| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Peter Scott
United Kingdom
1240 Posts |
 Posted - 30/01/2013 : 20:21:44
|
I see that the FIVA has today announced an "Old Vehicle Charter". If you want to read it you can do so on the VSCC web site.
This is an interesting document setting out guidelines on how we should maintain our cars to preserve their historic nature, as far as possible. It does however state quite clearly that they are for driving not for putting in museums. A view which is definitely in tune with the views of members of this forum.
However I'm sure that the the principles set out in this document could produce quite a significant debate.
What do you think of it?
Peter |
|
|
DickMorbey
United Kingdom
3682 Posts |
Posted - 01/02/2013 : 11:19:35
|
I am glad that Peter has flagged this topic because otherwise it might have passed many of us by. Shrouded, one might say
This is complex topic with potentially far-ranging consequences.
You can read more details at the following websites: http://www.fiva.org/EN/LatestNews.htm
The Charter itself at FIVA's website: http://www.fiva.org/EN/Torino/Charter%20of%20Turin.html
The principles that the Charter espouses can be summarised as:
Users should maintain as much of the original vehicle as possible in its running and restoration, document all work undertaken and, of course, maintain its roadworthiness.
The Charter seeks to establish this as an internationally-recognised protocol.
Owners of historical vehicles will have access to a document giving them clear guidance on the best way to look after their vehicle. An ID card based on the charter is also in the planning stages, guaranteeing every owner, buyer and seller that the vehicle has been used and cared for according to the Turin Charter.
Preserve, restore or modify?
The golden rule is to “keep the history in the vehicle”. A “better than new” appearance is not the aim. Restoration – this includes all kinds of repair, restoration or reconstruction.
Modification – this is comprised of all work which aims at a more or less precise, factory-new appearance of the vehicle, without taking historical accuracy into account. This kind of rebuilding can strip the vehicle of its cultural and historical significance and is not an approach endorsed by the charter.
For replaced parts, FIVA recommends the following marking system :
NB =“newly built” an accurate as possible a copy in terms of form, materials and make, reproduced directly from a documented original)
FR =“free reconstruction” (reconstruction without using any historic model in terms of form, material or work technique. The part however fulfils the technical function of an historic component utilised earlier)
CS =“conservational stabilisation” (a later structural reinforcement added to stabilize the historic substance).
FIVA recommends the indication of the year of restoration /manufacture of the replacement part with the two-letter code.
A handbook, under the working title of “Vademecum”, will soon be available from FIVA to provide further explanation of how the Turin Charter should be put into practice.
I believe the Charter is voluntary but bits aim is clear. FIVA aims to safeguard the right to drive historical road vehicles on international public highways and enable people to see more 'classic' cars on public roads.
We are not yet aware what the MGCC's response will be to the Charter. Humans and bovines now have passports which define their origins. Perhaps Triple-M cars will follow?
Regards
Dick |
 |
|
|
JMH
United Kingdom
913 Posts |
Posted - 01/02/2013 : 15:50:54
|
Blimey!
One can only ask how much it will all cost & what sort of admin nightmare it will be to validate?
To quote Hans Solo "I've got a bad feeling about this!"
JH
|
|
|
|
Peter Scott
United Kingdom
1240 Posts |
Posted - 02/02/2013 : 14:00:44
|
Well the thread is now up and running. Thanks Dick for posting a summary of the document.
Members of this forum are very interested in the history of our cars, witness the many postings recently, on the forum, on the subject. So should we not also be interested in preserving the ‘history’ for future generations? The FIVA is an international body whose objectives are to look after our interests. So we should be pleased that they are doing something to ensure that our interests are represented, when the politicians are considering legislation which may negatively impact us. Whether or not you agree with this particular tactic is another issue. I suppose that the originality police will be pleased but the special / replica builders perhaps not. I would have thought that majority of members, in between these two extremes, would find the substance of the charter reasonably in line with their thinking.
Yes / No?
Peter
PS Jeremy – What will the cost be if we do nothing and the legislators introduce new safety regulations which significantly reduce our freedom to use our cars? Would that not be a greater cost?
Peter |
|
|
|
JMH
United Kingdom
913 Posts |
Posted - 02/02/2013 : 16:54:40
|
Peter,
My point is has the horse not already bolted? Our cars are now 80 years or so old, nobody's is original & nobody has a clue what lesser bits have been replaced over the years.
I am lucky in that my J2 was with the same owner for nearly 60 of those years & he kept a very detailed service log, so I can see everything that's been broken, fixed, or replaced etc, (less the nuts & bolts) and that it has never been restored - but it was 20 years old before that log was started. Yes engine, gearbox & chassis etc were as fitted when new, but axles, radiator etc? Whilst i've got a pretty good idea, who knows? As for cars with long racing histories (most cars were thrashed in period, fell down the food chain, suffering all sorts of indignity along the way, before total restoration and then being thrashed again); how would these be recorded? They certainly don't fit comfortably within what the FIVA proposes for "modification", though I suspect the market will not be bothered by this one jot.
If the golden rule is to "keep the history of the vehicle", I think we have already lost, as most cars will only have that history recorded from now on. Further more I'm fairly confident that a full & "authenticated" record of the vehicle will no doubt be seen as desirable at the time of any sale, so some restorers dealers & owners may feel the need to be a tad creative with the record. It might even tempt owners into keeping a bit on the car that really should be replaced; steering arms, stub axles etc spring to mind. And what would you put down for a MMM car that was bought as a dumb-iron in a plastic bag, the current owner may not even be aware of it if there had been several owners since it's "restoration"?
Don't get me wrong, I think it's a noble aim and I am one of the biggest supporters of recording all car histories honestly and accurately, I just don't think it can be done without somebody having to put a lot of time, effort (& cost) into it to make sure that it is all accurate because there is too much to be gained by people being less than 100% honest about what's been done. If it's going to cost - somebody will have to pay.
Life used to be so simple.....
JH |
|
|
|
Oz34
United Kingdom
2569 Posts |
Posted - 02/02/2013 : 19:28:02
|
I love your final words Jeremy....must be getting old!
Dave |
|
|
|
Peter Scott
United Kingdom
1240 Posts |
Posted - 02/02/2013 : 21:09:03
|
Jeremy
I agree that keeping a detailed accurate history of most of our cars is not feasible. It is as you say too late. But I saw the charter as an objective to strive towards, recognising that reality would be less than perfect.
I'm not sure how effective this charter could be, but I do feel that we should do something to protect our interests or we could very easily suffer severe handicaps in the use of our cars. So should we not do what we can, starting from where we are, following the objectives of the charter as a 'guideline' rather than a 'rule book'?
Peter
|
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Forum Locked
Topic Locked
