Does anybody know if this is really true? I was seriously toying with the idea of importing an English built car from the 60's era but this makes me very wary as a lot of old cars have some kind of non-standard parts, I don't mean performance enhancing, but other regular things that get changed throughout the car's life time.
And it also begs the question, how can the guys at MFK know every detail about every old car on the road!? I can't believe that.
Cheers.
If you want it registered as a classic, then yes.
Normal registration, then no.
Tom
So if somebody wants to bring in a customised classic they can just register it as a regular car and it's then just tested by the MFK on grounds of safety? Alternatively, what's the advantage of registering as a classic? Can you elaborate a bit? Thanks.
If you want to register it as a classic car (much less tax, but only a few thousnd kilometers may be driven per year) it has to be in original condition.
Have at home two links to two good document which I will share tonight.
Its not upto them to know, its upto you to prove it we have 3 older cars (MG and Rovers) and MFK time is a total nightmare, just because a part passed last time doesn't mean it will this time etc
If you go for the "Oldtimer" MFK your experience will vary from inspector to inspector, and also from inspection station to inspection station.
I've put quite a few cars through the Veteran MFK. Most of the inspectors will tolerate minor modifications that don't stand out as being out of period. Minor things like Chromed parts will generally get through, as will invisible mods (like electrically assisted Power Steering or LED instrument lighting, modern heat/sound insulation under carpets), remember they are only allowed to check the car visually (i.e. not dismount any parts).
Truth is, the inspectors who were actually able to spot originality changes (disc brake upgrades to an original drum system) are mostly retired now. The younger guys just don't know the cars - I put a big Healey through the MFK this summer, and had to show the guy how to use the trafficator... he said he thought they just didn't have indicators.
Some inspectors will object to things like a 123 Distributor, or braided brake lines, although I've never had anyone really object to a radiator mounted electric fan. Most of the time if you explain that the OEM part is NLA, or not up to the safety standards or current traffic levels they will usually agree with you.
Basically, as long as the VIN and engine number match, the glass is intact (and has a safety mark), the brakes, shocks, lights and speedo etc work and the car _appears_ to be stock, you will get through. If you show up with a chopped, channeled Mach II Mustang with a Chevy Bus motor, Jag IRS and NOx you won't get through the MFK.
In general, the older and rarer the car, the easier the testing is. This summer I did a 1920's Rolls Royce. After explaining that this car has a Diff that a normal brake tester would damage (and showed him a printout from an English Forum detailing that) he just tested the brakes on a flat section of road. The car was clearly in very good nick, and it was clear that we weren't trying to sneak something through the inspection.
Between us my family has a fleet of six classic Minis, dating from '63-92. As well as an old Rover estate that (if I'm not mistaken) is a few years older than the ones bigblue2 has.
As long as the bodywork has been in reasonable condition,ie; no structural rust problems, no fluid leaks, and the car is safely road-worthy, we've had no serious problems with passing the Visite (what you're calling the MFK) with any of them in canton Geneva. The oldest Mini is due to be tested again in March so fingers crossed for her.
Replacement/upgrade parts have usually been accepted without comment, and it's almost impossible to get original parts these days so that's a blessing.
We do know others with similar cars who've done major work and then been been told to revert to drum brakes when they'd been replaced with discs, top-end exhaust systems aren't liked, braided brake cables have been queried and not always accepted despite being longer wearing for example.
It's to some extent a bit hit and miss, can often depend on the bloke doing the test on that particular day, and (possibly) what type of car you're trying to get through the test!
That leaves the 400 Estate from the 90s or a Rover Montego Estate - which is not a Rover it is an Austin!
Main advantage of registring a 'vintage' as such is that you have to renew MFK/MOT only every 6 years instead of 2-3, and you have some discount on insurance. On the other hand, you're not allowed to drive it more than 3000KM/yeas.
However, what you MUST visit if you're a petrolhead is the british car meeting in Morges (Lac Leman/Lake Geneva) between Lausanne and Geneva: http://www.british-cars.ch/index_a.html
Definitely a Rover, all the badges and paperwork say so; although my stepfather (who was a test driver for the Tuning department at The Cowley Works) always insisted it's really a Honda in disguise!
We also had Austin Maestro from new, that lasted nearly 34 years before it finally gave up the ghost and was retired to the Great Scrapyard in the Sky last summer.
Not that it matters, it's a wonderful car and OH is more than happy we've managed to keep ours on the road, albeit with a lot of help from an enthusiastic garage mechanic who spent hours tweeking the tick-over last year to get Rover through the emissions test!
I think you'll find yours is either a GSi or SLi.
Back in the day we had one of perkins powered Montegos - the SL - which was the mid-level trim (above the L). 6 months later the they were superceeded by X versions (LX and SLX), with my uncle buying the LX model. Arguments ensued between myself and my cousin based on him saying, incorrectly, the LX was a better trim level than the SL - Xs were important to boys in short trousers.
Superbly economical engine the Perkins diesel but utterly agricultural up against the PSA unit used in the 200/400.
The Montego was traded for a 620GSI a few years later - which was a return to quiet cruising - as the Montego had replaced a 2.5l Senator.
Big mistake to reply to the inspector I failed with the request to replace disks, which of course you cannot replace only one side only. and the pads ended up with 600chf bill and I just paid the mechanic to do the tests for me.
So next time just listen.
Although in the report sheet there are test numbers of the break and they were fine.
The inspector picked up that the outside shoulders of the front tyres were looking a little worn - I asked what he thought of the middle 75% - he said it looked OK. I said that the wear would have come from spirited driving and not having entirely found the ideal trail braking level for the car. He smiled and said "not to worry, I am just letting you know, you don't have to replace them."
I took my daily driver (1998 Alfa 145) for the MFK today... the inspector didn't notice the area of the sill where the jacking point is collapsed in, but he did note that the rear wiper blade ought to be replaced, that one headlight is a bit too high, and that there is a mark on the sidewall of one (winter) tire indicating that someone drove it without air for a fair distance (a previous owner). I don't need to go back and prove that these faults have been rectified. I will rectify them, including the sill, as I want to keep this car running until both kids have passed their drivers license.
So there you go. Some inspectors will go OTT, some won't.
By the way, Ken, you know when they do the brake testing the device shows the difference in Braking force Left to Right as a percentage, right? I asked him about this today, specifically how much difference is allowed Left to Right. I expected him to say 5%. No, anything under 30% difference is allowed. I was a bit surprised... 30% difference would easily put you in a spin with a dual circuit system, I guess the ABS (if you have it) compensates so well that 30% is ok. I specifically asked if this was only for cars with ABS, no 30% regardless of ABS or not.