Jump to content

Dutton/robin Hood?


Guest smitty12

Recommended Posts

Guest Kennedy48

As I'm thinking, a gbs/hood is from a ford sierra (or other) but nothing on new gbs/hood logbook says what car the original parts are from. If you use running gear from a lightweight that's the same as a sierra. And iva approve build as good quality. Selling the car on it doesn't Matter where the stuff came from, eg ford or ford to hood to gbs.

Again I'm just makig this up. I have no evidence. Just my thoughts.

 

Using a lightweight and sticking it on zero and not telling anyone is, yes illigal. Just like changing an engine and not telling anyone.

 

Luke

(Just my tired mind thinking)

Mine is.make Robin Hood

Model 2B

Body type sports

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 90
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

dave your right

you would not buy a lighweight badged as a lightweight but you know what is what..and what the lightweight will bring ,

i am exploroing the internet to find answers .i am in a difficult podition cos the lightweight is bol swasdhedc

cant repaire cannt replace . a prob.

 

what bdo i do ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dad,

 

Most of us on here know the quality of your builds and if you " re shelled" the lightwieght it wouldnt be a question of safety by anyone on here,,, but you may not ever want to sell it or sell it to someone on here,,, thats your dilema!

 

Saying that, the reshell option is a quick fix and you dont do quick fix's. so take the plunge and do it properly, you know you want to anyway and I'm sure vosa have forgotten about you by now. Lol,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest alfaGTA

essentially in order to remove the lightweight diff the chassis (as such) will have to be altered, a new chassis is not available so the only option is to repair the diff and reassemble if possible? If that is not possible then radically alter the chassis and submit for iva is the only option? If a new lightweight chassis was available from GBS for example at £20k would that put a different perspective on it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest RH CAT 7

i think this could go on and on ,pro s and cons of lightweight to zero ect. but more and more cars are going to swop over to zero s. be it a mono or 2b or lightweight, even the club names going that way!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ill just add one more for GDC as I feel you know full well the answer and in some way trying to justify what you know is wrong.

Your argument to rebody using another product from the GBS range is as illegal as to rebody an MGB as an MGA or MGC without going through an IVA

In most ways it's chassis dependant, if GBS had a standard chassis across the range then a re body or even a re chassis would be in the grey areas but they don't and its not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

would have to agree with Snapperpaul i'm afraid. i think it has mostly been said but my own thoughts (and understanding) are that if you change the chassis or alter it significantly you have to go through IVA (or sva back in the day).

 

For example Banham did the TT thing on a metro and cut the roof off and added some framework to the metro chassis. For a while this got past SVA requirements but eventually they were forced to go through SVA as the metro was significantly altered. IE it was not designed to have the roof missing. The Porsche speedsters use most of a beetle chassis but they have to go through as they have been chopped. Whereas a beachbuggy using a full beetle chassis doesn't because the chassis is still the same. (hope i am still correct in thinking this - was certainly true whilst SVA was around)

 

The MG thing seems a bit of a grey area to me as you are changing the chassis entirely but going like for like. I still think this should go through IVA but in the real world you would probably get away with it if one of those had a crash with a 'lightweight with a zero chassis' the investigators would look at the 2 and say ' well the mg looks standard to me everything in the correct place etc, but hang on this 'lightweight' has a spaceframe when it should have a monocoque according to the literature'.

 

I am not sure how 'they' would know if you were to do alterations to your chassis though. ie if you built a subframe for your lightweight how would they know that this hadn't passed SVA like this. I have been thinking of changing my sierra subframe for a double wishbone system on my 2b and i can't see how they could say one way or the other that i hadn't always had that as there are no pics taken at sva. But the 2b does already have a subframe so could be argued that it was designed that way as opposed to the lightweight which wasn't.

 

personally i think get it sorted through IVA if you change everything to a new chassis. But If you can do a small mod and make a diff carrier then its the same car and continue on. Safety first though as £450 for IVA is a small price to pay to know that you did everything correctly when you are carrying a passenger!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

agent zed you make a good case and the mods i had to make to the lightweight to achive iva were far from the origonal design so was that correct .

i have posted for responce i do this from time to time .

i have enjoyed the responses, and i never intended to ring my lightweight , phill shelton and i scrapped it 2 weeks ago . i got £85 for the shell .

my zero is sold and has emmigrated to the far north (scotland )

 

please get this forum talking the way it used to .

 

graham

Link to comment
Share on other sites

snapperpaul

yes i did know the answer , i put the question to debate, and you bit , a touch aggressive i thought .

i will not ring my lightweight , i have been through the ringer with the lightweight , to get it on the road . not going to

expose myself further , cos this is a public forum and my thoughts are public ..the lightweight was floored in its designe and was equally never designed to have 200 horses under the bonnett.

the engine bay floor cracked even with steel inserts added , and the diff did a nose dive .

eventually the diff failed and to replace the diff .the car was a rightoff as no way to replace the diff in situe ,

fortunatly there are still several still on the road , i think 6 in total .

 

graham

 

ps love to talk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the diff is totaly enclosed in the the monocoque of the car and is the first componant fitted and monocoque built round it. the only way to remove it is to cut in to the struture of the car with a 9" angle grinder

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...