My yellow van is regoed as
Year 1977. Make Holden. Model HZ 77A. Variant sandma. Shape pvn Tare 1450. GVM 1950. Seating capacity 2. Engine capacity 4144.0. Vin/chassis number AHZxxxxxM. Engine number QRxxxxxx axle code R11
The point is sandman is on the papers under variant and this all depends on how the blue slip is filled out
Last edited by RodneyHZ253; 15-09-2011 at 08:04 AM.
That is the silly thing about NSW system. It relies on the person filling out the form and sometimes they are not well eductated and have little idea. It should be a prescribed set of vehicle definitions to choose from. In Rodney's case it should be Make: GMH, Model: HZWM70, Variant: Holden or Holden Sandman (or Kingswood or Premier or whatever if it is one of those), Shape: pvn (or ute or sedan or whatever). A lot of stuff is out there is also registered pre blue slips and under different systems as well so there is no consistency. It looks like they have called Rod's van as a 1977 model HZ too, where is is a 1978 model HZ.
None of this really matters I suppose, as all they really need is chassis and engine numbers, but it'd be nice to get it right!
This is exactly what I have been trying get into oxbox's head.Originally Posted by GTS
He is confusing the legal unique identity of a vehicle with its identity as a collectable vehicle as a whole.
His statement was...
It has had a chassis swap so it is no longer a Sandman.
what he should of said was...
It has had a Chassis swap therefore not considered as collectable as a 100% Sandman.
He can never provide legal proof of his statement because a "The Model of a vehicle" is not a legal entity. His interpenetration of ADR compliance is all the proof he has offered to the debate and then refuses to highlight the clause that says that "it clearly shows........".
Ozbox, About my van, yes it has the wrong chassis. As you point out, I have been open about that and it does motivate my cause but that is not evidence to back up any of your claims which is what we are debating as adults here. It might make you feel a bit bigger to get one up on me but really..........come on....... how old are you? This isn't kindergarten.
and what your missing 2t is what im saying about values and people being caught out because of mismatched identity..if the tag does not match the chassis it is a mismatched identity and therefore not 100% a sandman..
your argument/debate point is not valid and you have let your own interpretations cloud the real point..
no valuer/insurance company will consider it to be a sandman so the identity is changed because of the tags..which is stated in the rta paperwork..its black and white but you see a nice colour mauve i think..
--- Updated ---
i certainly dont need to make myself feel big by getting one up on you..i just like having a good old debate/argument with people that are wrong.
im 52 young and this is play school ......
Ohhhh. A complete parameter change for the argument 18 pages in. This is gonna be good. Not sure how it can be proven or disproven given that we're now talking about what people think, rather than any actual regulations, but should be interesting nonetheless.
Where'd that popcorn smiley go?
I would suggest that if your van was going to undergo a restoration that you search high and low (including Oz's yard) for a chassis with a number close to yours (like if yours was BHZ12345A then try to find at least another BHZxxxxxA from a ute or van). Then restore it, but don't spend the earth on it as it will always be held back in value compared to a chassis numbers matching vehicle. My opinion is that a fully restored HZ Sandman van done to concours level is probably worth $40k. One done to a quality level but done sensibly (like using repro or incorrect but useable parts) is probably worth $25k. One done the same but without its original chassis is probably worth $13k. All just my opinion (forget actual values, but the relative values is what i'm getting at).
And given that Civil case I was referring to, a vehicle with a changed chassis is a problem when advertising. You couldn't advertise it as a Sandman. You'd have to call it something like "Used to be a matching numbers Sandman until chassis rails were replaced" or similar.
In the end I don't think Oz is telling you it isn't a Sandman once the rails are replaced. What he is trying to get across is that over-capitalising on a non-matching numbers vehicle is a potential folly. The identity of the vehicle changes with a change in chassis, in the extreme case a Holden van put on a Landcruiser chassis becomes a Landcruiser. If you put a Holden van on a ute chassis it effectively becomes a ute, although this is obviously a silly situation (aside, not sure how this would apply to a HK-HG ute or van where the chassis number is on the firewall and remains there after Landcruiser rails fitted?). I suppose the best way to say it is the identity of the vehicle is governed by the chassis. The description may not be - like the van body on the ute chassis, or a HQ coupe body on a WB Statesman chassis. RTA will still call the shape PANEL VAN or COUPE. It is very hard to call a HZ Sandman a HZ Sandman when the rego papers say it is a HQ, and the only places this really matters is:
1. In the vehicle value (resale and insurance).
2. If you sell it as a Sandman and someone sues you using the recent Victorian precedent for false advertising.
If you follow what I'd do at the top of this reply I reckon you'd have more chance of it being worth more, but still the value would take a significant hit without the original chassis.
Last edited by HK1837; 15-09-2011 at 10:44 AM. Reason: Bad spelling (must be fat fingers!). Or Lysdexia kicking in!
HK: I thank you for putting it like that.
I came to this site with (what I thought anyway) an ok knowledge of HQ-WB Holdens having owned one of every model at some stage or other. It soon became apparent to me that I knew squat diddly, thanks to a lot of them mkembers here who "put me straight". Im not going to mention names here, but a lot of people are responsible for contributing to my growing understanding of the vehicles. Sandman or no, Im just happy to own a Holden Panel Van at last! Thanks to all who have, and continue to assist my understanding, Im not the sharpest chisel in the toolbox by any stretch of the imagination. I thank each and every one for their pateince! Sorry for hijacking!
post number 89i can respect other peoples opinions but when they are trying to argue a point that is not valid then i will argue back..
the reason i am so gung ho on putting my point across to this argument is that we have so many lurkers here reading these posts that they need to know that these vehicles must have a matching chassis to tag to be truely collectible at a top scale..
legally in all states of australia the chassis number is the identifier of the vehicle..no if buts or maybe.
a sandman body with its old tags attached regardless of identifying things like console brackets etc is still just a body on another chassis if these 2 items do not align for numbers and therefore desreases its collectibility and value..
im happy for people to disagree with these points but no one should push the argument that the value is still in the vehicle.
if people are happy to have a sandman with sandman tags and mismatched chasis then so be it ...
but the education is about the value of matching chassis to tags and i will always pop up when this subject is bought up and put my points across so the lurkers can understand and not pay big bucks for mismatched chassis to tags..
I guess it's how you look at it Byron...
Anybody been game fishing for Marlin??? I'm sure I could of brought the few Marlin steaks for a lot less than the 200 liters of fuel I have burnt each time I went out and cought nothing.
Some of us are not concerned about the re-sale/over capitalisation of the vehicles. I think it's rare that anyone makes money on any hobby... otherwise we would do it for work, those that do are extreamly lucky.
I just want to drive mine and have some fun... and knowing my driving I'll probably be the one to bend the rails in it. haha
Mauser
“485650 HQ's cant be wrong...”
“You don’t drive a Kingswood, you make love to it. That’s why nuns only drive Toranas.” - Ted Bullpitt
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks