CFLs and UHF interference

[Andy Hall]

Then you need to replace the U2 batteries. ;-)

[Paul Martin]

Apropos of nothing... "Nice" used to be an insult.

Jerry is Jerry. When he's losing the argument (and sometimes before that), he resorts to insults. It's childish, but that's him. Perhaps he'll find an alternative diversion for his energies given time. Perhaps he may even mature.

I'm now expecting a torrent of abuse from him for pointing out his obvious character flaw. I'm sure if he displayed this attitude in real life, nobody would work with him or socialise with him.

[:Jerry:]

IYO.... Of course it would not be the first time that you too have been proven wrong.

[:Jerry:]

Glad to know that you won't be talking to yourself then!

[:Jerry:]

So why do you engage in it?

[John Rumm]

They change up and down - just not in discrete steps.

I drove a Volvo 66 for a few months many years ago, and got used to its peculiarities. When the transmission was correctly setup you could usually choose when it changed up by delicate use of the throttle - just backing off the power briefly would start it winding its way up the range so you maintained speed but lost revs. You also got some natural variation in drive ratio in response to changing load - more load pulled the belts deeper into the vee shaped pulleys reducing the effective diameter of the pulley. There was no "kickdown" as such, but accelerating hard in a higher ratio would cause the box to drop the gearing a bit (by widening the vee gap in the pulley) in addition to that gained from the loading effect described above.

[:Jerry:]

...and if you knew anything about the car in question you would know that one can't just swap the units over.

[Arfa Daily]

Well, nothing really. Just a bunch of grown-ups (mostly ... ;~} !! ) having a chat over a pint in a thread that has departed a long way from where it started ...

Shame it had to degenerate the way it did, but still, there's always one in every group !

Arfa

[The Natural Philosopher]

Even Plod admits that having one lorry at 56mph being overtaken by another at 57mph increases congestion, and anyone who regularly drives a single lane road with any traffic density will tell you that one slow vehicle causes tailbacks, and if there is ANY interference with the flow, brings cars to a halt further back.

All speed limits and traffic cal;ming and traffic lights do, is make people travel as fast as they can get away with. Due to sheer frustration mainly.

I used to burn far more fuel tryng to conform to speed limits with other traffic around, than just speeding p and slowing down with the natural flow of it.

If you want to save fuel, make it expensive. I konw how to dric-ve economically, and sticking rigidly to the limits is a LOT less effective than e.g. starting to slow down or a junction a mile ahead of time.

If keeping speed way down were the be all and end all of fuel economy, why is urban fuel consumption (seldom over 30mph) so much worse than a motorway, at 70mph?

Excessive sped limits demand longer drive times and greater driver concentration, and make the need to overtake higher and teh ability to do so legally far less.

All in all, its dangerous.

[The Natural Philosopher]

which just shows you know f*ck all.

No gearbox has ever been claimed to be conscious.

>

[Paul Martin]

I didn't.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Only of :jerry: can. with that kind of delusional framework who knows what he might do ?

[Paul Martin]

Nice try, but no biscuit. That's what's called a non sequitur.

"Must try harder."

[The Natural Philosopher]

teh lead seems to have lodged in your brain permanently.

Yeah. Right. Apparently the best way to open a late 80's locked jaguar was with a mallet on the front bumper. That acticvated the 'crash' sensor 'safaty related control' and the door locks sprang open.

>

[The Natural Philosopher]

Exactly. Which just goes to show what a clueless parochial clot :jerry' actually is.

[Ivor Jones]

: > : > Come 5pm and he picks up his car, gets in and sits there for : > several : > : > minutes wondering where the clutch pedal had gone. Turns out his : > : > mate had : > : > simply lifted out the entire engine and (manual) gearbox and : > : > replaced it : > : > with a completely new engine and auto box..!! : > : >

: > : : > : Hmmm, is that a pig I see flying overhead... : >

: > Believe me or not, I don't care, doesn't alter the truth. : >

: : ...and if you knew anything about the car in question you would know : that one can't just swap the units over.

Doesn't mean it can't be done at all.

Ivor

[The Natural Philosopher]

Americans can and do operate their parking brakes: they just do not use them in traffic, because THEY ARE NOT INTENDED FOR THAT PURPOSE.

The correct way to use a US automatic on e.g a hill star is to use left foot braking to hold it until you have picked up enough torque in the converter not to slide backwards. In general most do not at idle, anyway. There is enough creep in there to move you forward slowly, or at worst, hold you stationary. Indeed I am not sure, but its possible that some other kind of locking system may prevent a car in 'drive' from slipping backwards.

Certainly most auto drivers do not routinely use a hand or parking brake whether easily accessible or not: the transmission in 'park' is locked.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Only if you have been servicing it.

Otherwise they all tart with zero throttle these days.. well unless you flood them.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Well thats the Rools for Fools guidance..

In reality, you can use whatever works best.

I switch between auto and manual all the time.

I usually left foot brake on the auto. Why? because I like to have a smoother ride, and using both pedals together gives the smoothest changedowns. Its also about .3 second faster once you are used to it.

Yes, I occasionally get caught out not using the clutch and expecting the manual to change down..for the first 5 minutes..

[The Natural Philosopher]

Remind me never to buy a used car from you.