Julian

Specialist vehicles like ambulances, search and rescue vehicles and cherry pickers etc are exempt from the proposed legislation. You can guarantee there will be a clause on the V5 that the vehicle must be crushed when the 'authority' no longer wishes to use! Julian.

This is the crux of the matter in my opinion, as I previously mentioned. It reminds me of the time, many decades ago, when I worked as a licensed airframe/engine engineer in GA. (general aviation) One chap had purchased a business jet in the USA on the American register and brought it back to the UK. Attempts to transfer it onto the UK register had basically stalled because of a change to the mounting hardware for pilot harnesses due to a galley fitment. Months and months passed with the aircraft grounded as attempts to get the modification approved by the CAA failed and litigation ensued that cost many thousands. This is what we're in for, an endless bureaucratic nightmare with no guarantee of a favourable result. You can expect endless insurmountable hurdles from anyone on the gubbinsment payroll (civil servants), all seeking to avoid litigation or harming their gold plated pensions, with the net result being DIY modifications not being a practical reality even though theoretically possible for the common man. Julian.

The Commission proposes to introduce a definition for a roadworthiness test that components of the vehicle must comply with characteristics at the time of first registration. This may prevent most modifications to vehicles without further approval of the vehicle. (this will apply to many components and to all types of vehicle) This I suspect is the dangerous proposal. How will we get 'further approval' for (say) fitting a powerful tuned V8 to an old Series vehicle? How will we prove it's safe? There's no way that an MOT tester or SVA (VOSA) chap could make an informed decision and you can guarantee that in the case of an MOT testing station the garage's insurance will forbid such practise with liability laws being as they are. Furthermore, manufacturers certainly won't be interested. I suspect that modifications of significance will require stress analysis, failure analysis, destructive testing, risk assessment, non destructive testing etc etc. I don't believe that such a process would be within the financial means of the 'common man' in the UK, and I don't believe that the commission would allow for such modifications to be 'rubber stamped.' Maybe we need to look at the situation in other EU countries were activities like simple engine swaps or seat changes are already prevented? I'm sorry but your views on the matter have not calmed my nerves, in my job I always plan for the worst and anything better is a bonus! Julian.

That 'in-tube' devise is to be found on just about any Leyland car from Moggy-Minor onwards, actually just about any 'A' or 'B' series engine. It's always mounted vertically and is (as I understand it) to stop the possibility of any raw fuel from the inlet getting onto the rubber diaphragm on the carb and bsolloxing it. Julian.

I wonder if this is it: http://www.brit-car.co.uk/product.php?xProd=140398 There's a few different part numbers so I'd give then a call, or better, use the on-line text chat tomorrow. Julian.

+1 Julian

Yes, the examples I gave were just by way of examples, ie gubbinsments departments that have to 'self-fund' and not get cash from central gubbinsment coffers. Talking CAA turning a blind eye, you are right, they certainly can adopt a blind eye, but I remember once watching their surveyors at work at about 2 in the morning looking over the fleet of Emerald Airways freighters at Liverpool. 'Bladdy-Hell, I thought, civil servants working at this hour, there's trouble here! (as indeed there was) Julian.

Please ignore, any mods to delete?

It's not a stupid question, one of my old teachers used to say that the only stupid question was the one not asked! I have a Diesel series 3. On mine when you rotate clockwise against the spring you energise the glow plugs, when you turn it even further against the spring you energise the starter. See if yours does this, you'll need to experiment with your AVO. The turn to the left is not a feature on my (standard) switch, but if it's like most other cars I've seen with this facility then it's normally for accessories. (radio/fag lighter etc) So you should find a connection made by turning to the left, this connection should also be made by turning the switch to 'on.' (you can just forget about it I should think) This is all a bit of guesswork, I could well not be entirely correct! Julian.

Please do, I'm curious to find out if I was on the right track here. Either way it'll be a good thing to get sorted as you don't want to compromise performance or economy by having to run the ignition more retarded to stop pinking if a better set-up is available and more suited. Julian.

If it's like the series box you'll find a weep hole towards the underside rear of the spigot that the release bearing slides on - that will help you see if the seal's leaking If you take that bit off you'd be crackers to not change the seal anyway. I just did this on my series - I used a double lip seal as an improved component, if it's the same as the series then this is the item i think: http://simplybearings.co.uk/shop/p26769/35x50x10mm+Nitrile+Rubber+Rotary+Shaft+Oil+Seal+with+Garter+Spring+R23+/+TC/product_info.html Julian.

That's the 'official' reason. However, like all government bodies there's a good deal of disingenuous spin, their main task is to issue as many fines as they can as they have to entirely 'self-fund' and provide their own revenue. (like British Waterways or the CAA) Julian. Julian.

My memory is very sketchy here as I was never really a Rover V8 man but in the installation with two pipes (to either side of the dizzy vacuum capsule) you have are vacuum advance and a vacuum retard - depending on the source of vacuum. (manifold or adjacent to carb butterfly) There's maybe going to be a different set up on the dizzy as they differed internally depending on the carbs used. This question needs addressing properly as there's a chance that the dizzy will need to be modified to suit the new plumbing arrangement that you will be forced to use c/o the carb swap. I'd ask on a rover V8 forum if nobody here has the definitive exact answer. Julian.

My Vauxhall Astra Diesel does this too. (sometimes) As it's a modern fly-by-wire throttle jobbie I'm thinking it has a similar componet that's failing.... Sorry for the off-topic but it's maybe very helpful for me. Julian.

Good reading? bloomin heck, I wonder what bad reading looks like? Well, in a previous post I've already (falsely) been accused of 'throwing in the towel.' I think UKIP makes our plight abundantly clear. Heads need to be pulled free of the sand ASAP.... QED alfaman! What did Camaron say a few years ago? 'No more war of the motorist' ' for every new law we will repeal two old ones' Bla bla bla, lying toads, the lot of them. Julian.

Slightly off on a tangent (but far less so that the posters telling me to get a decent web browser :-0 ) but did you know that out of the 600 or so politicians in the UK only about 150 of them have ever been involved with business or industry and out of them only about 60 have any science based experience. What this means, in effect, is that the concept of modifications, alterations, testing etc on vehicles is purely an esoteric concept. I guess that's the downside of career politicians, much better we go back to unpaid ones..... Julian.

As it's a Landrover I should say your best bet is to drive with a waterproof coat on and pretend it isn't happening. It'll save you loads of stress and wasted effort long term Julian.

Spot on the money. Julian.

I might be tempted to leave them in. They look like an attempt to get the petrol mixed with the air. V8 inlet manifolds (is it dual plane or plenum?) are bsuggers for the fuel dropping out of suspension and adhering to the manifold walls during warm-up. It's a way of 'un-blueprinting' (if you understand my made up word?) the assembly. Julian.

Presumably it would be a simple matter to fit a standard 'ring' to a Sankey? Julian.

Well, against my better judgement I've emailed my (Tory) MP who I voted for in the last election - not because I have any great affinity towards the Tory party but I really did not want the Labour buffoons in again after they busted the country! Next time around I'm voting UKIP for certain. Julian.

'no' does not always mean 'no.' 'No' means give me £5.00 and 'you have a nice day!' On the issue of sankey brakes, I don't know what weight the trailer is but could you get away without a breakaway cable - just fit a auxiliary method of connection? I've a 1/2 ton trailer without brakes - that just has a chain that fastens to the ball hitch. Simples! Julian.

Dear Adrian, Thank you for the message. As I understand the situation, the Commission only produced its formal proposal on 13th July. When the standing committees of the European Parliament reconvene in the third week of September, the Commission proposal will be sent to one of them - perhaps to the Transport Committee (of which I am not a member). The chosen committee will debate it in public, listen to views from lobbyists and the public, write and report, and sometime (perhaps next spring) will vote its recommendations in public to the full parliament. Then there will be a big parliamentary debate in public and a vote on amendments proposed - which will be end of the the First Reading stage. The other EU legislative chamber (the Council of Ministers) will then react to ours by holding its First Reading and proposing its amendments. Then the parliament has a second reading and so on... The key for yourself is to make sure that your views are heard by members of the committee. You can do it yourself, or an umbrella organistion (such as "ACE" I believe) should do it for you on a bigger scale. So a long way to go, and lots of open-ness for the discussions. All good wishes Bill Newton Dunn, Lib Dem MEP (Bigger text as I couldn't read the original!) Julian.

Because, as I've already stated, wolly worded letters and waffle on bulletin boards will do no good. Politicians will do what politicians do, make stupid laws and ignore the views of the public. I've witnessed their activities for many decades. Here we have talk of trailer testing, SVA testing, MOT testing, informing insurance companies, lists of 'approved mods' etc etc. All this does is continue to provide ammunition for the legislators and knock more nails into our coffins. Our roads are about the safest in Europe and people still bang on about trailer testing with scant understanding of risk! As I've said before, unless we can protest and create some sort of civil disobedience then we are fsucked, as simple as that. All we can hope for is that we can get some public figure or celebrity like Clarkson to spearhead a campaign - I'm not holding my breath! Julian.

But this is the crux of the matter, the new EU regs potentially won't allow it,no matter how many SVA tests the vehicle goes through. And they won't allow aftermarket springs and winches. Finito, das ende, la fine etc etc. Julian.