genuine or repro ??? That is the question !

[shaun]

As an engineer and a restorer of military vehicles since 1981 I am fully in favor of repro parts to complete a project (infact i have just made the top Armour that was missing from my current project). And yes engines, transmissions, running grear all get changed while in service. But in all my years in the Road Transport industry, Military and now the museum world the chassis or Hull (lower hull in carriers) has always been "the Vehicle". If you make a new chassis that is a different vehicle to the one you are restoring, Reparing the chassis is one thing but replacment ???? After a massive landrover show near Peterbobrough last year the Police and DVLA were stopping landrovers and checking chassis, Vins and components. When they found rebuilt vehicles on old reg numbers (upgraded to coil spring and desiel engines )they were conficated and crushed (any vehicle manufactured before jan 1973 is road tax exempt ). Having a used a few old spares on a new chassis does not make it a 1942 vehicle etc.

The other thing to take into consideration are "Safety critical" parts. Brakes, steering, tracks etc. do the parts that have been "reproduced" or repaired meet the construction and use standards ? This area is such a mine field (no pun intented) as any bad publicty due to a poorly built vehicle, involved in an accident and then inspected by VOSA could end up with our vehicles becming banned from the road.

With todays technolagy it is possible to re-manufacture anything, as has been proved with WW2 Jeeps. But is a "repro" Jeep the same value or interest as one that has seen service and been places ? to me a major part of the value is in the object history, sitting in behind the armour or in the hull of something that was used in 1940 is part of the thought provoking experence.

Why are my views such, there are so many good restores out there rebuilding real vehicles and then there are the few who are in it for the money or the glory.

I realise this will touch a nerve with people, but you either have a real Jeep / carrier etc or a repro.

TTFN

[RichardT10829]

personally i am all for repro parts but only because if they are there it will prevent further carriers being pilfered or chopped (my romantic imagination says so) i do believe that these mods should be declared for sure and it is very much down to the owner to do so. i am involved in a reconstruction project at present whereby all of the non salvageable parts or parts new to the boat have been left coated bright green, luckily there is around 98% of that vehicle which is original....now in MV terms this is not really possible as it spoils the asthetics of the machine so what do we do ?

i beleive there is no point stamping the component unless its visable and then by doing so you could ruin the component.... perhaps if this was to be done the MLU family could devise a symbol all be it small bit like the broad arrow which we could spot if we looked for it which would advise of repro or not.


just a thought

I don't believe folk should be passing stuff off as something it is not.... as they say "It is what it is" mind there are very very few carriers out there that can say they are 100% original even during the war

[ajmac]

All vehicles should be 100% original and nothing added to them since they were disposed of postwar.
Great intention, but the simple result would be very few vehicles out there for anyone to see! Virtually no German vehicles at all, that is why the restoration of many Axis vehicles are so shrouded in mystery, it's because all they had was a pallet of bits. In my opinion it doesn't really matter, so long as it looks 100% correct and is based on one particular vehicle that is fine. There is a points system (or was) in the UK for cars and IIRC there used to be some guideline about 15% original parts to keep the ID of a warbird.
Forget our hobby for a moment and look at the wider picture. Take classic / vintage cars which dwarfs the MV hobby.
There are only a small number of original 60's sports cars out there, take a TR6 for example: normally new outer panels, new floor, boot floor, bottom of the A and B pillars, sills, front and rear valence, rare to find the original engine and gearbox by now. New hood, carpets, seats, new chrome trim. That's why 'originality' is such a grey area.
If there were to be a regulation which decreed that all none original parts to that vehicle had to be painted pink, most, if not all wartime vehicles would look hilarious
If you are one of the old boys (like Shaun) who got into the game when wartime restoration projects were cheap and you could find a clutch of them on a farm and buy them for scrap money all well and good. Today is a different story, unless you have pots of money you can't get anything like a carrier on a budget of less than £10k for a wreck (five years ago you could, shows the incredible inflation ATM in the MV world). There was a 100% original Carrier owned since the 1960s going in Lincolnshire not long ago. It needed work but it went for £30k!

I'd much rather see a largely reconstructed range wreck, like my Loyd, out and about than to have to read about them in a book alone....that would be sad.

Having said that I respect everyones opinion and if I had the money I wouldn't have started with such a poor project, I'd have brought the 100% original 'Barn find' Loyd from the Farmer down the road and left the Belgian wrecks to the cutting tourch....would it have made me a better man? I'll never know!

[Lynn Eades]

Shaun says an original lower hull or its a repro. How much of the lower hull?
What about a replacement floor? What about a division plate as well? My "Vehicle" will consist of as many original bits as I can resonably resurrect. the rest I will have to make.
The rules of the various transport authorities in different countries are not the same, and with a carrier, one may even choose not to make it road legal. Personally I dont care what some else thinks. I'll do mine, my way, for me.Thats because it's mine!
I dont have to please anyone else other than my Wife. If I ever choose to sell it, I'll declare what I have done, and I guess if someone does not like what I have done, They won't buy it. Someone else probably will.
I did see an email about an original car once, but was the petrol in the tank original?

[shaun]

All good points guys, My concerns are those who make the things from scratch - and claim they are something than a replica using some genuine parts. like i said im all in favour of repro parts and replacement pannels and i am not out to discredit anybodys work, but to build a vehicle from scratch using odd parts it is still not the same as saving a vehicle

The VOSA / DVLA only have to read some of the post on here and they would see vehicles being maunfactured from scratch in the UK. If these were landrovers and you carried out the same rebuild programe and then fitted a age related number (claiming it to be 1960 say) it could be confiscated and could be crushed. I believe DVLA looks for at least 50% of the original vehicle to be present to be clasified as the original.

One point to learn is we should all becareful what we publish on the internet.

We do need to save as many of the vehicles as possible, but not lets just go out there making new ones. Im sure if i was to make an exact copy of a MK4 WW1 male tank (even incorperating some genuine parts) it would be viewed by all collectors as the "replica". Yes it would be nice to have a WW1 tank for all to see touch and experence move but like Richie says "it is what it is ". it does not detract from the quality of the work but its "not" a WW1 tank at the end of the day and would not be worth the same as a real one. And if it was to be ever road registered it would need a "Q" plate.

Yes Alec, carriers are not laying around in scrap yards these days (well not as much) and they are greatly sort after. Yes i was lucky enough to find some many years ago, but i would like a real Spitfire, at the end of the war there were plenty of those in the scrap yards as well, unfortunalty thats life, i have to put up with a replica but i do not pass it off as real one.

Its one thing to restore a vehicle, its another to make a replica.

I know the carrier in Lincolnshire, not sure what work was needed. it was in very good order when i last see it at Christmas.

remember, just keep smiling and carry on !
(targets up !)

[ajmac]

There used to be a points system for retaining the reg on a vehicle in the UK, it went something like this:
Body: 0 Points
Chassis / Unitary Body: 10 Points
Axles: 8 Points
Engine: 1 Point
etc...
You had to reach 20 Points of some figure in order to retain the ID. However I think that has gone now...

The DLVA state:
Vehicles that have been rebuilt using a mix of new or used parts
In order to retain the original registration mark:

cars and car-derived vans must use:
The original unmodified chassis or unaltered bodyshell (i.e. body and chassis as one unit - monocoque); or a new chassis or monocoque bodyshell of the same specification as the original supported by evidence from the dealer or manufacturer (e.g. receipt).

And two other major components from the original vehicle - ie suspension (front & back); steering assembly; axles (both); transmission or engine.

So, we can summise from this that if a fabrication shop builds an entirly new Carrier monocoque for you from an original pattern this would still enable you to retain the vehicles details and register it as such, so long as you have the axles and and steering gear!

If that's the case for cars (do tracked vehicles sit in a loop hole?) then all the road legal Carriers in the UK ATM are in the clear.