Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Russell1972

  1. Yes, I've used it on a couple of cars. It's very good at very small leaks, as the fluid itself is the consistency of water, so trickles into the gap, settles and dries. You may need to apply 2 or 3 times, but it does work.
  2. The translation makes it a far more interesting read than a lot of online articles. 'The terms "abandoned" are not strong enough to describe this spectacle of desolation. Indeed, beyond being stored against each other, these Triumphs are far from being respected by their unknown owners.' Perhaps I should start to be more flowery with my TSSC reports. :-)
  3. They hide the rot incredibly well. I've just finished restoring a 1968 Single Cab pickup. What I thought would be just sills, ended up needing the middle third of the truck replacing. Sills, strengtheners, lower bulkhead, upper and lower loadbeds, complete side panel, new 'treasure chest' door. Even after a bare metal repaint, from a distance, and in photos, it doesn't look a whole lot different to when I bought it! 3 photos attached, as bought (with the whitewalls), half-way through the horrors, and what it looks like now. Russell.
  4. The main cross bar that runs behind the bumper, is sandwiched between the bumper mounts and the body and attached with the existing bumper bolts. The thinner bar that runs down under the rear is just bolted through the floor. I think I had to drill a couple of holes, so that part doesn't bolt to anything in particular.
  5. I bought one for my 2000 estate from the TSSC club shop about 17 years ago, and I see they still do them. https://shop.tssc.org.uk/product/towbar-20002500pi-estate-mkii-ptr28
  6. Could it be the current owner has just moved house (along with all their projects) and a new V5 has been issued for the change of address?
  7. I did my GT6 windscreen trim a couple of years ago and used this method. It worked eventually, but took an awful lot of patience. Russell.
  8. Yes, I will be there, definitely this time, no excuses. :-) Steve, if you want to pop over to my house before the meeting and take some measurements of my MK3 GT6, let me know and I'll PM you my address. The doors line up quite well on that. I can't bring it to the pub as I've got the front valences off it at the moment. Russell
  9. Colin, very wrong yes. :-) I went to a local Texas car show when I was holiday in the USA a few years ago, and there were a number of cars with wheels like that and larger. I was more interested where on earth you got tyres for them. Most of the brands I'd never heard of.
  10. I bought a mohair hood stowage cover, (to cover the hood when it's folded down), from them 4 years ago. Great quality and fits a treat.
  11. Over the years, our trip there has extended to be out on Wednesday back on Tuesday. A stop in Le Neubourg on the way down and Le Touquet on the way back (we use the tunnel). I'm taking a friend this year who I've been nagging to come for years. After he saw the new Le Mans film at the tail end of last year, he said "Is it like that?" , "pretty much" I said, which won him over. It does mean I have to take the 2000 estate again this time, as we'll be 3 up. It's currently in bits in the garage in preparation, fixing the diff leak that started after LeMans 2018. Russell.
  12. Well done Peter, glad you finally got it sold. Your experience only goes to reinforce my mantra, of "never sell anything - just build more sheds" Hopefully see you Tuesday.
  13. I also have this issue with my MK3 GT6 as outlined in the thread below, also a D-Type. I bought the car with that as a known problem, but the only solution I've found is to clout the overdrive case with a hide hammer while moving. It seems to stick once the box gets warm. At the moment, I've given up with it and am resigned to the fact the gearbox will have to come out. I'm preparing the car for it's first MoT for a while, so have electrically disconnected the overdrive to stop me trying it with all the tunnel back in. Russell.
  14. I think I have to wait for the prosecution letter to arrive. Bob from the FBHVC was quite keen that I get this letter into Suffolk Constabulary beforehand, but I’m not entirely sure how I can do that without annoying them. The Notice of Intended Prosecution I received at the roadside specifically says, do nothing until you receive further communication from us.
  15. The MoT History Checker always shows the unfriendly red banner, even for my pre-1960 Ford Pop. That site is run by the DVSA. The DVLA tax and MoT checker shows the green boxes. Apparently there is little correlation between these 2 systems. Bit more of an update, courtesy of the FBHVC, I have a definitive statement from the Department for Transport, which I've attached. statement on declaration.docx I quite like point b) is of a type no longer in production. Does that mean old Morgans still need MoTs? :-)
  16. Yes, although more specific guidelines are on the NTTA site. My trailer falls into this i. A secondary coupling as per “f" must be fitted to a braked trailer manufactured before 1982 that has a manual handbrake arrangement. So the officer knew his law on trailers. I just have to wait for the letter to arrive now.
  17. I'm on shaky ground with the trailer. It's only 6ft x 4ft, but massively over chassis-ed and braked. My dad built it on an old generator chassis made by Grey-Forsythe and there's still a chassis plate on it. I've attached a picture of the trailer and the plate (after scraping a few layers of paint off). The officer seemed more interested in a chain that stopped the tow-bar making contact with the road, rather than one that applies the brakes on detachment, but he didn't spend a great deal of time looking at the car or the trailer. The offence he's reported me for is RT86441 "no secondary coupling on trailer" which I don't seem to be able to find anything online about when looking for that specific offence code. The MoT offence is RT88096 "no test cert" which there's an awful lot of hits for.
  18. Update from the DVSA via email this morning. ----------- Thank you for your email enquiry dated 6 January 2019 , concerning a 40 year MOT Exemption Query. Under new legislation that came into effect on 20 May 2018, certain vehicles constructed or first registered more than 40 years ago are now exempt from MOT testing, unless they have been substantially changed. As long as the DVLA have a date of manufacture/first use on the vehicle record which shows the vehicle is over 40 years old, the on-line tax renewal system and other enforcement systems should automatically pick up that the vehicle is MOT exempt. If, for some reason, the system is still not allowing a vehicle to be taxed, there is also a V112 (self-declaration from MOT) application form that can be completed and taken to a Post Office. The V112 can be found here and was updated to show the above exemption on 20 May 2018 The DVLA operate the Vehicle Check service, so you will need to contact them for advice on the information displayed on it. -----------
  19. Hi all, I have an update. I emailed the FBHVC this morning and had a phone call this afternoon from Bob Owen, the Director of Legislation, which he followed up with an email, which is below : ---- The Federation of British Historic Vehicle Clubs is very interested in your predicament. Your vehicle, if not substantially changed, is exempt from the MOT and the prosecution is misconceived. You have understood the procedure correctly; it is not possible to declare that a vehicle is not substantially changed and therefore eligible until the date of next licensing following the expiry of the existing MOT. I understand your MOT expired in August, i.e. nearly eleven months before the next licensing date. In fact, DVLA do not record declarations, (or submission of a V112) so it is not clear how the policeman could have checked whether or not you had declared! The official Guidance on Gov.uk is also unambiguous , making no reference whatsoever to declaration. What is really annoying is that when the exemption procedure was announced the Federation predicted that this would happen and we were assured it could not, as the police were fully aware of the position.. With your permission we would wish to take this up, anonymously at first, with both the DfT in London and DVLA, who are responsible for the process, though of course DVSA are responsible for testing. ---- I have given him my permission to raise it with the DfT and DVLA. It's interesting that he says the declarations are not even recorded. More info as and when I get it. Russell.
  20. Hi Rob, yes indeed it was that very same car. Thanks all for your support, I will keep you informed with how I get on.
  21. Thanks Nick, I've already started to compose an email to them, in attempt to clarify the situation. Thanks Richard for the trailer info, that's very interesting. It was built by my Dad on an old generator chassis back in the early nineties for the brass band I play in. There will be records in our committee minutes mentioning it. It's a great solid well built trailer, but certainly doesn't "look" like it was built in the last 20 years, but I imagine that's not good enough.
  22. If you taxed it online then you should have had to click a declaration that the car isn't modified and eligible for the MoT exemption. As far as I'm aware that's the electronic equivalent of the V112. I'm currently looking round the DVLA website for details of the process, but even this is quite vague with no mention of declaration. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/historic-classic-vehicles-mot-exemption-criteria/historic-classic-vehicles-mot-exemption-criteria There's plenty of (sometimes contradictory) information on forums and classic car news sites, but if I'm to try and challenge this prosecution, I would only want to reference details from the .gov site, especially as that's what the officer seemed to be using when he called me.
  23. Hi all, Not a good day today. It looks like I’m going to be prosecuted for not having an MoT on an MoT exempt car and need to understand if I’ve mis-understood the process. I think I’ve fallen foul of the window where a car was already taxed when the MoT expired, but here’s what happened. Was off to the tip in the 2.5pi Estate towing my trailer, when I was pulled over by a traffic officer for not having a secondary coupling. In the 25+ years I’ve been towing that little trailer, I didn’t know I needed one, so that’s one prosecution I will learn by. However, he went off to check my details and came back to say my MoT expired on the 1st August 2018. I said, I know, but the car is MoT exempt as it’s over 40 years old. He knew nothing about the 40 year exemption, but did know about the pre 1960 exemption. He went off to clarify with the sergeant, who wasn’t sure either. So he put it on the traffic offence report, said he would call me back later to clarify, then let me go on my way. An hour or so later, he called me to say I should have declared it MoT exempt using the method shown on at the top of the MoT History Webpage (form V112) and would be continuing with the prosecution. I thought that form was just for when you apply for tax? Now, my car is one of those where after the 20th May 2018 exemption date, the tax was due before the MoT ran out. Tax is due 1st July. So, after August should I have SORNed it, then re-taxed it with that declaration? What confuses matters is the DVLA Mot Check site, shows a green box and a tick, whereas the MoT History site shows a red box and that it’s expired. This is exactly the same for one of my other cars that I know I’ve taxed after the MoT ran out, so would have checked the electronic version of that V112 form online. I thought the DVLA had done a blanket MoT exemption for all cars over 40 years old, then it was up to the owner to declare if it was modified. Otherwise why would they show the green box on an MoT check? I know, the easiest way round this would be to keep the cars MoTed and I have a feeling I’m about to learn an expensive lesson. Has anyone else had any issues with traffic officers and expired MoTs since the exemption came in? Russell.
  24. Thanks all for your ideas, but it looks like the gearbox will have to come out. For the top valve, I removed the cap, spring, pin and ball, the pulled out the tube. The tiny pin hole was clear, but I washed it out in white spirit anyway. Refitted everything, but it was the same. With use it has got better than when I first put it on the road, but just when I think it's fixed, it'll stick again then needs a clout with the hammer. Any last ideas before the 'box comes out? (that'll be after LeMans now). Russell.
  25. Thanks Pete, I'll check those. The overdrive seems to stick in at after engaging at higher revs, so could it possibly be holding on at higher pressure? I'll report back after I've had a another chance to fiddle. Russell
  • Create New...