SVA; avoidance or evasion?

[GBMUD]

I know we like nothing more than an energetic discussion about SVA rules on LR4x4, so, hypothetically:

If I were to buy a 90 or 110 with a rotton chassis or with rear end damage (or even a perfectly good one!), and a shiny galvanised 130 chassis and then use all the good front body parts from the 90 or 110, engine, transmission, axle/s etc. on the 130 chassis before adding double cab and Hi-cap body (Can a 110 hi-cap be modified to fit a 130DC?), could I legitimately claim the chassis as a replacement for the original car, keep it's identity and not have to go through SVA? If I would have to SVA anyway then I might be as well just to start with all the parts needed rather than find a suitable donor.

Does a Defender chassis number correspond to the wheelbase - 90,110,130? If not then there would be nothing to suggest what the vehicle started life as would there - assuming the V5 just said "2-axle, rigid body"?

Thoughts opinions and arguments welcome.

Thanks

Chris

[milliejasper1111]

Worms....can......open

[Hybrid_From_Hell]

Chassis Number will show what wheelbase it was, hence a log book from a 90 will show it built as a 90 not a 130

A new galv chassis is OK as you know for a replacement for something bought of the same chassis (length etc)

as thuis is deeemed a repair, also bear in mind come a MOT when they type in the chassis number they will spot

that whats on the ramp does tally = hassle time

Nige

[Retroanaconda]

Yup, it only counts if it's a like-for-like replacement for the original item. And you must be able to prove that, a purchase receipt from Richards or whomever.

Quite where the line is drawn between things like roll-cage mounts and winch rear cross-members being added during manufacture and the thing being a totally different wheelbase...well I don't know.

[T1G UP]

I know we like nothing more than an energetic discussion about SVA rules on LR4x4, so, hypothetically:

If I were to buy a 90 or 110 with a rotton chassis or with rear end damage (or even a perfectly good one!), and a shiny galvanised 130 chassis and then use all the good front body parts from the 90 or 110, engine, transmission, axle/s etc. on the 130 chassis before adding double cab and Hi-cap body (Can a 110 hi-cap be modified to fit a 130DC?), could I legitimately claim the chassis as a replacement for the original car, keep it's identity and not have to go through SVA? If I would have to SVA anyway then I might be as well just to start with all the parts needed rather than find a suitable donor.

Does a Defender chassis number correspond to the wheelbase - 90,110,130? If not then there would be nothing to suggest what the vehicle started life as would there - assuming the V5 just said "2-axle, rigid body"?

Thoughts opinions and arguments welcome.

Thanks

Chris

guess you've had a row with the wife?!

you've missed april fools by quite some time aswell.

if you take the wheelbase as identified by the chassis number then obviously it will now be highlighted down the line.

it's like having an escort on a mondeo v5...still a ford, but.

but thats not to say you wouldn't get away with it. we have a guy who has owned a series for years, been "upgraded" on a regular basis, now looks like a 300 tdi 90 to me! his mot man must turn a blind eye?

there are alot of "hybrids" that would survive for years, coiler chassis and tdi engines but series bodywork so who's to know? would you turn informer as it would be a professional spot. also if the chassis/ mods were done before 88 then there ok? is that correct??

Personally there are good reasons not to tell the dvla of certain mods, the same as you don't declare your cash sales to the hmrc or your lr spends to the wife!

[western]

Does a Defender chassis number correspond to the wheelbase - 90,110,130? If not then there would be nothing to suggest what the vehicle started life as would there - assuming the V5 just said "2-axle, rigid body"?

Yes,refer to attached page.

[plasticbadger]

Two thoughts,

Firstly, as the conversion from 90 or 110 to 130 uses mostly manufacturer's original parts and importantly type approved parts then an SVA test would not be any issue to pass (particularily as you would probably go in as a commercail not passenger car). You may even find that on discussion with your local office they offer you a VIC instead.

Secondly, why not start with a 130? You can still pick up ex-MOD 130s pretty cheap, an ambulance sold yesterday on Witham's auction for £2800 in very good condition. If you started with this, or a tattier one, then all the work would be classed repair rather than modification, I would think again the worst you would need was a VIC for the change in body style / engine etc?

[GBMUD]

Thanks everyone, pretty much what I suspected.

Ralph, thanks for the confirmation on the chassis number details. Any idea how the old 127s were done? The ones that were made by SV out of stretched 110s off the line?

Firstly, as the conversion from 90 or 110 to 130 uses mostly manufacturer's original parts and importantly type approved parts then an SVA test would not be any issue to pass (particularily as you would probably go in as a commercail not passenger car). You may even find that on discussion with your local office they offer you a VIC instead.

Secondly, why not start with a 130? You can still pick up ex-MOD 130s pretty cheap, an ambulance sold yesterday on Witham's auction for £2800 in very good condition. If you started with this, or a tattier one, then all the work would be classed repair rather than modification, I would think again the worst you would need was a VIC for the change in body style / engine etc?

Starting with a 130 would be an option subject to getting one for the right price - if it had a decent chassis I would go for Waxoyling it rather than galv.! Was that £2800 ex. VAT? As you suggest, an SVA might not be the end of the world, just something I would prefer to avoid!

Need to find someone looking for a 110 first.

Cheers

Chris

[plasticbadger]

Was that £2800 ex. VAT?

That was £2800 + VAT, but it appeared to have a completely solid chassis and bulkhead, plus was a later model with the push button doors, though it was sold with no confirmed mileage and as a non-runner (3.5 V8). It would have been a good project base, in fact I thought about it myself but my trailer wouldn't carry a 130!

[western]

Thanks everyone, pretty much what I suspected.

Ralph, thanks for the confirmation on the chassis number details. Any idea how the old 127s were done? The ones that were made by SV out of stretched 110s off the line?

Cheers

Chris

a friend had a 'A' prefix early 127, as far as we could tell, as it was factory built it retained the original 110 chassis number.you could clearly see the 17 inch chassis extension joints & the 17 inch exhaust piece, he had all it's docs from Thames Valley Police & all the details we checked gave it as a 110 chassis, this vehicle is still on the road & was IIRC Supplied by a LR dealer in Reading to TVP vehicle workshops as a 127 4 door cab hi-cap pickup, TVP had a box body fitted with a full hiegth lift up door & 3/4 length roller shutters in each upper bodyside. below is the only fairly decent photo I have of subject 127.

Matbe Si White knows this vehicle, we know it was garaged at TVP HQ Kidlington near Oxford.