Designa chassis

This site contains affiliate links for which LandyZone may be compensated if you make a purchase.
A

Austin Shackles

Guest

any comments?

they appear to offer what would be ideal for my project, a 110 galv chassis
built up with either S/H suspension and axles, or with reconned axles.

new brake pads, hoses, springs, dampers in either case.

I've written to DVLA to enquire about the various registration
possibilities... AFAICS, putting a different body on a land rover is
"radically rebuilt vehicle" and provided it retains its chassis and main
components, it's not a problem.

However, starting from a shiny new chassis with recon/new components on it
has its attractions...


--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.fsnet.co.uk my opinions are just that
"Ask yourself whether you are happy, and you cease to be so."
John Stuart Mill (1806 - 1873)
 
On Sun, 15 May 2005 09:52:51 +0100, Austin Shackles
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>any comments?
>
>they appear to offer what would be ideal for my project, a 110 galv chassis
>built up with either S/H suspension and axles, or with reconned axles.
>
>new brake pads, hoses, springs, dampers in either case.
>
>I've written to DVLA to enquire about the various registration
>possibilities... AFAICS, putting a different body on a land rover is
>"radically rebuilt vehicle" and provided it retains its chassis and main
>components, it's not a problem.
>
>However, starting from a shiny new chassis with recon/new components on it
>has its attractions...

If you replace the chassis with one made to the original
specifications, and retain the rest of the vehicle, then there's no
reason why you shouldn't keep the identity of the vehicle the parts
came from. Even if you go for new axles, provided you keep the
original engine and transmission you can still keep the identity.

See http://www.dvla.gov.uk/vehicles/regrebil.htm

Alex
 
On Sun, 15 May 2005 09:52:51 +0100, Austin Shackles
<[email protected]> made me spill my meths when he wrote:

>However, starting from a shiny new chassis with recon/new components on it
>has its attractions...

You going to use an existing registered vehicle and replace the
chassis with a new one? I understood that to be perfectly fine, the
bits you are going to recon will be from the same vehicle of course :)

I saw Richards Chassis' at Billing a few years back, they looked good
as well. He had a galv bulkhead on the stand as well, apparently a one
off though from memory.

http://www.richardschassis.co.uk/

They aren't a million miles from one another either, near Doncaster
--

Wayne Davies, Harrogate 07989 556213

Just another point of view...
www.4x4prejudice.org
 
On or around Sun, 15 May 2005 09:03:44 GMT, Alex <[email protected]>
enlightened us thusly:

>On Sun, 15 May 2005 09:52:51 +0100, Austin Shackles
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>any comments?
>>
>>they appear to offer what would be ideal for my project, a 110 galv chassis
>>built up with either S/H suspension and axles, or with reconned axles.
>>
>>new brake pads, hoses, springs, dampers in either case.
>>
>>I've written to DVLA to enquire about the various registration
>>possibilities... AFAICS, putting a different body on a land rover is
>>"radically rebuilt vehicle" and provided it retains its chassis and main
>>components, it's not a problem.
>>
>>However, starting from a shiny new chassis with recon/new components on it
>>has its attractions...
>
>If you replace the chassis with one made to the original
>specifications, and retain the rest of the vehicle, then there's no
>reason why you shouldn't keep the identity of the vehicle the parts
>came from. Even if you go for new axles, provided you keep the
>original engine and transmission you can still keep the identity.
>
>See http://www.dvla.gov.uk/vehicles/regrebil.htm

yeah, well... I looked at that and it don't answer all the questions.

Actually, it's supposed to end up with a 3.9V8 and ZF auto, so it's not
keeping whatever engine it comes with. The new chassis plus recon running
gear option would effectively make it a new vehicle, though, and it won;t be
able to have the identity of the transit, as it'll not have any of the
mechanicals.

swapping the engine/box wouldn't be a problem with keeping the original
chassis and axles and so forth, as that gets enough points.


Thing is, it's got to be pretty well watertight on the legality, 'cos if I
do get to build it it'll be PCV licensed. I also want to avoid Q-plates if
at all possible, as it might give insurance grief.


--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.fsnet.co.uk my opinions are just that
Travel The Galaxy! Meet Fascinating Life Forms...
------------------------------------------------\
>> http://www.schlockmercenary.com/ << \ ...and Kill them.
a webcartoon by Howard Tayler; I like it, maybe you will too!
 
Austin Shackles wrote:

>
> any comments?
>snip

>
>
Austin,
I'm building up a coil sprung Lightweight using one of their chassis,
and to be honest I haven't had any problems so far.

Customer service seems quite good, although communications were a little one
sided (that could have been because they were moving that week).

Ian , their engineer(?) is spot on and is happy to discuss any modifications
or non standard fittings.

Quality of the chassis and galvanising is good.

Hmm not a lot else to say..

HTH
Mark
--
Nothing is more precious than Independence and Liberty
 
On or around Sun, 15 May 2005 10:30:32 GMT, [email protected]
enlightened us thusly:

>On Sun, 15 May 2005 09:52:51 +0100, Austin Shackles
><[email protected]> made me spill my meths when he wrote:
>
>>However, starting from a shiny new chassis with recon/new components on it
>>has its attractions...
>
>You going to use an existing registered vehicle and replace the
>chassis with a new one? I understood that to be perfectly fine, the
>bits you are going to recon will be from the same vehicle of course :)

well, aye, that's an option: buy a cheap 110 with a knacked chassis, then
replace the chassis and recon the axles etc. meself. The option of a
rolling chassis all assembled with no bodywork to remove is attractive,
though, and not as expensive as it sounds.

--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.fsnet.co.uk my opinions are just that
Appearances: You don't really need make-up. Celebrate your authentic
face by frightening people in the street.
from the Little Book of Complete B***ocks by Alistair Beaton.
 
On Sun, 15 May 2005 09:52:51 +0100, Austin Shackles
<[email protected]> wrote:

>any comments?

My mate had a rolling coil sprung 88inch chassis off them about 5
years ago.
No complaints except that they galvanised it after bolting on the
removable gearbox x-member.

 
On or around Sun, 15 May 2005 14:28:01 +0100, Tom Woods
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>On Sun, 15 May 2005 09:52:51 +0100, Austin Shackles
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>any comments?
>
>My mate had a rolling coil sprung 88inch chassis off them about 5
>years ago.
>No complaints except that they galvanised it after bolting on the
>removable gearbox x-member.

Hmmm. sounds good enough then. I wonder if they make a V8-engine one - I
noted when I fitted and RRV8 in my previous 110 that the engine mounting
points had to move forward about 4" to get the propshafts etc. to line up.


--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.fsnet.co.uk my opinions are just that
Soon shall thy arm, unconquered steam! afar Drag the slow barge, or
drive the rapid car; Or on wide-waving wings expanded bear the
flying chariot through the field of air.- Erasmus Darwin (1731-1802)
 
In message <[email protected]>
Austin Shackles <[email protected]> wrote:

> On or around Sun, 15 May 2005 09:03:44 GMT, Alex <[email protected]>
> enlightened us thusly:
>
> >On Sun, 15 May 2005 09:52:51 +0100, Austin Shackles
> ><[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>any comments?
> >>
> >>they appear to offer what would be ideal for my project, a 110 galv chassis
> >>built up with either S/H suspension and axles, or with reconned axles.
> >>
> >>new brake pads, hoses, springs, dampers in either case.
> >>
> >>I've written to DVLA to enquire about the various registration
> >>possibilities... AFAICS, putting a different body on a land rover is
> >>"radically rebuilt vehicle" and provided it retains its chassis and main
> >>components, it's not a problem.
> >>
> >>However, starting from a shiny new chassis with recon/new components on it
> >>has its attractions...
> >
> >If you replace the chassis with one made to the original
> >specifications, and retain the rest of the vehicle, then there's no
> >reason why you shouldn't keep the identity of the vehicle the parts
> >came from. Even if you go for new axles, provided you keep the
> >original engine and transmission you can still keep the identity.
> >
> >See http://www.dvla.gov.uk/vehicles/regrebil.htm
>
> yeah, well... I looked at that and it don't answer all the questions.
>
> Actually, it's supposed to end up with a 3.9V8 and ZF auto, so it's not
> keeping whatever engine it comes with. The new chassis plus recon running
> gear option would effectively make it a new vehicle, though, and it won;t be
> able to have the identity of the transit, as it'll not have any of the
> mechanicals.
>
> swapping the engine/box wouldn't be a problem with keeping the original
> chassis and axles and so forth, as that gets enough points.
>

As I read it - need to *retain* points, not gain them. So, for a leaf
sprung Series motor, you can change the chassis to a coil sprung one,
but changing the engine will put you one point over.

And, yes, there are an awfult lot of "illegally registered" vehicles
out there.........

Richard

<snip>

--
www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk [email protected]
Running a business in a Microsoft free environment - it can be done
Powered by Risc-OS - you won't get a virus from us!!
Helping keep Land Rovers on and off the road to annoy the Lib Dems
 
On Sun, 15 May 2005 14:59:34 +0100, Austin Shackles
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On or around Sun, 15 May 2005 14:28:01 +0100, Tom Woods
><[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>
>>On Sun, 15 May 2005 09:52:51 +0100, Austin Shackles
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>any comments?
>>
>>My mate had a rolling coil sprung 88inch chassis off them about 5
>>years ago.
>>No complaints except that they galvanised it after bolting on the
>>removable gearbox x-member.
>
>Hmmm. sounds good enough then. I wonder if they make a V8-engine one - I
>noted when I fitted and RRV8 in my previous 110 that the engine mounting
>points had to move forward about 4" to get the propshafts etc. to line up.

They'll make whatever you ask them too. Down to little shelves with
lips round the edge (fixed to the chassis/outrigger) so that you can
fit a battery under the passenger seat. Made to measure to a specified
battery too.
 
>
>yeah, well... I looked at that and it don't answer all the questions.
>
>Actually, it's supposed to end up with a 3.9V8 and ZF auto, so it's not
>keeping whatever engine it comes with. The new chassis plus recon running
>gear option would effectively make it a new vehicle, though, and it won;t be
>able to have the identity of the transit, as it'll not have any of the
>mechanicals.
>
>swapping the engine/box wouldn't be a problem with keeping the original
>chassis and axles and so forth, as that gets enough points.

Nothing to say you have to do all the changes at the same time. Change
the chassis, then at a later date change the engine/box. This is
assuming that you tell them you've changed the chassis in the first
place. A set of number punches will provide the new chassis with the
old identity.

>Thing is, it's got to be pretty well watertight on the legality, 'cos if I
>do get to build it it'll be PCV licensed. I also want to avoid Q-plates if
>at all possible, as it might give insurance grief.

Are you sure? Have you any idea how hard it is to get vehicles which
were not designed for PCV through a PCV MOT? The PCV MOT regs are
horrendous.

Alex
 
I used a designa chassis on my 90. build of it was ok. galvanising was ok.
customer service leaves a lot to desired!
I told them I was putting a V8 in with a ZF 4 speed auto and the told me no
problem they will fit the mounts to match same. When I got it the engine
mounts were 3" too far forward and I ended up making my own mounts.
I also asked them to include the body to chassis mounts at the front of the
rear tub as mine were rotten. They said they would but in the end they
didn't.
I asked if the gearbox cross member was included, they said it was but when
the chassis turned up it was missing. When I phoned and asked where it was
(the driver wasnt interested!) they said they never include it.
Wish I had gone to Richards chassis !

Richard
"Austin Shackles" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> any comments?
>
> they appear to offer what would be ideal for my project, a 110 galv
> chassis
> built up with either S/H suspension and axles, or with reconned axles.
>
> new brake pads, hoses, springs, dampers in either case.
>
> I've written to DVLA to enquire about the various registration
> possibilities... AFAICS, putting a different body on a land rover is
> "radically rebuilt vehicle" and provided it retains its chassis and main
> components, it's not a problem.
>
> However, starting from a shiny new chassis with recon/new components on it
> has its attractions...
>
>
> --
> Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.fsnet.co.uk my opinions are just that
> "Ask yourself whether you are happy, and you cease to be so."
> John Stuart Mill (1806 - 1873)


 
On Sun, 15 May 2005 13:16:57 +0100, Austin Shackles
<[email protected]> made me spill my meths when he wrote:

>I also want to avoid Q-plates if
>at all possible, as it might give insurance grief.

I haven't been in a position to test this but I understood that Q
plates aren't as bad as you might think. Things like engineers reports
and the like might suggest that a Q plated vehicle has had more
stringent checks than others. And once done, the MoT man will keep you
on the straight and narrow :)

There was an interesting forward control style vehicle in the Seacroft
area of Leeds some years back. It was based on a Range Rover and had
corrugated panels for bodywork. The front was heavily glazed,
including down by the feet for excellent break over vision. It looked
grey in colour, very utilitarian, reminded me of those old big Citroen
vans, almost as if an aluminium extrusion double glazing firm had done
it. Anyone here know more, surely it can't have just disappeared.
--

Wayne Davies, Harrogate 07989 556213

Just another point of view...
www.4x4prejudice.org
 
On or around Sun, 15 May 2005 14:51:17 +0000 (UTC), beamendsltd
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>> swapping the engine/box wouldn't be a problem with keeping the original
>> chassis and axles and so forth, as that gets enough points.
>>
>
>As I read it - need to *retain* points, not gain them. So, for a leaf
>sprung Series motor, you can change the chassis to a coil sprung one,
>but changing the engine will put you one point over.
>

'zackly. If I retain the original chassis, axles, steering, suspension,
then changing the engine/box is not a problem, as the other lot accrue
enough points to keep the original reg.


The problems arise with building what is effectively a new vehicle.
However, that has to be possible, as the bearmach lot (IIRC) built a new
series III a bit back and got a 1998 or whatever plate on it.

--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.fsnet.co.uk my opinions are just that
"Remember that to change your mind and follow him who sets you right
is to be none the less free than you were before."
Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (121-180), from Meditations, VIII.16
 
On or around Sun, 15 May 2005 10:30:32 GMT, [email protected]
enlightened us thusly:

>
>http://www.richardschassis.co.uk/
>


coo, shiny.

'ere, how come no-one's making replacement chassis for Classic Rangies?

--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.fsnet.co.uk my opinions are just that
In Touch: Get in touch with yourself by touching yourself.
If somebody is watching, stop touching yourself.
from the Little Book of Complete B***ocks by Alistair Beaton.
 
Austin Shackles wrote:
> On or around Sun, 15 May 2005 10:30:32 GMT, [email protected]
> enlightened us thusly:
>
>
>>http://www.richardschassis.co.uk/
>>
>
> coo, shiny.
>
> 'ere, how come no-one's making replacement chassis for Classic Rangies?
>

Probably because the bodies to fit them disintegrate quicker than the
chassis!
 
> They'll make whatever you ask them too.......
erm, read my other post
Richard


"Tom Woods" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 15 May 2005 14:59:34 +0100, Austin Shackles
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>On or around Sun, 15 May 2005 14:28:01 +0100, Tom Woods
>><[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>>
>>>On Sun, 15 May 2005 09:52:51 +0100, Austin Shackles
>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>any comments?
>>>
>>>My mate had a rolling coil sprung 88inch chassis off them about 5
>>>years ago.
>>>No complaints except that they galvanised it after bolting on the
>>>removable gearbox x-member.
>>
>>Hmmm. sounds good enough then. I wonder if they make a V8-engine one - I
>>noted when I fitted and RRV8 in my previous 110 that the engine mounting
>>points had to move forward about 4" to get the propshafts etc. to line up.
>
> They'll make whatever you ask them too. Down to little shelves with
> lips round the edge (fixed to the chassis/outrigger) so that you can
> fit a battery under the passenger seat. Made to measure to a specified
> battery too.


 
>
> As I read it - need to *retain* points, not gain them. So, for a leaf
> sprung Series motor, you can change the chassis to a coil sprung one,
> but changing the engine will put you one point over.
>
> And, yes, there are an awfult lot of "illegally registered" vehicles
> out there.........
>
> Richard


But if you change the chassis to a coil sprung one you would
also have to change the suspension and the axles so you would
only end up with 5 points
--
Andy

SWB Series 2a ( dressed as a 3) "Bruce"
It's big, it's mean it's really, really green


 
"MVP" <mr.nice@*nospam*softhome.net> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 16 May 2005 17:02:26 +0100, "Andy.Smalley"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>>
>>> As I read it - need to *retain* points, not gain them. So, for a leaf
>>> sprung Series motor, you can change the chassis to a coil sprung one,
>>> but changing the engine will put you one point over.
>>>
>>> And, yes, there are an awfult lot of "illegally registered" vehicles
>>> out there.........
>>>
>>> Richard
>>
>>
>>But if you change the chassis to a coil sprung one you would
>>also have to change the suspension and the axles so you would
>>only end up with 5 points
>
> you could 'adapt' the axles to take coil springs.
>
>
> Regards.
> Mark.
> --


I wondered about that but are they still original?
AIUI if you modify the chassis it's not to original specification
does the same apply to axles?
even so you still only end up with 7 points
--
Andy

SWB Series 2a ( dressed as a 3) "Bruce"
It's big, it's mean it's really, really green


 
In message <[email protected]>
"Andy.Smalley" <[email protected]> wrote:

> >
> > As I read it - need to *retain* points, not gain them. So, for a leaf
> > sprung Series motor, you can change the chassis to a coil sprung one,
> > but changing the engine will put you one point over.
> >
> > And, yes, there are an awfult lot of "illegally registered" vehicles
> > out there.........
> >
> > Richard
>
>
> But if you change the chassis to a coil sprung one you would
> also have to change the suspension and the axles so you would
> only end up with 5 points

The scores on the doors:
------------------------
Chassis/Body Shell/Monocoque 5 Points
Suspension 2 Points
Axles 2 Points
Transmission 2 Points
Steering 2 Points
Engine 1 Point

The blurb:
----------
"This covers vehicles which are substantially altered from their
original specification, but which are not kit conversions".

"In these cases the vehicle components used from the original
vehicle will be given a numerical value and, in order to retain
the original registration mark the vehicle must score eight or
more points.
If less than eight points are scored or a second-hand or modified
chassis or altered monocoque bodyshell is used an ESVA/SVA/MSVA
certificate will be required to register the vehicle and a 'Q'
prefix registration number will be allocated."

So, our hypothetical Series vehicle with a coil sprung chassis
fitted will only retain 3 points even if fitted with the original
engine and gearbox - 5 Points short!

The chassis will be changed - no points retained
The suspension will change (leaf to coil) - no points retained
The axles will be changed - no points retained
The steering will be changed - no points retained

Whether modifying an existing axle to take coils would retain
the points could be debated - but the quote above: "substantially
altered from their original specification" would imply not.

Richard

--
www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk [email protected]
Running a business in a Microsoft free environment - it can be done
Powered by Risc-OS - you won't get a virus from us!!
Helping keep Land Rovers on and off the road to annoy the Lib Dems
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

dag019
Hypothetical project feasibility
Replies
17
Views
3K
FlyingPete
FlyingPete
payydg
Swapping Chassis number onto rebuild - DVLA advice
Replies
0
Views
5K
payydg
payydg
cornish rattler
Planning Ahead For Chassis Swap
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
cornish rattler
cornish rattler
S
Defender 90 2.5TDi on a TD5 chassis?
Replies
3
Views
1K
Swidds
S
farmershort
110 Defender v8 options??
2 3 4
Replies
67
Views
8K
farmershort
farmershort
Back
Top