Board logo

Dodgy or what?
Humbug - 4/10/08 at 10:03 AM

Just seen this on ebay.

Described as "Audi TT kit car", Manufacturer "Audi", Model "SIERRA XR4X4"

a quick check of the reg on www.mycarcheck.com says it is a 1991 Ford Sierra Xr4x4 (5 Door Hatchback). The sellet admits it is registered as a Sierra

Strange, cos it looks very like a Banham body...

I wonder if it has been SVAd?


[Edited on 4/10/08 by Humbug]

donut - 4/10/08 at 10:25 AM

Yeah i would say it's a Paul Banham jobby. I don't think that has been anywhere near an SVA station, if it had they would have registered it correctly.

Or they didn't know how to register it.

[Edited on 4/10/08 by donut]

BenB - 4/10/08 at 11:07 AM

Except....

If it's a Paul Banham body most of them (AFAIR) used a standard chassis with the body chopped off it. As the chassis is the same it doesn't need SVA. Then again, some of their later cars used a shortened chassis so maybe it does!!!

mr henderson - 4/10/08 at 11:12 AM

The under bonnet view shows quite a bit of non-Sierra chassis work. I'd be surprised of there was much Sierra shell left in it.

John

Humbug - 4/10/08 at 11:50 AM

quote:
Originally posted by BenB
Except....

If it's a Paul Banham body most of them (AFAIR) used a standard chassis with the body chopped off it. As the chassis is the same it doesn't need SVA. Then again, some of their later cars used a shortened chassis so maybe it does!!!


Except... the Banham used a Metro/Rover 100 as the base, not a Sierra Xr4x4!

Also, according to my understanding, even if they used a Metro as the base, it was not the "original unaltered chassis" if the roof has been chopped off, so it should be SVAd

[Edited on 04.10.2008 by Humbug]

BenB - 4/10/08 at 12:32 PM

Yes, that's what I wondered as I wrote my post!!!

But there certainly were cars on the road working on the principle that the chassis was original (even if altered) therefore no SVA...

... then again doesn't make it right!!

(I must admit I didn't look at the under GRP shots, I've got a slightly sensitive stomach and expected nasties!!!)....

clairetoo - 4/10/08 at 02:07 PM

quote:
Originally posted by mr henderson
The under bonnet view shows quite a bit of non-Sierra chassis work. I'd be surprised of there was much Sierra shell left in it.

John

I'd be very surprised if there was any Sierra metalwork on it at all.................

Chippy - 4/10/08 at 02:28 PM

The add states XR4X4 running gear, doesn't mention the chassis, which looking at the pictures seems to be a tubular effort, (note- not spaceframe). Cheers Ray

GregSL75 - 4/10/08 at 06:32 PM

My Dad built a Banham XJSS quite a few years ago:




It has never been SVA'd although is registered as XJss on the V5. I've often wondered whether it should be because it started life as a coupe XJS and had the roof chopped and then subsequent strengthening bars added to give it some rigidity back. But to my mind that's altering the chassis as it's a monoquoque??

It was sold and built as not requiring one, but that is no guarantee obviously. I have a mate who fell foul of that with a Landranger Rangerover kit and that was sold as not requiring SVA (only modified the ladder chassis by removing a couple of feet off the back overhang, not between the axles, same as any bobtail) One was involved in an accident and then taken away and crushed, Landranger were taken to court and they have folded now.

gingerpaule - 4/10/08 at 09:43 PM

Do the Z-Car Minis have a similar issue or are they typically SVAed too?