Let this be a warning to us all

[AliK]

So my fellow Z heads, I discovered something rather scary I like to share...

My brother in-law has one of the finest, best looked after / restored TR6 PIs around - mainly driven spiritedly in the Sussex countryside but nothing crazy and never in his long ownership found deep potholes.

At Christmas when we were admire her, I spotted that one front wheel had more negative camber and toe out than the other. So I asked him to look it over. He recently got under it and found that one of the top wishbone to chassis mounting points had sheered off!!!

Free AA trailer to CCK Historic who confirmed that not only had it gone, but the whole of the wishbone mounting to chassis metal at the top had cracked / started to go.

The only mods are slightly lower springs and some poly bushes. Stocks wheels / brakes and shocks.

What has the TR got in common with the Z? 40+ year old metal and miles -oh and previous owner(s) "history" that is impossible to know.

I often worry that with our mods such as harder bushes, thicker roll bars, more LBFT, harder springs and shocks, lower profile tyres, track days etc that we are stressing the old metal beyond it's "when new" capabilities and introducing stress fractures that may bite us. How much of it is hiding beneath the under seal I wonder?

We had planned a track day to go head to head with the Z - thank God we spotted this before any fast or hard cornering antics!

We all spend £££s on many things to improve our cars but how often do we get under them and "properly" check the important stuff is safe / torqued correctly for zero cost?

Now this is precisely why I disagree with no MOT for historic class cars.

Be safe out there my friends.

 

[Jimbo]

ooof that was a very good spot!
imagine if it had let go properly around a corner or something
doesn't bear thinking about but shows the importance of regular checking even if our cars are mot exempt

 

[uk66fastback]

Good spot! A timely reminder this time of year before a lot of classics see the sun in spring. The first Mustang coupe I brought over from the US had ONE bolt holding the front suspension to the tower on one side. Again, spotted when it was MOT'd upon arrival.

 

[Alphabettispaghetti]

Great post Ali.

I think its worth having a check over just as a bottom covering exercise. i wonder what will happen when the first person is found responsible for their car not being in road worthy order.

 

[johnymd]

Many years ago I had a similar failure on my old 240z. On my way to work I was travelling at a fair pace round a long sweeping bend. Halfway round the steering went a little loose so I started to slow down. As I touched the brake the car tried to turn right. I coasted to a stop and on checking out underneath I found one side of the front crossmember had pulled away from the chassis and was hanging down a few inches. On welding it back together I struggled to find good metal.

It is always worth checking for corrosion at the crossmember mount area and the tiered mount. These are the 2 critical points. You can also check the front antirollbar mount which is a common failure area although is this fails you could still safely drive the car home.

 

[SeanDezart]

Restore your Zs !

MOT over here is every 5x years for classic cars - almost as scary !

 

[johnymd]

The problem is that the front chassis rails will corrode from the inside if they have not been waxoiled from new. The Uk cars will have had years of damp conditions and could probably all do will new chassis legs by now if they were used as everyday cars in their early years. Both of my UK cars have had brand new Nissan chassis legs along with many other new panels but there are a lot of cars out there that have not had the repairs they could do with.

I’ve been looking at a Uk 240z in a local body shop over the last 6 months that went in to have a few rust bubbles investigated. It has under up having a major front end restoration with both complete chassis legs, lower inner wings, baulkhead sections, rad support panel and strut turret replacement. The car generally looked pretty good but many patches over patches over rust was hedden under sealer and new paint.

I think a few track days may be the safest way to check for hidden issues probably safer than a failure on the roads.

 

[uk66fastback]

Great post Ali.

I think its worth having a check over just as a bottom covering exercise. i wonder what will happen when the first person is found responsible for their car not being in road worthy order.

I am sure people are prosecuted currently or driving cars on the road in a not road-worthy order, even though they have an MoT. I think what you mean is those on the road without an MoT in the first place - door hanging off, holes in the floor etc. I am not sure 'road-worthy order' has definition if the car is not required to have an MoT.

 

[AliK]

Thanks chaps - glad it resonated and I guess sometimes it pays to be an anorak when looking at cars

Johnny makes a valid point re the box sections you just can't see from the inside - I may have to take a closer look at my chassis rails again without the under seal.

Mr fastback, that is an interesting debate especially as "roadworthy" becomes a matter of interpretation. There are the obvious things an owner can spot and then there are those that you can't. Most of us commenting are into and all over our cars as part of the fun of ownership, but many many if not most classic car owners have never been under their cars and for them it's about the pride of ownership / polishing / displaying / a sunny weekend drive. Nothing wrong with that at all, just that they wouldn't see anomalies and rely on third parties such as MOTs etc.

 

[Bobafett]

I have 5 classics on the road, and thought of not needing an MOT now scares me!

 

[toopy]

I'm currently MOT less, and will be from now on, what i will be doing however, is every other year, i will take the car to my local friendly garage, to perform a MOT check, but without the associated A4 sheet of official approval at the end.
They are also happy for me to venture into the pit, so i can give the underneath a decent visual check myself, mainly for obviously damaged under seal and any rusty bolts/nuts noted for future renewal!
I barely do a thousand miles a year, and winter is spent in the garage, so i really don't see a biannual check as a problem

 

[Woody928]

Thanks for sharing dude, always some stark reminders for us all!

Now this is precisely why I disagree with no MOT for historic class cars.

Be safe out there my friends.

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest there's nothing wrong with the change being implemented. I seem to regularly be pointing out to many people that any car pre 1960 didn't require an MOT before this change came into force anyway. Its only expanded the bracket and there's hardly been a regular accidents involving pre 1960 vehicles....

I still check my car over when convenient and like to get it up on a lift annually when convenient to have a good gander around. My biggest concern is the ageing metal that the car is made of which will have lost strength over the years. Particularly with uprated components there's a lot of stress that could be put through certain areas unless reinforced etc. All part of the game we play, in all honestly I'd be far more concerned about structural integrity in the event of an accident....

 

[pmac]

My brother in-law has one of the finest, best looked after / restored TR6 PIs around

Clearly from the photos you put up and the fact that it took someone else(you) to spot a wheel and an odd camber this is NOT a "best looked after" car at all.
IMHO of course.

 

[AliK]

Clearly from the photos you put up and the fact that it took someone else(you) to spot a wheel and an odd camber this is NOT a "best looked after" car at all.
IMHO of course.

Firstly - great to have you back uncle Pete.

Secondly: that was pretty much the point, while it has been maintained by specialists etc which is what most normal (not like us) classic car owners do, this can happen.

Interestingly he just heard back today and the cause was:

"Upper wishbone had seized in the steel sleeves inside bushes, someone hadn’t greased them."