Haven't posted any pics of the car for sometime, so thought it was time for a bit of an update. Sold the demonstrator recently & the new owner has had it resprayed in his favourite colour scheme! It's amazing what a coat of paint & a few stickers can do!
[img]http://
Description [/img]


Description


Description


Description


Description


Description

The sharp eyed amongst you of course have spotted that it has the new high nose & wider front wing!

[Edited on 22/11/10 by russbost]

Daft question - why don't you put the lights / indicators on the front wing? I think it could look quite good.

I dont think "Ferrari" will be very pleased ????

Who gives a sh1t what Ferrari think? It looks great.

Sorry, you are right, it does look good, and the paint finish seems quality

The lights can't go on the wing for IVA & I've only done the new high nose recently, but yes it had occured to me that the new setup would lend itself to having the lights mounted on it.
Ferrari??? Didn't know they'd done a 2 seater F1 stylee car

Russbost
You have made a fantastic job off the car
TOP JOB
Jacko

[Edited on 22/11/10 by jacko]

"You have made a fantastic job off the car"

Well, thanx for that, but can't claim the credit for the paintwork, the rest however I am responsible for!

I'm with confused. Who gives a t*ss about the 'F' team? The car looks the dogs doo dahs mate

I just wonder how many of the 'cruisers' will want to try it on with that little beauty?

Nice job

Tell the customer to put a number 8 on the front, then everyone will pull out of the way for him! lol

I have to honest russbot, I've always been a bit unsure about the car, but that looks very, very good.

You must be very proud of your work, and if you dont, you should.

is it just the pics, or does the front wing obscure the headlights?

If that thing ever gets road registered, the owner WILL get a letter from Ferrari's solicitors when he's spotted. They guard their brand vigorously. Even if it only does track sessions, he's likely to get a letter. It won't be the first, nor the last time this has occurred.

It looks good as it stands, so why deface it with someone else's logo? I'd be a little upset if I was the originator.

Cheers,
Nev.

I think that car looks awesome. The lick of paint does wonders. You should be proud or your creation.


As for the owner getting a letter from the F$£$$^£^ people. My mature response would be 'ohhh I'm scared'. Then I wouldn't worry about it unless they actually started with the legals.

I am not sure that the look and branding of F1 cars are patented anyway. If you look closely the branding changes from race to race. I don't see how they could keep you with patenting it.

That nose really improves the front end of the car, well done it looks fantastic

Although I would have preferred to see Williams FW18 colours.........

talking about wings - i don't think the end plates look right. They seem to be angled and i think they may look better with the bottom edge level with the ground - like the williams.

I think it looks stunning, and Neville - That car is already road registered

Hi Russ, Car looks stunning - who did the paint work? I am still looking for a local fibreglass specialist to do my Cyclone. Will you be at the EKCC AGM tomorrow?

Managed to delete my earlier post - it was duplicated, so I deleted one & that deleted both

Anyway, long story short, the new high nose & wide wing was added to the demonstrator at customers request prior to his purchase of the car, the wing did seem to obscure the lights slightly, but on checking against a wall the beam pattern still seemed identical, he was happy to move the lights if necessary, suffice to say the next one will be a little different again. Agree the wing end plates should be parallel to the ground.

"if that thing ever gets on the road" too late it already is, about 2 years ago!!

John, yes should be at the EKCC AGM tomo evening, see you there!

quote:

---

Originally posted by eddie99
I think it looks stunning, and Neville - That car is already road registered

---

Where's the front number plate? Not on the car - it's just been painted
Where's the indicators? Next to the headlights - pay attention
Where's the headlights at minimum 500mm? Who says headlights have to be at 500mm after SVA/IVA? Actually they are only just below
The front wings don't meet regs, as 120 degrees coverage needed. Yes they do - pay more attention
The list could go on a lot further...... It couldn't, the car would pass IVA with some very minor mods, I put one thro' at Edmonton only a month ago, we can make a bet on it if you want!!!

Park it in front of a Ferrari dealership for a day, and see what comes in the post . I reckon many Ferrari dealers might (secretly) be quite pleased if someone parked that out front, nice bit of publicity for them, & I certainly won't be getting anything thro' the post, I did say it's a customers car, I can't stop people from painting in any colour scheme they choose & they put what badges they want on too so far as I'm concerned! It's hardly like pretending a Toyota MR2 is a 355, or a Peugeot is a 460 is it?

quote:

---

Who says headlights have to be at 500mm after SVA/IVA?

---

The front wings, if 120degrees, are incorrectly mounted. Check your C&U regs, and IVA manual.

Headlights should be up near to level with the top of the rims.

Indicators within 400mm of max width?

I'd like to see the rest of the fail list if that car was put through IVA again. Yes, I know we all change them after the fact, but that one takes the biscuit. And painted as it now is, it's screaming out to get pulled by the traffic, or more and more likely by VOSA and DOT police at their roadside stops. They've even been practising lately here where I live. The local towing co's are having a field day towing chavmobiles away for infringements.

Don't misunderstand me, it's a nice looking car, but you'd be doing yourself and your customer a big favour by making it properly compliant.

Not too far away, MOT stations will be told to fail cars that appear non compliant, and then the vehicle will have to be rechecked at an IVA station. The rules are in place now. EC and all that.

You will tell us all when it gets put off the road, won't you?

You may think you're smart , but remember the old 'he who laughs last'? Join the real world, and get some sense.

I'm not against these type of cars, far from it, but I'd just like to see them safe and compliant.

Cheers,
Nev.

First, this isn't my car, it's a customers, I can't stop customers doing what they want to with the car anymore than Vauxhall can stop the Barry Boys from "tuning" Corsas with drainpipes for exhausts! Personally I think it has a little more class than a Corsa, but you're perfectly entitled not to like it, lots of people don't!

I would be very interested to see anything from construction & use specifying headlamp height, Westfields old Eleven is well under as I'm sure are plenty of others, if there is genuinely a reg please give us a link, it's an important issue. I think you are wrong as they were going to change the IVA height to 350mm instead of 500, unfortunately they did an about turn on that, how it would affect your view of the road or anyone elses view of you I have no idea

Yes the indicators are correctly located (400mm rule) as are the wheel arches which are identical to one I've just put thro' IVA (admittedly with edge trim glued in place) - why on earth do you think the wheelarches are wrong in terms of placement, check the manual you'll find it is you that is wrong.

It's nothing to do with being "clever"- TTBOMK we are governed by 3 separate sets of rules, construction & use, MoT & IVA, the only ones which matter POST IVA are the first 2 which are substantially less onerous. Please don't misunderstand me, I don't condone running anything dangerous or obviously not complying with the laws of the road, however, where something is arguable & has no affect on road safety but does affect aesthetics then I'm all for going for the aesthetic route.

Also I promise (it's in writing note!) that I WILL tell you & the rest of the Locost masif if I or any of my customers have any trouble with VOSA or the law, I feel it's sensible to share that sort of stuff as it stops other people falling into the same trap!

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1989/1796/schedule/4/made

Dip-main beams:

quote:

---

(c) Vertical–

(i)Maximum height above the ground–

(A)Any vehicle not covered by sub-paragraph (B):
1200 mm

(B)A vehicle first used before 1st Janary 1952, an agricultural vehicle, a road clearance vehicle, an aerodrome fire tender, an aerodrome runway sweeper, an industrial tractor, engineering plant and a home forces' vehicle:
No requirement

(ii)Minimum height above the ground–

(A)Any vehicle not covered by sub-paragraph (B):
500 mm

(B)A vehicle first used before 1st January 1956:
No requirement

---

Thanx for that, & quite obviously fair comment, I note that's 1989 legislation, but so far as I can see from the government website is still current.

My recommendation to customers will be will be to position lights at above 500mm. What that reg doesn't make clear is to what point of the lens that is measured - it used to be the "cut off" on the lens, many modern lights don't have this & I seem to remember that for IVA it was the centre of the lens (tho' just had a look & can't find that in the regs) in the absence of a cut off marking. I'm sure a significant no. of vehicles would struggle with that - the aforementioned Lotus 11 (or 23) rep, Lambo Countach & Espada, Lola T70, Porsche 917 reps etc etc, however in the absence of any measuring point being mentioned I would have thought the top of the lens would have to be taken, tho' quite prepared to be proved wrong on that.

I would also point out that as vehicles age & springs settle anything marginal at test will become technically illegal shortly afterwards!

I feel all this really shows is that regulations are a minefield, the truly ridiculous thing being that you can remove the lights completely & be legal!

One thing I would point out tho'is that having had something similar on the road since 2005 I've yet to be stopped - a colleague who also drives the car has been stopped once - all the cop was interested in was "what is it", "what engine's it got" etc etc

You can only have no lights if you're not running it at night. Which makes perfect sense.

You're dancing around the rules though, and when it boils down to it they'll give you the option of a FPN or going to court to defend yourself and they know full well that no sane person would risk hundreds to defend themselves for wanting their lights slightly lower to make their car look pretty. It's just not worth it.

As for cars settling - my 20 year old tin-top is still at original ride height, give or take a few mm, according to the chassis manual. Original springs, though new shocks.

looks good, not my cup of tea though,

also his rear tyres are on the wrong way

Nice build. Please post some pics further away. I would like to see pics of it on the road as well.

BTW.Many supercars just make it through regulations and many even fail thats why you get some homologation companies sorting out these types of issues. I don't think its that cut throat where anyone will die or get seriously injured, its just regulation....and as you said "you can even take off the headlights", but it would then be silly (and DANGEROUS) to drive at night. These cars are uncommon and not in daily use, they are an expression of F U N, makes us feels like kids again

"also his rear tyres are on the wrong way"

You lot are too observant!!! You're quite right tho' I'll drop him an email to let him know - he'll think I'M very observant!

quote:

---

I don't think its that cut throat where anyone will die or get seriously injured, its just regulation....and as you said "you can even take off the headlights", but it would then be silly (and DANGEROUS) to drive at night. These cars are uncommon and not in daily use, they are an expression of F U N, makes us feels like kids again

---

quote:

---

quote: I don't think its that cut throat where anyone will die or get seriously injured, its just regulation....and as you said "you can even take off the headlights", but it would then be silly (and DANGEROUS) to drive at night. These cars are uncommon and not in daily use, they are an expression of F U N, makes us feels like kids again

I don't want to come across toooo seriously here, but headlight position and visibility are pretty important, pretty much a life or death situation if you don't get seen or your vision is compromised. And it would be illegal to drive at night without lights, in the uk obviously. And while your car may be an expression of fun, it still should be safe and legal above creativity. If my kid gets knocked down because someone wanted to put their F1 replicas headlights behind the nosecone low down and made it harder to see than it needed to be I'd be going on a murdering spree.

---

Think some people have slightly misunderstood my comment about it being legal to remove headlights, obviously in that situation it is only legal (& sensible) to use the car in daylight hours, what I see as being daft is to specify a headlamp position down to the last mm when such things change constantly (ever seen a smoooth road in the UK!) what would make far more sense would be to specify a separation (important we can tell whether it's got one light or 2) & that it should adequately light a specified area in front of the vehicle, it seems crazy to specify position so demandingly when we don't specify a light intensity or area coverage, so you could have lights at the right position & that would pass IVA, but they could be all but useless in a real life situation.

It's like so much of the test, it simply doesn't make sense & applies meaningless criteria which don't help overall safety at all, I had hoped many of these items would be tidied up when they changed from SVA to IVA, but sadly, not so. Again, please don't misunderstand me, I thiink vehicles should be tested & some criteria should be a lot stricter than they are, but others need to be removed or relaxed if your aim is safety of both owner/user & the general public. All IMHO of course