Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

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.

32971

General Discussion Area / Re: Tyre Speed Rating

« on: 29 January 2008, 16:56:09 »

I would have it swapped for another, the dealer shgould have known better

Abslutely. I would expect any tyre fitter to be able to identify the correct tyre spec but for a main dealer to get it wrong is disgusting.

You shouldn't have to lose out. They have supplied you with goods that are not fit for purpose. I would demand that they reimburse me or change the tyre for a W rated one.

If you do get past the MOT (shouldn't do but you never know) and subsequently have a claim it's a get out of jail free card for your insurers.

Kevin

32972

General Discussion Area / Re: Tyre Speed Rating

« on: 29 January 2008, 16:05:48 »

V rating is 149 MPH. However, I believe the manufacturer's min. rating is W (168), since it's not impossible for a 3.0 to exceed 149 with a following wind. Weight has a part to play too, and they can be derated under heavy load.

Bottom Line: The tyre fitters have supplied a tyre that's not suitable for the vehicle. I'd take it back and demand that they change it FOC.

Kevin

32973

General Discussion Area / Re: Do Parkers know something I don't ??

« on: 05 February 2008, 19:04:22 »

A 4 cylinder 3.2 eh..? Fruity.

And TheBoy thinks he's got a tractor.

Must be a really complex head design to fit 24 valves on it too. 6 Valves per cylinder!

That lot is total guesswork.

Kevin

32974

General Discussion Area / Re: Please take a moment

« on: 29 August 2007, 10:52:08 »

Whoever you are, our thoughts are with you, and if there's anything I can do to help, I'm only a PM away.

Kevin

32975

General Discussion Area / Re: How much!!!!

« on: 05 February 2008, 20:45:44 »

yeah its a scam i dont know why, but i (and my sister) have sold a couple of phones on e-bay (not even decent ones) and for some reason they always seem to get bid on for stupid amounts then never bought, then the user that does it closes account grrrr. We both had to pay listing fees and it takes ages to get it back from e-gay.

The cynic in me would say that it's the network operators trying to kill off the market in 2nd hand phones.... But then they subsidise new phones so probably don't care.

Kevin

32976

General Discussion Area / Re: drive safely

« on: 05 February 2008, 19:08:17 »

Ahh, bless'em. The "more money than talent" brigade. Where would the high-end sports car business be without them?  

Kevin

32977

General Discussion Area / Re: A Plea to the management

« on: 05 February 2008, 21:46:58 »

you see ,  now you've said that, I'm going to have to go and get a Caffrey's from the beer fridge.

What's it doing there?

.. or did you run the dishwater too hot and put it in there to cool down?

Hmm. There's a bottle of Broadside in the garage.... Back in a mo... Hic

Kevin

32978

General Discussion Area / Re: Vehiccle tax price's?

« on: 31 January 2008, 10:09:58 »

That sounds quite like a direct LPG liquid injection system somebody is offering. I wonder if one could modify the VX fuel input to cope with LPG as against Petrol, a couple of solenoids , perhaps a bit of heating, like the current LPG vapourisers.

That's something I would like to play with one day. If you inject as a liquid you lose No power over petrol and the better properties of the fuel actually allow you to gain some.

Problem is, on the vehicle I have in mind, there's precious little space for an LPG tank. :-/ It would certainly have to be one fuel or the other.

As usual it was done ar$e first. The grant was 80% of the cost for a 1.0 Micra and nothing for cars over 1800cc!!!! Dont these numptys realise that it is the bigger engined cars which need converting not tiny cars like Micras which are already fuel efficient.

Problem is, in their eyes, the unwashed like us should accept a Micra and be happy with it. They'll still be swanning around in Jags at our expense though.

The UK only causes 2% of the worlds CO2, other countries cause much more yet their fuel is cheap

This is it. If we cut CO₂ unilaterally, we achieve nothing other than make ourselves less productive and drive more industry to China, India, etc..

Kevin

32979

General Discussion Area / Re: Vehiccle tax price's?

« on: 30 January 2008, 23:11:27 »

LPG reduces CO2 by a small amount, and if you register the vehicle as dual fuel you can get 10 or 15 quid off the road tax I believe. Probably have to brave a VLO to do so, so take some Kendal mint cake for when  you are in the queue...

More to the point, the CO2 emissions from your car on LPG are in part just resulting from gas that would likely be flared at a refinery so the NET result of using it in a car is probably zero emissions. Too big a picture for a politician to see, sadly.

Direct petrol injection is injection of petrol directly into the cylinder in a similar way to a common rail diesel. Most fuel injected petrol engines inject into the inlet manifold or just behind the inlet valves (as in all petrol Omegas). They are more efficient but not very widespread at the moment.


Kevin

32980

General Discussion Area / Re: Vehiccle tax price's?

« on: 12 January 2008, 11:00:49 »

At MOT they just measure the mixture of gases coming out of the exhaust (and not CO2 anyway). It's the volume of gases that makes a difference.

They measure this at type approval by collecting everything that comes out of the exhaust pipe during a simulated drive on a rolling road and analysing it.

Kevin

32981

General Discussion Area / Re: Vehiccle tax price's?

« on: 12 January 2008, 01:49:50 »

I expected our Range Rover tax to have gone up when people were moaning about tax prices on 4 x 4's, but it didn't for the reason already said it was older than 2001 ish.... which does seem a little strange when i would have thought the emissions on an older car would have been greater than a newer one  

Yes but the "increases for 4x4s" was media generated bull5hit. It was only ever based on CO2 and only for post-May 2006 cars.

The problem with older cars is that they were never rated for CO2 at type approval so, although it's obviously a guzzler, there's no fair way they can tax it. Don't upgrade it for a post-2006 one whatever you do!

Kevin

32982

General Discussion Area / Re: Vehiccle tax price's?

« on: 12 January 2008, 01:09:25 »

So to sum it up then.................

Only vehicles that are affected by the car tax increase are those that are registared on or after March 2001?

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_10012524

For cars registered before 1 March 2001 there are 2 bands. 1549cc and below and above 1549cc.

After this it's based on CO2 emissions and for cars registered after 23/03/06 there's an additional band.

Doesn't matter what type of vehicle it is. CO2 emissions is all that matters.

.. and is there any reason to think there won't be increases across the board?  

Kevin

32983

General Discussion Area / Re: commodore

« on: 05 February 2008, 13:06:42 »

Don't wanna come back but my visa expires soon and I can't find a reasonable lass to marry. The plus side of being in Oz is third party insurance included with rego (road tax) and petrol is about 40p a litre. My last car in UK in 2002 was a Saab turbo which was good but I like my commodore so much want something similar when back in UK.
Thanks for all the replies.

Crikey! For 40p a litre I'd settle for an unreasonable lass!  

Kevin

32984

General Discussion Area / Re: commodore

« on: 05 February 2008, 11:34:37 »

I bet you'll find a big difference in the cost of running them both though.

That goes without saying. Be sure to research our petrol prices before agreeing to anything!

Kevin

32985

General Discussion Area / Re: commodore

« on: 05 February 2008, 11:17:23 »

In normally aspirated form the 3.8 V6 generates a little less power than the 3.0 and 3.2 V6 models we have in the UK (208 and 218 BHP respectively IIRC). The engines are a bit more refined and of newer design than the 3.8 being DOHC per bank 4 valve per cylinder engines rather than the 2 valve per cylinder pushrod design of the 3.8 so their improved breathing and willingness to rev makes up for the shortfall in capacity. The only down side is that you really need to keep on top of the cam belts  (change belt and tensioners every 40k / 4 years).

I've never driven a commodore but I have driven cars with the 3.8 GM V6 in the US and comparing them with my 3.2 Omega tells me you won't have a problem with it.

We have a similar 4 speed auto box (the 4L30 instead of the 4L60). The cars are obviously similar size and weight. I can't comment on the interiors and ride, handling, etc but I think you'll be happy with an Omega.

Kevin