Will This Become Legit Im Worried

[marc9584]

http://www.the-ace.org.uk/armageddon/

[1234dist]

[rovermadman4825]

If this is true they can fukc off, what causes the most accidents? In my opinion cars that are to easy to drive people pushing cars to the limit and the driver not beung good enougth to handle it so most modern cars really. People who have buil their cars frim the ground up gave alot more respect for their cars so wont be a tit behind the wheel (well some of them) it just sounds like another cash cow altho the amount of money in tax the government will miss out on off tuneing web site ect will be astronomical, abd how many mire people will lose their jobs or go out of business because of this new bull$hit law.....

[maestrovdpt16]

Can you imagine every aftermarket car parts place going under? The likes of sfs, samco, forge, gaz, (I'm sure there are many more)

I think once the many angles are looked into there will be no real way of defending this law. It will impact heavily on what is already a suffering market, all tuning car businesses like gbe etc will be a thing of the past. Rovertech won't be very interesting.

It will just force cars underground like in the good old days, and lets face it, mod it like factory and who is really going to know?

Alright my maestro may be pushing that idea to it's limits and many 200 t16's are on here too.

Mainly this is an eu directive that will further continue to ruin our economy if our government are stupid enough to follow it. We just have to hope there are enough petrol head MP's to run it out of the house. But we may well have to rely on the house of lords for a more level headed view, not for the first time

[Barrie J]

Have a look at the attached link, it gives a more balanced view of the situation.

http://fbhvc.co.uk/2012/08/23/eu-roadwo ... s-testing/

[SubCat001]

I am not entirely convinced that this potential legislation would outlaw "modifying". The main aim to me appears to be unity across all the member states when it comes to vehicle testing. Either way it's pretty unworkable.

How will a tester determine if a vehicle differs from it's original specification? Even if the resources were available it would be incredibly time consuming. What about SVA'd cars? How much information will be available about kit cars? Grey Imports? Rallying would potentially become illegal. Then there is the economic impacts. I can't see large chains like Halfords liking this much, let alone the effects it would have on more specialised businesses here and abroad.

[1234dist]

Not to mention the end of BTCC, Formula 1 and any other performance sports.

They can't have performance if there are no companies developing performance parts.

Kiss good bye to the likes of the Veyron and SLR as they won't even be able to get tyres so will be on blocks.

Short answer its boll0cks to produce debate...nothing more.

[maestrovdpt16]

Apparently it has been introduced in other eu countries so it's far from something to just provoke debate.

[maestrovdpt16]

Here, a post lifted from the MMOC, from Mg Mal who is quoting someone else from a Landrover forum:

I've finally had a response from the DfT press officer I contacted, and it doesn't make good reading.

This is what I asked (I've taken out the preamble - I'd already spoken to them on the phone).


Basically I've currently got two key questions:

1) Do you know what further approval for vehicle modifications is likely to consist of? Are we looking at sending all modified vehicles for an IVA or similar, or just getting the MOT man to tick a box? In the event of universal IVA testing for modifications, what is likely to happen wrt vehicle identities, registration marks, and deemed age of manufacture?

2) What is likely to happen for existing modified and custom vehicles, particularly wrt classic vehicles which fall outside the EU documents definition of historic (e.g. because of an engine conversion).

This is the response I got:


Hi John

With regard to your earlier query, question one we are currently unable to answer.

2) If responding on the basis that we are dealing with the proposals as currently written, if a vehicle does not classify as historic due to having been modified it cannot be tested as it no longer meets the original type approval.

However, this is yet to be clarified. The Department for Transport is seeking clarification from the EU Commission and will be attending a number of meetings in September to do so.

Hope this helps

So finer details hang in the balance, seems they see it as being not 'if' but 'when' but have to clarify a few points before rolling it out.

I'm guessing as is mentioned we may have to IVA test every modified car!

[jase]

If you were a politician why wouldnt you want to do it tho?

The impact on motorsport is irrelevant to them. That wont really make a massive economic dent and will take many years to start having any real effect.
And p1551ng off owners of stiffly sprung noise machines? hardly an issue!
The positive aspect for them is a winner tho. General public opinion is modified car owners are bad, killers, evil etc.
Stopping them(us) modifying is a quick, short term vote winner. It will make the road a happier place with no load exhausts. Road deaths will also decrease being there will be less miles being covered.
Plus there is the serious issue where modifactions do cause a danger. I cant think of any if you include bad maintenance (ho hum...) but im sure there are cases.

I got shouted at to slow down last week. I was covering my brake at 20mph on an A road. The idiot in question had heard my car pull off a speed bump on a hill 200yds away so automatically assumed i was trying to kill his family. Without actually noticing i was crawling and well aware he had no control of his kids.



Some countries you arent allowed to modify cars, we used to have a member who's limit of modifications was a boost gauge. I think he was from spritzerland.
My fords remap is TUV approved so im guessing that has to link to all this. So mods arent all out the window. But it does kill all our fun.

[Stevo135+]

I see you point Jase, but it should become down to the manufacturers to design their cars to become un-moddable or have no performance benefit from doing so.

If i were going to go out now and buy a new Audi A1 TFSI, Skoda Fabia VRS or even a Polo 1.2TSI or Clio 1.2 TCI etc,
all i would be thinking about is how much more power, torque, throttle response or less lag their could be if i replaced the overly complex whisper quiet multiple silenced, multiple catted exhaust system with a turbo back de-cat system or just a bit of straight pipe even?

It's the same with restrictive airbox's and small intercooler's when there is space for a big Forge front mount, behind the bumper and cheap looking plastic re-circ valves when you could have a nice billet alloy quality BOV etc.

Car manufacturer's very rarely fit parts to their cars that are there for any performance reasons, and everything is so compromised that there is great justification for aftermarket parts firms to develop better performing, better looking, and better quality parts for them, and the benefits on modern cars can be huge!

Nissan R35GTR's gain like 50bhp? with a full turbo back exhaust system i've heard. And that was one car that was supposed to have been designed to be un-moddable and not built to have huge built in extra engine strength etc.

Yes the Legislation will force modifying underground, but i can't see how people will stop modifying their car's or how aftermarket firms will be able to resist fully developing new models to take advantage. It's the manufacturer's faults that car modding has become so common place and achievable. They could quite easily design tamper proof new car's, but despite what they say it's never been hard to mess with cars and make improvements with non std parts.

There is apparently a new Superchips map for the Ford Eco-boost 1.0 engine, that takes it to about 160bhp in the latest Focus. They will sell loads of such software upgrades like this anyway, and banning car modifying is going to not change that at all!

[Punx0r]

Yet more reasons to claw back some legislative power from the EU. Support a EU-skeptic party!

[Pinkie15]

Sorry, haven't read all the replies (getting too late).

There's a similar debate raging over on .org.

Essentially this is nothing new, the German's and Dutch have had this law for years. In Germany it's the TUV thingy, the Dutch version is apparently even more strict.

It just means that replacement/modded parts have to have a type approval from a car manufacturer, not necessarily from the manufacturer of the car it's going into/onto.

Given that most aftermarket companies have been doing this for quite some time for the German market means no to little change.

[british beef]

It was me that posted it on . Org still it will mean modification getting even more exspensive and bespoke company going down the pan because to get type approval is a long and exspensive process but we still shouldn't turn our noses up at it saying o it wnt happen because like pinkie said Belgium has a tuffet law than Germany and the belguims can't moddifi there engines wat saying that the law for us is even tuffer . Org poo Pooed it we should all get to gether and see if we can stop it because it wnt be long till modified cars will be illegal

[rovex]

Yet more reasons to claw back some legislative power from the EU. Support a EU-skeptic party!

Problem with that is all those that are have extremely nasty policies as well as being euro sceptic. UKIP for example want a church run state that would be hell for anyone but the most extremely bigoted daily mail reader.

I dont like these new MOT rules at all, but i understand that only the part has to be type approved, not the whole car, as a result something like my twin rear spoilers are fine because they are both MG-R originals, even if they were not both fitted as standard.

Like many laws it might seem like a good thing to many, but soon enough a LOT of cars will fail MOTs because of home made running repairs that are perfectly safe, but not original.

[british beef]

We should all vote bnp

[pengy_666]

If it wasnt for their history and dodgy ideas sometimes, they would be worth looking into. Some of their ideas are good.

Note the KEYWORD "some"

[arron mg zs]

i been voting bnp for a few years now, cant see a problem with any of there views.

[sparky25]

Or quite simply note vote at all then the government wouldnt no what to do lol they all screw it up in the long run and if bnp allow moified cars and no insurance or tax i think everyone would vote for them then lol

[jase]

If i were going to go out now and buy a new Audi A1 TFSI, Skoda Fabia VRS or even a Polo 1.2TSI or Clio 1.2 TCI etc,
all i would be thinking about is how much more power, torque, throttle response or less lag their could be if i replaced the overly complex whisper quiet multiple silenced, multiple catted exhaust system with a turbo back de-cat system or just a bit of straight pipe even?

It's the same with restrictive airbox's and small intercooler's when there is space for a big Forge front mount, behind the bumper and cheap looking plastic re-circ valves when you could have a nice billet alloy quality BOV etc.

Car manufacturer's very rarely fit parts to their cars that are there for any performance reasons, and everything is so compromised that there is great justification for aftermarket parts firms to develop better performing, better looking, and better quality parts for them, and the benefits on modern cars can be huge!

hahha, yeh, spot on mate.

That new 1.0 ford engine looks an amazing peice of kit.
Love some of the ideas integrated into it. Clever stuff.

[rovex]

i been voting bnp for a few years now, cant see a problem with any of there views.

Then you dont understand what they are really about and what a BNP government would actually mean. Like with UKIP people tend to think that if they are white, straight and working they will be ok under them, but thats not true at all. They both basically want a dictatorship that only benefits them and actively hurts others. Their manifestos are a very very watered down, palatable version of what they really want.

[jase]

basically want a dictatorship that only benefits them and actively hurts others. Their manifestos are a very very watered down, palatable version of what they really want.

like the mainstream parties then?

[maestrovdpt16]

oh dear, why is it any time a discussion on a car forum starts I have to look the other way? I nearly took the bait on the guy who votes BNP, but I've been here before :WAVES GOODBYE:

[peteT16]

I steer clear of politics on forums, it usually goes south in a big way.

[Dave_ZS]

Well that's this thread trollied

[maestrovdpt16]

Can we just agree that someone who idolizes hitler and is horribly right wing in a fundamentalist fashion possibly isn't the best person or party to lead the country? [You see it is like a strange obsession I hate it but somehow I just have to ask ]

[Dave_ZS]

Can we just agree that someone who idolizes hitler and is horribly right wing in a fundamentalist fashion possibly isn't the best person or party to lead the country? [You see it is like a strange obsession I hate it but somehow I just have to ask ]

Good point

[Punx0r]

My original point was a hint at the conservative party, who'd made noises about reversing the rule whereby any EU law is automatically adopted here (as a member state).

I could be wrong, but I suspect the proposed legislation here has come from the EU. It seems like a typical attempt at harmonisation.

Please let's keep this on topic, not about the relative merits of the BNP

[peteT16]

It did indeed come from Brussels, and was put out on the internet for discussion 2 years ago, I'm puzzled why it's suddenly leapt to prominence.

Reading the original proposal talks a lot about soveriegn states maintaining existing legislation, I've got a feeling this is a storm in a teacup tbh

[Punx0r]

Let's hope so Pete!

I understand there's an issue with incompetent people working on safety critical areas of cars (brakes, bodging structural rust etc), but I don't want to live in a state where it's fobidden for a DIYer to do their own work.

That said, this new proposal doesn't seem to concentrate on areas of safety.

[stefaclese]

I'm puzzled why it's suddenly leapt to prominence

Exactly. And as Ant says, anything like this would have to go through Parliament before being applicable in the UK now, not that that fills me with the slightest bit of confidence! But smells like nonsense to me.

[Punx0r]

anything like this would have to go through Parliament before being applicable in the UK now

Is that so, Stef? I thought we were at the point whereby EU law automatically succeeded any similar UK law. I may well be behind any recent changes...

[peteT16]

Be calm

http://www.pistonheads.com/news/default ... ryId=26260

[stefaclese]

Not sure if it would apply in this case, but one of the few positive things this government have done is make Parliament ratify any more transfer of powers to the EU. Whether this counts as a shift of powers to the EU or not is another matter, I don't think it applies to EU laws though which have to be negotiated by member states.

Be calm

http://www.pistonheads.com/news/default ... ryId=26260

There we go then, usual interwebz apocalyptic panic

[maestrovdpt16]

Mainly the government step in against anything to do with business and chiefly anything that affect the golden square mile of London, or banking. I don't really see them stepping in about regulations on car modifications. Anything proposal angling towards making cars safer or more green it would be political suicide to be against.

Also that supposed statement didn't say it was all over at all, just that it was early days and nothing was decided yet. This is just the beginning, far from the end.

So anyway, as we were saying, My main problem with people who vote BNP is that...