alastairq

3 hours ago, Kickstart said:

But the 4L really needed a very lazy gearbox and didn't benefit from 4 speed.

 

Indeed.

But the customer is always 'right'....and as drivers of cars we generally tend to be in lurve with huge numbers of gears, clutches, horrible gearsticks, and all the  associated driver errors and wear [as a result] that go with such testosterone-fuelled lifestyles.

Ford [amongst others] had it right first time round [with gearboxes] by fitting an immensely reliable 3 speed auto box [the C4]...as a basic standard.

The 200 Cu In 6 engine with a C4 is a pure delight to drive [especially for someone who has spent a lifetime matching revs, double de-clutching, grinding gears [once in a while...it is permitted, you know..to grind maybe a dozen gears out of 5 000 -odd gearchanges , often more in a week sometimes]..

In all honesty I cannot for the life of me understand the passion for 6 or 22 speed gearboxes.....It's as if drivers [buyers?} think they are still actually , in control of things?

My late lamented 200-6 in a '67 Mustang was a delight to drive....At roundabouts all I had to do was simply accelerate....No messing about with clutches finding the biting point without stalling the engine, or messing about changing gear via a neutral position which meant the engine wasn't actually doing anything for performance whilst the driver fumbled around with the gear lever, then found the clutch biting point, yet  again....Oh dear, such a waste of time and effort.

The 6 pot, with 3 speed C4 auto box [no neutrals between gears, notice?} in a relatively lightweight car meant it was 'gone'.....

No revving needed, just using the low down grunt of the engine...such a lovely lazy way of getting about...

The lighter weight of the 6 when compared to any of the V8s used, meant for a nicer balance of the car when cornering [or, going round bends?]

Now I am left with the Dellow, which has 3 gears, not including reverse. I generally only use 2 of them..the whole car weighs less than 400 kilos anyway, so under 50 bhp is perfectly adequate.

I am beginning to think that bhp and 'speed' capabilities are a waste of time in this day & age, on our public roads.

Neither can be fully used, without being inconsiderate of others.

On the one hand, there is ''integrity''....& on the other hand there is''seeing what we can get away with''..

3 hours ago, PhilJ W said:

The Ford Zephyr had a similar cylinder head incorporating a similar inlet arrangement

 The US Ford inline sixes had the inlet manifold and cylinder head cast together.. [the ''Logs'' as they were known]...

The big problem being, a tuner couldn't guarantee the smoothness of the runners going to the end cylinders, since the manifold could  not be removed. 

Some went to the extreme of cutting the whole inlet log off the cylinder head..but that meant a lot of machining needed to be done to make & fit a new inlet manifold design.

Offenhauser produced a piggyback manifold [plus a triple carb set up]..which meant, two large holes cut into the top of the manifold at each end. The Offy piggyback manifold would then be clamped on top...with gaskets, of course.

Very impressive looking....if not the ultimate in bolt on power tuning...

The Offy setup had a progressive linkage too...On gentle throttle openings, only the centre [the original] carb would be in use. Once the throttle was opened wider, so the two end carbs came into play.

I suspect a decent two barrel carb [or twin choke, such as a Weber]...on an opened-out original head/manifold produced enough power...

Getting hold of an Aussie inline six Ford head is today rather in the realm of hen's teeth...with costs to match.

IIRC, Ford Australia also improved on Ford US's idea of a decent base engine too.

Ford US used as a base, an inline 6 motor, originally of some 170 cu in, but after the mid 60's [After the first year of Mustang production. really]...that went up to 200 cu in [3.3 litres in eurospeeekks]..

However, as ever watchful of production costs , Ford US designed that inline 6 with an integral inlet manifold. [Saved on studs, nuts and gaskets, I suppose?]...which rather limited what could be 'done' by those seeking more than 125 bhp.....it was integral with  the head casting.

Ford Australia saw further, and produced the same [quite strong, really] 6 cylinder engine, but whose cylinder head was separate from the inlet manifold.

Thus the Aussies were able to tune & extract a lot more power from that good basic six.......

Yes, I am subscribed to Perun's channel....have been for some time now....

When [If?] I get to see or new conservative candidate next year, I must remember to ask him what his [or his party's] strategy is for dealing with putin's inevitable challenge to NATO  before the end of this decade? What, they don't actually have a strategy? 

Quelle Surprise!

Oh well, I guess it'll be like covid again....this time it'll be the hardest up dealing with the continual power outages we will be subjected to, courtesy of russian cruise missiles and strategically important [but doubtless undefended] power nodes this country isn't liberally outfitted with?

All intended to persuade us, the voters, to persuade our government [whoever it will be?] to stop supporting Ukraine..Or the other Baltic countries...

It's coming, they've all been warned....Probably all got their Caribbean villas booked for the duration..

As an aside, I suspect the next Putin-style conflict will be Venezuela's intention to invade [for financial reasons] Guyana.

Or should I say, for the benefit of Maduro and his chums..and their chums, and so on?

Will we, the Brits, get involved with assisting Guyana?  Given our past combined history?

Will we, the Brits, really care?

 Will the US be so tied up with diving up their own fundament, that they won't bother either?

I don't suppose   Guyana could rely on Brazil very much?

The collapse of democracy as we get tied up with concerns over who gets what at christmas?

After all, given that Venezuela has as much oil to sell as Russia?

As would Guyana?

Opportunism....

Corruption at its worst?

A month goes by, then suddenly an explosion of wit and acute observation........Nothing at all like our local Parish council meetings...

I note  from the advert, that a new owner could get themselves a ''Buyer Protection Plan?''

Protection from what, I might ask?

Or, who??

20 hours ago, Kickstart said:

Not many cheap rwd doner cars anymore (and not sure anyone would want to use a BMW)

 Taking a peek at what the Classic reliability Trials folk do with old BMW's, they are probably worth more of a 'look' than we imagine?

Heck, I even know of a trialling Skoda Estelle that uses a BMW-derived differential in the transaxle.

Indeed, BMW rear half shafts I found had exactly the same diameter and spline count as those found in my old Skoda Rapid trialler.....which possibly begged a question or three??

There are other RWD donors out there too......especially when looking at the more 'commercial' world?

Of course, we don't have to  be so much in lurve with huge engine capacities, or sheer BHP figures.

My Dellow likely puts out, at best, around the low 50 bhp mark from its sidevalve Ford engine......yet weighs in [with a full tank of fuel, all 15 gallons..never tried it as I cannot afford the fuel]...under 400 kilos...

So it's just as valid to look at BHP per tonne figures.

Which puts us neatly into Reliant 850 cc figures for RWD sources. {One can have as many wheels as one desires...?}

51 minutes ago, Nick C said:

It looks like you can still buy new kit cars as well - such as this one for under £5k - I was surprised, I'd expected to see that modern legislation would have made them impossible to get road-approved...

For the UK, there are several categories of vehicle built from a kit. The category will depend on the type of kit supplied or used.  The SVA [as was] isn't too onerous to meet....

This site may help categorise 'kits?'

https://www.theukrules.co.uk/rules/driving/vehicle-registration/kit-built/

There is a definitive difference between a 'kit-built' vehicle, and a 'kit-converted' vehicle.

Not forgetting ''re-builds?''

''Reconstructed classic vehicles?''

''Radically altered vehicles?''

All depends really on what one has had for breakfast....seemingly?

30-odd years ago, I was lucky with my Cannon when turning it into  a 'road-legal' vehicle. Or rather, i timed it well....Squeezed everything in before the original SVA test rules came into force.

Thus,  the basic vehicle was ''inspected'' by a suitably qualified Police Officer.....who issued [or sent off for] a 'chassis number'' for it.

Once the chassis number [the vehicle's actual, new, identity]...was received [ and stamped out & secured to a prominent chassis member]..it could all be insured....then I could drive it to a pre-booked MoT test station, where it underwent a proscribed 'MoT' test. This also involved another drive to get the vehicle officially weighed. this, for the MoT tester's brake testing equipment. 

Thus far, no registration number.......which confused a local bobby no end.

Once the test certificate wa issued [a pass, obviously].....the relevant paperwork could then be sent off to acquire a registration number.

This was for a Q plate, as the components of the vehicle, when inspected, came from a variety of different [old] vehicles , so no one particular vehicle identity could be found.

All very easy...didn't even have a windscreen!  But it had to have seat belts fitted, and dual circuit brakes...Plus the C&U regs applicable at the date of registration. Which in my case meant some thoughtful measuring of the rear light positions so that the arcs of visibility weren't fouled by stuff like spare wheels, etc.  For the rear, easily-found trailer light units met all the requirements [E numbers, etc]

Really stuffed for fixing the front number plate in accordance with the regs, however...So I did 'cheat' on that one.....and did much the same as many old Jag E-type owners ended up doing.

However, today the process is somewhat more tedious....

7 minutes ago, Hobby said:

I'm not bothered about the legalities of it all, though you seem obsessed by it.

 You should be......After all, the legalities of it all are what back up the Highway Code.

Or do you prefer Yourway Code?

1 hour ago, Hobby said:

Therein lies the issue, one person who doesn't want to be overtaken and doesn't understand the "keep to the left" bit... the A5 north of Shrewsbury is the same.

The problem with that''keep to the left'' idea, on a single carriageway road like the A166 Garrowby Hill is that folk using the same lane, overtaking without wanting to be across the centre line, seem to think they have a priority when it comes to pushing in front of those they overtake.

When in reality [IE if it went to a Court of LAw].....the overtaker in such a position has contravened either the Careless driving, or dangerous driving  regulations.

IN other words, they should not have started overtaking if they cannot keep clear of the vehicle they ar overtaking...in all respects..IE, before, during, and after the overtaking maneuver.

Try telling that to an Audi driver, however?

As far as I'm concerned these days, if the overtaker cannot or will not use the other side of the carriageway to overtake, then they are asking for trouble.

As far as the A166 mentioned is concerned, years ago I investigated, communicating with the relevant Highways Authority.

Where the carriageway happened to 'bulge outwards' for the short distance, they had no intention of creating a second lane on the uphill side of things, on account of what was suspected might occur where the carriageway returned to a single lane. {IE, potentially , stalled HGVs on the steepest part, due to cars & vans pushing in front where the second lane might end...Instead of using the other side of the centre line  road marking. Which might be inconvenient for traffic coming in the other direction...as has often been the case even recently......

Why is it that folk seem to think that, because they are overtaking, everybody else has to 'keep out of their way?'

A166 Garrowby Hill....[B steep for waggins..complete with gravel trap escape road for those who have gone beyond the OH Shhh moment.]

Around the middle part [the steepest, also bending]....the uphill side has the single lane [single carriageway road all the way]...which actually becomes quite wide at one point.

Wide enough for higgerant drivers to consider the single lane to be two lanes.....so that they can overtake slower vehicles in their overly high horsepower new fat-RS wagens...without having to cross the centre line dividing the opposing lanes...[Or, so they think?}

But it is not two lanes, it is but one lane.

Imaging if one is driving down a single carriageway main road, and some clown decides to insert their vehicle alongside, between you and the oncoming traffic? 

What would you think????

On Garrowby Hill, the main issue is, if one keeps hard over to the left edge of the road, when going uphill...where the road narrows down again, one can find oneself being almost pushed off the edge of the carriageway by higgerant drives intent on not allowing you to get in their way!

If one s brought to a stand because of vehicles trying to get past on one's right, but in your own lane.....will one be able to get started again, given the gradient????

''Getouttamyway'' syndrome at its very worst.

I stay wide, closer to the centre line..which doubtless annoys other drivers when my 50 mph up the 1 in 4 bit is still too slow for them.

I use the description ''drivers'' very loosely.

Other drivers obviously don't see my road position as being 'reasonable?'

When ' not being reasonable' means preventing them from doing whatever they fancy doing,regardless!

Do I care?? Do I eckerslike!

Of course, those are the road users who complain when the Police go out in numbers, to enforce the Laws on them...when they should be out catching burglars...

Sorry folks,  it's all about despair.

Market Weighton hill, A1079, for those who live further out towards the stix?  {Styx, AKA 'umber?]?

In my last known job, I was frequently disappointed when sat near to existing licence holders [who should know better....Yet, have to be educated]...couldn't identify when they were on a dual carriageway, or not?

The above hill [East Yarkshire, for those who rarely venture into the fog o the north] has a 3 lane carriageway    2 up, one down, spearted for the most part by a double continuous white line road marking..but not near the top.....[single solid white line on the uphill side]...being a case in point.

When I ask why we are travelling at 70 mph, the response usually was, 'this is a dual carriageway'...[This might be in a Land Rover]...

I then would ask, ''why they thought it was a dual carriageway?''

The response was often something to do with the 3 lanes!

The follow-up depended on whether I was in coaching mood...or assessing for suitability for an upcoming course...

Either way they could be nobbled for exceeding the military speed limit for a Land Rover  [JSPs]...Not that I ever did that, of course....

More likely, a short stop in a layby whilst I explained the niceties of how to identify what sort of road they were on, etc......and their speed limits, both civilian & military...

All basic pre-driving test skills expected of a learner or novice...Never mind someone who has held a licence for a few years!

Nowadays, as a retired [retarded?] person, I don't get angry....or even, annoyed [often] by what I observe from other drivers..especially those who give the impression they actually know what they are about with driving......[More often, much older drivers, too]...

I simply endure the disappointment of it all.

2 hours ago, Hobby said:

I'm with Alastair on this.

 Be aware, it'll be a tight squeeze.................

44 minutes ago, Reorte said:

One of life's great mysteries, why anyone ever thought that was a good idea.

 

Until just a few years ago there were some short stretches left on the A6 (at the top of Shap, and a bit more between Penrith and Carlisle), but they've recently been repainted away in to a less bonkers 2+1 arrangement.

 

I know of one or two bits of road that can still technically be used like that. There's the A66 approaching downhill to Keswick, towards the roundabout. It's two lanes uphill, but the markings separating the downhill lane is a broken / solid line combination, so technically you can use it to pass. Looking at Streetview it was painted in to a double white line a few years back, then more recently back in to the solid / broken combination. No idea why.

 It's so sad that drivers and riders cannot be trusted by the rest of us, to follow the Highway Code,...especially when it comes to the phrase, ''if safe to do so?''

The old idea of 3 lanes with a bi-directional overtaking lane surely was an attempt to fill up the gene pool?  [Those left must be better drivers?]

FIAT 1100 just before the Superminx estate, too...

I don't think a oo common sight in the UK at the time?

{ A more recent version being seen in India, mainly as a taxi, the Premier Padmini...}

Spotted the Skoda 1000 MB, and the Renault Dauphine......

Also noted the Mk1 Consul in ripe banger condition...

48 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

Nevertheless, on they trundle, like a Russian in a minefield, until inevitably they hit something.    

 Such a shame the outcomes aren't anything like as 'fatal?'  One or two mangle-ations would surely bring all the others up short toot sweet?

Such a shame that greed has brought us to the state were it has to take one, two or three mangleations before the powers-that-be decide to actually do something about what we normal 'umble mortals [AKA voters?]...have been clamouring for for years now?

[In other words, nobody wanted to pay enough to obviate the need for alarm & despondency over the state of things.  Far better to ignore stuff until somebody actually dismembers themselves?  Same principle as letting the customer do the quality control?]

Hah...just as well...Bring back the days of only one brake light on the offside, I say!  That'll cure the tailgaters! {Or at least, their insurance companies will cure them?]

Perhaps this should be uploaded to tw@tter or farcebuk? That'll get the frothers foamin'?

I note no cyclists appeared to have been dismembered during that run? Despite neither cyclists nor drivers giving each other 1.5 metres of space...yet traffic flowed, the cyclists didn't care [still dont]...Maybe something to do with vehicles actually being of a sensible width that fitted the existing roads, eh?

Loved the Bristol VR and RE buses..proper buses that, if clouted, felt nowt, and could continue. Unlike today's plastic fantastics?

No signs of Tata products self immolating either....[Is it really founded on a religious concept , I wonder?]

BTW, Blair, I do quite like heaters now I've ceased to work, and am getting older....But the Dellow, is actually too darned hot below the chest line anyway....

So hot I often have to hang my right elbow out over the door top just to keep it cool. Having to rest one's left foot on the gearbox side helps keep the old toes cosy too...

The TT version obviously had some of the same issues....But, aside from scale/gauge, what differences were there between the TT version and the OO version?

[As a youngster , with TT for space & cost reasons, when the diesels were offered at knockdown prices, they were a good source of the 0-6-0 chassis.]

Anyway....just to annoy all the other road users round hereabouts, my 21  1/2 year old Suzuki GV passed yet another MoT yesterday.

On Tuesday I even gave it a wash..hosepipe and dirty rag jobbie...This usually only happens once a year....but this year I'm a month early, as I got the MoT booked well in advance.

Only advisories which I knew all about already [and was simply waiting for the postman to arrive].. 

So I can get away with yet another year of Dad's taxiing for my son & heir...

Annual mileage is creeping up too...reflecting the longer essential journeys I'm making.

Still, once this next year is over, hopefully son & heir will go onto other things....and my mileage will return to what it was 7 years ago when I stopped working...

I might then be able to dump the thing, and get back into something over 40 years old, with zero VED and without the annual 40 pensionquids con that is the MoT to endure.

Trouble is, eyeballing the so-called 'classic' car market finds me staring askance at some of the prices being asked for what I consider to be ''kwapp?'

After all, the suzuki only cost me 500 sovs, 6 years ago now..so any replacement has to be a cheapoh banger...that'll have to beat 6 years ownership, at least.

I'm wondering whether to get a set of cheapoh  winter tyres [and some 2nd hand wheels to go with them]...Indeed, I do wonder whether that would be worth it? Given the global warming thing?

But then, over winter, son & heir does tend to get a bit frantic when things don't go according to plan.....Which is something his Mum & I try to avoid, to give him the best chance of succeeding .

I'll have to  have a look at Camskills, see what they've got?

There always seems to be a ''secret'' downside to all these modern high horsepower small [weeny?] engines?

Mind, my 21 1/2 YO Suzuki GV [it's got 4wd if I want to use it]...has the venerable Suzuki J20 2 litre petrol engine.

Rumoured to have been able to produce 130-odd bhpeees...at lordy only knows what rpms...

I have to take the rev counter over the 4000 rpm mark to feel any real benefit of all that BHPeee....and that makes me wince.

Which I suppose brings me to my point....just how often in our day-to-day driving lives do we actually make full & proper use of all that BHPeee on tap?

Do we have to get to a motorway, just to take advantage of all that bhpeeee?

What if I don't happen to be near a motorway?

Mostly my injin runs to about 2000 to 2400 rpms, no more. That equates to a bit of acceleration {IE, I'm increasing speed]...and a normal road speed of around 50 mph or so.

Probably using about 40 or 50 of those potential bhpeees...or fewer?

Soooo, why do we need such high potential BHPeees for normal, day-to-day driving? Is it all an effort to pander to our egos?

The Ford Popular being compared would be the very pre-war designed, 103E Pop. [the upright] with it's very simple [cheap to produce] pre-war suspension.

.Plus, they had 17 inch diameter wheels and 5.5 to 1 rear axle ratios, which meant the engine would be revving quite high at cruising speeds.....not good for engine wear.

The VW Beetle having independant suspension with torsion bars...and a much more amenable final drive ratio.

HArdly a comparison, really? The roadholding abilities would limit  the reasonable cruising speed, methinks?

However, had the comparator from Ford been the 100E  sidevalve  cars, things may have been a bit different, perhaps?  

Confusing is the fact Ford continued production of the upright Popular until around the time the Mini was being introduced [1959?]

Plus, they sold ....well enough.

The beetle's torque curve was quite flat, hence the 'high' cruising speed, timed to match the torque curve. Also, Germany had the autobahn system, whilst the UK was just getting rid of cobbled main roads....Horses for courses, again?

The sidevalve Fords could have been adjusted to cruise at similar speeds [if the motorway system had been 20 years earlier in inception?]....if final drive ratios, gearboxes and engine power characteristics had been played around with.

But we didn't have motorways [to any extent] so there wasn't the need for a high cruising speed.....too many corners, for one thing.

The Beetle's reputation for longevity grew out of the fact the engine was very low stressed for its size.

Start tuning them, and reliability was the first thing that went out of the window.

Easiest way to tune a sidevalve Ford is to supercharge it.   Overcomes the engines inherent breathing issues. Probably more effective than doing similar with a similar size OHV engine as well. But Ford sidevalves did have an immensely strong bottom end....which was one reason why they were so popular with the specials brigade in the 40's and 50's? [Lotus, Ginetta, etc etc etc]

That, and being cheap and easy to find helped a lot too...

17 minutes ago, 30801 said:

 

Think it was more about getting creative for the testing process.

The only zero VED petrol car I've had was a Smart and its 71bhp 1.0l engine didn't feel compromised in any way.

Economy was only on a par with the Jazz which made > 120gm of emissions albeit at a more believable test.

 

 Just bought a 2016 Suzuki Celerio for my ex...[they stopped doing them a year later..coincided with recent Govt changes to VED for  previous low emissions cars...my advice, avoid buying post 2017 cars, if intending to drive on a shoestring?]

  Zero rated VED, and almost 70 mpgs to boot.

Dearest daughter [I don't have a less expensive daughter!] has also just got herself a zero-rated VED Hyundry  Eye-dirty....a diseasel, as it happens, courtesy of another driver's no claims bonus.

Cheaper to drive the  15 miles cross country each way commute than to go by train [not quite door-to-door at her end, either]..and quicker than using the bus too...[and less smelly!]

Around the 60 bhp mark, from the Suzuki...Double that of the Ford 100E, with over twice the frugality in fuel. Sloggz a bit , 4 up with loads of luggage, however...but marched up Garrowby Hill at 50 mph regardless.

[I've been up Garrowby Hill at 4 mph flat out, 2000 rpms.....modern overtakers are a ruddy nuisance, as cannot afford to let anyone get in our way, in case we have to stop, and cannot re-start....Modern  drivers forget this important principle.]

They did hate it when I got to the top, and belted off at 50 mph or more once more.  Modern drivers have had life far to easy because of modern technology, I concluded.