Okay,the press are touching a nerve,here.

Four children died because their fathers Land Rover was re-built using parts from other vehicles. Not in my view - i think they died because it was constructed and driven by a prat.

It had more scaffolding around it than an unfinished Barrat Home,and was top-heavy as a result of just that - Not to mention the swamp-buggy tyres,wheels,suspension lift etc..

Its idiots like this that cause the authorities to look again at the idea of outlawing modified vehicles.

My Polo is constructed from no less than five cars and a motorcycle,not to mention both genuine and pattern new stock,and then some universal parts.

But every single component has been checked carefully and selected specifically by someone who has a clue what they're doing. And the whole car is inspected by an engineer regularly. Id suggest its a darn sight safer than most 5-8 year old cars that have the same mileage,but less servicing. Its probably safer than some new cars - some of the re-calls are pretty concerning.

And i believe in the concept of building cars to last,but with upgradeable engines as technology progresses - infact,my project for '09 is an early,totally original base model Vauxhall Nova with the catalyst 3-cylinder all aluminium 1.0 12v engine from the latest Corsa. But running classic cars on new engines wouldn't support wasteful capitalism on its current scale,would it...?

Most cars are modified,whether your G has a Peugeot turbo diesel intercooler,or your factory car has pattern servicing parts,or you drive a Sierra-based kitcar,or a factory commercial chassis cab with aftermarket body.. Where do they want to draw the line?

Where do you want to draw the line? What are your views on the subject of modified vehicles?

no cut an shuts.

minuite you cut out anything structural(not sill skins, a-pillars and bulkheads an shit) vehicle should be scrap, however with landies, bulkheads are replaceable... depends on quality of work i guess...

I read that news item and it touched a nerve with me as well

Just because his Land Rover has the chassis from one Landy, axles from another, engine from another etc, doesn't mean it was a deathtrap. That pisses me off, the way the press brandish things like that around.

Thats pissed me off as well, its his driving that caused the crash, and not the modifications, he was driving too fast for the roads. From what iv gathered from reading internet articles, is that he couldn't get past a van, and crashed. in not one of the articles does it state that the modifications caused the crash, they're just blatantly using the story to try and shun the world of modified cars.

anyway that's my opinion

Yet another story that gives modded car owners a bad name. Its terrible how everyone thinks of a modified car as a 'deathtrap' driven by a 'chav' or 'idiot'.

All my cars are modified, my dads car is modified, hell even my mums car is modified and she is 50 years old with a dodgy back and drives a focus 1.6.

What is wrong with a modded car? As long as the work is done properly the mods are often an improvment over the original design. Surely even all the call backs on the new cars today should be classed as modifications?

I thought the land rover had to swerve off the road to avoid a van coming the opposite direction.

Either way its grim news for all of us that service/fix our own cars.

And I'll bet most of us have driven our cars when we shouldnt have, when the brakes were a bit dodgey, had a ball joint or wheel bearing that should have been replaced long ago etc etc.

ball joint you say

thing is, am sure that car passed its MOT

i dont know how i feel about it...the driver is facing jail..but he's lost 4 of his kids....think there was another 2 in the car...so there guna be without a dad if he goes to jail

he's lost 4 kids and his wife left him and he's going to jail, surely knowing he was partly to blame for the loss of his 4 kids for the rest of his life will have a bigger effect than going to prison

This issue of the safety of modified cars could be solved with an additional vehicle inspection test, like an SVA test, running with the current MOT system. If you wish to declare your car as modified (i.e. have valid insurance) then you are required to have the additional MOT/SVA test, to assess if it meets similar criteria to an SVA. this is plainly never going to happen (very time and money consuming) and there would be more grey areas than the current MOT system, for example, my steel wheels are from a Mk2 golf, do i have to tell the insurance company? in theory yes.

My subframe is an excellent example of an effectively homemade part of the car, i without doubt trust its construction, but would the SVA man?

I'd actually be more than happy for extended tests to be applied to modified vehicles because there is no doubt in my mind that some modifications are made by people with no clue at all.

Not a bad post for 01:37 after a night down the pub eh?

i think any engine swaps, large welded areas etc should be checked, minorstuff like debadged grilles and clear lights, lowering etc shouldnt need to

SVA is a ball ache because there isnt a category for your average modded car. There is only 'Radically altered' (IE a cherry picker on the back of a van) or 'self build' where you have to give evidence that you constructed it from nothing, and it goes on a Q plate.

But your right, if there was just a quick test that they could do, basically someone who actually knows what they are on about saying 'yeah that looks about right'. Thats all it would take to keep the roads safe without ruining everyones fun.

some insurance do require a mechanic certifies engine swaps. but i agree it could go further. The issue for me is the 12 months between mots. How many posts on here are 'car failed mot ' which could mean its not been roadworthy for months! Even garages mess things up too.

I'm not sure there is a solution, as long as there are halfwits who dont perform decent work!

I'm sure i read that part of his chassis (which was uber rotten) broke away from his trailing arm or summit which caused him to crash... In that case he's a f**king numpty for off roading with a knackered chassis!

thing is, am sure that car passed its MOT

The question is, should it have? and was it modified after passing it's last test?

From what I remember, the front brake calipers were mismatched, making it pull up to one side.

Haven't read the article but sounds pathetic.

This is what the press do, they have to find something or someone to put the blame on..

some insurance do require a mechanic certifies engine swaps. but i agree it could go further. The issue for me is the 12 months between mots. How many posts on here are 'car failed mot ' which could mean its not been roadworthy for months! Even garages mess things up too.

I'm not sure there is a solution, as long as there are halfwits who dont perform decent work!

Technically your MOT is only saying that your car came in on so and so day and was safe then. After that who knows!?

And I'll bet most of us have driven our cars when we shouldnt have, when the brakes were a bit dodgey, had a ball joint or wheel bearing that should have been replaced long ago etc etc.

Does a one use hub nut on it's 7th use count too?

i feel sorry for them tbh

but that story of modifying cares make them dangerus is complete wankkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk

they will never get rig of vehicle modifing it one of the bggest industrys in britian and the biggst in america! there for if they got rid of it less tax money will be going to the goverment!

and think how many people do up cars on here for a living and for fun! people would be out of jobs and there will be petions and roits about it and stuff

itll just be crap that media have come up with

and probs cause they all drive big range rovers (witch are alot more dangeus than a little polo and other cars that get modified)

no cut an shuts.

minuite you cut out anything structural(not sill skins, a-pillars and bulkheads an shit) vehicle should be scrap, however with landies, bulkheads are replaceable... depends on quality of work i guess...

Thing is,hearse's and stretches are cut and shut. As are some minibuses. What about aftermarket cabriolet conversions? The back end of a classic beetle with a Harley Davidson front,breadvan pick-ups,flip front minis - there are thousands of genuine and safe chopped up bodies on our roads.

And then there are a few standard cars with shoddy garage work,like brake pipes rubbing against the suspension strut because someone forgot to clip it in its rubber mount..

Its like anything though. Gas boilers in most houses theses days. Some people can tinker with there own no problem because they know what they are doing. Others pay someone who knows what they are doing to do the work for them and other foolish sods can't help but give it a go even though they know nothing about it.

Anything can be dangerous if you don't know what your doing with it. It doesn't mean everyone should be punished for it though.

i think MOT's should be every 6 months, but a little cheaper.

the amount of shitters on the roads is unreal.

most of them mine!

Edited 22 December, 200817 yr by Jackblack

i think MOT's should be every 6 months, but a little cheaper.

problem is they wouldnt be!

theres nothing wrong with a properly done cut and shut, like a hearse or limo etc.

i think it goes the other way as well, some mods that wont pass an mot aren't dangerous.

if they said we couldnt mod our cars it would eventually end up like the light aircraft world, where the owner can only change bulbs, all other work has to be done by an engineer!

/\

makes sense to be more like the aviation industry

only licensed engineers carry out work on aircraft, any mods must be carried out by a licensed engineer, then signed off by someone licensed.....

would be good to see something similar in the car world...have a log book of all work carried out, and a signature by a licensed mech to say its road worthy

problem is, implementing it would be near on impossible

/\

makes sense to be more like the aviation industry

only licensed engineers carry out work on aircraft, any mods must be carried out by a licensed engineer, then signed off by someone licensed.....

would be good to see something similar in the car world...have a log book of all work carried out, and a signature by a licensed mech to say its road worthy

problem is, implementing it would be near on impossible

and it would completely ruin the point in modifying a car for most people too,

most people create homemade cars for their own satisfaction, get featured in mags for spending countless days and nights in the garage fiddling around in their garage, would be abit gay having every single feature in a magazine telling a story of how the owner had to 'pay this engineer to do this, that mechanic to do that'

imagine the madness on the build up to edition38, every MOT/testing station in the country would have a long queue of dubs waiting to get checked over for all the last minute mods