LINE OF HISTORY GUIDELINES
To establish that a vehicle has a continuous line of history, even though following major damage, it may have undergone substantial repair or replacement at some time in its competition history, it will be necessary to establish what if any major components have been replaced and/or discarded. Usually this will be the tube chassis-frame, monocoque or body shell. If no major components have been replaced and have simply undergone major repairs, then the line of history is unbroken and will not be the subject of the guidelines below.
Note: these guidelines are for individuals to consider before making an application for vehicle certification.
1. Was the level of damage, or deterioration so severe that the original components had to be replaced? Inspection or proof of the condition of the replaced component is required, as is proof of the fate of the replaced and/or discarded components.
2. Did the new components provide minimal change to the specification of the rebuilt vehicle? The vehicle must have been rebuilt to essentially the same basic specification as prior to the replacement and incorporate as many of the original distinguishing components as possible. Proof of the original specification required.
- Was the intent of the rebuild an attempt to get the vehicle back into competition as soon as possible?
- And if so, how long was the vehicle out of action because of the component replacement/vehicle rebuild – was it less than 3 months?
Note: If the answers to Questions 1 and 2 were in the affirmative then the original vehicle would likely retain its Line of History.
3. Were the major component/s replaced as a method of upgrading the specification of the original vehicle?
Note: If the answer to this question is affirmative, then it will likely require more detailed investigation depending on the extent of the replacements and the level of the upgrade. The rebuild could effectively constitute the construction of a new vehicle, in which case the “year the vehicle represents” may now start from the date of the completion of the replacement vehicle.
4. Were the discarded major component/s sufficiently significant or different to represent the original vehicle and confirm its unique identity?
Note: If the answer to this question is affirmative then there is likely to be a case for restoring/resurrecting the original vehicle with its history extending from the date of manufacture to the date of the event that resulted in it being withdrawn from active competition.
5. Were the discarded major component/s used to create another vehicle?
Note: The answer to this question will depend on the timing of the “creation.” If it took place in one of the existing historic periods then the vehicle will have a claim to the specification at that time. However under CAMS 5th Category regulations it isn’t acceptable to create a new historic vehicle. It is acceptable to use a discarded but repaired chassis to repair another damaged vehicle provided the process is accurately recorded and the chassis number of the repaired vehicle is retained.
6. Did the rebuilt vehicle retain the original documentation/log book?
7. Was there a change of ownership following the rebuild?
8. How long was the vehicle out of action because of the component replacement – was it more than 12 months?
Note: The answers to Questions 6, 7 and 8 will assist in determining the circumstances and timing of the rebuild. Logbooks did not have the significance “in the day” that they do now, and questionable documentation in the past can create problems when historic classification is being sought.