Cars, cars, cars...

1…4344464849…100

Comments

  • First.Aspect
    First.Aspect Posts: 17,167
    That's a lovely car Derek. The hub caps look original.
  • pinno
    pinno Posts: 52,317
    First.Aspect said:

    That's a lovely car Derek. The hub caps look original.

    They are alloys Mike but just for you

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVscvF1loAM
    seanoconn - gruagach craic!
  • pinno
    pinno Posts: 52,317
    ...and one vid leads to another...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJRT5ey0M2w
    seanoconn - gruagach craic!
  • lesfirth
    lesfirth Posts: 1,382
    veronese68 said:

    Lad had a classic

    pinno said:

    ...and one vid leads to another...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJRT5ey0M2w

    Watching that was the best ten minuets I have spent for a long time.
    A long ,long time ago a mate and I rebuilt a write off Cooper S for rallying. Re registered it was a J reg ( I said it was a long time ago) .New body shell, 1310 cc , twin 1 1/2 inch carbs ,731 cam and a straight cut gear box. Fuel and brake pipes inside and rubber cone suspension ( no hydroelastic crap). Roll cage,twin fuel tanks .......ah I feel a severe bout of nostalgia coming on. Happy days.
  • pinno
    pinno Posts: 52,317
    lesfirth said:

    veronese68 said:

    Lad had a classic

    pinno said:

    ...and one vid leads to another...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJRT5ey0M2w

    Watching that was the best ten minuets I have spent for a long time.
    A long ,long time ago a mate and I rebuilt a write off Cooper S for rallying. Re registered it was a J reg ( I said it was a long time ago) .New body shell, 1310 cc , twin 1 1/2 inch carbs ,731 cam and a straight cut gear box. Fuel and brake pipes inside and rubber cone suspension ( no hydroelastic censored ). Roll cage,twin fuel tanks .......ah I feel a severe bout of nostalgia coming on. Happy days.
    A Jack Knight box?
    seanoconn - gruagach craic!
  • lesfirth
    lesfirth Posts: 1,382
    pinno said:

    lesfirth said:

    veronese68 said:

    Lad had a classic

    pinno said:

    ...and one vid leads to another...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJRT5ey0M2w

    Watching that was the best ten minuets I have spent for a long time.
    A long ,long time ago a mate and I rebuilt a write off Cooper S for rallying. Re registered it was a J reg ( I said it was a long time ago) .New body shell, 1310 cc , twin 1 1/2 inch carbs ,731 cam and a straight cut gear box. Fuel and brake pipes inside and rubber cone suspension ( no hydroelastic censored ). Roll cage,twin fuel tanks .......ah I feel a severe bout of nostalgia coming on. Happy days.
    A Jack Knight box?
    That name rings a bell but I can not remember .
  • veronese68
    veronese68 Posts: 27,814
    pinno said:

    ...and one vid leads to another...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJRT5ey0M2w

    I was there last Thursday, currently building MGB shells. It really is a remarkable place.
    Kinesis Pro6
    Marin Nail Trail
    Cotic Solaris
  • pinno
    pinno Posts: 52,317
    £7 to 11k for a mini shell.
    A guy locally bought a Heritage clubman shell and had it fitted out.
    There's a company in Essex that imports Ford Escort Mk1 and 2 shells from the far east.
    They are approx. £5k but... not very good. Same company will 'straighten' it out for you and make it right and they will cost you... £22k.
    seanoconn - gruagach craic!
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    @Stevo_666

    _
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 43,463
    Past a Lamborghini parked up on double yellow lines up near Berkeley Square earlier, number plate THE 8AT, never seen an 8 used to represent TW on a registration before.
  • carbonclem
    carbonclem Posts: 1,784
    pinno said:

    £7 to 11k for a mini shell.
    A guy locally bought a Heritage clubman shell and had it fitted out.
    There's a company in Essex that imports Ford Escort Mk1 and 2 shells from the far east.
    They are approx. £5k but... not very good. Same company will 'straighten' it out for you and make it right and they will cost you... £22k.

    I guess on a matching numbers early RS or Mexico that makes financial sense to keep the original
    2020/2021/2022 Metric Century Challenge Winner
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,398
    rick_chasey said:

    @Stevo_666

    Clearly unbiased city official...he should work for TFL.

    If speed is the only factor in road safety and the only relevant factor in transport is safety, the limit would be 5mph everywhere. But its not.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • monkimark
    monkimark Posts: 1,928
    Whoever claimed either of those things?

    All other things being equal, slower is safer, it's very basic physics.

    Speaking as someone who rides a 600cc motorbike to work every day, I'm not going to pretend that I love the 20 limits I have to ride through but taking a step back, I can see that any objection I have is pretty petty and selfish.
  • pinno
    pinno Posts: 52,317
    Helsinki has a population of only 632,000.
    London: almost 9m.

    At the current average (https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/london-cyclist-deaths-
    10 deaths per 155,000 cyclists, which is 1 in 15,000 roughly.

    I wonder what the fatality rates in the UK of similar sized City's to Helsinki are.
    The snippet doesn't give detailed information on traffic density. It's probably much higher in London.
    I would hazard a guess that the Finns are far more reserved than Brits.
    seanoconn - gruagach craic!
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,398
    monkimark said:

    Whoever claimed either of those things?

    All other things being equal, slower is safer, it's very basic physics.

    Speaking as someone who rides a 600cc motorbike to work every day, I'm not going to pretend that I love the 20 limits I have to ride through but taking a step back, I can see that any objection I have is pretty petty and selfish.

    Which other factors relevant to road safety does Rick post mention?

    In the end, bad laws get ignored. Good example is the 20mph limit: over 80% ignore it.
    https://highwaysindustry.com/most-drivers-ignore-20mph-speed-limits-official-figures-show/
    Sounds superficially attractive but in most places its too low for the road involved so gets ignored. Many are being put in where there are no specific hazards and simply lose their impact.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    20mph does show up the MGIF crowd, as it’s quite easy to do 20mph on ya bike and they’re still trying to get past you.

    Stevo hasn’t quite worked out that doing 25 in a 20 is still safer than 35 in a 30
    _
  • briantrumpet
    briantrumpet Posts: 20,348
    rick_chasey said:

    20mph does show up the MGIF crowd, as it’s quite easy to do 20mph on ya bike and they’re still trying to get past you.

    Stevo hasn’t quite worked out that doing 25 in a 20 is still safer than 35 in a 30


    I realised just how weird the MGIF mentality is when I was close-passed by a friend/work colleague who didn't know who I was, even showing me the finger. When I challenged her about it (I phoned her up once I got home), whe was all contrition: she wouldn't have done it if she'd known it was me... but she was all for it when she thought it was a strnger on a bike she was close-passing. What is it about cars and people's mentality when they get in them?
    https://www.facebook.com/unanglaisendiois
  • briantrumpet
    briantrumpet Posts: 20,348
    Stevo_666 said:

    monkimark said:

    Whoever claimed either of those things?

    All other things being equal, slower is safer, it's very basic physics.

    Speaking as someone who rides a 600cc motorbike to work every day, I'm not going to pretend that I love the 20 limits I have to ride through but taking a step back, I can see that any objection I have is pretty petty and selfish.

    Which other factors relevant to road safety does Rick post mention?

    In the end, bad laws get ignored. Good example is the 20mph limit: over 80% ignore it.
    https://highwaysindustry.com/most-drivers-ignore-20mph-speed-limits-official-figures-show/
    Sounds superficially attractive but in most places its too low for the road involved so gets ignored. Many are being put in where there are no specific hazards and simply lose their impact.
    In case you're interested - even if people go over 20mph, the average speed is reduced, and so are the number and severity of accidents.

    https://www.rospa.com/media/documents/road-safety/20mph-zones-and-speed-limits-factsheet.pdf

    A major review of road casualties in London between 1986 and 2006 was published in the BMJ in 200914. It demonstrated that 20mph zones reduced the number of casualties by over 40% (41.9%). The 20mph zones were slightly more effective in preventing fatal or serious injuries to children, which were reduced by half (50.2%). There was a smaller reduction in casualties among cyclists than any of the other major groups of road users studied, with a reduction of 16.9%.
    https://www.facebook.com/unanglaisendiois
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 27,325
    rick_chasey said:

    20mph does show up the MGIF crowd, as it’s quite easy to do 20mph on ya bike and they’re still trying to get past you.

    Stevo hasn’t quite worked out that doing 25 in a 20 is still safer than 35 in a 30

    I had just that yesterday even though I was officially speeding.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • ddraver
    ddraver Posts: 26,697
    They're putting the new speed cameras in these 20mph zones that don't flash or anything. I've seen a few incidences of people getting caught multiple times day after day until the first letter hits the door mat...

    Generally, I don't think 20 zones are a bad idea but there's one in Plymouth Centre that really makes it hard to argue the "safety not money" point...
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,398
    rick_chasey said:

    20mph does show up the MGIF crowd, as it’s quite easy to do 20mph on ya bike and they’re still trying to get past you.

    Stevo hasn’t quite worked out that doing 25 in a 20 is still safer than 35 in a 30

    How do you know what speed other people will drive at? Assumptions, assumptions...
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,398
    briantrumpet said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    monkimark said:

    Whoever claimed either of those things?

    All other things being equal, slower is safer, it's very basic physics.

    Speaking as someone who rides a 600cc motorbike to work every day, I'm not going to pretend that I love the 20 limits I have to ride through but taking a step back, I can see that any objection I have is pretty petty and selfish.

    Which other factors relevant to road safety does Rick post mention?

    In the end, bad laws get ignored. Good example is the 20mph limit: over 80% ignore it.
    https://highwaysindustry.com/most-drivers-ignore-20mph-speed-limits-official-figures-show/
    Sounds superficially attractive but in most places its too low for the road involved so gets ignored. Many are being put in where there are no specific hazards and simply lose their impact.
    In case you're interested - even if people go over 20mph, the average speed is reduced, and so are the number and severity of accidents.

    https://www.rospa.com/media/documents/road-safety/20mph-zones-and-speed-limits-factsheet.pdf

    A major review of road casualties in London between 1986 and 2006 was published in the BMJ in 200914. It demonstrated that 20mph zones reduced the number of casualties by over 40% (41.9%). The 20mph zones were slightly more effective in preventing fatal or serious injuries to children, which were reduced by half (50.2%). There was a smaller reduction in casualties among cyclists than any of the other major groups of road users studied, with a reduction of 16.9%.
    See above - in many cases 20 is simply too slow, that's why most people ignore them. There is more to it than just speed as I keep saying. Better if people concentrate on driving sensibly, observing and anticipating rather than staring at their speedometer to make sure they're not going to get caught out on roads where the 'natural' speed is higher.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,398
    ddraver said:

    They're putting the new speed cameras in these 20mph zones that don't flash or anything. I've seen a few incidences of people getting caught multiple times day after day until the first letter hits the door mat...

    Generally, I don't think 20 zones are a bad idea but there's one in Plymouth Centre that really makes it hard to argue the "safety not money" point...

    Go on, give us the details.

    To be fair, fixed speed cameras are in known locations and there are apps that tell you where they are. It's the mobile ones that are most dangerous as they set up where they think they will catch most drivers (such as on bridges above straight stretches of motorway or dual where I often see them), rather than at places where there are real hazards.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 43,463
    Stevo_666 said:

    briantrumpet said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    monkimark said:

    Whoever claimed either of those things?

    All other things being equal, slower is safer, it's very basic physics.

    Speaking as someone who rides a 600cc motorbike to work every day, I'm not going to pretend that I love the 20 limits I have to ride through but taking a step back, I can see that any objection I have is pretty petty and selfish.

    Which other factors relevant to road safety does Rick post mention?

    In the end, bad laws get ignored. Good example is the 20mph limit: over 80% ignore it.
    https://highwaysindustry.com/most-drivers-ignore-20mph-speed-limits-official-figures-show/
    Sounds superficially attractive but in most places its too low for the road involved so gets ignored. Many are being put in where there are no specific hazards and simply lose their impact.
    In case you're interested - even if people go over 20mph, the average speed is reduced, and so are the number and severity of accidents.

    https://www.rospa.com/media/documents/road-safety/20mph-zones-and-speed-limits-factsheet.pdf

    A major review of road casualties in London between 1986 and 2006 was published in the BMJ in 200914. It demonstrated that 20mph zones reduced the number of casualties by over 40% (41.9%). The 20mph zones were slightly more effective in preventing fatal or serious injuries to children, which were reduced by half (50.2%). There was a smaller reduction in casualties among cyclists than any of the other major groups of road users studied, with a reduction of 16.9%.
    See above - in many cases 20 is simply too slow, that's why most people ignore them. There is more to it than just speed as I keep saying. Better if people concentrate on driving sensibly, observing and anticipating rather than staring at their speedometer to make sure they're not going to get caught out on roads where the 'natural' speed is higher.
    Too slow for what?

    I’ve tried to explain before that 20 makes more sense than 30 as an arbitrary limit (and any limit is arbitrary) as it is the point where the likelihood of a pedestrian dying after being hit by a vehicle starts to increase more sharply. It has more science behind it than 30 does and also means that those who like to push the limit slightly beyond its maximum will still be going slower.

    Unfortunately you are right about the ‘natural’ speed of a road. Chucking a few 20 signs up on a wide road with verges and pavements isn’t going slow anyone down.
  • briantrumpet
    briantrumpet Posts: 20,348
    Stevo_666 said:

    briantrumpet said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    monkimark said:

    Whoever claimed either of those things?

    All other things being equal, slower is safer, it's very basic physics.

    Speaking as someone who rides a 600cc motorbike to work every day, I'm not going to pretend that I love the 20 limits I have to ride through but taking a step back, I can see that any objection I have is pretty petty and selfish.

    Which other factors relevant to road safety does Rick post mention?

    In the end, bad laws get ignored. Good example is the 20mph limit: over 80% ignore it.
    https://highwaysindustry.com/most-drivers-ignore-20mph-speed-limits-official-figures-show/
    Sounds superficially attractive but in most places its too low for the road involved so gets ignored. Many are being put in where there are no specific hazards and simply lose their impact.
    In case you're interested - even if people go over 20mph, the average speed is reduced, and so are the number and severity of accidents.

    https://www.rospa.com/media/documents/road-safety/20mph-zones-and-speed-limits-factsheet.pdf

    A major review of road casualties in London between 1986 and 2006 was published in the BMJ in 200914. It demonstrated that 20mph zones reduced the number of casualties by over 40% (41.9%). The 20mph zones were slightly more effective in preventing fatal or serious injuries to children, which were reduced by half (50.2%). There was a smaller reduction in casualties among cyclists than any of the other major groups of road users studied, with a reduction of 16.9%.
    See above - in many cases 20 is simply too slow, that's why most people ignore them. There is more to it than just speed as I keep saying. Better if people concentrate on driving sensibly, observing and anticipating rather than staring at their speedometer to make sure they're not going to get caught out on roads where the 'natural' speed is higher.

    I'm guessing you haven't bothered to read the studies that show that 20mph limits slow people down, even if they are still breaking the limit. Or if you have, you're ignoring them.
    https://www.facebook.com/unanglaisendiois
  • monkimark
    monkimark Posts: 1,928
    edited September 2022
    If you need to stare at your speedometer to maintain constant speed, you probably shouldn't be driving. It also surely applies equally to any speed limit, not just 20mph?
  • MattFalle
    MattFalle Posts: 11,644
    monkimark said:

    If you need to stare at your speedometer to maintain constant speed, you probably shouldn't be driving. It also surely applies equally to any speed limit, not just 20mph?

    nah fam.

    you get to the speed. you maintain it using your road senses. you may fluctuate 1/2 mph either way but deffo no more.

    its simplez, innit. if you can't do it without STARING at your speedo theres something wrong and should you really driving ?

    you ride a motorbike, you know this stuff.
    .
    The camera down the willy isn't anything like as bad as it sounds.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    Stevo_666 said:

    rick_chasey said:

    20mph does show up the MGIF crowd, as it’s quite easy to do 20mph on ya bike and they’re still trying to get past you.

    Stevo hasn’t quite worked out that doing 25 in a 20 is still safer than 35 in a 30

    How do you know what speed other people will drive at? Assumptions, assumptions...
    Only absolute morons do 30 in a 20
    _
  • monkimark
    monkimark Posts: 1,928
    That is a strange and long winded way of agreeing with me.
    MattFalle said:

    monkimark said:

    If you need to stare at your speedometer to maintain constant speed, you probably shouldn't be driving. It also surely applies equally to any speed limit, not just 20mph?

    nah fam.

    you get to the speed. you maintain it using your road senses. you may fluctuate 1/2 mph either way but deffo no more.

    its simplez, innit. if you can't do it without STARING at your speedo theres something wrong and should you really driving ?

    you ride a motorbike, you know this stuff.
  • MattFalle
    MattFalle Posts: 11,644
    monkimark said:

    That is a strange and long winded way of agreeing with me.

    MattFalle said:

    monkimark said:

    If you need to stare at your speedometer to maintain constant speed, you probably shouldn't be driving. It also surely applies equally to any speed limit, not just 20mph?

    nah fam.

    you get to the speed. you maintain it using your road senses. you may fluctuate 1/2 mph either way but deffo no more.

    its simplez, innit. if you can't do it without STARING at your speedo theres something wrong and should you really driving ?

    you ride a motorbike, you know this stuff.
    isn't everything MF does strange and long winded?
    .
    The camera down the willy isn't anything like as bad as it sounds.

Categories