Important Historic Vehicle Survey -

YouTube · Post by **amulheirn** » Tue Apr 12, 2016 8:27 pm

I've noticed that the Federation of British Historic Vehicle Clubs (FBHVC) has just started a survey of 'historic' vehicles. Their definition of this is a vehicle that is 30 years an older (as opposed to a vehicle in Historic taxation class). I am sharing this here because although the club has a large contingent of non-historic replicas, there are many who have either original AC or other historic vehicles.

Regular forum users may be aware there's been some discussion in other threads such as this one regarding historic vehicles and the potential for regulations to change.

The link to the survey is here:
http://fbhvc.co.uk/research/survey-2016/

The club is not currently a member of FBHVC, but is considering joining. If you have a vehicle that is taxed as 'Historic', it is worthwhile indicating this on your membership record. To do so:

1. Go to http://members.the289register.com

2. Click 'Request Edit Link' at the top. An email will be sent to you with a link in it.

3. Click the emailed link - you will be taken to your membership record. Look for the checkbox next to historic status and click it.

4. Save your membersip record.

historic.jpeg

Post by **clive** » Wed Apr 13, 2016 12:53 am

amulheirn wrote:
The club is not currently a member of FBHVC, but is considering joining. If you have a vehicle that is taxed as 'Historic', it is worthwhile indicating this on your membership record.

[/attachment]

Why is it worthwhile?

Paul Blore · Post by **Paul Blore** » Wed Apr 13, 2016 6:50 am

So that we know how many members these potential issues affect and therefore help us come to a decision on FBHVC membership.

Paul

YouTube · Post by **amulheirn** » Wed Apr 13, 2016 6:54 am

clive wrote:
amulheirn wrote:
The club is not currently a member of FBHVC, but is considering joining. If you have a vehicle that is taxed as 'Historic', it is worthwhile indicating this on your membership record.

[/attachment]
Why is it worthwhile?

I think it is worthwhile giving the committee some information on which to base their decision. Saves money being spent if it is not going to be useful to the club membership.

Roger King · Post by **Roger King** » Wed Apr 13, 2016 9:30 am

The survey has been going on for some time now. Many members may own a historic car in addition to their kitcar. Do please note that the survey is relevant to owners of all cars UP TO 1995, which many may not have thought of as historic. The bigger the numbers the better in this - and legislation doesn't only affect cars registered as historic. Your non-historic kitcar may have an older engine - who knows, it may be drawn into changes in emission testing regulations. The Federation also has a working committee on fuel content, specifically ethanol - if you have a 70s or 80s RV8 engine, and E10 becomes the default fuel (as it just has in Belgium), your car is now basically parts. And the engine won't be worth much.

YouTube · Post by **amulheirn** » Wed Apr 13, 2016 9:40 am

Roger King wrote:... The Federation also has a working committee on fuel content, specifically ethanol - if you have a 70s or 80s RV8 engine, and E10 becomes the default fuel (as it just has in Belgium), your car is now basically parts. And the engine won't be worth much.

Interesting - I wasn't aware of that.

Roger King · Post by **Roger King** » Wed Apr 13, 2016 9:54 am

amulheirn wrote:
Roger King wrote:... The Federation also has a working committee on fuel content, specifically ethanol - if you have a 70s or 80s RV8 engine, and E10 becomes the default fuel (as it just has in Belgium), your car is now basically parts. And the engine won't be worth much.
Interesting - I wasn't aware of that.

Lots of materials incompatability issues - have a look at the FHBVC website, or this from the JEC:

http://www.jec.org.uk/latest-news/665/f ... cerns.html

Whilst a lot can actually be done, I read on a US site some time ago that as the percentage of ethanol goes up (and it is creeping up, most of our fuel is now E5 (5%) but at that level they don't have to tell us), more materials are affected. A major concern is that aluminium and zinc were on the incompatability list, and I can't think of any carburettor made of anything else...

Post by **peterc** » Wed Apr 13, 2016 4:29 pm

Roger
Surely there are millions of newer cars with Ali parts in their engines not just the older Rover V8.

If it's only older grades of Ali then we would need to add a fuel additive that protects the Ali against deterioration from longer term storage. E.g lack of use like most classics.
I have heard ethanol also affects fuel hoses.
Of course if we change all these parts then the car can't be classed as a classic anymore as its not original !!
Boom boom.

Roger King · Post by **Roger King** » Wed Apr 13, 2016 4:41 pm

peterc wrote:Roger
Surely there are millions of newer cars with Ali parts in their engines not just the older Rover V8.

Apparently not these days for components that hold petrol. Carburettors are the big risk, as far as I'm aware.
Most components in modern cars that retain or transfer fuel are now plastic of some variety.
Brass apparently suffers more than ali, with carburettor parts (again) chiefly affected. But rubber fuel line is a real problem with bits of rubber coming loose and sticking in float valves, etc. I have switched most flexible lines in my cars to PTFE now. Diaphragms such as in accelerator pumps, Stromberg dashpots, fuel pumps etc. could become more of a problem.

There's loads about all of this on the 'net.

The 289 Register

Important Historic Vehicle Survey -

Important Historic Vehicle Survey -

Re: Important Historic Vehicle Survey -

Re: Important Historic Vehicle Survey -

Re: Important Historic Vehicle Survey -

Re: Important Historic Vehicle Survey -

Re: Important Historic Vehicle Survey -

Re: Important Historic Vehicle Survey -

Re: Important Historic Vehicle Survey -

Re: Important Historic Vehicle Survey -