- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Any car-nuts here?
Collapse
X
Collapse
-
-
I don't need that - I am strong enough and the wife drives the new car.Originally posted by MaryPoppinsI'd still not breastfeed a naziOriginally posted by vetranUrine is quite nourishingComment
-
Exactly.Originally posted by malvolio View PostI had a drive belt break on the M4 and didn't discover this until I tried to get round the roundabout at Junction 18. and then had another 20 miles to go on main roads, though Bath and then down the lanes to home. Yes the car is driveable but (a) the rack is geared at about 2.5 turns lock to lock as opposed to the 4 or more than a manual rack would use, (b) it's bloody knackering since you need both arms to get any turning applied at all and (c) in an emergency I really couldn't have reacted fast enough.
Also a race car is a lot lighter than a road one, and if it's being driven properly at competitive speeds you don't need a lot of steering input anyway. They are a lot less fun getting out of the pits at 20 mph. In my experience, anyway...
So yes, the car is dangerous and shouldn't be on the roads. Unless you really fancy proving the size of your bollocks and explaining to the nice officer how little impact this trivial failure had in causing the accident...Comment
-
So I think you've mad a sensible decision...Originally posted by d000hg View PostI don't need that - I am strong enough and the wife drives the new car.
...but are you strong enough that you would have exactly the same ability to swerve quickly to avoid a child who darts out in front of you? And I mean exactly.Comment
-
Swerving that violently - that it can only be achieved with PAS - would likely roll the car or lead to another accident, surely? Cars are not designed to turn radically other than at very low speeds.Originally posted by northernladyuk View PostSo I think you've mad a sensible decision...
...but are you strong enough that you would have exactly the same ability to swerve quickly to avoid a child who darts out in front of you? And I mean exactly.
And I don't recall the part of the driving test where they test your ability to swerve violently... I don't think this is an approved maneuver is it?
This seems a silly argument anyway. An older car without PAS could be entirely road legal and not have the agility of a modern PAS vehicle.Originally posted by MaryPoppinsI'd still not breastfeed a naziOriginally posted by vetranUrine is quite nourishingComment
-
What planet are you on Foxy?Originally posted by WTFH View PostThe OP was, but you weren't. You made generic statements complaining about anyone who disagreed with you, then saying that "failed power steering does not make the car more dangerous" and that "consider potential hydraulic failure when designing these items?"
You then went on to talk about a 1980s French rally car, which you were quick to criticise another poster for when they called it a race car.
Perhaps you should really have suggested that the OP check if the car was fixed as part of the Mazda 2010 recall and then take it to a local mechanic for their opinion.
...but it's easier to call people names and make sweeping generalisations than actually be polite and useful
Where did I call anyone names?
Neither did I criticise Mal, I simply pointed out I was talking about a rally car not a race car in response to his post.
Are you sure you're cut out for the internet?
Get a grip FFS.Last edited by Dark Black; 8 August 2017, 16:00.Do what thou wiltComment
-
OK, I'll give you the answer you wanted.Originally posted by d000hg View PostSwerving that violently - that it can only be achieved with PAS - would likely roll the car or lead to another accident, surely? Cars are not designed to turn radically other than at very low speeds.
And I don't recall the part of the driving test where they test your ability to swerve violently... I don't think this is an approved maneuver is it?
This seems a silly argument anyway. An older car without PAS could be entirely road legal and not have the agility of a modern PAS vehicle.
Carry on driving your death trap, its all OK, lets hope you don't swerve to avoid your own, or a relatives child, child with a fulll compliment of logs.
The Chunt of Chunts.Comment
-
Sorry, maybe you meant this as a compliment:Originally posted by Dark Black View PostWhat planet are you on Foxy?
Where did I call anyone names?
Originally posted by Dark Black View PostThe usual "experts" replying here after a quick Google, and the health and safety police wringing their hands...
…Maybe we ain’t that young anymoreComment
-
Aww, diddums wanted to join in the thread after the question was already answered.Originally posted by MrMarkyMark View PostOK, I'll give you the answer you wanted.
Carry on driving your death trap, its all OK, lets hope you don't swerve to avoid your own, or a relatives child, child with a fulll compliment of logs.
Originally posted by MaryPoppinsI'd still not breastfeed a naziOriginally posted by vetranUrine is quite nourishingComment
-
MM is probably, on reflection, just jealous of my clear upper-body strength dominance that I can drive without PAS
Originally posted by MaryPoppinsI'd still not breastfeed a naziOriginally posted by vetranUrine is quite nourishingComment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers

Comment