Hobby

I dont think Katy has had any of the latest ones for any decent time but I've had three. Golf estates: 1.6tdi 55mpg, 2.0tdi 52mpg and now an Octavia 1.0Tsi 50mpg. All measured using Fuelly over 3 years/40k and not guesswork brim to brim like most people think is accurate. Previously a 1.9tdi Roomster manual, 55mpg. As I said pretty much no difference. I could get much more, when driving in Germany this year the Octavia was doing 60+, but much of my local work is town which brings down the average.

I'd rather it just disappeared without a trace... But I'd also like to see Liberty disappear from Formula One as well, but can't see either happening!

No chance of that over here! Lucky to get 50 miles without some sort of obstacle.

Which makes little difference, 30kg against a total weight of near 2000kg, 1.5%. Other modern non VAG gearboxes give similar results and they're a damn sight more relaxing in everyday driving conditions!

For modern gearboxes such as the VAG dsg gearboxes there is very little difference between manual and auto mpg in real world driving. Check out the real mpg websites to see. My old car was a Golf estate with the 7 speed dsg, according to the Honest John website the difference was only 1mpg.

It's interesting regarding gearing, the last few classics I've owned i got hold of the brochures for them and back in those days you got lots of useful information not seen now, one of which was the gearing ratios. I did notice that the gearing ratio for both the auto and manual (4 or 5 speed) in top was pretty much the same, so they'd obviously geared the auto for cruising economy regardless on the number of gears it had. Re gear boxes and their foibles, I leaned to drive in a Maxi with a cable operated gear change, after that I feared nothing!! 🤣

The chances are that it's still picking up on that wheel anyhow, on a curve, for instance, the flange will be in contact with the rail and there's also the metal rim outside the tyre.

Ah, the old auto vs manual debate, nothing like it! In the old days of 3 speed autos vs 4 and 5 speed manuals there was really only one sensible choice, the manual, but now? A modern 7 speed auto is as economical as a manual version of the same car and is often quicker on acceleration, so those two arguments are out of the window. When it's combined with adaptive cruise control and a modern, very busy, motorways it beats a manual hands down. For the average driver. And there's the key, enthusiasts can shout all they want about manual gearboxes being the "true" way to drive and will defend them to the ends of the earth, but for most of the drivers out there convenience is the key and only modern auto gearboxes have that key... Personally, as a lifetime manual gearbox driver who had to convert to autos due to family reasons I only wish I'd done it earlier! It's like debating soft top motoring vs the rest, enthusiasts will give lots of reasons they think it's the tops, but it's only their opinion, most people may like it as a novelty but that novelty soon wears off when it's all the time and not on the odd occasion! It's an interesting point about fuel consumption vs changing for a newer, possibly more efficient, car. There's lots of reasons people change cars, it might be they have to as part of their job or a lease agreement, or it could just be something as simple as wanting a new(er) car, or change of circumstance, such as smaller or larger needs. I'd suggest, though, that fuel costs on a modern car with long service intervals will come second only to the finance costs, there could even be a small saving on the service costs depending on the cars being compared. My Octavia has clocked up over £3600 in fuel costs in the 32 months we've had it and has had one service and two new tyres in that time, the costs of which are a lot less than a quarter of the fuel costs. If you are already paying £400pm on finance then switching at the end of the finance package to a new car at similar costs may well be a better way forward than keeping the car, which would probably involve having to finance the final lump sum and losing any benefit from warranties, etc. Perhaps not such a simple equation?

Back on topic, Romania yesterday: https://www.sursazilei.ro/video-accident-la-suceava-mocanita-aruncata-de-pe-sine/

Anything called that deserves it! ;)

and what's wrong with Mansfield, they held a motor race in Birmingham!!

That i do need to reply to as I'm sure I never said that, simply pointed to others' interpretation of the law, from the Police, Law Firms and other motoring sources which all agree that it is legal to put them in the bottom-right as long as they don't obscure viision.The laws you quote do not prevent their use unless they obscure the forward vision of the driver, there is no precedent that I'm aware of, just individuals (police) interpretation of them. In fact if there is a precedent it is that Twitter post by the GMP. As I said I'll agree to differ, even if you wont, there is plenty of evidence to support the sources I have quoted (NOT my views), prosecutions have taken place, but where the phone or satnav was obstruction line of vision.

I've no doubt it does, Stewart, but it has to be proved that it obscures the drivers line of vision for the driver to be prosecuted, which the dice would do but a properly mounted satnav/phone like the one in that video won't, I'd refer you back to the GMP Twitter/X link. Also the case to which you refer to (includes air fresheners as well!): https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/local-news/cabbie-fined-for-hanging-furry-dice-961482

Probably those air fresheners as well!

OK, just looked both of them up and they do not prohibit the use of a windscreen mounted satnav or mobile phone. What it does say is: "A person is guilty of an offence if he uses, or causes or permits another to use, a motor vehicle or trailer on a road when— (a)the condition of the motor vehicle or trailer, or of its accessories or equipment, .... is such that the use of the motor vehicle or trailer involves a danger of injury to any person.” Which I assume is the section you are referring to, in this case mounting a satnav/phone directly in your line of sight and therefore blocking your view of the road would qualify. But that isn't what he's done, he has mounted it well below the level of his eyesight and therefore the provision of that act does not apply, in fact if mounting a satnav on a windscreen was illegal then the police would spend all of their time prosecuting people judging by the numbers i see, not to mention the prosecution of people who sell the mountings. I will go back to the advice given online by numerous websites which cover such things and, I feel, they would not give such advice if it contravened either that act or it's amendment, the key point is that it does not interfere with your field of vision. This is from Honest John's website: https://www.honestjohn.co.uk/askhj/answer/159890/i-was-stopped-by-police-for-my-sat-nav-placement-where-should-i-place-it- Greater Manchester Police Twitter/X post: I'm not sure of where we can go with this other than I'll have to "agree to differ" with Stewart and Craneman!

In which case any satnav mounted along the bottom of the windscreen in any place, middle or either edge, would fall foul of that. If you do a search it says that the rule is simply that it doesn't block the driver's view, nothing more. I made my comment based on that it was a body cam that he was using and therefore below neck level. If you look at the section where he gets into the van before crossing, the cam is just about level with the top of the phone in it's holder, that would mean it's well below his eye level and therefore legal. Personally I prefer one that mounts to the vents which makes it lower, I don't like windscreen mounted ones, but that's just personal preference, I don't see anything illegal in that video unless one of you can link me to the law which prohibits it?

Why? It's clear from his body cam that it's not blocking his view forward and bottom right is one of the recommended places to put it.

Dad had a two tone grey A60 Cambridge in the early 60s as his company's commercial traveller's car, it was certainly a mile muncher, he reckoned he could get about 84mph out of it!

Perhaps not the best choice of driver/car combination for Dunlop considering what Mike Hawthorn died in...

Is the reading of the plan that difficult? I thought map reading was supposed to be a male strength!

Ah, 27/28 April, LaGrange got his date wrong! Thanks C126!

April 24, 2024 is a Wednesday according to my calender. So what show is it?

TBH I always use the plan so never really looked at the stand numbers which half the time weren't very clear to see anyhow. What's on on April 24? That's midweek!

What's going on in that first photo, @monkeysarefun, there's a group of people in the bottom right all looking one direction? That last photo looks at first glance like the UK until you look closer, the loco (obviously to us!), the telegraph/electricity poles and the yellow and black roadwork barriers being the most obvious giveaways!