1958 series 2 v8 hybrid coil sprung etc all info please!

[drak ula]

hello all, i am about to buy a battered but interesting looking special, registered as 1958 v8, manual, has what looks to me to be modified lightweight body with rock sliders, crash bars, full roll cage, v8 3.5 rover engine, coil springs, disc brakes, reg UFK 582.
the current owner didn't build it and doesn't seem to know much about the history. i don't know if the chassis is original modified s2, chopped range rover, or chopped defender, assume axles are range rover or defender, but are wide.
any info would be extremely appreciated, if you know of this car or who built it or what it is built from i would love to know, thanks.

[100SRV]

Hello,
If you plan to use on the road I'd avoid this unless you have receipts for the components and proof that it has been inspected by the DVLA (not necessarily for SVA compliance but to record change of bodywork).

The 3 letter/3 digit number plate on such a mongrel makes me suspicious that it is a tax dodger. Also check the paper trail for MoTs - when was it first registered, how old is the oldest MoT, when was it converted?

Can you see serial numbers on the chassis (RH front dumb iron), engine (LH land between number 3 and 5 spark plug), transmission, axles (long tubular portion on front of front axle an rear of rear axle).

100SRV

[drak ula]

hi 100srv, thanks for response, i am all new to land rovers (though has a standard series 3 20 years ago) and have not collected this yet, just paid a small deposit. so don't know about history or about tax dodger cars, thought it was common practice back in 80s to upgrade old ladies with range rover engines, brakes etc...from rotten old range rovers? as far as i know there is no history or old mots but looks to me like it has been this way for a long time, far from a recent conversion, which is why i posted on here hoping someone would know history of such an individual looking 'mongrel'. i will be having it transported and buying unseen, so can't check for serial numbers etc until it arrives, but it is registered with dvla as having the v8 3.5. what is your suspicion, why might this not be ok to use on road? as i said i thought this practice of building hybrid series cars on later parts was common enough? all info welcome to me as i am pretty ignorant of all this and would rather lose my dep' than the whole value if this really is to be avoided. cheers

[drak ula]

p.s. what exactly is the 'dumb iron' (don't say 'you are' ;-)

[drak ula]

p.p.s this seems like a smarter and VERY much more expensive version of the same kind of thing!
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1955-Series-1-Land-Rover...

[100SRV]

drak ula said:

p.s. what exactly is the 'dumb iron' (don't say 'you are' ;-)

A curved side piece of a vehicle chassis, to which the front springs are attached.

For a coil sprung chassis the VIN is usually between the steering box bolts, on a leaf-sprung chassis just above where the spring hanger is welded on.

I'd avoid all mongrel Land Rovers unless the vendor can document vehicle provenance per my previous post, if they can't then walk away. A series One club member has a problem where another owner has a vehicle with the same registration and has requested a V5 for this car, can't remember whether this has been resolved but it is messy.

[paintman]

drak ula said:

p.p.s this seems like a smarter and VERY much more expensive version of the same kind of thing!
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1955-Series-1-Land-Rover...

At least its on leafsprings! Unlike the one in your first post. (If you've had a look at the extra photos of this link the dumb irons are the parts of the chassis where the front of the front springs are attached.)

I do wonder with all the various ones that are around just which bits of them are actually of the year they claim to be. Apart from the registration number and VIN plates! Simply a cynical attempt to avoid road tax - and possibly the MOT.
That said, AIUI if they were modified prior to a certain date - which I can't remember off the top of my head - DVLA etc are entirely uninterested.

[drak ula]

ok 100srv and paintman, thanks for the info and advice, but to be completely honest i don't see what the problem is in building a special and using a tax free i.d. to save a few hundred quid each year, as well as be allowed to use the nicer white or silver on black plates, it is only the same as hot rodders have been doing for decades, basing their hot rods on some old triumph or ford or whatever i.d. i appreciate that this is not allowed anymore and there are strict rules about how much of the orginal car is used in order to be entitled to use that i.d. otherwise you get stuck with a q plate. but in the old days you could get away with any significant part like jag irs and call it a 60s jag! or rover v8 and call it a rover. so unless this is actually a ringer and built out of someone's stolen pride and jot and then given an iffy reg (which i very much doubt looking at the state of it!!! who would bother ringing such a battered old wreck, if you were a crook, surely you'd nick steal something nice and valuable to give a new i.d. to?) then i am not too especially upset about a 'cynical attempt to avoid tax' and don't really see why any of us should be, but more input and ideas on the subject respectfully welcome.

[drak ula]

p.s. 100srv, just looked at your 'garage', love your tomcat! looks awesome, notice that is on a tax exempt reg ;-) hmmmmm...... 100" v8 tomcat on 1972 reg.... cynical tax dodge? ;-) good on you i say!

[paintman]

drak ula said:

ok 100srv and paintman, thanks for the info and advice, but to be completely honest i don't see what the problem is in building a special and using a tax free i.d. to save a few hundred quid each year, as well as be allowed to use the nicer white or silver on black plates, it is only the same as hot rodders have been doing for decades, basing their hot rods on some old triumph or ford or whatever i.d. i appreciate that this is not allowed anymore and there are strict rules about how much of the orginal car is used in order to be entitled to use that i.d. otherwise you get stuck with a q plate. but in the old days you could get away with any significant part like jag irs and call it a 60s jag! or rover v8 and call it a rover. so unless this is actually a ringer and built out of someone's stolen pride and jot and then given an iffy reg (which i very much doubt looking at the state of it!!! who would bother ringing such a battered old wreck, if you were a crook, surely you'd nick steal something nice and valuable to give a new i.d. to?) then i am not too especially upset about a 'cynical attempt to avoid tax' and don't really see why any of us should be, but more input and ideas on the subject respectfully welcome.

Well, you DID ask.......
If you like it, buy it. I'm assuming you've looked into insurance?