Welcome to OOF
My Ital van, 1.3 A series, used 4l of oil a day (and 2l of coolant). So that was about 1l per 50 miles.
Granted, it was ragged to within an inch of its life every second of the day.
didn't burn oil.
You're confusing Cologne and Essex engines! A 2.8i will happily hit the rev limiter in the first four gears(which is about 6k); an Essex is running out of puff at 5, and done by 5.5 if your mechanical sympathy is turned off. If you're daft enough to remove the rev limiter from a 2.8i(it's on the rotor arm) it's easy to blow them up. The Essex can be improved by milling out the centre of the plenum under the carb, with no other mods it will eventually hit 6k, but do it frequently and you'll be resetting the valve clearances. Both use the same 3.02 diff ratio and similar diameter tyres.
Both suffer from timing gear failure, and the oil pump hex drive is truly shit. And they're heavy.
....
Back in the mid nineties a woman I know owned a 2.8i with a 5 speed box.
It needed thrashing to within an inch of it's life to have any meaningful acceleration due to a combination of leggy gearing and a lack of torque at low revs. I know the V6 Essex lump has been described as a 'boat anchor' but at least it had good low speed torque.
Turbo Technics (blast from the past but still trading I believe) did a nice job of resolving that. I was a member of Capri Club International (membership card still comes in handy as an ice scraper) and mentioned the mod to my mate. He had it done by them and it flew.
I don't like driver aids. It has produced the lazy disinterested drivers we are all complaining about.
Talk of Capri's always reminds me of a girl called Amanda that me and my mates all lusted after when we were about 19 or so.
She was hot, knew it and thought she was too good for the likes of us!Anyway she got a new boyfriend, who was a bit older, drove a 2.8i Capri and was a bit of a self-abuser to be honest.
One day walking past his car in the car car park we spotted a set of footprints on the inside of the windscreen!Oh how we laughed!
Actually, now you have the sump off, I would take a peek at one or two of the main / big end bearings. That will tell you everything you need to know about whether it's worth persevering.
If you do, it's vital you mark and keep the bearing caps and bearings the right way so they go back as they came off
top end cam housings will starve of oil long before the crank though normally
I don't believe there will be or should be a second referendum.
But if there were, my guess is 'remain' would win it.
If there is a second referendum I don't believe there should be a 'remain option'. I think the choice should be between TM's deal ( piss poor though it is) or no deal. We (not me) have already voted to leave.
I am trying to drop the sump. I have removed all the bolts and screws I can see attaching the sump to the block and the bell housing, but it did not fall off. I hve given it tentative taps with a hammer, but it stays put. Is there a trick to release it?
scrape part of the gasket out with a Stanley knife, then pry the sump off with a nylon wedge in the hole.
You could knock a screwdriver into the gasket and pry the sump off that way. But you'll probably have to straighten and or dress the edges afterwards.
Worth checking if there's any significant current draw when parked up too. Last time this happened to me the heated rear windscreen relay contacts had welded themselves closed.Well, at 14.35v (dropped to 13.8v briefly with everything switched on before coming back up to 14.25v) at idle, the alternator is clearly ok.
Don't believe that I had left anything switched on, so have acquired a new battery to prevent any further issues.
You ought to spend £20 on a drop tester....
What is totally unacceptable about this agreement is the knock on effect that the outcome will have on us all regardless of where we live or nationality. Trade should have been a condition of the agreement on the table today. Well done Barnier and May. I expected common sense to apply but instead spite reigns supreme. They did tell us this the day after the vote in fairness.
Thing is, if there had been as much public say and involvment of such an important decision back in '92,'99,'03 and especially '09 then we would have had a membership that the majority of the public could have gotten behind or at least shaped in some way through democratic means. Instead we have had decades of conflating being elected a representative of the people with being given an agenda to do whatever someone likes vis-a-vis Europe. All parties are guilty of this.
We finally had a vote for in or out at a point where the UK was increasingly frustrated with the EU and because Cameron had the guile to oppose Junker's election to high office he deliberately made it difficult for the then PM. This was probably the nail in the coffin for the EU's relationship with the UK. Until the EU makes itself a club that citizens wish to identify with rather than just be a member of because it is convenient/easy/good for the economy/etc then it will continuie to have a problem with the people it is supposed to represent.
Remember that they gave Ireland a referendum on closer integration about a decade ago and it failed. So they had another until it finally passed. The EU is not a democratic institution. It is an institution masquerading as a democratic body. To even consider a second vote on Brexit is absurdly unequal in the balance of public voice. PM Brown signed us up to the current incarnation of the EU despite the fact that polls showed the majority of the public were against it. Where were the cries for a public vote then?
What you are saying is going some way to understanding the UK constitution, and what 'Parliament is Sovereign" actually means. In the UK, 'the people' aren't sovereign - they have no say in the day to day, week to week, month to month or year to year running of the country, or any agreements that the govt enters into.
Parliament took powers from the King back in the 1600's. It did not pass those powers to the people - it kept them for itself. In effect parliament replaced a single dictator (the King) by itself. The only powers the public have are those granted to the public by parliament, and those powers can be revoked. Women only got the vote in 1918/21 because parliament voted to give them that right. Parliament can revoke that right.
So as things stand, the treaties we entered into in '92,'99,'03 and '09 did not (and still would not) require public approval. Infact it can be argued that they don't even need parliamentary approval because international treaties are (arguably) govt to govt agreements under crown prerogative.
So the next time you see someone write something like "we had a referendum and the majority ordered the govt to..." you can safely assume the writer doesn't understand our parliamentary democracy. The public have no right to order the govt/parliament to do anything - they can only give an opinion. Because, ultimately Parliament is Sovereign.
