OT: What car is this?

On 24-Mar-17 6:07 PM, Rod Speed wrote:

...

A bit difficult to hire and even more difficult to sneak unnoticed into central London though.
--
--

Colin Bignell
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 24/03/2017 18:34, Nightjar wrote:

It's London.
It would go unnoticed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGR3gXiWhYg

--
Adam

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 24-Mar-17 7:03 PM, ARW wrote:

You could try painting it bright yellow and writing sightseeing tours on the side, like the DUKW on the bridge at the time of the attack :-)
--
--

Colin Bignell
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload


But likely not that hard to steal if you had been paid to drive one.

Likely would get noticed, but I bet most would assume there was some anti terrorist operation going on or maybe even a full coup and they would just yawn and carry on regardless.
One yank did get a bee in his bonnet about something, built a full armoured bulldozer and then proceeded to demolish half the town with it. Took quite a bit of stopping.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Can't see that working. People would trip over them and some would likely end up falling over into the road etc.

Not convinced that that is even possible design wise.

Even worse for tripping over and falling into the road. No thanks.

They wouldn’t necessarily get 4 flats and that latest one didn’t want to go anywhere after the car had mounted the kerb anyway. Still quite capable of killing people with flat tires anyway.

Even sillier than you usually manage.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Nightjar wrote:

But this week's terrorist (being the same age as me) would have had 'grandfathered' rights to drive 7.5 tonners
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 24-Mar-17 5:41 PM, Andy Burns wrote:

That is why I specified younger extremists. Interesting that he didn't choose to hire a 7.5 tonner though.
--
--

Colin Bignell
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 24/03/17 18:01, Nightjar wrote:

No right to drive 7.5 tonnes on a standard license has ever existed. 3.5 tonnes, yes.
Above that you need a C1.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/cars/advice/what-you-can-drive-on-a-standard-uk-car-licence/
--
No Apple devices were knowingly used in the preparation of this post.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Plain wrong I'm afraid

My standard licence does indeed have category C1 for vehicles above 3.5 tonnes and not exceeding 7.5 tonnes
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 24-Mar-17 7:41 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

That is what you can drive if you pass the test today. The full list of what the old categories allowed and their current equivalents are given here:
https://www.gov.uk/old-driving-licence-categories
--
--

Colin Bignell
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Dunno. While the metalwork between the top set of lights looks closer, the metalwork above and below the number plate doesn’t.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 23/03/2017 15:18, Rod Speed wrote:

Can't remember where, but it was reported that the car was a Hyundai.
Only two options for a 4x4 I believe: Tuscon (was ix35 until last year) or Santa Fe (slightly bigger).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload


But there isnt any evidence that a 4x4 is involved and the numberplate shows it’s an i40 and that matches the photo of the back of an i40 and that isnt a 4x4.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thursday, March 23, 2017 at 3:19:02 PM UTC, Rod Speed wrote:


ry_slide/public/hyundai-tucson-0003.jpg?itok=Ex_McrQd

Look at the pictures again:
https://images.cdn.autocar.co.uk/sites/autocar.co.uk/files/styles/gallery_s lide/public/hyundai-tucson-0003.jpg?itok=Ex_McrQd
and
https://i0.wp.com/order-order.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/car.jpg
The shape of the lights match, as does the profile of the rear bumper. Now compare the relative sizes / positions of the 'Hyundai' and 'Tucson' badges in the two images.
Now look at a couple of pictures an i40: Estate: http://carsnb.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/hyundai-i40-wagon_08-6 50x433.jpg Saloon: http://cdn1.autoexpress.co.uk/sites/autoexpressuk/files/styles/arti cle_main_image/public/5/23/dsc_7310_0.jpg?itok=CYNDGxjB
Looking at this version of the image:
http://i.imgur.com/g3vR3jI.jpg the ve hicle registration looks like EK66RWO.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 24/03/2017 11:07, snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.co.uk wrote:

Although the reg in that photo stills looks more like EX to me I agree it could be EK66RWO which is indeed shown by Halfords as an HYUNDAI TUCSON CRDI SE NAV BLUE DRIVE 1685cc DIESEL, 5 Door ESTATE
The press don't help. They report it as both a Tucson and as an i40. Sometimes in the same article :(
--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 24/03/17 14:21, Robin wrote:

Rear lights /tailgate all wrong for a tucson surely?
--
New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in
the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yes.

But not the metalwork above the number plate.

Pity about
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/agWgpGho6uw/maxresdefault.jpg
All that really proves is that the back of an i40 does vary a surprising amount.

Pity that the plate lookup produces the right rental operation and i40.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

ry_slide/public/hyundai-tucson-0003.jpg?itok=Ex_McrQd

The pictures are taken at different angles in very different light. What yo u see as the metalwork above the number plate not matching is down to; ligh t, reflections and angles. If you take the two images and overlay them (sca led so the Hyundai badges in the middle of the boot are the same size), you will see that they are the same i.e. it's a Hyundai Tucson.

'

33.jpg

main_image/public/5/23/dsc_7310_0.jpg?itok=CYNDGxjB

Yep, that shows the vehicle in question really isn't an i40


e

Checking on the DVLA site gives:
EX66RWO is a BLACK Hyundai i40 EK66RWO is a GREY Hyundai Tucson - and that is car in the picture in TNP's original post.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Pity it isnt grey and doesn’t get the owner right.
EX66RWO clearly is the car involved.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Monday, March 27, 2017 at 6:51:42 PM UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:

ng


.

P's

Rod, are you suggesting that the car involved is black?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

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.