Suspension required?...rambling thoughts.......

[ROD]

So ,now Im at a loose end waiting to hear back from a car Ive seen for sale,Ive been pondering finishing one of my little wagons Ive been building.Which in turn got me thinking...all those old  veteran/vintage cars that go on the London to Brighton run etc,they cant have much in the way of suspension travel. "bone shakers" as they are described. Apart from the "bone shaking" aspect,I wonder if a car actually needs suspension from a legal point of view if it only travels at about 20mph?
  Also...In the states they build replicas of vintage cars. They are about 3/4 scale,I wonder if one of those could get an iva/msva over here if it had the correct lighting etc?

[scannerzer]

if you go by last night's top gear then yes it should be do-able. they built a single seater car on a 100cc quad
and got it road legal but money is no object at the bbc!!

[morrag]

Well, having had a close look at one of the 'cheaper end' of the market quads recently , but which still a road legal vehicle, I felt it was pretty basic to say the least, so I'm not that surprised the Clarkson offering was deemed roadworthy!!however it was an interesting item, and certainly gave me something to think about Morrag

[ROD]

Never watch the programme,cant stand clarkson!

[morrag]

I sympathise with that view Rod, but I try to ignore the "Egos" and just check out the mechanical bits of interest, last session they did a good track test with the new Morgan 3 for instance, but I take your point. Suspension wise I don't think there can be a specific directive, or requirement, because if you think of how stiff some modified suspensions are, they are almost at the point of being non existent!! so........Morrag

[Manky Monkey]

I guess if a bike can pass with a "hardtail" frame, a car should be able to as well? Wouldn't be a lot of fun to drive -I'm sure the steering would be horrendous though, with every ripple & pothole throwing you all over the road.
General rule of thumb seems to be, if it's fitted, it must work. So if it's not fitted...

[hunter]

The TAZ Trike was solid front and rear.
But it did have fat tyres.

[Manky Monkey]

Girder forks on the front, so it had some basic suspension, but not a lot.

[Olds]

Never seen anything that says you have to have suspension, just that what is fitted must work correctly. Old tractors have a pivoting front axle so no actual suspension there.

[ROD]

Yeah ,I was thinking about pivoting front suspension. I did this on a couple of my little 4wheel karts,mainly cos only one rear wheel drives,and if the suspension is solid it could lift the drive wheel as it goes over a pothole and drive is lost.The pivoting front end always ensures the drive wheel is on the road.
 Andy.. I realise it would be very bumpy,but as I said ,it would only be on a slowish moving vehicle,so less vibration transferred from the pot holes.

[nabsim]

A bit off topic but you could put the quarry dumpers on the road, not sure what had to be done to get them roadworthy but they definately didn't have suspension

[ROD]

Yep,thats off topic Nabs

[nabsim]

Only in that they were dumpers Rod, they were still on the road without any form of suspension

And in fact I am an idiot, it was the loading shovels not dumpers

[Manky Monkey]

According to the Rods n Sods forum, the quad thingy Clarkson was driving on the A3 near Guildford in Surrey, (the Top Gear studio's just up the road), had the registration number from a yellow Transit van.

[ROD]

doesnt surprise me! That other programme where they buy/do up and sell cars..cant think of the name..apparently had a couple of cars with moody registrations as well.Also heard that one car only had the 'good' nearside shown ,as the o/side wasnt quite finished! Another car,wasnt bought nearly as cheap and bargainous as they led viewers to believe .All a big con,just to sensationalise their so called refurbishing!