I agree with Adam. Let's leave it the FBHVC, after all we've got to put our trust in some organisation. Anyway, any amendments, were they to occur can't be retrospective, the cock up over black and silver number plates is an example. If any amendments were to occur they will be applicable from a certain date.
I think too much can be read into this.

Hi,

Most small trailers use over-run brakes, which might be slightly difficult with an articulated trailer, so suggests "coupled brakes".

Hmmm! Does that mean there is a loophole in the "Substationally Altered Vehicle" regulations, that permits alterations that have already been implemented a specific number of years ago, thus avoiding an SVA/IVA?

I hope that somebody here will know what I'm chuntering on about?

602

The training poles at Taunton are now full 11M ones!

Im curious, what's so wrong with the current system?

I realise EV conversions add a new layer of complexity, but surely it can just be treated as an engine?

I've just read this and agree with Tim's concerns. Specifically:

Q11 refers to the definition of a restored vehicle and includes the sentence "For vehicles with a separate body and chassis, restoration may require the production of a completely new body". There is NO mention of the potential need for a completely new chassis

Q13 refers to the point at which a chassis or bodyshell modification affects the identity of a vehicle and includes the sentence "Removal, addition or alteration of major components such as side members or major cross-members ... should be considered as a new identity". I'm aware that some people opt for coil springs when they replace their chassis, so does this mean that their vehicle should lose its current identity?

Q19 refers to the elements to be considered for assessing a radically altered vehicle. The FBHVC's suggestion is that, as well as modifications to the chassis, "other major mechanical changes (eg engine or type of suspension) should also be considered". So as well as the coil spring point mentioned above, where does that leave owners with V8, 300tdi, 2.5l engine conversions?

I may be reading too much in to this, but my concern is that this could result in a lot of future issues. Personally, I also think that a coordinated response from the club, rather than individual members, would be more appropriate and carry more weight (although I realise that this is likely to involve a lot of work for those in charge)

Modifying an S3 door to take the S2 check rod. Pretty much a'cut n paste' job with a cutting disc, bit of sheet steel and tin snips.

No way anybody would pay for my waffle, so as long as I am a LRS2C member, we can't charge for forum access... 

Good man Clive, maybe they'll have a change of policy.

There are no plans or intentions to make this forum "members only" and to make users pay for access 

It would kill the forum 
(as others have or will find)

99% of this forum as accessible to the general public.
We have one small section for S2C Members only which deals with club news and information - which is fair enough.