Practical Classics Magazine fansite
https://practically-classics.co.uk/forum/
https://practically-classics.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1604
Grumpy Northener wrote:Guys - The build date of the car is 21st Jan 1973, and registered mid Feb - so I stand no chance - it's galling when you go to a meet - same car / spec etc - few weeks older - free road tax - talk about disproportionate - Rich - where exactly is over here ? - not that I'm planning on moving !
This highlights the hideousness of the present situation. Because of the Brown line, post 1972 vehicles are not regarded as “Historic”. Does that mean that my 45000 mile 1974 V8 or my 1979 Midget are old bangers? MG Midgets , MGBs and it’s derivatives make up a very sizable part of the classic car sector, no doubt making quite a contribution to the £3 Billion. Many of these cars were built after 1972 and when Abingdon was set to close, many late examples went straight into “Preservation”, so the post 1972 cars must account for a sizeable chunk of the MG contribution (Yet they are officially overlooked“The situation regarding historical and vintage vehicles (i.e. vehicles registered before 1973) should be mentioned. There are nearly half a million pre 1973 vehicles in the country. The related activity is worth over £3 billion to the UK annually with the export trade being worth over £300 million. Over 27000 people in the UK earn some or all of their living serving the historical vehicle movement. Owners of these vehicles are reporting significant problems with E5 blends.
These include material compatibility and drivability issues. To maintain the originality of the vehicle it is not desirable to replace original incompatible parts with new compatible parts, nor is it always possible. Unfortunately the introduction of ethanol into petrol is more problematical for these vehicles than the phase out of leaded petrol. The lead could be replaced by a fuel additive. The ethanol is a component in the fuel and its effects can only be partially negated by the use of fuel additives, for example corrosion inhibitors.
To maintain this valuable business and asset, consideration should be given to providing after market corrosion inhibiting fuel additives and preserving a specification for a zero ethanol grade petrol.
Consideration should be given to maintaining a specification for E0 fuel for historic and vintage vehicles”.
). I am not so familiar with Triumphs but I assume the same thing happened with the Spitfire and the TR7/8. I know the TR7 was regarded by some, as a retrograde step, after the TR6, so perhaps some late TR6 models were “Preserved” from new.Much easier way is to get rid of road tax except for a nominal £10pa fee to ensure its road legal and put the tax onto fuel... Take your pick...brownnova wrote:Could theree not be a system whereby low users of classics register and prove they do under a set mileage a year in their 'historic vehicle' and therefore dont pay any road tax?
I went on to suggest that if there is to be a fixed date, the end of Y reg (Suffix) would be more logical cut off point and a better compromise than the Brownline (ie The 31 12 72 cut off introduced by Brown).You may infer that I would like to see a reintroduction of rolling tax exemption. What I should prefer to see, is the abolition of road tax, as a direct tax and to see it replaced by fuel duty, so that you pay for what you use and those lazy people, who more or less get the car out, if they wish to put out their bins, are penalised on account of the poor fuel economy, associated with short trips.
However, whilst we have direct vehicle duty, I should prefer to see rolling tax exemption for vehicles of over a certain age (FIVA define an historic vehicle as basically one that is thirty years old).