I've just found my next project! And I'll stick with MK:
http://www.freewebs.com/mega-r1/mini_index.html
cool
I want one......
Rescued attachment images.jpg
Yeah I know
Cheers
Chris
nice one!
Wauw very cool. And probably no SVA ???
Isaw this being built in Martins workshop,the usual quality build,looked a very strong construction,and yes no SVA.
But I cannot see how bradwood motor sport will get anywhere near there weight of 400kgs,a little optimistic .
I think it will be at least 525kgs and thats only if they use perspex windows and fibreglass panels and doors etc, but I may be proved wrong.
How did that avoid the SVA - surely it has to be classed as a new chassis?
cool ....... any idea on cost
That thing will be a real handful, so much power to the rear and such a small wheelbase. Anyone agree??
Cheers
Most importantly; Snoopy, will it go into production?
I'm already dreaming about the specs.... I've even decided on the colour! R1 blue, with a carbon fibre roof!
I WANT ONE! (but first I'll go back in the garage to work on my Indy...)
i saw it at martins last time i was over, and wondered how long before someone with no imagination copies it like what everyone does with martins
idea. on the sva side i think it's a case of keep your f#####g mouth shut and no one will know... insurance could be a prob we run a dropped body
kitted corsa with a 1.2 motor and that's a grand a year and i'm 54 but thats an agread value of 12 grand
tony
http://www.zcars.org.uk/mini/mini_single_rl.htm
There are other people doing it already.
Yep - been done many times before.
So if we all keep our mouths shut can I avoid SVA and just keep my mechanicals registered as a Sierra please.
That "mini" would not have enough of anything to qualify for an age related plate - I cannot see how it could possibly be legal without an
SVA. There have been enough people complaining about spurious registrations on here before now, but soemthing like this and it is OK????
Dont see a problem myself,it's no different to a beetle based buggy.
The Mini's body is the chassis,and the body is all there!Same steering ,front suspension,slight difference in engine and position thats all,with
a roll cage.
And yes I've seen it,I was there when the owner dropped it off and he discussed the design draft with Martin.
Dean C.
PS. SSHHH !
quote:
Originally posted by DEAN C.
Dont see a problem myself,it's no different to a beetle based buggy.
The Mini's body is the chassis,and the body is all there!Same steering ,front suspension,slight difference in engine and position thats all,with a roll cage.
Is it done as shown? Are there any more tubes to be added? Reason I ask is that nothing prevents the rear shock pickup point from moving up and
down. Needs better triangulation forward to the cage...
[Edited on 11/5/04 by kb58]
quote:
Originally posted by kb58
Is it done as shown? Are there any more tubes to be added? Reason I ask is that nothing prevents the rear shock pickup point from moving up and down. Needs better triangulation forward to the cage...
But the floor and sills go back in.
Does that mean 'cos my porsche has had new floorpans and sills that i should SVA it?
It's like the woodmans axe, he's had it 30 years and it's had 4 new handles and 6 new heads.
Many many cars have serious modifications without recourse to re-registering - bottom line it's a mini shell who decides when you've got a
new car?
Practical Classics "re-built" a TR6 from two pieces of the bulkhead and a reg document a few years ago!!
I think you're being a bit precious.
Cheers
Chris
quote:
Originally posted by chrisg
But the floor and sills go back in.
I accept the point about rebuilding a car such as a TR, but that would be rebuilt to the original design spec, whilst this "Mini" does not
have a chassis which would fit that desription.
If I put Mini outer body panels on my locost chassis when it is finished it will not be a Mini, and I wouldn't expect it to be SVA exempt.
Hi guys,
I'll try and answer some of your questions on my car as best I can.
Firstly, with regards to SVA I am simply following the DVLA rules and have consulted with them at the design stages. If you look at their website, I
score the required 8 points to be classed as a radically altered vehicle. My local DVLA chap is fully aware of what I am doing and is happy that this
is not a kitcar (so no SVA). The sills are Mini as is the bulkhead, steering, front suspension/axles, body shell...... The only possible issue is the
floor, which I can weld a front piece of mini floor in if people need to be really pedantic.
Other examples include the Zcars Mini and Chesil Speedster which full under the same rule - let's face it if the Chesil Speedster doesn't
require SVA......
Secondly, the reason I asked Martin to build me this car was that I loved the Z-cars Mini (and still do) and wanted to buy one. However, I really
wanted double unequal length rear wishbones to allow full adjustability. I learned from my recent Fury build just how important it is to be able to
adjust rear toe-in and camber to get the handling spot on. I'm just a bit like that I guess I think the idea of hand built cars like this is
that you can have them exactly as you want them and I couldn't find anyone who made this off-the-shelf.
In summary, I'm having my first go at building a one-off BEC so no promises on curb weight or how good it will look. They are just my hopes (and
wishes!). We'll give it a go and I'll add some pics as the build progresses.
Regards
Chris
P.S. I really can't praise Martin enough on his contribution to this. It's been said here before, but what a top bloke.
[Edited on 8/11/04 by ChrisBradley04]
[Edited on 8/11/04 by ChrisBradley04]
quote:
Originally posted by ChrisBradley04
However, I really wanted double unequal length rear wishbones to allow full adjustability. I learned from my recent Fury build just how important it is to be able to adjust rear toe-in and camber to get the handling spot on.
quote:
The point system is weighted as follows;
The original or new (direct replacement from the manufacturer) unmodified chassis/monocoque bodyshell has a value of 5
quote:
the suspension (front and back) 2,
quote:
axles (both) 2,
quote:
transmission 2
quote:
steering assembly 2
quote:
engine 1.
Rear adjustment to toe-in is by shims between hub and upright. A well treid and tested MK solution that's cheap and outlasts rose joints.
Your concern is the chassis (5 points) and the DVLA are happy with it. Ironically, if I left the rear in and made it look like an ice cream van I
would require an SVA
.
I guess if we all made enough fuss about it they would define the rules more clearly, remove the discretion of local DVLA officers and perhaps even
ban them from the roads
Thanks for explaining how it avoids the SVA Chris - still sounds potentially suspect to me, but then that has to be down to the specific person who
makes the decision, hope you have it in writing from him.
Someone I know is converting a Fiat Coupe to Sierra Cosworth running gear and the changes to the chassis (incresing the height of the transmission
tunnel) meant that he was told he would have to go through SVA and get a Q plate.
I'm sorry lads but I really dont see what your real objections are to this car being exempt.
This in no shape or form could be considered to be such a radical chassis change as say a locost,it's close i'll admit.
It retains all the sills (strengthened)and the floor is replaced with sectional steel, and floor plates fixed to them.Much stronger than original and
ten times stronger than most rotten minis.
The framework more than makes up for the removal of anything else,and I cant remember much of a bulkhead in my old cooper Mk1 ,this is basically to be
compared with a rally prepared mini in it's basic shell construction.
I've built quite a few Land Rover coilsprung specials on Range Rover chassis for on and off road and these were much less like original than any
of these mini specials.
As for the cosworth cross that Andy mentioned it sounds like duff information to me,other wisethere are a few MGB V8 specials and Morris Minors with
fiat lumps ,and Escort /pinto,V8,zetec,toyota engined specials begging to be SVA'd
Let the lad get on with it,in my opinion it's a well built and modified fun car and probably as safe as anything else on the road or track. Good
luck to him I say.
DEAN...
Good luck to you mate, looks like a great project to me, and much safer than the car it was based on, which is the major reason for SVA tests in the
UK.
Mike
quote:
Originally posted by quadra
and much safer than the car it was based on, which is the major reason for SVA tests in the UK.
Mike
quote:
Originally posted by andyps
quote:
Originally posted by quadra
and much safer than the car it was based on, which is the major reason for SVA tests in the UK.
Mike
And an SVA test would help prove that!!
I guess a crash test is the only way to prove certain elements of safety..............
Last resort only Andy
Barrel rolled whilst navigating in a Landy comp safari motor a few years ago,80 mph downhill,flipped three times before touching the floor and taking
off again,hurt like hell.
I am now a big believer in full harnesses and roll cages,without which I wouldn't be writing this!