :-( 2005 Kia Sorento the parts hauling heap V8 Humber Hawk 1948 Standard12 pickup SOLD 1953 Pop build (wifey's BIVA build).
|
|
|
|
Sept 25, 2018 14:29:03 GMT
|
These are the answers I need and it is good news . Thank you
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 25, 2018 18:03:56 GMT
|
Crockpot , I seem to recognise that wording ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 25, 2018 19:44:00 GMT
|
|
|
Proton Jumbuck-deceased :-( 2005 Kia Sorento the parts hauling heap V8 Humber Hawk 1948 Standard12 pickup SOLD 1953 Pop build (wifey's BIVA build).
|
|
|
|
Sept 25, 2018 20:56:40 GMT
|
Ok, I wonder if any one has the answer I'm looking for. I need to fix new engine mounts to the chassis rails of a 1950's chevy pickup. I need to know if I can drill holes and bolt through the chassis rails or can I weld new mounts directly to them. I am trying to avoid a BIVA inspection Thanks, Steve. hi Steve,
you made me curious. Time for a build thread?
Peter
|
|
|
|
ftz313
Part of things
Posts: 221
|
|
Oct 13, 2018 10:41:53 GMT
|
I read post - Sep 25, 2018 at 11:55am. I then thought this is someone trying to spew out modern legislation and apply it to an older vehicle when they can't. This was my conclusion when I read the section 'This would be based on their purpose and whether they formed part of the vehicles original Type Approval.' to which I then went and determined that 'type approval' started in 2007.
source-https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A32007L0046 Note the use of the word 'establishing' and date of entry 29/10/2007.
In short type approval can't be fitted to vehicles before 2007 because it did not exist then. I believe your 1950's Chevy would be built before this so therefore the requirement on you to use your vehicle on the road are C&U and mot (where reqd).
Regards.
|
|
Last Edit: Oct 13, 2018 10:42:43 GMT by ftz313
|
|
|
Darkspeed
Club Retro Rides Member
Posts: 4,671
Club RR Member Number: 39
|
|
Oct 13, 2018 12:45:39 GMT
|
In short type approval can't be fitted to vehicles before 2007 because it did not exist then. I've got a 1978 Datsun fitted with a type approval from a 2010 Nissan and nothing was said about it at the last MOT! - Why do think that was not picked up - should I worry?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 13, 2018 14:18:54 GMT
|
Aaand he's back . Still talking curse word. Go away and read and try to understand what has been written here by Kapri, Implandy and others.
|
|
Proton Jumbuck-deceased :-( 2005 Kia Sorento the parts hauling heap V8 Humber Hawk 1948 Standard12 pickup SOLD 1953 Pop build (wifey's BIVA build).
|
|
|
|
Oct 13, 2018 14:24:32 GMT
|
|
|
Proton Jumbuck-deceased :-( 2005 Kia Sorento the parts hauling heap V8 Humber Hawk 1948 Standard12 pickup SOLD 1953 Pop build (wifey's BIVA build).
|
|
ftz313
Part of things
Posts: 221
|
|
Oct 18, 2018 22:53:07 GMT
|
When I read this I saw this covering type approval (basically the marking of approved/reached certain standard/test) for rear lights, seat belts, windscreens etc coming into effect in 21st Aug 1984. What I did not see was detailed drawings of for ex what the chassis should be which I believe is what the link I provided does is for for 200X on vehicles. We're talking about a 1950's Chevy and trying to apply legislation which came out 30 years later-this is not possible ? I laugh at the name calling but the sharper amongst us will see the argument I am making and the place I am trying to steer this away from-which is essentially applying registering a vehicle legislation to an already registered vehicle where c&u regulations are the yard stick.
|
|
Last Edit: Oct 18, 2018 22:58:28 GMT by ftz313
|
|
Darkspeed
Club Retro Rides Member
Posts: 4,671
Club RR Member Number: 39
|
|
Oct 18, 2018 23:00:23 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ftz313-Your pseudo-intellectual "argument" above has all the hall marks of the sort of wibble that Freemen on the land come out with. Like you they read legislation and reach conclusions that are totally at odds with what was written.
On the other thread you are spoiling you implied that it was only this forum that was at odds with your interpretation of the regulations. I suggest that you have not looked very hard. Try NSRA Rods'n'sods Pistonheads Volkszone Mini forum Morris Minor owners forum Difflock MIG welding forum (projects)
That covers some of the bigger ones, all of which have BIVA information buried in the threads, all of it with just the same information as here. Yes, we are talking about a 1950's Chevy as you say. However, once modified enough to lose it's registration via the "8 points rule" it's not a 1950's Chevy, it's a new car which needs to be registered. It cannot be registered unless it has Type approval (which you are so fond of referring to) which is granted by way of a BIVA test and approval (effectively Type approval lite). Oh, also the 8 point rule has nothing to do with determining the age of a vehicle (again, from the other thread). As for the subtle insult " but the sharper amongst us will see the argument ", you have clearly not noticed that there are some very sharp people on here. Strangely I do not see them coming to your defence. Why would that be I wonder?
|
|
Last Edit: Oct 19, 2018 7:10:22 GMT by crockpot
Proton Jumbuck-deceased :-( 2005 Kia Sorento the parts hauling heap V8 Humber Hawk 1948 Standard12 pickup SOLD 1953 Pop build (wifey's BIVA build).
|
|
tofufi
South West
Posts: 1,452
|
|
|
When I read this I saw this covering type approval (basically the marking of approved/reached certain standard/test) for rear lights, seat belts, windscreens etc coming into effect in 21st Aug 1984. What I did not see was detailed drawings of for ex what the chassis should be which I believe is what the link I provided does is for for 200X on vehicles. We're talking about a 1950's Chevy and trying to apply legislation which came out 30 years later-this is not possible ? I laugh at the name calling but the sharper amongst us will see the argument I am making and the place I am trying to steer this away from-which is essentially applying registering a vehicle legislation to an already registered vehicle where c&u regulations are the yard stick. Firstly, try 70/156/EEC as well. eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM%3Al21037Secondly, as I've already explained, in the eyes of DVLA the vehicle is NOT the original registered vehicle once the vehicle doesn't have 8 points (from the 8 point rule). Therefore, it's a new vehicle and must meet the current standards.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 19, 2018 13:33:49 GMT
|
MY info comes from 46 years involvement with modifying cars and actively participating in forming the legislation we currently 'enjoy' by way of being involved with all Consultations since 1976 when Type Approval was first proposed. For the past 15 years I have been even more actively involved with legislation including dealing DIRECTLY with both DVLA and VOSA ( now DVSA) and their governing department DfT . Likewise involved in liaison with ETA ( European Tuners Organisation ) and via them SEMA . Founding member of ACE who sought to actively promote awareness of creeping legislation culminating in becoming a lobbying organisation to co ordinate ALL who wished to have their voice heard . I was for my sins married to the manager of a DVLA LO for 10 years. To continue to aid MY hobby I am actively involved with promoting BIVA , where suitable , as a method of registration and to try to remove the pub talk that puts so many people off even trying. I also run a secret Facebook group for those with live builds who need assistance and want to share info with those who have already used the system. I also give advice on how to do mods and stay within the 8 point rule system , and also how to legally 'rebody' chassis' whilst retaining dentity . The 8 point rulewas clarified ( as much as possible ) over a 6 months Q&A session with DVLA and VOSA resulting in an official Press Release by all organisations involve. My life has all been a lie ...apparently.
|
|
Last Edit: Oct 19, 2018 18:14:26 GMT by kapri
|
|
|
|
Oct 21, 2018 14:02:22 GMT
|
"My life has all been a lie ...apparently" Dwayne Dibbley
|
|
Proton Jumbuck-deceased :-( 2005 Kia Sorento the parts hauling heap V8 Humber Hawk 1948 Standard12 pickup SOLD 1953 Pop build (wifey's BIVA build).
|
|
mylittletony
Posted a lot
Posts: 2,337
Club RR Member Number: 84
|
|
Oct 23, 2018 10:18:09 GMT
|
... the sharper amongst us ... You are literally on your own with this dead horse you keep trying to flog. There have been so many people who have tried to educate you, yet you are totally immune to any reasoned argument on the subject, just because you have your fingers in your ears shouting "La-la-la" doesn't make you right - just the same as my 4yr old son
|
|
|
|
|