Posted this on uk.rec.cars.maintenance without any practical response -
apart from 2 UK DIY's
Any idea how to adjust the (left) rear door on a Kangoo van? It closes fine
at the top, but the bottom doesn't seem to engage with the catch properly.
Can't seem to find any adjustment of the hinge or catch.
Dave - The Medway Handyman
Grip the top firmly and apply a pulling motion while preventing the bottom
moving with your knee until "Re-aligned" to the point that your door will
If glass is installed in said rear window wear safety specs for when the
window goes bang when you over stretch the panels.
As an aside, back in the days when we were switching from real measurements
to the new fangled metric stuff, I was told by a guy who worked for Ford in
Dagenham that they had spent many hours sorting out a door problem.
Apparently a large number of Cortina bodies were shipped over from Belgium
but the doors for them were built in England. The hinge mounting points on
the bodies had been built to the metric measurements but the doors had used
imperial. Needless to say they didn't match and much modification was
needed. I can't vouch for the truth of this but it sounds like exactly
the sort of thing that would happen (like when they had to lower the track
throughout the length of the Piccadilly line tunnels because the new trains,
purpose built, were too tall).
I had a similar experience when I took over the manufacture of a medical
device. The original manufacturers were getting out of soft metal products,
but the NHS still needed the product. As we were well known to the
manufacturer, they asked us to take it over. We got a complete set of
carefully prepared metric drawings. However, if you actually made it to
those drawings, the product did not work. I knew the product had first been
made in the 1950s, so would have been designed in Imperial measure. Once I
had converted things like 'hole 16mm dia fit H8' to 'drill through with 5/8"
drill', it worked. When I spoke to the blokes on the workshop floor, they
said they had never used the metric drawings and simply worked from jigs and
If you used that kind of precision it didn't work, which was the problem. It
needed loose tolerances.
The device was a Heaf test gun. Dr Heaf invented a simple test for
tuberculosis in 1951, which involved firing a circle of six needles into the
inner forearm, through a film of protein derived from the TB bacillus. You
probably had it done at school around age 12-14, where it was more commonly
known as the BCG test, as anyone with a negative reaction would get a BCG
vaccination against TB.
The original gun was an Eclipse automatic centre punch with the needle
holder fitted instead of the centre punch and chrome plated to look nice. I
still have one of those. It was redesigned sometime in the late 1950s partly
to reduce the firing pressure (even the later ones could cause bruising if
misused) and partly to allow for different depth settings for the needles to
allow for adult and infant testing. That design lasted until 1990 when, at
the request of the Department of Health, I designed a disposable version.
The needles on the original were disinfected between use by dipping in meths
followed burning it off. Around 300 pupils could be tested in an afternoon,
using 4-5 guns over and over again and that did not sit well with the AIDS
campaign of not reusing needles. The DoH finally abandoned the Heaf test in
2005, nominally on grounds of cost. However, the company making the vaccine
would have been seriously embarrassed had it been required to produce
vaccine that year and I was told, unofficially, that there were political
reasons not to upset them.
On Fri, 21 Aug 2009 02:41:08 +0100, nightjar wrote:
Fascinating. I remember that test at school, and tales abounding in the
months leading up to it about how painful it was and how it'd go all
infected and nasty and your arm would probably drop off etc. :-)
Not entirely lies, at least about the vaccination. That should be done at
the insertion of the deltoid muscle - a small depression on the outside of
your upper arm. When I was working with members of the British Thoracic
Society on the development of the disposable Heaf test, I saw some of the
pictures of what could go wrong if it was done too high. In one case, almost
50% muscle loss occurred.
On Fri, 21 Aug 2009 17:32:25 +0100, nightjar wrote:
OK, I'm glad I hadn't heard that *before* I had it done ;-)
I remember it being briefly painful, but not any worse than any other
injection. I don't recall it being sore or anything afterwards, but maybe
that's just ailing memory.
That suggests you had a Grade 0 negative reaction to the Heaf test, which
means you had no antibodies to TB. People with a mild (Grade 1) reaction to
the Heaf test would also be vaccinated and could develop a small blister.
That would itch and scratching it was not a good idea.
My father had a friend with chronic TB, so I gave a nice, strong positive
reaction, which meant that I got a series of chest X-rays for some years, to
check that I did not have active TB. In fact, the evidence is that an early
exposure to TB has probably strengthened my immune system. That is possibly
why I got very few childhood illnesses, while the girl next door, with whom
I was encouraged to associate when she was ill, got just about everything
The test wasn't a big deal, it was the injection itself that people were
scared of. Mine did go "infected and nasty", apparently due to putting a
plaster over it for protection rather than leaving it open to the air as
advised. Didn't see anyone's arm drop off :-)
Our school had a specific threat of dire punishment to anybody punching
anybody else's BCG scab.
Heh. I don't remember any flaming meths being involved, so I guess we
must have been on the receiving end of your version.
I guess the risk isn't that high in the UK these days, but when I used
to go to Russia I was glad I had that little scar on my arm. We had a
girl at work this summer who was just out of school, who'd never heard
of the BCG and thought we were winding her up until everybody showed her
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.