gazelle Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 Anyone know a source of 40 resilient GPS trackers that we can borrow for a weekend in March, suitable for attachment to an assortment of off road sheds ? Try Trident Sensors. They supply the trackers for the Fastnet race referred to earlier. Martin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo Posted December 19, 2008 Share Posted December 19, 2008 On the original subject of the thread, there is a case for some people not being allowed to have spanners if they do not understand engineering. The dangers of bad modifications. What was the probability of this happening on the road? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
white90 Posted December 19, 2008 Share Posted December 19, 2008 quality video on the dangers of home modifications Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lara Posted December 19, 2008 Share Posted December 19, 2008 On the original subject of the thread, there is a case for some people not being allowed to have spanners if they do not understand engineering. The dangers of bad modifications. What was the probability of this happening on the road? I love the reaction from the fat guy in blue!!!! Does he even realise something odd happened? Lara Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pat_pending Posted December 19, 2008 Share Posted December 19, 2008 On the original subject of the thread, there is a case for some people not being allowed to have spanners if they do not understand engineering. The dangers of bad modifications. What was the probability of this happening on the road? Did I spot a tax disc in the window? Now that should not be near the highway, someone deserves a visit from the stupidity police. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike4444244 Posted December 19, 2008 Share Posted December 19, 2008 On the original subject, there is such a thing as a 'voluntary' SVA test, perhaps given the recent events it might be a good idea to voluntarily put your car through an SVA test if you have done substantial mods, then if the worst does happen you have a more of a leg to stand on, if it fails SVA then you shouldn't really be driving it anyway... NB this applies to the 'commercial' test only, I wouldn't like to put a landy through the car test, the SVA man can keep his balls to himself Just my 2p Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Igol Posted December 20, 2008 Share Posted December 20, 2008 In answer to the mods question earlier. When the police and VOSA carry out crack downs, it is specialist officers who do the inspections and its quiet amusing watching the boy racers pulling off their mods in some car park, not to mention the ones who have their cars condemed at the roadside. Oh and you know what REME stands for - Royal Engineers Minus Education Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Hancock Posted December 20, 2008 Share Posted December 20, 2008 I was always told it stood for 'Rough Engineering Made Easy' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alistair P Posted December 24, 2008 Share Posted December 24, 2008 I'm sure that we all know of a court case going on at the moment involving somebody who may have made mods and repaired their own vehicle with tragic concequences, and I don't want to dwell on that - because this thread will get deleted if we do, I was wondering how long it will be before the only jobs we are allowed to do on our own vehicles is change the oil and fill up the wash fluid? They managed it with household electrical work - I used to do all my own wiring around the home - I have a degree in electronics, and am pretty good, but because I don't want to pay for the part P ticket, I can't do much at all. I was wondering how long it will be before working on a vehicle is 'vorboten'? Surely, this also has concequences to forward looking small engineering firms. If something goes wrong with one of their 'modification' products and somebody gets hurt or worse, would their insurance cover them? It strikes me that - in common with much of what passes for 'legislation' introduced by this 'government' over the last 10 years - there would be nothing to be gained by attempting to tighten up this area; as there is ample existing legislation covering everything discussed here already. Further, you simply can't legislate for crass stupididy on the basis of what someone might possibly do in every possible situation at some hypothetical point in the future. For example: 1. If your car doesn't stop straight because it has different sized calipers front right and left, it will fail the MOT - period. Quite how the vehicle in question passed its MOT on this failure point alone is beyond me. Similarly, if the steering was genuinely as vague as has been reported, something must have been mechanically wrong (tracking, PAS box, worn bushes?) which also should have been an MOT failure. Fitting a roll cage on top of a 2" suspension lift simply doesn't do that on its own. On both these points the vehicle in question shouldn't have been on the road in the first place. With this in mind it seems to me that the MOT testing station was complicit in the situation and passed a vehicle that it shouldn't have done. This gives the lie to the idea that 'qualified' persons will always (or even generally) do a better job than an 'enthusiast'. The reality is that I am 'an enthusiast' and will almost invariably do a better job on my vehicle than most of the 'qualified' garage mechanics I have encountered. Things I can't do / don't want to touch, (e.g. welding!) I leave to someone who I trust. 2. If you are driving like a prat (60mph along a narrow road with a loose surface, where oncoming slow moving traffic is towing trailers) and you kill someone, you may well be charged with causing death by dangerous driving. In this case the modifications to the vehicle, and indeed the make of the vehicle itself, were irrelevant - essentially a side show for the Daily Mail to hysterically scream 'Frankenstine 4x4' over and some rentamouth copper to rant at. The reality is that in the same circumstances of p*ss poor driving, he would have had the same charges levelled at him if his land rover had been brand new factory standard or if indeed he had been driving a characterless eurobubble. 3. The failure of the trailing arm welds didn't, as I understand it from the press reporting, cause the accident. The welds failed when the car decended the bank at speed and subjected the arms to forces greater than they would ever have been subjected to in normal operation on the road - or indeegreenlaning off of it. Taken to its logical conculsion, you might as well say that every car should be engineered so that no part of it will ever fail in any extreme situation. This is clearly fatuous; the reality is that even factory trailing arms might have failed in the same situation but still not contributed to the crash itself. I think what I object to the most over all this, is the fact that my vehicle could also be described in court as a 'Frankenstine' combination of 5 vehicles: the original (1), new engine (2), recon gearbox (3), recon back axle (4), all the other bits I have stuck on it (5). Personally I call it a model of environmental sustainability and recycling.... The cynic in me thinks that the only reason that the government might want to ban 'amatures' from working on their own vehicles is that £40 to 120 an hour in labour charges at a 'authorised' (read + a charge to get 'authorised') garage x lots of 5 hour jobs x lots of garages x lots of cars = a huge great wedge of coporation tax at 40% and income tax at 40% to enable the chancellor to freely p*iss more of our money away on Lulabors next irrelevant lost cause. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmgemini Posted December 25, 2008 Share Posted December 25, 2008 Good morning Alistair.... The first paragraph of your post I would like to point out that it might just pass the MOT...I am informed by an MOT tester that brakes are allowed a 25% imbalance across the axle....So in theory two different sized callipers on one axle could pass..... Merry Christmas mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeds Posted December 25, 2008 Share Posted December 25, 2008 For example: 1. If your car doesn't stop straight because it has different sized calipers front right and left, it will fail the MOT - period. Quite how the vehicle in question passed its MOT on this failure point alone is beyond me. Similarly, if the steering was genuinely as vague as has been reported, something must have been mechanically wrong (tracking, PAS box, worn bushes?) which also should have been an MOT failure. Fitting a roll cage on top of a 2" suspension lift simply doesn't do that on its own. On both these points the vehicle in question shouldn't have been on the road in the first place. With this in mind it seems to me that the MOT testing station was complicit in the situation and passed a vehicle that it shouldn't have done. This gives the lie to the idea that 'qualified' persons will always (or even generally) do a better job than an 'enthusiast'. The reality is that I am 'an enthusiast' and will almost invariably do a better job on my vehicle than most of the 'qualified' garage mechanics I have encountered. Things I can't do / don't want to touch, (e.g. welding!) I leave to someone who I trust. The MOT can only test the vehicle as it is presented on the day of the test. It can not test items which are repaired/modified AFTER the date of the MOT test! Regards Brendan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alistair P Posted December 25, 2008 Share Posted December 25, 2008 The MOT can only test the vehicle as it is presented on the day of the test. It can not test items which are repaired/modified AFTER the date of the MOT test! Regards Brendan Brendan You are of course absolutely correct from a technical point of view. I accept that the vehicle in question could have been perfect when last presented at the MOT up to a hypothetical 363 days earlier. Based on news reporting (always dangerous I know) however, there seemed however to be so much wrong with the vehicle in question that frankly it strains credibility that it all went that badly wrong in the intervening time. Sounds to me like that sort of catalogue of errors must have taken some time to put together.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmgemini Posted December 25, 2008 Share Posted December 25, 2008 I am not prepared to discuss any vehicle on here that I have not seen personally. My post is purely could a vehicle with different callipers across an axle pass an MOT....... mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discomikey Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 I was under the impression that you can do your own wiring BUT if you come to sell the house it has to have a certificate to say any work done is up to spec (but thats hard as the spec seems to change every week)And i know of plenty of jobs carried out by so called experts that you would think a blind man had done (no disrespect to any blind people reading this ) how would a blind person read this wozza? mikey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.