|
|
Jul 18, 2017 20:02:16 GMT
|
In my case there is a lamp / power post within 10 feet of the garage, maybe its got the other phases and hence the low cost to get them into the garage.
There does seem to be more than one phase outside, amusingly a neighbour used to complain when I used my lathe or welder because his lights would dim, the houses were on a shared supply, one cable to my main fuse and another from my fuse to his.
I talked to the board about solving this and for free they separated our supplies.
Anyway, we used to have occasional power cuts, maybe twice a year, but shortly after the new supply to the house was installed when the next power cut came all the houses in the street were in darkness except mine, its happened other times too, so thanks to that complaining neighbour I had electricity when he didnt.
I'm going to guess that one of the other phases was out there passing to maybe the next street and they put that to my house to solve the voltage drop problem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jul 17, 2017 22:10:13 GMT
|
Damn, I thought I'd replied to this earier but I mustn't have pressed to post.
It was a good 15 years ago and I cant remember, although I do have the info somewhere.
It wasnt much more than £1k though, although I had to provide a duct to get the cable inside the garage then they would come and install and terminate.
I think I'll be moving house in a few years, hopefully to somewhere I'll stay for good, I'll seriously consider having it done then.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2017 23:28:00 GMT
|
I don't have a lift but I do have a lot of 3 phase equipment.
I run it all using a Phase converter, the old fashioned box of capacitors and transformer with a motor to make it a rotary type. They are an option that you might also find cheaply second hand. There is no doubt that an Inverter is much better technology now that they are available for sensible money. I think that would be the way I would go in your situation unless a cheap converter comes up. I wouldnt bother changing a motor and wouldnt pay a lot more for a single phase machine.
I priced having a 3 phase supply put in years ago and it wasnt too bad but that would be OTT for your situation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jul 11, 2017 20:12:55 GMT
|
Remember when the Vauxhall show was at Billing Aggrodrome? A wonderful opportunity every year to meet with like minded Vauxhall enthusiasts and have your car nicked. I can recall when of the four remaining Nova Spiders was stolen in 2005, never to be seen again. From a hotel outside of the venue wasnt it? (Edit, just seen other similar replies) Not something Billing can be knocked for if thats the case. The trouble is with an event like this any car thieves targetting a particular model have the cars brought to them. Just follow the one they want to wherever it gets parked for the evening and wait until nobody is around it. Its no problem to get into the show to have a good look and choose a car. That said, I wasnt a fan of Billing Aquadrome, it was only the last couple of years they did any decent level of maintenance.
|
|
Last Edit: Jul 11, 2017 20:13:53 GMT by chris y
|
|
|
|
Jun 30, 2017 21:15:15 GMT
|
I stamped my Fugitive chassis number in a few extra places in case it ever gets stolen and then turns up somewhere. Put at least one of your plates in a very difficult to see place that only you can find without a major stripdown and don't post their locations here of course.
I also welded a tab to the chassis and a steering part that I put a disc padlock through to fix the steering at full lock.
Fugitives obviously have poor security with no doors, exposed engine and wiring etc etc so thinking now about adding something extra isnt a bad idea.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2017 21:29:27 GMT
|
And this is an observation not a criticism but I've always thought the Carlton GSi's look very under-wheeled. I'd agree in a way, especially the more boring later style wheels that my red car has. Part of the probelm with them is that the wheels are tucked up under those flat top rear arches and there is almost no room to play with to move them outwards so they always have a bit of the Commer van effect I think.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 25, 2017 21:34:42 GMT
|
I've got these two. I've had a few others, two more 24v GSis, a Carlton 2.6CDX estate and an Astra estate, C reg with Cav SRi engine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 25, 2017 20:38:36 GMT
|
No, it doesnt, but if the failed item makes the car unsafe / illegal to use then its not legal to use it until its safe again.
MOT status doesnt matter a bit in an MOT exempt vehicle but being unsafe does, whether with or without MOT.
Same as how in any more modern vehicle if it fails its test while the old test is still valid it doesnt make it illegal to drive the vehicle, however if the fail item makes the vehicle unsafe thats illegal, fix the fault and drive legally until the old test runs out if you like.
Having a valid MOT certificate and having a safe vehicle are two separate requirements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2017 17:07:29 GMT
|
Garages here are charging £25 for an MOT at the minute, its the cheapest way to get an hour of a garages time dedicated to vehicle safety, with the added incentive they have that issuing the certificate means they have some accountability for their work and its tested to a recognised standard rather than someones opinion.
Even if the price went back up to £30 or £40 which is the most I've ever needed to pay its a cheap hours labour and I get a certificate to say that someone spent an hour checking safety aspects of my car and didnt find any concerns. Not a bad thing to have a wad of in the cars history file too.
As it happens I don't have a pre 60 car but if I did I would get it tested because of the above logic (unless I knew it would fail and wanted to delay fixing it, which is what is wrong with the silly exemption)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 19, 2017 22:09:27 GMT
|
I once used lorry diff oil (EP120 I think), not to quieten though, the oil was leaking into the brake drums and I wanted it to stay in the axle without replacing the seals. I worked fine. It was like treacle to get in. Maybe that oil would be thick enough to make it quieter while still being a proper EP oil to preventing further wear. Sorry, just remembered it was EP145 gear oil.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 19, 2017 20:31:00 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 19, 2017 20:24:25 GMT
|
On a completely unrelated car my two Carltons had cats fitted from new (since removed) but the computer takes the tester through some steps and does a cat test then a non cat test every year, they pass every time.
I don't know why that is, I assumed that for some years it was just benefit of the doubt about whether the engine was built before cats were mandatory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 16, 2017 22:51:59 GMT
|
I once used lorry diff oil (EP120 I think), not to quieten though, the oil was leaking into the brake drums and I wanted it to stay in the axle without replacing the seals. I worked fine. It was like treacle to get in.
Maybe that oil would be thick enough to make it quieter while still being a proper EP oil to preventing further wear.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 16, 2017 18:30:59 GMT
|
I have no idea, one question though, why not diesel?
For almost all vehicles I'd go for petrol, I'm not a diesel fan at all, but for low speed with torque off road and being able to use red diesel as its never going on the road I'd have thought it would be a good idea.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It would be worth asking someone who knows like the paintshop but I was advised that the first thing you should do is nothing, for a couple of weeks to be certain that all of the solvent is out of the paint before you seal it.
That might not be true but I do it just in case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Definitely saveable, but very ambitious bodywork if its your first time. If you only have limited time around a busy life the shell will take a couple of years.
If you are paying for the shell work you will have difficulty finding someone to do it to a restoration standard without costing you many £ks, I don't know how many because I've never paid but probably a lot more than £3k and you might need some new panels which could cost a bit but would reduce fabrication costs. The kind of place that does MOT repairs is not what you want at all.
Maybe someone could recommend a good company near you that could give an estimate to help you decide.
|
|
|
|
|
|
May 16, 2017 22:12:24 GMT
|
I believe it works like this: The driver is responsible for making sure that any vehicle used or kept on the road meets the relevant Construction & Use regulations at all times, with exemptions for travelling to and from a pre-booked MoT test or to and from a pre-booked repair station. That's it. It's completely irrelevant to any potential prosecution under the C&U regulations if you have a valid MoT or not, if your vehicle is not up to standard when Mr Plod looks at it, you can be done. There is a completely different (and potentially unrelated) offence of not having a valid MoT certificate, which you are committing if your MoT has expired and you use or keep the vehicle on the road. A valid MoT is not invalidated by a subsequent test failure, it only becomes invalid once the date on the certificate has passed. It's not that a possible defence against a C&U prosecution of "I didn't know" is nullified by taking the vehicle for an early test, there is never any such defence. So as I see it, taking your car in early or not makes no difference; if it fails to meet the required standard, you can be prosecuted. Interestingly, the current refusal to issue an MoT form has on it the following: "If you intend to use your vehicle on the road you should have it repaired without delay and have it retested before the existing test validity expires"...that doesn't even suggest that shouldn't use the car, but it is subject at all times to the above C&U requirements. However, if you get a note saying "in my opinion the vehicle is dangerous because..." type thing, you'd do well to take it seriously! Oh, and going back to The Sun article...load of curse word in my opinion. No evidence whatsoever that the police are using the failure data to "target" vehicles, not a single case stated, just a load of speculative rubbish. What would you expect? I believe that you are bang on with that, this thread makes it clear that very many people, even among car enthusiasts, don't understand.
|
|
|
|
|
|
May 12, 2017 22:32:00 GMT
|
In the end I decided to read the article knowing that it would be typical tabloid rubbish.
So what the numpties at the Sun are saying is - don't take your car in for MOT early because then you will know that its dangerous, much better to take it in at the last minute so that you don't know its dangerous for as long as possible, and that makes it OK to drive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
May 11, 2017 22:49:41 GMT
|
this volvo 340 has been here years, at least 10 that I know off! bit of a rubbish pic though! If thats been there for years my first thought would be to wonder what could be in the garage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This has been discussed many times in many places.
I'm confident that your old MOT doesnt become invalidated and as far as MOT goes you can drive the car until it runs out even if its failed a test.
However, you cant drive an unsafe car whether with lots of MOT or little.
For example, you just failed a test because the brakes don't work but you still have an old MOT, you drive away and have an accident, you get nicked for faulty brakes, you don't get nicked for no MOT. Sure enough you shouldnt have been driving the car.
Another example, your car fails on a number plate or emissions, you drive home and fix the faults and don't book the re-test for a few days, you still have the remaining time from last years MOT so you can legally drive the car in those few days because it has a valid MOT and is in safe and legal condition.
Thats how I understand it and what I'm happy to do.
If I decide to drive a car that has just failed and I know to be unsafe then I would deserve to be caught and punished for using an unsafe car knowingly (although not knowing doesnt make it any more legal, just morally different)
If this
|
|
|
|
|