|
Author |
A few questions (currently 5,378 views) |
Alex_Rowbottom |
Posted on: August 5th, 2014, 10:58:18 |
 |
|
Minimum Member

Posts: 72
|
|
Ah right okay I don't mind going through the iva as long as it doesn't go on a Q plate. But yeah an older car may be the better option does anyone know of any available for sale? A lot of modifications are going to be done to the shell and I know I am going to need to get someone to do it for me as I'm not going to be capable of carrying the work out myself. |
|
|
 |
Reply: 75 - 113 |
|
 |
simon5666 |
Posted on: August 8th, 2014, 19:00:10 |
 |
|
Baby Member

Posts: 14
|
|
|
Quoted from admin, posted May 23rd, 2014, 19:36:05 at here |
|
AJEC Racing tried to do a Zcars rear engine conversion with a Honda R engine. See http://www.minimarcos.org/memcars/honda/ It wasn't very successful and is being converted back to standard in USA.
Mike Shilvock built a racer with a 2-litre Vauxhall engine in the back. There wasn't much left of the original car!
|
|
that was my old car , a good idea but used the wrong company ... It wasn't a Z cars kit it was a one off custom by Ajec Racing , trouble was the company got sold part way through the build and some of the knowledge went with the original owner of the company. The original quote to do the work seemed to spiral until I had to admit defeat and let them sell the car online. Ajec Racing has since gone , mainly due to the owner being arrested for drug dealing ( 19 years !) and the mechanic who fabricated the exhaust got 9 years for dealing too. If your going to try to make a bike engine mini marcos or Honda vtec go to Z cars . I should of gone to them first . Would love to see photos of my old MM
|
|
|
 |
Reply: 76 - 113 |
|
 |
Alex_Rowbottom |
Posted on: August 15th, 2014, 23:51:45 |
 |
|
Minimum Member

Posts: 72
|
|
Does anyone know if the dimensions of theses seats would fit into a mini marcos? Backrest Height: 918 mm (36.1 inches) Shoulder Width: 517 mm (20.4 inches) Seat Width: 511 mm (20.1 inches) Seat Cushion Depth: 483 mm (19.0 inches) |
|
|
 |
Reply: 77 - 113 |
|
 |
Brian |
Posted on: August 16th, 2014, 16:20:33 |
 |
|
Big Member

Location: San Mateo, CA, USA Posts: 329
Reputation: 0 (tot: ) |
|
which seats are those? And is this a mk1-3 or 4-6?
My sparco evo 2 seats just barely fit into my mk6 -- I'm not sure I'd be able to fit side windows on the car with the seat. I need to find dimensions on it though. |
|
|
 |
Reply: 78 - 113 |
|
 |
Alex_Rowbottom |
Posted on: August 16th, 2014, 17:14:39 |
 |
|
Minimum Member

Posts: 72
|
|
They are recaro sportster cs and most likely mk4 |
|
|
 |
Reply: 79 - 113 |
|
 |
Brian |
Posted on: August 17th, 2014, 16:43:25 |
 |
|
Big Member

Location: San Mateo, CA, USA Posts: 329
Reputation: 0 (tot: ) |
|
My seats are these: http://www.sparcousa.com/product/evo-ii#
If you look at the third image, it has fairly detailed dimensions on there.
The mounting plate, which sticks about 1cm on each side at the bottom, just barely fits between the exhaust tunnel and door sill. The shoulder wing is either just at, or just beyond the plane where the window would close. The top is about as close to the roof as I'd go (couple inches).
As a side note, my mk6 has a lowered floorpan, I don't know when that was introduced, but I suspect it was at mk5 or so. This means there's an additional 2" of headroom near the back of the seat pan. Probably only about 1" extra room where my seat is.
I would consider my seat to be the biggest fitting thing.
In a smaller car, I'd probably need to lean the seat back more, and also if I lifted the seat up a small bit off the floor pan, it would give room for a wider seat or room to move the seat closer to the center of the car, to allow a side window. |
|
|
 |
Reply: 80 - 113 |
|
 |
Alex_Rowbottom |
Posted on: August 17th, 2014, 21:17:51 |
 |
|
Minimum Member

Posts: 72
|
|
|
|
 |
Reply: 81 - 113 |
|
 |
Alex_Rowbottom |
Posted on: August 18th, 2014, 17:04:29 |
 |
|
Minimum Member

Posts: 72
|
|
I have found a mini marcos which I am interested in but it is on a Q plate, but I was wondering if there is a way in getting it off a q plate? Any ideas? |
|
|
 |
Reply: 82 - 113 |
|
 |
jimnaylor |
Posted on: August 19th, 2014, 21:47:28 |
 |
|
Big Member


Location: Bedfordshire Posts: 221
|
|
It's almost impossible to get a car off a q plate. The DVLA proceedures simply don't allow for it. |
|
|
 |
Reply: 83 - 113 |
|
 |
Alex_Rowbottom |
Posted on: August 19th, 2014, 22:06:57 |
 |
|
Minimum Member

Posts: 72
|
|
Oh right okay even if it has all the correct paperwork with it? Like the original paper work with the car? Also what if it is registered incorrectly? As it is currently under the make leyland cars not marcos? Or D&H fibreglass?
Alex |
|
|
 |
Reply: 84 - 113 |
|
 |
jimnaylor |
Posted on: August 20th, 2014, 13:03:22 |
 |
|
Big Member


Location: Bedfordshire Posts: 221
|
|
If it's not registered as a Marcos and the v5 has no referance to Marcos, then you might do it by throwing the leyland v5 away and trying to register it as a new find and get an age related plate. But to do so as minimum it would need a genuine Marcos body/chassis plate and the mechanicals would need to be age related too. But it's iffy and would think you only stand a chance if its a mk3 or earlier. Registering new finds of old cars has been done quite a few times but it's not a simple process, google it,
Paperwork once it's q plated means nothing. I know someone with a 60's lotus europa on a q plate, DVLA agree it was wrongly put on a q plate (it had a chassis change, chassis for lotus' are classed as subframes so can be changed, the inspector didn't know that). But he has been arguing for about 5 years with the support of club lotus and getting nowhere. It's probably going to be exported to Japan where the reg doesn't matter.
Basically it's difficult because the whole reason the rules are there is to stop q cars being sold as genuine, which is ultimately what you are trying to do. |
|
|
 |
Reply: 85 - 113 |
|
 |
Alex_Rowbottom |
Posted on: August 20th, 2014, 21:46:06 |
 |
|
Minimum Member

Posts: 72
|
|
So essentially if I applied with a v62 form and wrote mini marcos for the make and model instead of Leland cars and wrote the chassis number and the engine number in I may be able to get a age related plate |
|
|
 |
Reply: 86 - 113 |
|
 |
Brian |
Posted on: August 20th, 2014, 23:40:58 |
 |
|
Big Member

Location: San Mateo, CA, USA Posts: 329
Reputation: 0 (tot: ) |
|
From the sounds of it, the running gear would need to be from the same vintage as the car's age. Not sure if you'd be able to register it with an old engine, then do your swap you've been looking at... |
|
|
 |
Reply: 87 - 113 |
|
 |
jimnaylor |
Posted on: August 21st, 2014, 12:47:18 |
 |
|
Big Member


Location: Bedfordshire Posts: 221
|
|
I think a V62 is the wrong form. Read these:
https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-registration/old-vehicles
https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-registration/new-registrations
But I strongly suggest you do a through hunt on registering old vehicles and age related plate on google before doing anything.
With things like this there are lots of pitfalls, so something wrong and you might not be able to recover from it. (such as getting it classed incorrectly). There are lots of stories out there.
The DVLA don't do things like this often and the people move about. It can very much depend who you get first looking at your case. But once they have the genuine body number you are in the system so you need to make sure you are doing it right.
Also be aware they may want to inspect the vehicle to check it is what you say it is, hence the mechanicals need to be of the correct age. If they are not an inspector could easily say it's a kit car not a genuine old car which then means a Q plate. Then you are totally stuffed. |
|
|
 |
Reply: 88 - 113 |
|
 |
jimnaylor |
Posted on: August 21st, 2014, 13:16:40 |
 |
|
Big Member


Location: Bedfordshire Posts: 221
|
|
Just looking at the forms highlights the type of issues you will find.
To get a new reg number your car needs a valid MOT, but as far as I'm aware you can't get an MOT without a reg number...... nothing is simple. |
|
|
 |
Reply: 89 - 113 |
|
|