LS1 240Z on eBay

AliK

Vehicle Dating Officer
Staff member
Club Member
0 points for non standard gearbox, 1 point for L gata engine.
2 points for standard suspension, 0 points if aftermarket adjustable coil overs.

So my gearbox isn’t a Zed box is that 2 points, Rebello 3.2 is that 1 point and suspension 2 points

The DVLA website and guidance are woefully vague so there have been many consultations and requests for clarification with the DVLA on the specifics. If you read as written on the DVLA website, you may start to wonder if any of our modified cars get enough points. BUT, when you understand what is actually meant by the rules and what the type approval tests look for, it's not as bleak as it first seems.

As Jon has alluded, so long as the engine is a straight 6 of OE type, it still gives you a point. As strange as it sounds, even an RB engine won't lose you points. That one has been put that to the DVLA before. But a BMW straight 6 though? You may or may not be able to argue the toss during a type approval inspection, depending on how the inspector considers the meanings of original configuration (straight 6) and OE type. ;)

The coilovers always end up in an online discussion about interpretation. Reading the FBHVC consultation literature when the ruling was coming in, I understand that this rule was meant for things like converting leaf springs to coilovers; or for example, a TR's Strong Arm Lever dampers and separate springs to coilovers. In fitting adjustable coilovers on a Z, you are keeping the same suspension configuration and most importantly, you're not changing the "method of operation" - just providing additional capability. As far as I understand, it doesn't lose you points. I have had to clarify these points with the DVLA to ensure our club dating letters are not off the mark in declaring a Z as a VHI.

Good read here even if still a touch vague on the details - https://assets.publishing.service.g...ical-interest-substantial-change-guidance.pdf

Also there is a clear message: "5 of these points must come from having the original or new and unmodified chassis, monocoque bodyshell or frame". Changes to the subframe by putting on new parts of the same shape and type are OK. But cutting out the spare wheel well to put in a fuel cell is considered to be modifying the monocoque. Adding a roll cage or beefing up chassis rails is also OK. Altering bits of the chassis / monocoque to fit in a wide gearbox or engine not OK.

So in the case of the car discussed in this thread, in my estimation it gets:
  • Chassis, monocoque bodyshell: 5 points from what can be seen in the photos.
  • Suspension (front and back): 2 points - and I'm taking the line that coil overs do not constitute a change to the method of operation
  • Axles (both): 2 points (even if TTT control arms are used, it's not changing their configuration / method of operation i.e. you're not changing to double wishbone etc).
  • Transmission: "nil po'an" (as they say in the Eurovision song contest)
  • Steering assembly: 2 points (assuming original rack and pinion set up).
  • Engine: "nil po'an"
That makes 11 points for a minimum of 8. Even if you want to argue the toss on coilovers, it's still a 9 pointer.

Previously we had a thread on that topic but I can't seem to locate it. We shouldn't clog this one up if the discussion wanders from the car in question.

(And finally a disclaimer: These are my personal views based on my own investigations for club dating letters etc and not the views of the club itself. If you have genuine concerns about a particular vehicle, you should always gain clarifications directly from the DVLA and make absolutely sure you are not exposed to "interpretation".)
 

AliK

Vehicle Dating Officer
Staff member
Club Member
I know it's tempting to claim MoT exemption - I've done that with my cars however with something like a 300 bhp V8 sitting in the engine bay things could get difficult is an insurer asks to see/checks the MoT status.

I FUNDAMENTALY disagree with MoT exemptions!!! I think it's the dumbest idea ever. As an example: even with all my tinkering and intimate knowledge of my car, I can't measure the delta or braking efficiency across the same axle or between axles. How many classic car owners regularly jack up their cars and wiggle their wheels to check for track rod / bearing play and have enough knowledge to judge what is acceptable? Or know how to test their shock absorbers? 90% of classic car owners are drivers and polishers not mechanics.

Anyway, we're going off topic a little - so to bring it back on track - as a buyer, I would absolutely want to see a current MOT test certificate. And yes, not all MOTs were created equally, but it's more peace of mind than taking an owner's word for it. Albeit said in good faith.
 

Rob Gaskin

Treasurer
Staff member
Site Administrator
Think this needs splitting off this Thread and a new one for general guidance.

Ali you are still reading the radically altered car section (which applies to any age of car) and is all about registering a car, not the Historic MoT section.

Ali what is the most dangerous part of a car ... the driver. How often are they checked? How can that be right?
 
Last edited:

jonbills

Membership Secretary
Site Administrator
Think this needs splitting off this Thread and a new one for general guidance.

Ali you are still reading the radically altered car section (which applies to any age of car) and is all about registering a car, not the Historic MoT section.

Ali what is the most dangerous part of a car ... the driver. How often are they checked? How can that be right?
I don't think I'm the most dangerous part of my car :)
 

AliK

Vehicle Dating Officer
Staff member
Club Member
Think this needs splitting off this Thread and a new one for general guidance.

Ali you are still reading the radically altered car section (which applies to any age of car) and is all about registering a car, not the Historic MoT section.

Ali what is the most dangerous part of a car ... the driver. How often are they checked? How can that be right?

Well sire, I'm agreeing with you on both counts! We're definitely wandering away from the gorgeous LS car and I agree that it should need an MOT.
 

Bazzateer

Club Member
I believe the points system only applies to maintaining the ID of a car. Less than 8 = Q plate territory.
Free VEL (not exempt, just free) relates to the age of the car (40 yrs), regardless of any mods (providing the ID remains after the points system has been applied).
MoT Test exemption has the same age restriction at VEL but only if not substantially altered.

I think that's right anyway.
 

Geoff-R

Club Member
I think, regardless of MOT exemption status, any self respecting car enthusiast with a historic vehicle will and should get an MOT on their car. Whilst this is personal preference I would always choose to have an MOT done rather than not. Think of it as a vehicle check up with a small price to pay in the long run.
 

MCBladeRun

Club Member
I always think there's probably fine print you didn't know about in the terms and conditions of sale in your insurance premium - if you had an accident it would void the insurance if it were found to be in a state of disrepair - something easily found by an MOT, such as the ball joints?
 

uk66fastback

Club Member
If something is worn, then it’s not roadworthy. And driving an unroadworthy car is an offence. Define ‘unroadworthy’ in a legal context though.
 
Top