Government response to petition 'Classic-Cars'

The date being 26 Apr 2008, Chris Bolus decided to write:

Austin Rover did produce a K-series Mini prototype. I think it was called Minki. Actually I quite like the AP box even if it does soak up the power.

The date being 26 Apr 2008, Pete M decided to write:

Whilst I agree that VED is a comparatively small part of the cost of running a car, you are allowed to reshell a classic car but with a new shell e.g. a Heritage Mini and keep the registration. You are also allowed to replace the engine and any other components if you want to, so you could end up with a virtually new car on an old registration.

Of course that's not the same thing as passing the car off as something it's not.

The date being 26 Apr 2008, "Dave Plowman (News)" decided to write:

No, the Government should pay it out of general taxation, but still on a per household basis. That way it would save all the costs of administration, collection and enforcement which greatly exceed the cost of giving a licence to the very few households without a tv. It would also get around the iPlayer problem.

Hmm. It's rather too easy to get a fiddled MOT. Policing that well would be very expensive if not impossible.

So you'd prefer a much bigger spread of VED based on engine size etc - or even on car value so the rich can subsidise the poor in this respect?

Type 49 shell MK1 Escorts anyone? A MK1 RS logbook and VIN plate will=20 fetch over =A3300 on their own.

--=20 Conor

I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't=20 looking good either. - Scott Adams

That's the complete reverse of my experience. You might be able to lock the brakes on an A40, but they will fade to nothing on a crash stop from

1. The P4 won't.

That's rather like saying you don't need brakes at all. Think Herbert Austin thought that way.

I've already made it clear where I stand on VED, so don't attempt to tell me that I wan't something else. VED isn't making poor people any the less poor. Removing the 10p rate of tax isn't making poor people any the less poor. Removing half of GDP in tax isn't making poor people any the less poor.

Taxation doesn't exist to make poor people better off. It exists for two reasons, so that politicians can prove to themselves that they have power over ordinary people's lives and to put money into the Treasury to pay for the stupid ideas of politicians.

I think there was a huge variation in lining materials and qualities at the time. I owned two Mayflowers, one after the other. The first had good brakes that faded quite quickly if used too often. The second had brakes that needed a leg like a hydraulic ram for anything approaching an emergency stop, but they were constant in that there was never any sign of brake fade. I replaced those brakes by taking the old shoes to a brake reliner (remember them?) and he reckoned the material he was about to take off was the wrong one for the car, and should only be used with a servo. We discussed the options for brake linings, and there did appear to be a direct trade-off between pedal pressure when cold and anti-fade properties. I went for a particular compromise, and was very happy with that choice.

As for the P4, it depends on which model you had. Some of them - the

100 for instance - had disc brakes. But I had the 105, and that had twin trailing shoe drum brakes, which worked wonderfully in reverse but I didn't like them when going forwards, except in snow. I got those shoes relined too, and it made no difference, so I think that was a design rather than materials issue. But I agree with you, they didn't fade. Indeed, at the bottom of a long hill (I went to Lynmouth in it) they were slightly better than they were at the top!

I have come to the conclusion that we are unlikely to agree, because our expectations are different.

Jim

The message from "Dave Plowman (News)" contains these words:

So you have said in the past but I can't see how any MOT tester would risk his livelihood for the paltry profit he might make from a fraudulent test certificate. He only needs to be caught out once and his job has gone and for what? Adding some small value to a wreck so it can be sold on to someone who is almost bound to complain to the authorities if the wreck could not have been roadworthy at the time of the test.

Thanks for confirming you're an even bigger fool than I first though.

You're missing the point I was making, 'period' mods are one thing (for example fitting a brake servo or rear seat belts to a car were those additions were options [1]) but installing a different engine into the vehicle that although theoretically possible - meaning that the engine comes from the same stable as the car, the MGB engine etc into a Minor scenario [2] - but was never done and perhaps never even considered is another thing, as is dropping say the Triumph 1500cc engine into a 1969 Midget, if you want a 1500cc Midget go buy a later version!

It comes down to how owners see their classic cars, I've always seen it as preservation, choosing what I own at the time to match what I need in a car - those cars that were not suitable for my needs were either used as 'high days and holiday' cars or sold and a more suitable car found to meet my every-day needs. Others obviously consider that they should be able to modernise an older car rather than choose a car that more closely fits their needs, personally I see such modifications as, at best customising, and at worst vandalism that removes any 'Historic' aspect to the vehicle and thus it's Historic VED class.

[1] I'm not against the use of the modern equivalent components, thus for example, using a Lockheed remote servo in place of the none available Girling original. [2] all the problems you cite above could be sorted, given a CAD program and engineering shop.

Err, one doesn't need insurance on the car to MOT it, the car can be trailered to the testing station, the vehicle can be driven on trade plates or the car could have been sitting on the garage forecourt for the last few weeks or months.

That might have been so in the past but know it means hacking the VOSA computer system! One might be able to obtain a forged MOT but that really doesn't do much once the VOSA MOT database is crossed referred to the SORN and insurance databases...

No, that would be the worst solution, I would prefer the BBC to become fully commercial before allowing it funding to be at the whim of the incumbent political party - "Do NOT broadcast that exposé on us receiving back-handers, otherwise expect to loose 50pc of your funding from next month"...

In message , Chris Bolus writes

Same with my '70 Minor 1000 4-door saloon, though it's temporarily off the road until a replacement NSF chassis leg can be welded into place. It wouldn't bother me unduly if I had to tax it. My 'modern' - an '89 Sierra diesel estate - will never be a classic by any stretch of the imagination, but I'll keep that too, as it's reliable and long-legged and electrically quiet (for mobile amateur radio). I far prefer driving the Minor, though, and may well take it on holiday, to Wales probably, this year instead of the Sierra.

Thanks for confirming that you can only respond with personal abuse.

Shush, don't tell that to Practical 'Classic' magazine...

There were several, the development story at

is quitefascinating. There is more along the same lines at

It's not just the inefficiency. It's fairly fragile; I'm on my third in under 10k miles, and the parts to repair it are virtually unobtainable. I also converted one to manual due to a failed gearbox; I didn't really want to, tried everything I could think of short of replacing the 'box, but as the car is eventually destined you my younger daughter to learn in, that seemed pointless.

It is unpredictable, being inclined to slip if driven hard, and if it's cold it's slow to drive or change. Sharing the oil with the engine means that the oil grade is critical and it wasn't designed for modern oils.

Issigonis himself, in his retirement, worked on developing a "gearless" version of the Mini. I think he would have approved of the CVT used in the Metro!