Omega Owners Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  


Please check the Forum Guidelines at the top of the Newbie section

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - LC0112G

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 86
General Car Chat / Re: Car mileage clocking
« on: 17 November 2018, 20:06:14 »
I had a J reg Vauxhall Cavalier GSi2000 as a company car from new. Kept it for 4 years, put about 90K miles on it and then (stupidly) sold it for peanuts to local used car dealer the day I picked up the LC.

A few months later I was in the Local Vx dealership (can't remember why - LC was probably busted) when the new owner drove it in. He wanted to look at my car, and I wanted to look at his. I explained to him how the crease in the roof had happened, and the damage to one of the wing mirrors. I then looked at the speedo. Showed 64K miles. ::)

General Discussion Area / Re: Brexit negotiations
« on: 17 November 2018, 00:01:59 »
I cannot see that. it is like comparing lemons to beach rocks. North Korea has very little International trade because of sanctions due to its nuclear ambitions . The UK would still have a massive amount of trade on WTO or better terms.

WTO is also an international treaty. We can only trade under WTO if we abide by ALL the rules of WTO. Given that Parliament is sovereign it can chose to ignore EU/WTO/whatever rules, and in doing so we would end up in a situation similar to North Korea.

Not saying that's in anyway likely, but constitutionally it is possible. That was my point.

General Discussion Area / Re: Brexit negotiations
« on: 16 November 2018, 14:15:28 »
And here's the issue with May's 'deal'   ::)

If the ludicrous backstop is deployed, we cannot withdraw unilaterally as they have agreed that it can only end by mutual consent.

In my opinion, the ONLY way that the Irish border issue can be solved is through the future trading relationship, but the EU have refused to talk about the future, insisting on the backstop.  Incidentally, this probably contravenes A50, as A50 says that the withdrawal agreement takes account of the future relationship, but there is nothing beyond a bland non binding political statement of good faith.  ::)

There is now no incentive for the EU to engage in any meaningful way on any innovative border solutions, as all they have to do is insist it is impossible and the only way is the customs union...permanently.  Sabine Weyland (Barnier's deputy) has publicly said that the customs union will form the basis of the future trade agreement.

If there is no agreement that sorts the border issue by the end of the transition, then the backstop comes into force and we are trapped.  The UK won't have the ability to pursue an independent trade policy, we will have no say in the EU's trade policies, yet they will have the ability to grant access to UK markets to any old Tom, Dick or Harry.  And there isn't a damn thing we can do!

Some sovereignty....  ::)

Wrong, again. What part of Parliament is sovereign is difficult to understand?

This or any future parliament can decide to unilaterally revoke any agreement/treaty. One parliament cannot bind the actions of a future parliament. It's true that any other deals that rely on the Withdrawl Agreement would come crashing down too, but if parliament want's to tear everything up and start again from scratch it can. Trouble is, that risks landing us in a situation like North Korea which has no international trade to speak of.

What we can't do is tear up the Withdrawl agreement and continue trading with the EU in the same way we currently do (during the transition period), or in whatever way is agreed during negotiations.

General Discussion Area / Re: Brexit negotiations
« on: 16 November 2018, 14:01:13 »
Indeed, but how long can a parliament persist with pushing through policies which do not have national support? Eventually the work of ministers starts getting hampered by the fact that they find themselves dangling from lamp posts.

The answer to that is for however long the Police/Army decide to uphold/enforce the laws that parliament subjects it's people to. 

General Discussion Area / Re: Brexit negotiations
« on: 16 November 2018, 13:58:08 »
Quite but you missed out that the EU cleverly trumps all. For example Italy's parliament has set a budget but the EU doesn't like it so they have to set another or be fined.

No. The UK Parliament can decide to ignore the EU, or anyone else for that matter. However, doing so would undoubtedly result in a reaction from the other 27 EU members since we would be breaking treaty obligations that previous parliaments had agreed to follow. So the UK's choice then becomes do we want to stay in the club and follow all the rules we have previously helped draft and agreed to, or do we want to leave the club and do our own thing. There can be no cherry picking of which rules we want to follow and which we don't if we want to stay in the club.

I have no knowledge of Italy's constitutional situation. Joining the Euro undoubtedly means they have treaty obligations to other Euro nations. If those treaties involve budgetary conditions then they should either follow them, or leave the Euro. I would expect that as a sovereign nation they have the choice, so it's which they want the most.

General Discussion Area / Re: Brexit negotiations
« on: 16 November 2018, 11:10:31 »
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.

General Discussion Area / Re: Brexit negotiations
« on: 15 November 2018, 16:14:48 »
In fact much of our "Sovereign Parliament's" time is spent rubber stamping EU directives, laws, rules and regulations onto to statute book.  It was estimated by the House of Commons Library that approximately 60% of parliament's time is spent this way.

Now that might be your idea of a Sovereign Parliament, but it sure as hell isn't mine!

Our elected MEP's, the UK government, and the HMG Appointed Commissioners are involved in every step of every EU law. These laws don't get to the point of 'being rubber stamped' until/unless HMG agrees to them. The idea that we are rubber stamping laws into the UK statute book with no say in the process is bogus.

However, even once the laws have been agreed, and entered into the EU rulebook, Parliament is still sovereign. It can vote to obey the the laws it has previously agreed to, or it can vote to scrap the whole lot and leave the EU. What it cannot do is pick and choose which laws it wants to obey, and which it wants to ignore. That's been the leave camps problem all along - they think they can have tariff free trade with the EU, tariff free trade with the rest of the world, and no freedom of EU movement, and no EU financial contribution.

Whilst we are in the EU there is nothing to stop us 'just saying no'. No additional money, no Euro, no EU army, no loss of rebates, no new EU laws, etc. But once we leave, we lose all that, and chances are we'll have to follow any new rules they dream up without having a say in any of it.   

General Discussion Area / Re: Brexit negotiations
« on: 15 November 2018, 14:32:59 »
That sounds very reasonable legally , however when you are dealing with people I would maintain that a marginalised "naughty child" UK versus 27 united countries would soon see whatever changes they wished. At best we would be a second class or possibly in our unique third class as a member country. Human nature is not to forgive and forget however much we might like to believe it is.  At the very least there might be an EU veto put on us to never have another referendum ;D ;D

The UK parliament is sovereign. It can hold any referendum it wishes.

And no parliament can bind a future parliament. So even if the current parliament passed a law to ban a future referendum, a future parliament could repeal that law and hold one anyway.

General Discussion Area / Re: Brexit negotiations
« on: 15 November 2018, 14:21:42 »

the problem is that the Genie is out of the bottle never to go back in.

A friend has been having a go today and told me BREXIT  should just be cancelled, forget the whole thing he said.  ::)

My reply that the EU would screw us even more if we try to backtrack, IE the rebate would go, they'd try and force us to take the Euro, and all the opt out's and vetoes would go as well, (all of which would have evenually happened anyway had we voted to remain,) clearly hadn't occurred to him.

I don't think it has to most remain minded people either.  :-X

I've explained to you before why that's rubbish. Yet you continue to peddle it. Why?

We can either unilaterally revoke Art 50, or we cant. The ECJ is apparently due to hear the submissions on Nov 27th, with a ruling expected before Christmas. 

If the ruling is that we can revoke, and we do, then all the existing arrangement remain in place. It's then up to us if we want to give up rebates, opt outs etc in the future. I expect we'd have to contribute to the EU's costs of our failed BRexit, but that's it.

If the ruling is we can't revoke, then we either leave with no deal, leave with some version of the current TM deal.   

Omega General Help / Re: Vibration in rear when turning
« on: 12 November 2018, 11:58:59 »
If you open up the diff you'll find it's basically 3 parts -

1) the input drive pinion (leave this alone)
2) the crown wheel
3) the "centre"

The crown wheel bolts to the centre, whilst the centre contains all the LSD gubbins. So....

If you get a good LSD from a scrappy but the gear ratio is wrong, then you can just open up your existing diff, whip out the centre+crown wheel, swap the crown wheel onto the centre from the good diff, and re-assemble. This means you're using your old pinion and crown wheel (so the gear ratio is the same) but a new LSD centre.

Obviously there is a bit more to it than that, and you must ensure the backlash and side bearing preloads are correct on re-assembly.

Disclaimer - I've not done an Omega diff but I am in the middle of doing a Lotus Carlton one (which uses cones not plates) so the internals are similar. Hopefully it'll be going on the car this weekend.

Omega General Help / Re: Vibration in rear when turning
« on: 12 November 2018, 11:12:14 »
My understanding is that once the LSD plates are damaged they are basically scrap, and there isn't much you can do to fix them except replace.

The LSD plates can warp or become pitted. Warping happens when the oil gets too hot. Pitting is caused by micro welding where the heat of the slipping diff causes the plates to instantaneously weld together and then break free again. This roughens the surface and causes more heat/micro welding/pitting. Ultimatley it's down to the oil breaking down or no/insufficient friction modifier.

Replacing the oil can help quieten things down again for a while, but it can't fix any warping or pitting.

It's also possible that one of the bearings inside the diff is damaged, but you'd expect that to show up when driving/accelerating/overrunning straight and level too.

Omega General Help / Re: Vibration in rear when turning
« on: 08 November 2018, 22:08:11 »
Might also be worth replacing the oil in the diff if it is a LSD.
Be sure to use a mineral oil with the GM LSD additive.

^^^ This ^^^

And you MUST use the additive. The additive is a friction modifier which allows the diff plates to slide smoothly over each other. If you don't use the additive the plates release and grab suddenly, which isn't good for any of the LSD gubbins. It causes the plates to get very hot and wear rapidly, and ultimately this wrecks the LSD.

General Discussion Area / Re: Investment question.
« on: 24 October 2018, 13:34:44 »
Talking BTL in front of LC0112G will get you knuckles rapped you know ;) (I joke, he makes very valid points re. Tax). Seriously though, my personal view is that they have their place but as said, research heavily, and if done right they aren't an investment, they're a business.


The days of buying a "cheap" terraced house and renting it out for large profits are gone IMV. It's still possible to get 'lucky' (crossrail), but the tax climate has changed dramatically over the past few years, and there is a budget to look forwards to next week as well.

General Discussion Area / Re: Investment question.
« on: 23 October 2018, 22:58:01 »
Even 8% would see an income of 3800 ;)

You need to distinguish growth during the accumulation stage from growth during the drawdown stage.

During accumulation you can ride the rollercoaster and accept more risk for greater probable return. Some IFAs I know aim for 10% p/a on their own portfolios, but would be strung up by the goolies (by the regulators) if they put customers money in such a risky portfolio. Aiming for more than about 8% simply isn't allowed.

However, during the drawdown stage it is considered best to switch out of high risk, high return stuff in favour of steady eddy stuff which is much less volatile. It won't grow as much, but on the other hand it won't drop much during a stock market crash either.  Once you switch out of the high risk/high return stuff the returns will drop from 8% to perhaps only 4%.

It would be fair to say that my portfolio is very aggressive... Very little cash and no bonds, and only about 3% in greater europe.

My best performing fund is Black rock European Dynamic. Up 135% in 9 years. I also hold funds in China and India up by similar amounts. One pension pot invested in various global funds rose by over 40% in one year - 2016. Did something happen in 2016? ::)

BTW does a 3% annual deposit increase offset 3% annual inflation?

Basically yes. It's a rule of thumb. Some providers allow automatic increases linked to CPI, or RPI or Wage inflation.

General Discussion Area / Re: Investment question.
« on: 23 October 2018, 18:20:20 »
Your household income, so if you take home 2k a month, that would be 300...

I believe that pension calculators under estimate the pot value/market performance, and make no allowance for any specific portfolio.

Using a compound calculator I get anything from 127-145k if it makes 7% and 549-714k  if it averages 14%...

Depending on retiring at 65 or 67 and me not adding to current pot.

Paying in 250 a month with a 3% annual increase sees that rise to 343-406k at 7% and 1.08m to 1.48m at 14%

Worst case, I do nothing more and run out of money aged 83 on 1k pm, paying 250 pm will see me to 90/92 at 1,750-2,100 pm at 7%.

14% growth will give me an income of 10k- 13.75kpm to 90/92.

The lower number assumes drawing on pot at 65 vs 67, and drawdown income is gross and assumes the same growth rate as the original investments. It also does not include state pension.

No-one would plan on 14% returns nowadays. Even 7% is considered aggressive.  An IFA has to work with rates prescribed by the regulator, and I think they're cautions = -1%, average = +1%, aggressive = +3%. I agree these are overly pessimistic, but whilst 14% may be possible you'd have to be very very lucky. Most would pick a year on year growth rate between 4% and 8%.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 86

Page created in 0.366 seconds with 19 queries.