my MG ZS

the MG corners better/faster than the Lancer did. I guess that's due to
the short wheel base and wider tyres.

--
Have a nice day!..

Xeno

2024-09-21 09:29:40 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
the MG corners better/faster than the Lancer did. I guess that's due to
the short wheel base and wider tyres.

In part. Suspension kinematics play a greater role these days. Your
current MG has a torsion beam rear suspension, a type that could not be
designed before the advent of computer modelling. IIRC, your MG3 was the
same. As I have stated in the past, they are a compromise in handling
and ride but the coils are easy to *tune* and the kinematics of the
trailing arms are simple but effective. They are not new. Fiat has used
the torsion beam rear since the early 80s on the Uno since it gives a
good *space* configuration in compact wagons, hatches and SUVs but still
provide good handling. For instance, Peugeot 308 uses the torsion beam
for its handling characteristics. Even the moose test wasn't a problem;

Handling has come a long way.

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

Mighty Mouse

2024-09-21 13:32:06 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
the MG corners better/faster than the Lancer did. I guess that's due
to the short wheel base and wider tyres.

In part. Suspension kinematics play a greater role these days. Your
current MG has a torsion beam rear suspension, a type that could not
be designed before the advent of computer modelling. IIRC, your MG3
was the same. As I have stated in the past, they are a compromise in
handling and ride but the coils are easy to *tune* and the kinematics
of the trailing arms are simple but effective. They are not new. Fiat
has used the torsion beam rear since the early 80s on the Uno since it
gives a good *space* configuration in compact wagons, hatches and SUVs
but still provide good handling. For instance, Peugeot 308 uses the
torsion beam for its handling characteristics. Even the moose test
wasn't a problem;
http://youtu.be/jMzaufUquys
Handling has come a long way.

what sort of suspension did the Lancer have?

--
Have a nice day!..

Mighty Mouse

2024-09-21 13:38:29 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
the MG corners better/faster than the Lancer did. I guess that's due
to the short wheel base and wider tyres.

In part. Suspension kinematics play a greater role these days. Your
current MG has a torsion beam rear suspension, a type that could not
be designed before the advent of computer modelling. IIRC, your MG3
was the same. As I have stated in the past, they are a compromise in
handling and ride but the coils are easy to *tune* and the kinematics
of the trailing arms are simple but effective. They are not new. Fiat
has used the torsion beam rear since the early 80s on the Uno since
it gives a good *space* configuration in compact wagons, hatches and
SUVs but still provide good handling. For instance, Peugeot 308 uses
the torsion beam for its handling characteristics. Even the moose
test wasn't a problem;
http://youtu.be/jMzaufUquys
Handling has come a long way.

what sort of suspension did the Lancer have?

btw.. MG ZS in on sale at present for $22k. no wonder they sell like hot
cakes. also other models .. https://mgmotor.com.au/offers/

--
Have a nice day!..

Keithr0

2024-09-22 11:55:19 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
the MG corners better/faster than the Lancer did. I guess that's due
to the short wheel base and wider tyres.

In part. Suspension kinematics play a greater role these days. Your
current MG has a torsion beam rear suspension, a type that could not
be designed before the advent of computer modelling. IIRC, your MG3
was the same. As I have stated in the past, they are a compromise in
handling and ride but the coils are easy to *tune* and the kinematics
of the trailing arms are simple but effective. They are not new. Fiat
has used the torsion beam rear since the early 80s on the Uno since
it gives a good *space* configuration in compact wagons, hatches and
SUVs but still provide good handling. For instance, Peugeot 308 uses
the torsion beam for its handling characteristics. Even the moose
test wasn't a problem;
http://youtu.be/jMzaufUquys
Handling has come a long way.

what sort of suspension did the Lancer have?

btw.. MG ZS in on sale at present for $22k. no wonder they sell like hot
cakes. also other models .. https://mgmotor.com.au/offers/

OK if all you want is a cheap shopping trolley.

Xeno

2024-09-22 12:24:51 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
the MG corners better/faster than the Lancer did. I guess that's
due to the short wheel base and wider tyres.

In part. Suspension kinematics play a greater role these days. Your
current MG has a torsion beam rear suspension, a type that could not
be designed before the advent of computer modelling. IIRC, your MG3
was the same. As I have stated in the past, they are a compromise in
handling and ride but the coils are easy to *tune* and the
kinematics of the trailing arms are simple but effective. They are
not new. Fiat has used the torsion beam rear since the early 80s on
the Uno since it gives a good *space* configuration in compact
wagons, hatches and SUVs but still provide good handling. For
instance, Peugeot 308 uses the torsion beam for its handling
characteristics. Even the moose test wasn't a problem;
http://youtu.be/jMzaufUquys
Handling has come a long way.

what sort of suspension did the Lancer have?

btw.. MG ZS in on sale at present for $22k. no wonder they sell like
hot cakes. also other models .. https://mgmotor.com.au/offers/

OK if all you want is a cheap shopping trolley.

That's all the MG ZS was ever meant to be. Ditto with the MG3. Both are
cheap runabouts and I don't think there's anything wrong with that.
These days my needs are for a cheap runabout - but I'll stick with
Toyota if possible.

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

Mighty Mouse

2024-09-22 12:35:20 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
the MG corners better/faster than the Lancer did. I guess that's
due to the short wheel base and wider tyres.

In part. Suspension kinematics play a greater role these days.
Your current MG has a torsion beam rear suspension, a type that
could not be designed before the advent of computer modelling.
IIRC, your MG3 was the same. As I have stated in the past, they
are a compromise in handling and ride but the coils are easy to
*tune* and the kinematics of the trailing arms are simple but
effective. They are not new. Fiat has used the torsion beam rear
since the early 80s on the Uno since it gives a good *space*
configuration in compact wagons, hatches and SUVs but still
provide good handling. For instance, Peugeot 308 uses the torsion
beam for its handling characteristics. Even the moose test wasn't
a problem;
http://youtu.be/jMzaufUquys
Handling has come a long way.

what sort of suspension did the Lancer have?

btw.. MG ZS in on sale at present for $22k. no wonder they sell like
hot cakes. also other models .. https://mgmotor.com.au/offers/

OK if all you want is a cheap shopping trolley.

That's all the MG ZS was ever meant to be. Ditto with the MG3. Both
are cheap runabouts and I don't think there's anything wrong with
that. These days my needs are for a cheap runabout - but I'll stick
with Toyota if possible.

The ZS has developed a creak/crack sound with body and steering wheel
movement. it's not loud or consistent but a bit annoying and I'd prefer
it wasn't there

--
Have a nice day!

Xeno

2024-09-22 12:52:01 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
the MG corners better/faster than the Lancer did. I guess that's
due to the short wheel base and wider tyres.

In part. Suspension kinematics play a greater role these days.
Your current MG has a torsion beam rear suspension, a type that
could not be designed before the advent of computer modelling.
IIRC, your MG3 was the same. As I have stated in the past, they
are a compromise in handling and ride but the coils are easy to
*tune* and the kinematics of the trailing arms are simple but
effective. They are not new. Fiat has used the torsion beam rear
since the early 80s on the Uno since it gives a good *space*
configuration in compact wagons, hatches and SUVs but still
provide good handling. For instance, Peugeot 308 uses the torsion
beam for its handling characteristics. Even the moose test wasn't
a problem;
http://youtu.be/jMzaufUquys
Handling has come a long way.

what sort of suspension did the Lancer have?

btw.. MG ZS in on sale at present for $22k. no wonder they sell like
hot cakes. also other models .. https://mgmotor.com.au/offers/

OK if all you want is a cheap shopping trolley.

That's all the MG ZS was ever meant to be. Ditto with the MG3. Both
are cheap runabouts and I don't think there's anything wrong with
that. These days my needs are for a cheap runabout - but I'll stick
with Toyota if possible.

The ZS has developed a creak/crack sound with body and steering wheel
movement. it's not loud or consistent but a bit annoying and I'd prefer
it wasn't there

That's what warranty is for.

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

Trevor Wilson

2024-09-21 21:32:43 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
the MG corners better/faster than the Lancer did. I guess that's due
to the short wheel base and wider tyres.

**Indeed. Back in the early 1980s, I took a mate's Porsche 911T (2.7L)
for a spin. It was, by a considerable margin, the most exciting,
engaging car I had ever driven. Quick, precise and great handling. A
couple of years ago, another mate called in with his classic Porsche
911T (2.7L). He took me for a spin. What a POS. Slow, average handling
and big disappointment. Same car. 40 years difference. And torsion bar
rear suspension. My 23 year old Stagea kills the old Porsche in every
department. Except for styling. Oh, and NEVER drive an old Porsche in
the wet. You know why. In my Stagea (AWD), I don't even notice wet roads.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

Noddy

2024-09-22 03:25:40 UTC

Post by Xeno
In part. Suspension kinematics play a greater role these days. Your
current MG has a torsion beam rear suspension, a type that could not
be designed before the advent of computer modelling. IIRC, your MG3
was the same. As I have stated in the past, they are a compromise in
handling and ride but the coils are easy to *tune* and the kinematics
of the trailing arms are simple but effective. They are not new. Fiat
has used the torsion beam rear since the early 80s on the Uno since it
gives a good *space* configuration in compact wagons, hatches and SUVs
but still provide good handling. For instance, Peugeot 308 uses the
torsion beam for its handling characteristics. Even the moose test
wasn't a problem;
http://youtu.be/jMzaufUquys
Handling has come a long way.

**Indeed.

Trevor, take what this moron claims with a grain of salt the size of
Nebraska, as he has absolutely *no* idea what he's talking about. Like
his utter nonsense here about torsion beam rear suspensions not being
possible before the advent of computer modelling.

This claim is utterly *ridiculous* :)

Torsion beam suspension has been around since the 1920's. The world's
most popular car, the VW Beetle, first appeared in 1936 and used it for
decades. Even the Porsche that you talk about so fondly for it's great
handling characteristics used torsion bar rear suspension and did so
going back to the very first days of the 356 :)

The bloke has no fucking idea and just makes this shit up as he goes
along. He is the Donald Trump of aus.cars, and why you people keep
giving him the attention he craves his a mystery as all he ever does is
insults your intelligence :)

--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

alvey

2024-09-22 09:20:37 UTC

Post by Xeno
In part. Suspension kinematics play a greater role these days. Your
current MG has a torsion beam rear suspension, a type that could not
be designed before the advent of computer modelling. IIRC, your MG3
was the same. As I have stated in the past, they are a compromise in
handling and ride but the coils are easy to *tune* and the kinematics
of the trailing arms are simple but effective. They are not new. Fiat
has used the torsion beam rear since the early 80s on the Uno since
it gives a good *space* configuration in compact wagons, hatches and
SUVs but still provide good handling. For instance, Peugeot 308 uses
the torsion beam for its handling characteristics. Even the moose
test wasn't a problem;
http://youtu.be/jMzaufUquys
Handling has come a long way.

**Indeed.

Ahhh, still the same deperately insecure and revolting specimen as ever
I see Fraudster. You couldn't just state your facts could you? Nope, you
just have to demeen and insult. This is cretinous enough, but you've
undone all this bad work (and created a farce) by being a proven serial
liar, monumental hypocrite and all gigantic fraud. Or to put it into
words you might understand, you're a worthless buffoon.

snip more Google stuff and gratuitous insults.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

Xeno

2024-09-22 10:52:17 UTC

Post by Xeno
In part. Suspension kinematics play a greater role these days. Your
current MG has a torsion beam rear suspension, a type that could not
be designed before the advent of computer modelling. IIRC, your MG3
was the same. As I have stated in the past, they are a compromise in
handling and ride but the coils are easy to *tune* and the
kinematics of the trailing arms are simple but effective. They are
not new. Fiat has used the torsion beam rear since the early 80s on
the Uno since it gives a good *space* configuration in compact
wagons, hatches and SUVs but still provide good handling. For
instance, Peugeot 308 uses the torsion beam for its handling
characteristics. Even the moose test wasn't a problem;
http://youtu.be/jMzaufUquys
Handling has come a long way.

**Indeed.

Ahhh, still the same deperately insecure and revolting specimen as ever

Deeply insecure, for sure! It really eats at him that he didn't qualify
for any apprenticeship ever.

Post by alvey
I see Fraudster. You couldn't just state your facts could you? Nope, you
just have to demeen and insult. This is cretinous enough, but you've
undone all this bad work (and created a farce) by being a proven serial
liar, monumental hypocrite and all gigantic fraud. Or to put it into
words you might understand, you're a worthless buffoon.

Well, in posting the above, he *proved* he didn't have a clue about
steering, suspensions and handling. See my other post on this topic.

Post by alvey
snip more Google stuff and gratuitous insults.

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

Xeno

2024-09-22 10:49:38 UTC

Post by Xeno
In part. Suspension kinematics play a greater role these days. Your
current MG has a torsion beam rear suspension, a type that could not
be designed before the advent of computer modelling. IIRC, your MG3
was the same. As I have stated in the past, they are a compromise in
handling and ride but the coils are easy to *tune* and the kinematics
of the trailing arms are simple but effective. They are not new. Fiat
has used the torsion beam rear since the early 80s on the Uno since
it gives a good *space* configuration in compact wagons, hatches and
SUVs but still provide good handling. For instance, Peugeot 308 uses
the torsion beam for its handling characteristics. Even the moose
test wasn't a problem;
http://youtu.be/jMzaufUquys
Handling has come a long way.

**Indeed.

Trevor, take what this moron claims with a grain of salt the size of
Nebraska, as he has absolutely *no* idea what he's talking about. Like
his utter nonsense here about torsion beam rear suspensions not being
possible before the advent of computer modelling.
This claim is utterly *ridiculous* :)
Torsion beam suspension has been around since the 1920's. The world's
most popular car, the VW Beetle, first appeared in 1936 and used it for
decades. Even the Porsche that you talk about so fondly for it's great
handling characteristics used torsion bar rear suspension and did so
going back to the very first days of the 356 :)

Oh dear Darren, it appears you have made a fool of yourself - again! Or
is that *still*!

For your edification, I was referring to a torsion *beam* suspension,
not a transverse torsion *bar* suspension. FFS, Valiants had
longitudinal torsion bar suspensions, as did the venerable Morris
Marina. They were *not* torsion beam suspensions - which are an entirely
different kettle of fish.

The VW and Porsche you refer to - they are pure torsion bar. That the
torsion bar is *housed* in a solid beam does not make that *beam* a
*torsion beam*. It's the torsion bar that *flexes*, not the beam. In
Felix' MG, the suspension has *no torsion bars* at all, the car being
suspended upon *coil springs*. In the MG, his current and his previous,
the torsion *beam* is the connecting beam between the two trailing arms.

Post by Noddy
The bloke has no fucking idea and just makes this shit up as he goes

Nope! From this book;

Car Suspension At Work.
The theory and practice of steering, handling and roadholding
Jeffrey Daniels

A major development of the 1970s, initiated by Volkswagen
but widely copied, is the torsion-beam axle. When the Golf
first appeared, it was equipped with a trailing-arm rear
suspension in which the arms were joined by a semi-rigid
transverse beam. It quickly transpired - to judge by the
evidence of its widespread copying - that this was a
brilliant notion. In particular, it combined two of the
better features of the trailing arm and the dead axle: the
forced camber change of the former, but the higher roll
centre of the latter. It thus incorporated both of the
features which reduced basic understeer.
The system also had structural advantages (it was devised
by Volkswagen in the first place as part of the
outstandingly successful weight control programme for the
Golf). The torsion beam absorbed some of the stresses
which would have had to be fed into the body with pure
trailing arms; it also acted as the rear anti-roll bar,
adding yet another understeer-reducing element. As the
system has been progressively developed, different
manufacturers have used torsion beams of different
cross-section, and mounted them at different points
along the trailing arms so that the rear suspension
member resembles a flat 'H'. Some engineers indeed refer
to the layout as the 'H-beam'. It is clear that the
tuning and positioning of the torsion beam are critical
to suspension performance, and especially to the car's
behaviour in the mid-corner lift-off situation. The Golf
and Polo are noteworthy for their evident positive
rear-wheel camber during cornering, and for their
willingness to lift the inside rear wheel, yet they do
not appear to oversteer violently, even in the most
extreme situations.

Yes, I am in possession of the above book. Not being able to find the
above on-line, I had to type out all the text so excuse any induced errors.

The torsion beam of a Golf is *not* a tube or square shape, that
wouldn't twist at all. Instead, the typical torsion beam is a U shape.

https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/145953436916

Note the U shaped beam in the above linked pic. It was the shape that
required the computer modelling. How to get a beam to flex sufficiently
without fatigue failing - that was the tricky bit. The computers doing
the modelling were quite large. In the early 80s I saw a Camira
undergoing suspension modelling and suspension destruction testing at
the Holden Development Labs at Fishermans Bend. In this case the
engineers were modelling how the suspension deflections were being
transmitted to and through the body - amazing stuff.

Remember how Felix complained that his MG3 rode harsh around town? Well,
that's one of the downsides of a torsion beam suspension - but they do
smooth out nicely at highway speeds however.

Post by Noddy
along. He is the Donald Trump of aus.cars, and why you people keep
giving him the attention he craves his a mystery as all he ever does is
insults your intelligence :)

Ah Darren, you've done it again! You've *proven* that you have never sat
your arse in an apprentice class in any TAFE college ever, not as an
AME, not as an auto machinist, and definitely not not as a motor
mechanic. In your desperation to win a point, you're making a habit of
this, I have to say. The Golf came out in *1974* Darren and it was the
*first* with a torsion beam. Had you been a motor mechanic apprentice in
the 80s Darren, or the 90s, you would have learnt all about car
steering, suspension and handling - but you didn't get an apprenticeship
because you didn't qualify - failed that year 9 exam, remember? The
Apprenticeship Commission of the day figured that if you couldn't even
pass year 9 English, maths and science, you would be unlikely to be able
to complete, and pass, the TAFE component of the apprenticeship. You're
proving them right! Well done. Now go back and hide in your cubbyhole,
you're insulting everyone's intelligence!

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

Mighty Mouse

2024-09-22 11:15:52 UTC

Post by Xeno
In part. Suspension kinematics play a greater role these days. Your
current MG has a torsion beam rear suspension, a type that could
not be designed before the advent of computer modelling. IIRC, your
MG3 was the same. As I have stated in the past, they are a
compromise in handling and ride but the coils are easy to *tune*
and the kinematics of the trailing arms are simple but effective.
They are not new. Fiat has used the torsion beam rear since the
early 80s on the Uno since it gives a good *space* configuration in
compact wagons, hatches and SUVs but still provide good handling.
For instance, Peugeot 308 uses the torsion beam for its handling
characteristics. Even the moose test wasn't a problem;
http://youtu.be/jMzaufUquys
Handling has come a long way.

**Indeed.

Trevor, take what this moron claims with a grain of salt the size of
Nebraska, as he has absolutely *no* idea what he's talking about.
Like his utter nonsense here about torsion beam rear suspensions not
being possible before the advent of computer modelling.
This claim is utterly *ridiculous* :)
Torsion beam suspension has been around since the 1920's. The world's
most popular car, the VW Beetle, first appeared in 1936 and used it
for decades. Even the Porsche that you talk about so fondly for it's
great handling characteristics used torsion bar rear suspension and
did so going back to the very first days of the 356 :)

Oh dear Darren, it appears you have made a fool of yourself - again!
Or is that *still*!

my money is on still..

Post by Xeno
For your edification, I was referring to a torsion *beam* suspension,
not a transverse torsion *bar* suspension. FFS, Valiants had
longitudinal torsion bar suspensions, as did the venerable Morris
Marina. They were *not* torsion beam suspensions - which are an
entirely different kettle of fish.
The VW and Porsche you refer to - they are pure torsion bar. That the
torsion bar is *housed* in a solid beam does not make that *beam* a
*torsion beam*. It's the torsion bar that *flexes*, not the beam. In
Felix' MG, the suspension has *no torsion bars* at all, the car being
suspended upon *coil springs*. In the MG, his current and his
previous, the torsion *beam* is the connecting beam between the two
trailing arms.

Post by Noddy
The bloke has no fucking idea and just makes this shit up as he goes

Nope! From this book;
   Car Suspension At Work.
   The theory and practice of steering, handling and roadholding
   Jeffrey Daniels
   A major development of the 1970s, initiated by Volkswagen
   but widely copied, is the torsion-beam axle. When the Golf
   first appeared, it was equipped with a trailing-arm rear
   suspension in which the arms were joined by a semi-rigid
   transverse beam. It quickly transpired - to judge by the
   evidence of its widespread copying - that this was a
   brilliant notion. In particular, it combined two of the
   better features of the trailing arm and the dead axle: the
   forced camber change of the former, but the higher roll
   centre of the latter. It thus incorporated both of the
   features which reduced basic understeer.
   The system also had structural advantages (it was devised
   by Volkswagen in the first place as part of the
   outstandingly successful weight control programme for the
   Golf). The torsion beam absorbed some of the stresses
   which would have had to be fed into the body with pure
   trailing arms; it also acted as the rear anti-roll bar,
   adding yet another understeer-reducing element. As the
   system has been progressively developed, different
   manufacturers have used torsion beams of different
   cross-section, and mounted them at different points
   along the trailing arms so that the rear suspension
   member resembles a flat 'H'. Some engineers indeed refer
   to the layout as the 'H-beam'. It is clear that the
   tuning and positioning of the torsion beam are critical
   to suspension performance, and especially to the car's
   behaviour in the mid-corner lift-off situation. The Golf
   and Polo are noteworthy for their evident positive
   rear-wheel camber during cornering, and for their
   willingness to lift the inside rear wheel, yet they do
   not appear to oversteer violently, even in the most
   extreme situations.
Yes, I am in possession of the above book. Not being able to find the
above on-line, I had to type out all the text so excuse any induced errors.
The torsion beam of a Golf is *not* a tube or square shape, that
wouldn't twist at all. Instead, the typical torsion beam is a U shape.
https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/145953436916
Note the U shaped beam in the above linked pic. It was the shape that
required the computer modelling. How to get a beam to flex
sufficiently without fatigue failing - that was the tricky bit. The
computers doing the modelling were quite large. In the early 80s I saw
a Camira undergoing suspension modelling and suspension destruction
testing at the Holden Development Labs at Fishermans Bend. In this
case the engineers were modelling how the suspension deflections were
being transmitted to and through the body - amazing stuff.
http://youtu.be/Y89aLdZzwNo
Remember how Felix complained that his MG3 rode harsh around town?

rode harsh everywhere

Post by Xeno
Well, that's one of the downsides of a torsion beam suspension - but
they do smooth out nicely at highway speeds however.

Post by Noddy
along. He is the Donald Trump of aus.cars, and why you people keep
giving him the attention he craves his a mystery as all he ever does
is insults your intelligence :)

Ah Darren, you've done it again! You've *proven* that you have never
sat your arse in an apprentice class in any TAFE college ever, not as
an AME, not as an auto machinist, and definitely not not as a motor
mechanic. In your desperation to win a point, you're making a habit of
this, I have to say. The Golf came out in *1974* Darren and it was the
*first* with a torsion beam. Had you been a motor mechanic apprentice
in the 80s Darren, or the 90s, you would have learnt all about car
steering, suspension and handling - but you didn't get an
apprenticeship because you didn't qualify - failed that year 9 exam,
remember? The Apprenticeship Commission of the day figured that if you
couldn't even pass year 9 English, maths and science, you would be
unlikely to be able to complete, and pass, the TAFE component of the
apprenticeship. You're proving them right! Well done. Now go back and
hide in your cubbyhole, you're insulting everyone's intelligence!

--
Have a nice day!..

Keithr0

2024-09-22 11:44:49 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
the MG corners better/faster than the Lancer did. I guess that's due
to the short wheel base and wider tyres.

In part. Suspension kinematics play a greater role these days. Your
current MG has a torsion beam rear suspension, a type that could not
be designed before the advent of computer modelling. IIRC, your MG3
was the same. As I have stated in the past, they are a compromise in
handling and ride but the coils are easy to *tune* and the kinematics
of the trailing arms are simple but effective. They are not new. Fiat
has used the torsion beam rear since the early 80s on the Uno since it
gives a good *space* configuration in compact wagons, hatches and SUVs
but still provide good handling. For instance, Peugeot 308 uses the
torsion beam for its handling characteristics. Even the moose test
wasn't a problem;
http://youtu.be/jMzaufUquys
Handling has come a long way.

Older Porsches got a reputation as widow makers, hanging on like glue
through corners until suddenly they didn't. A fellow Australian expat
told me that his teenage son, who had just got his licence, had his eye
on an old 911, my advice was, if he was attached to the boy, don't allow
it, if he wasn't, just make sure that he was well insured

Trevor Wilson

2024-09-22 21:34:08 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
the MG corners better/faster than the Lancer did. I guess that's due
to the short wheel base and wider tyres.

In part. Suspension kinematics play a greater role these days. Your
current MG has a torsion beam rear suspension, a type that could not
be designed before the advent of computer modelling. IIRC, your MG3
was the same. As I have stated in the past, they are a compromise in
handling and ride but the coils are easy to *tune* and the kinematics
of the trailing arms are simple but effective. They are not new. Fiat
has used the torsion beam rear since the early 80s on the Uno since
it gives a good *space* configuration in compact wagons, hatches and
SUVs but still provide good handling. For instance, Peugeot 308 uses
the torsion beam for its handling characteristics. Even the moose
test wasn't a problem;
http://youtu.be/jMzaufUquys
Handling has come a long way.

**Yep. A mate showed me the photos of (what was left of) his 911, after
he lost control in the wet and hit a pole. The engine exited the vehicle
and landed some 20 Metres from the rest of the car. Of course, Rai
always like to play on the edge. He hit a police radar trap doing
250kph. The cops didn't bother chasing him. He thought he was free and
clear, until he came upon a roadblock. He was locked up in Gouburn
lockup for the night.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

Xeno

2024-09-23 07:30:30 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
the MG corners better/faster than the Lancer did. I guess that's
due to the short wheel base and wider tyres.

In part. Suspension kinematics play a greater role these days. Your
current MG has a torsion beam rear suspension, a type that could not
be designed before the advent of computer modelling. IIRC, your MG3
was the same. As I have stated in the past, they are a compromise in
handling and ride but the coils are easy to *tune* and the
kinematics of the trailing arms are simple but effective. They are
not new. Fiat has used the torsion beam rear since the early 80s on
the Uno since it gives a good *space* configuration in compact
wagons, hatches and SUVs but still provide good handling. For
instance, Peugeot 308 uses the torsion beam for its handling
characteristics. Even the moose test wasn't a problem;
http://youtu.be/jMzaufUquys
Handling has come a long way.

**Indeed. Back in the early 1980s, I took a mate's Porsche 911T
(2.7L) for a spin. It was, by a considerable margin, the most
exciting, engaging car I had ever driven. Quick, precise and great
handling. A couple of years ago, another mate called in with his
classic Porsche 911T (2.7L). He took me for a spin. What a POS. Slow,
average handling and big disappointment. Same car. 40 years
difference. And torsion bar rear suspension. My 23 year old Stagea
kills the old Porsche in every department. Except for styling. Oh,
and NEVER drive an old Porsche in the wet. You know why. In my Stagea
(AWD), I don't even notice wet roads.

Older Porsches got a reputation as widow makers, hanging on like glue
through corners until suddenly they didn't. A fellow Australian expat
told me that his teenage son, who had just got his licence, had his
eye on an old 911, my advice was, if he was attached to the boy, don't
allow it, if he wasn't, just make sure that he was well insured

Can't outrun radio signals! ;-)

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

Daryl

2024-09-24 10:05:20 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
the MG corners better/faster than the Lancer did. I guess that's
due to the short wheel base and wider tyres.

In part. Suspension kinematics play a greater role these days. Your
current MG has a torsion beam rear suspension, a type that could not
be designed before the advent of computer modelling. IIRC, your MG3
was the same. As I have stated in the past, they are a compromise in
handling and ride but the coils are easy to *tune* and the
kinematics of the trailing arms are simple but effective. They are
not new. Fiat has used the torsion beam rear since the early 80s on
the Uno since it gives a good *space* configuration in compact
wagons, hatches and SUVs but still provide good handling. For
instance, Peugeot 308 uses the torsion beam for its handling
characteristics. Even the moose test wasn't a problem;
http://youtu.be/jMzaufUquys
Handling has come a long way.

**Indeed. Back in the early 1980s, I took a mate's Porsche 911T
(2.7L) for a spin. It was, by a considerable margin, the most
exciting, engaging car I had ever driven. Quick, precise and great
handling. A couple of years ago, another mate called in with his
classic Porsche 911T (2.7L). He took me for a spin. What a POS. Slow,
average handling and big disappointment. Same car. 40 years
difference. And torsion bar rear suspension. My 23 year old Stagea
kills the old Porsche in every department. Except for styling. Oh,
and NEVER drive an old Porsche in the wet. You know why. In my Stagea
(AWD), I don't even notice wet roads.

Older Porsches got a reputation as widow makers, hanging on like glue
through corners until suddenly they didn't. A fellow Australian expat
told me that his teenage son, who had just got his licence, had his
eye on an old 911, my advice was, if he was attached to the boy, don't
allow it, if he wasn't, just make sure that he was well insured

Sounds like whatever happened was more to do with the drivers lack of
skill and or common sense than a car handling issue.
I've heard it said that WRX's suffer badly from understeer at their
limit but I've never even got close to that limit because you need to be
driving like a psycho on a public road for it to happen, much the same
with the old Porsche.

--
Daryl

Noddy

2024-09-24 10:48:09 UTC

Post by Trevor Wilson
**Yep. A mate showed me the photos of (what was left of) his 911,
after he lost control in the wet and hit a pole. The engine exited the
vehicle and landed some 20 Metres from the rest of the car. Of course,
Rai always like to play on the edge. He hit a police radar trap doing
250kph. The cops didn't bother chasing him. He thought he was free and
clear, until he came upon a roadblock. He was locked up in Gouburn
lockup for the night.

Rear engined Porsche's are a little bit different. Particularly the 911.

Their problem isn't that they're not a great handling car as they are.
However they're unique compared to most performance cars in that they
give little to no warning when they're at their limit and let go very
quickly once they are. Very few drivers catch it :)
--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

Daryl

2024-09-25 06:47:48 UTC

Post by Trevor Wilson
**Yep. A mate showed me the photos of (what was left of) his 911,
after he lost control in the wet and hit a pole. The engine exited
the vehicle and landed some 20 Metres from the rest of the car. Of
course, Rai always like to play on the edge. He hit a police radar
trap doing 250kph. The cops didn't bother chasing him. He thought he
was free and clear, until he came upon a roadblock. He was locked up
in Gouburn lockup for the night.

Sounds like whatever happened was more to do with the drivers lack of
skill and or common sense than a car handling issue.
I've heard it said that WRX's suffer badly from understeer at their
limit but I've never even got close to that limit because you need to
be driving like a psycho on a public road for it to happen, much the
same with the old Porsche.

Rear engined Porsche's are a little bit different. Particularly the 911.
Their problem isn't that they're not a great handling car as they are.
However they're unique compared to most performance cars in that they
give little to no warning when they're at their limit and let go very
quickly once they are. Very few drivers catch it :)

No doubt that its true but my point was that the limit is very high and
to loose the rear end on a public road you need to be driving like a nut
case.

--
Daryl

Noddy

2024-09-25 08:03:04 UTC

Post by Noddy
Their problem isn't that they're not a great handling car as they are.
However they're unique compared to most performance cars in that they
give little to no warning when they're at their limit and let go very
quickly once they are. Very few drivers catch it :)

No doubt that its true but my point was that the limit is very high and
to loose the rear end on a public road you need to be driving like a nut
case.

I think it depends a lot on the model. Some of the higher horsepower
variants are pretty easy to unstick. Especially when traction is
anything less than ideal.
--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

Jonesy

2024-09-26 00:51:27 UTC

Post by Noddy
Their problem isn't that they're not a great handling car as they
are. However they're unique compared to most performance cars in that
they give little to no warning when they're at their limit and let go
very quickly once they are. Very few drivers catch it :)

No doubt that its true but my point was that the limit is very high
and to loose the rear end on a public road you need to be driving like
a nut case.

I think it depends a lot on the model. Some of the higher horsepower
variants are pretty easy to unstick. Especially when traction is
anything less than ideal.

Pooor Deryl. So very desperate for someone to talk to that he lets all
these highly dubious Fraudster Facts go unchallenged. Gorn Deryl! Ask
Fraudster for some specific details of *any* experience driving Porches
that he has. And lets not forget here that he's had no connection with
the motor trade for *at least* the last 20+ years. I'd confidently opine
that his only experience would be parking his arse on the back porch.

alvey

Xeno

2024-09-26 08:54:24 UTC

Post by Noddy
Their problem isn't that they're not a great handling car as they
are. However they're unique compared to most performance cars in
that they give little to no warning when they're at their limit and
let go very quickly once they are. Very few drivers catch it :)

No doubt that its true but my point was that the limit is very high
and to loose the rear end on a public road you need to be driving
like a nut case.

I think it depends a lot on the model. Some of the higher horsepower
variants are pretty easy to unstick. Especially when traction is
anything less than ideal.

Actually, it looks more like Daryl is *running interference*, ie.
providing a distraction from the huge cockup Darren made of his (lack
of) *knowledge* of torsion beam suspensions. What was even more humorous
has been Darren's exposure of, by his own words, his lack of knowledge
of *torsion bar* suspension systems. He even attempted to take the focus
off that by pointing to my claim - that the torsion beam suspension
wasn't possible without computer modelling - calling it bullshit.
Numerous engineering texts prove him wrong on that score too - including
the one from which I cited relevant excerpts. These are two sad little men!

Post by Jonesy
alvey

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

Xeno

2024-09-26 09:04:23 UTC

Post by Noddy
Their problem isn't that they're not a great handling car as they
are. However they're unique compared to most performance cars in that
they give little to no warning when they're at their limit and let go
very quickly once they are. Very few drivers catch it :)

No doubt that its true but my point was that the limit is very high
and to loose the rear end on a public road you need to be driving like
a nut case.

I think it depends a lot on the model. Some of the higher horsepower
variants are pretty easy to unstick. Especially when traction is
anything less than ideal.

FFS Darren, that applies equally well to a Front Engine RWD car with a
bit of power. In fact, it's *easier* since the weight is at the front
and not enhancing traction at the rear. As I said in another post, drive
torque increases slip angles and that is why a powerful 911 will hang
the arse out when the throttle is planted - same as any powerful FE-RWD car.

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

Mighty Mouse

2024-09-26 14:15:09 UTC

Post by Noddy
Their problem isn't that they're not a great handling car as they
are. However they're unique compared to most performance cars in
that they give little to no warning when they're at their limit and
let go very quickly once they are. Very few drivers catch it :)

No doubt that its true but my point was that the limit is very high
and to loose the rear end on a public road you need to be driving
like a nut case.

I think it depends a lot on the model. Some of the higher horsepower
variants are pretty easy to unstick. Especially when traction is
anything less than ideal.

FFS Darren, that applies equally well to a Front Engine RWD car with a
bit of power. In fact, it's *easier* since the weight is at the front
and not enhancing traction at the rear. As I said in another post,
drive torque increases slip angles and that is why a powerful 911 will
hang the arse out when the throttle is planted - same as any powerful
FE-RWD car.

speaking of Porsche, check this out ..
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/cY4R8GnJB7o

--
Have a nice day!..
stay sane, be happy, and enjoy living.

Trevor Wilson

2024-09-24 21:45:55 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
the MG corners better/faster than the Lancer did. I guess that's
due to the short wheel base and wider tyres.

In part. Suspension kinematics play a greater role these days. Your
current MG has a torsion beam rear suspension, a type that could
not be designed before the advent of computer modelling. IIRC, your
MG3 was the same. As I have stated in the past, they are a
compromise in handling and ride but the coils are easy to *tune*
and the kinematics of the trailing arms are simple but effective.
They are not new. Fiat has used the torsion beam rear since the
early 80s on the Uno since it gives a good *space* configuration in
compact wagons, hatches and SUVs but still provide good handling.
For instance, Peugeot 308 uses the torsion beam for its handling
characteristics. Even the moose test wasn't a problem;
http://youtu.be/jMzaufUquys
Handling has come a long way.

**Indeed. Back in the early 1980s, I took a mate's Porsche 911T
(2.7L) for a spin. It was, by a considerable margin, the most
exciting, engaging car I had ever driven. Quick, precise and great
handling. A couple of years ago, another mate called in with his
classic Porsche 911T (2.7L). He took me for a spin. What a POS.
Slow, average handling and big disappointment. Same car. 40 years
difference. And torsion bar rear suspension. My 23 year old Stagea
kills the old Porsche in every department. Except for styling. Oh,
and NEVER drive an old Porsche in the wet. You know why. In my
Stagea (AWD), I don't even notice wet roads.

Older Porsches got a reputation as widow makers, hanging on like glue
through corners until suddenly they didn't. A fellow Australian expat
told me that his teenage son, who had just got his licence, had his
eye on an old 911, my advice was, if he was attached to the boy,
don't allow it, if he wasn't, just make sure that he was well insured

**Yep. A mate showed me the photos of (what was left of) his 911,
after he lost control in the wet and hit a pole. The engine exited the
vehicle and landed some 20 Metres from the rest of the car. Of course,
Rai always like to play on the edge. He hit a police radar trap doing
250kph. The cops didn't bother chasing him. He thought he was free and
clear, until he came upon a roadblock. He was locked up in Gouburn
lockup for the night.

**Nope. You should drive an OLD 911 on a wet road sometime. You'll
understand.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

Daryl

2024-09-25 07:09:41 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
the MG corners better/faster than the Lancer did. I guess that's
due to the short wheel base and wider tyres.

In part. Suspension kinematics play a greater role these days.
Your current MG has a torsion beam rear suspension, a type that
could not be designed before the advent of computer modelling.
IIRC, your MG3 was the same. As I have stated in the past, they
are a compromise in handling and ride but the coils are easy to
*tune* and the kinematics of the trailing arms are simple but
effective. They are not new. Fiat has used the torsion beam rear
since the early 80s on the Uno since it gives a good *space*
configuration in compact wagons, hatches and SUVs but still
provide good handling. For instance, Peugeot 308 uses the torsion
beam for its handling characteristics. Even the moose test wasn't
a problem;
http://youtu.be/jMzaufUquys
Handling has come a long way.

**Indeed. Back in the early 1980s, I took a mate's Porsche 911T
(2.7L) for a spin. It was, by a considerable margin, the most
exciting, engaging car I had ever driven. Quick, precise and great
handling. A couple of years ago, another mate called in with his
classic Porsche 911T (2.7L). He took me for a spin. What a POS.
Slow, average handling and big disappointment. Same car. 40 years
difference. And torsion bar rear suspension. My 23 year old Stagea
kills the old Porsche in every department. Except for styling. Oh,
and NEVER drive an old Porsche in the wet. You know why. In my
Stagea (AWD), I don't even notice wet roads.

Older Porsches got a reputation as widow makers, hanging on like
glue through corners until suddenly they didn't. A fellow Australian
expat told me that his teenage son, who had just got his licence,
had his eye on an old 911, my advice was, if he was attached to the
boy, don't allow it, if he wasn't, just make sure that he was well
insured

**Yep. A mate showed me the photos of (what was left of) his 911,
after he lost control in the wet and hit a pole. The engine exited
the vehicle and landed some 20 Metres from the rest of the car. Of
course, Rai always like to play on the edge. He hit a police radar
trap doing 250kph. The cops didn't bother chasing him. He thought he
was free and clear, until he came upon a roadblock. He was locked up
in Gouburn lockup for the night.

Sounds like whatever happened was more to do with the drivers lack of
skill and or common sense than a car handling issue.
I've heard it said that WRX's suffer badly from understeer at their
limit but I've never even got close to that limit because you need to
be driving like a psycho on a public road for it to happen, much the
same with the old Porsche.

**Nope. You should drive an OLD 911 on a wet road sometime. You'll
understand.

Been there done that and not had a problem but then I knew not to drive
it like a loonie in the wet.
I had a 1979 911 SC for a couple of weeks, the owner left it with me to
fix a few things and I was given permission to drive it as much as I
liked, fabulous car and I'd have one in a heartbeat, trouble is they are
stupidly expensive, the one I had was bought for about $60k about 8yrs
ago, now its worth around double.
I was talking to the owner of a fully restored 1969 911 at a car show
and I asked how much his car was worth, he told me that he had just
knocked back an offer of $280k, said that the offer wasn't even close.

--
Daryl

Clocky

2024-09-26 21:53:37 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
the MG corners better/faster than the Lancer did. I guess that's
due to the short wheel base and wider tyres.

In part. Suspension kinematics play a greater role these days.
Your current MG has a torsion beam rear suspension, a type that
could not be designed before the advent of computer modelling.
IIRC, your MG3 was the same. As I have stated in the past, they
are a compromise in handling and ride but the coils are easy to
*tune* and the kinematics of the trailing arms are simple but
effective. They are not new. Fiat has used the torsion beam rear
since the early 80s on the Uno since it gives a good *space*
configuration in compact wagons, hatches and SUVs but still
provide good handling. For instance, Peugeot 308 uses the torsion
beam for its handling characteristics. Even the moose test wasn't
a problem;
http://youtu.be/jMzaufUquys
Handling has come a long way.

**Indeed. Back in the early 1980s, I took a mate's Porsche 911T
(2.7L) for a spin. It was, by a considerable margin, the most
exciting, engaging car I had ever driven. Quick, precise and great
handling. A couple of years ago, another mate called in with his
classic Porsche 911T (2.7L). He took me for a spin. What a POS.
Slow, average handling and big disappointment. Same car. 40 years
difference. And torsion bar rear suspension. My 23 year old Stagea
kills the old Porsche in every department. Except for styling. Oh,
and NEVER drive an old Porsche in the wet. You know why. In my
Stagea (AWD), I don't even notice wet roads.

Older Porsches got a reputation as widow makers, hanging on like
glue through corners until suddenly they didn't. A fellow
Australian expat told me that his teenage son, who had just got his
licence, had his eye on an old 911, my advice was, if he was
attached to the boy, don't allow it, if he wasn't, just make sure
that he was well insured

**Yep. A mate showed me the photos of (what was left of) his 911,
after he lost control in the wet and hit a pole. The engine exited
the vehicle and landed some 20 Metres from the rest of the car. Of
course, Rai always like to play on the edge. He hit a police radar
trap doing 250kph. The cops didn't bother chasing him. He thought he
was free and clear, until he came upon a roadblock. He was locked up
in Gouburn lockup for the night.

Sounds like whatever happened was more to do with the drivers lack of
skill and or common sense than a car handling issue.
I've heard it said that WRX's suffer badly from understeer at their
limit but I've never even got close to that limit because you need to
be driving like a psycho on a public road for it to happen, much the
same with the old Porsche.

**Nope. You should drive an OLD 911 on a wet road sometime. You'll
understand.

Not sure how price is relevant to the discussion and there is no way you
really drove that car like you owned it so...

Post by Daryl
I was talking to the owner of a fully restored 1969 911 at a car show
and I asked how much his car was worth, he told me that he had just
knocked back an offer of $280k, said that the offer wasn't even close.

...at a car show. What it's worth is dependent on what the next
speculative investor thinks it's worth. What it's really worth is far
less and you only find that out when the bubble bursts.

--
In thread "May need to buy petrol soon" Sept 23 2021 11:15:59am
Keithr0 wrote: "He made the assertion either he proves it or he is a
proven liar."

On Sept 23 2021 3:16:29pm Keithr0 wrote:
"He asserts that the claim is true, so, if it is unproven, he is lying."

Noddy

2024-09-23 00:21:57 UTC

Post by Trevor Wilson
**Indeed. Back in the early 1980s, I took a mate's Porsche 911T (2.7L)
for a spin. It was, by a considerable margin, the most exciting,
engaging car I had ever driven. Quick, precise and great handling. A
couple of years ago, another mate called in with his classic Porsche
911T (2.7L). He took me for a spin. What a POS. Slow, average handling
and big disappointment. Same car. 40 years difference. And torsion bar
rear suspension. My 23 year old Stagea kills the old Porsche in every
department. Except for styling. Oh, and NEVER drive an old Porsche in
the wet. You know why. In my Stagea (AWD), I don't even notice wet roads.

They suffer from a Pendulum effect. A rear engined car with the engine
behind the transaxle putting all the weight being the rear wheels. Their
big problem is that they give little to no warning when their limits are
reached, and when it is they swap ends *very* quickly.
--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

Xeno

2024-09-23 00:38:35 UTC

Post by Trevor Wilson
**Indeed. Back in the early 1980s, I took a mate's Porsche 911T
(2.7L) for a spin. It was, by a considerable margin, the most
exciting, engaging car I had ever driven. Quick, precise and great
handling. A couple of years ago, another mate called in with his
classic Porsche 911T (2.7L). He took me for a spin. What a POS. Slow,
average handling and big disappointment. Same car. 40 years
difference. And torsion bar rear suspension. My 23 year old Stagea
kills the old Porsche in every department. Except for styling. Oh,
and NEVER drive an old Porsche in the wet. You know why. In my Stagea
(AWD), I don't even notice wet roads.

Older Porsches got a reputation as widow makers, hanging on like glue
through corners until suddenly they didn't. A fellow Australian expat
told me that his teenage son, who had just got his licence, had his
eye on an old 911, my advice was, if he was attached to the boy, don't
allow it, if he wasn't, just make sure that he was well insured

They suffer from a Pendulum effect. A rear engined car with the engine

And you suffer from a narcissistic effect combined with an inferiority
complex - hence all your lies.

Post by Noddy
behind the transaxle putting all the weight being the rear wheels. Their
big problem is that they give little to no warning when their limits are
reached, and when it is they swap ends *very* quickly.

To a novice driver - they give little warning. To a professional, they
give heaps. What most novice drivers can't handle is the power at the
rear wheels which increases the slip angles at the rear tyre contact
points. If you understood the concept of slip angles and the
relationship with applied torque at the wheels, you might have a clue.
You might also realise that it is the tyres that limit the drivers feel
of the slip angles and that is what provides warning of a rear end
breakaway. The wider the tyre, the more sudden the drop off at the
adhesion limits.

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

Trevor Wilson

2024-09-23 21:13:27 UTC

Post by Trevor Wilson
**Indeed. Back in the early 1980s, I took a mate's Porsche 911T
(2.7L) for a spin. It was, by a considerable margin, the most
exciting, engaging car I had ever driven. Quick, precise and great
handling. A couple of years ago, another mate called in with his
classic Porsche 911T (2.7L). He took me for a spin. What a POS.
Slow, average handling and big disappointment. Same car. 40 years
difference. And torsion bar rear suspension. My 23 year old Stagea
kills the old Porsche in every department. Except for styling. Oh,
and NEVER drive an old Porsche in the wet. You know why. In my
Stagea (AWD), I don't even notice wet roads.

Older Porsches got a reputation as widow makers, hanging on like glue
through corners until suddenly they didn't. A fellow Australian expat
told me that his teenage son, who had just got his licence, had his
eye on an old 911, my advice was, if he was attached to the boy,
don't allow it, if he wasn't, just make sure that he was well insured

They suffer from a Pendulum effect. A rear engined car with the engine

And you suffer from a narcissistic effect combined with an inferiority
complex - hence all your lies.

Post by Noddy
behind the transaxle putting all the weight being the rear wheels.
Their big problem is that they give little to no warning when their
limits are reached, and when it is they swap ends *very* quickly.

**Funny thing about tyres. Back in the day (ca. 1976) my Escort was shod
with Avon radials (Turbosteel™ ?). I travelled the same route every
weekday for five years, which involved driving down and up the twisty
bits on the lead up to the Spit Bridge. Naturally, I wanted to see how
fast I could negotiate the corners, edging ever faster each day. One of
my mates invited me to try his Avon tyres. They were crossplys! I though
he was joking. I tried them and found that, although they began to let
go much earlier than the radials, the ultimate level of adhesion was
much higher with the crossplys. They were VERY predictable. I assume
things may have changed by now.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

Noddy

2024-09-24 01:49:00 UTC

Post by Xeno
To a novice driver - they give little warning. To a professional, they
give heaps. What most novice drivers can't handle is the power at the
rear wheels which increases the slip angles at the rear tyre contact
points. If you understood the concept of slip angles and the
relationship with applied torque at the wheels, you might have a clue.
You might also realise that it is the tyres that limit the drivers
feel of the slip angles and that is what provides warning of a rear
end breakaway. The wider the tyre, the more sudden the drop off at the
adhesion limits.

The bullshit train just keeps chugging right along. I would bet the farm
that this deluded mental case has never so much as *sat* in anything
with a "Porsche" badge on it, let alone driven one. This dickhead is a
Marina expert :)

Years ago I remember seeing Alan Jones, the 1980 Formula 1 world
champion, talk about rear engined Porsches and how they could be
extrmely unpredictable cars when it came to breaking loose. Similarly,
Jim Richards, who spent some time racing in the Porsche Cup series, said
the same things, as I'm sure did any other "professional" driver who
spent time in one.

Not according to Dr. Google though :)

Post by Trevor Wilson
**Funny thing about tyres. Back in the day (ca. 1976) my Escort was shod
with Avon radials (Turbosteel™ ?). I travelled the same route every
weekday for five years, which involved driving down and up the twisty
bits on the lead up to the Spit Bridge. Naturally, I wanted to see how
fast I could negotiate the corners, edging ever faster each day. One of
my mates invited me to try his Avon tyres. They were crossplys! I though
he was joking. I tried them and found that, although they began to let
go much earlier than the radials, the ultimate level of adhesion was
much higher with the crossplys. They were VERY predictable. I assume
things may have changed by now.

Not a great heap.

As far as tyres go there are a *hell* of a lot of variables that affect
performance. Radials are very different to crossplys as you mentioned,
but there's more to it than that. Rubber compound, tread width, sidewall
ratio, and even things like rim width relative to the tread footprint
all make an appreciable difference to how well a tyre performs on a
given car.

--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

Spike

2024-09-24 06:36:28 UTC

Post by Xeno
To a novice driver - they give little warning. To a professional,
they give heaps. What most novice drivers can't handle is the power
at the rear wheels which increases the slip angles at the rear tyre
contact points. If you understood the concept of slip angles and the
relationship with applied torque at the wheels, you might have a
clue. You might also realise that it is the tyres that limit the
drivers feel of the slip angles and that is what provides warning of
a rear end breakaway. The wider the tyre, the more sudden the drop
off at the adhesion limits.

The bullshit train just keeps chugging right along.

Well Bumhole (Vic) *does* produce 95% of Australia's bullshit.

Post by Noddy
I would bet the farm

Whilst you garage farm vehicles Fraudster you don't actually own one.

Post by Noddy
that this deluded mental case has never so much as *sat* in anything
with a "Porsche" badge on it, let alone driven one.

HUGE LOL!!!
One of the biggest PKB statements of all time. Well done!

Post by Noddy
Years ago I remember seeing Alan Jones, the 1980 Formula 1 world
champion, talk about rear engined Porsches and how they could be
extrmely unpredictable cars when it came to breaking loose. Similarly,
Jim Richards, who spent some time racing in the Porsche Cup series, said
the same things, as I'm sure did any other "professional" driver who
spent time in one.

Another gigantic lol! You "remember" someone saying something!!! Crikey
Fraudster, you live in some sort of Opposite World. One where you
"remember" things that never happened, but forget things that *did* happen.

Post by Noddy
Not according to Dr. Google though :)

Post by Trevor Wilson
**Funny thing about tyres. Back in the day (ca. 1976) my Escort was
shod with Avon radials (Turbosteel™ ?). I travelled the same route
every weekday for five years, which involved driving down and up the
twisty bits on the lead up to the Spit Bridge. Naturally, I wanted to
see how fast I could negotiate the corners, edging ever faster each
day. One of my mates invited me to try his Avon tyres. They were
crossplys! I though he was joking. I tried them and found that,
although they began to let go much earlier than the radials, the
ultimate level of adhesion was much higher with the crossplys. They
were VERY predictable. I assume things may have changed by now.

Not a great heap.

What are you babbling about here Fraudster? Your Ranga? (aka 'The Great
Heap Ford')

Post by Noddy
As far as tyres go there are a *hell* of a lot of variables that affect
performance. Radials are very different to crossplys as you mentioned,
but there's more to it than that. Rubber compound, tread width, sidewall
ratio, and even things like rim width relative to the tread footprint
all make an appreciable difference to how well a tyre performs on a
given car.

And who can't "remember" your dogmatic claim that the fastest way to
stop a car was to lock up the brakes? Tyres? Pah...

What a clown you are.

alvey

Xeno

2024-09-24 08:56:17 UTC

Post by Xeno
To a novice driver - they give little warning. To a professional,
they give heaps. What most novice drivers can't handle is the power
at the rear wheels which increases the slip angles at the rear tyre
contact points. If you understood the concept of slip angles and the
relationship with applied torque at the wheels, you might have a
clue. You might also realise that it is the tyres that limit the
drivers feel of the slip angles and that is what provides warning of
a rear end breakaway. The wider the tyre, the more sudden the drop
off at the adhesion limits.

No Darren, I am a *qualified motor mechanic*, an achievement you can
only dream about since you didn't even qualify to enter into any
apprenticeship ever.

Every car is predictable. What is unpredictable is the driver's
sensitivity to said breakaway. What you're talking about here are *slip
angles* and the influences, both positive and negative, upon them.

Post by Noddy
Jim Richards, who spent some time racing in the Porsche Cup series, said
the same things, as I'm sure did any other "professional" driver who
spent time in one.
Not according to Dr. Google though :)

Not according to you, huh? You're the only Dr. Google here. BTW, name
dropping won't help you here, it only proves you have been browsing Dr.
Google's efforts.

Post by Trevor Wilson
**Funny thing about tyres. Back in the day (ca. 1976) my Escort was
shod with Avon radials (Turbosteel™ ?). I travelled the same route
every weekday for five years, which involved driving down and up the
twisty bits on the lead up to the Spit Bridge. Naturally, I wanted to
see how fast I could negotiate the corners, edging ever faster each
day. One of my mates invited me to try his Avon tyres. They were
crossplys! I though he was joking. I tried them and found that,
although they began to let go much earlier than the radials, the
ultimate level of adhesion was much higher with the crossplys. They
were VERY predictable. I assume things may have changed by now.

Not a great heap.
As far as tyres go there are a *hell* of a lot of variables that affect
performance. Radials are very different to crossplys as you mentioned,

The difference is in the slip angles Darren and, if you don't understand
how they affect a car, and you've proven you don't, then you haven't
even a basic grasp of *car handling*. But that is only to be expected
from a *failure* like you!

Post by Noddy
but there's more to it than that. Rubber compound, tread width, sidewall
ratio, and even things like rim width relative to the tread footprint
all make an appreciable difference to how well a tyre performs on a
given car.

All factors affecting slip angles. Throw into that mix acceleration,
braking, steering geometry, tyre type, etc. and you'd be getting
somewhere. As it is, you don't even know what slip angles are. Cornering
power Darren, which is defined as cornering force divided by the slip
angle required to generate the force. Involves maths and physics at a
level way beyond the ken of your failed year 9.

But start here anyway;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornering_force

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slip_angle

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

Daryl

2024-09-24 10:09:52 UTC

Post by Trevor Wilson
**Indeed. Back in the early 1980s, I took a mate's Porsche 911T
(2.7L) for a spin. It was, by a considerable margin, the most
exciting, engaging car I had ever driven. Quick, precise and great
handling. A couple of years ago, another mate called in with his
classic Porsche 911T (2.7L). He took me for a spin. What a POS.
Slow, average handling and big disappointment. Same car. 40 years
difference. And torsion bar rear suspension. My 23 year old Stagea
kills the old Porsche in every department. Except for styling. Oh,
and NEVER drive an old Porsche in the wet. You know why. In my
Stagea (AWD), I don't even notice wet roads.

Older Porsches got a reputation as widow makers, hanging on like
glue through corners until suddenly they didn't. A fellow Australian
expat told me that his teenage son, who had just got his licence,
had his eye on an old 911, my advice was, if he was attached to the
boy, don't allow it, if he wasn't, just make sure that he was well
insured

They suffer from a Pendulum effect. A rear engined car with the engine

And you suffer from a narcissistic effect combined with an inferiority
complex - hence all your lies.

Post by Noddy
behind the transaxle putting all the weight being the rear wheels.
Their big problem is that they give little to no warning when their
limits are reached, and when it is they swap ends *very* quickly.

To a novice driver - they give little warning. To a professional, they
give heaps. What most novice drivers can't handle is the power at the
rear wheels which increases the slip angles at the rear tyre contact
points. If you understood the concept of slip angles and the
relationship with applied torque at the wheels, you might have a clue.
You might also realise that it is the tyres that limit the drivers
feel of the slip angles and that is what provides warning of a rear
end breakaway. The wider the tyre, the more sudden the drop off at the
adhesion limits.

Sounds like the Avon's that were the formula Ford control tyres, used to
be able to get them cheap after the pro race teams had used them and
they still had plenty of life left, similar to an R spec tyre which is a
road legal race tyre.

--
Daryl

Daryl

2024-09-24 09:59:39 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
the MG corners better/faster than the Lancer did. I guess that's due
to the short wheel base and wider tyres.

In part. Suspension kinematics play a greater role these days. Your
current MG has a torsion beam rear suspension, a type that could not
be designed before the advent of computer modelling. IIRC, your MG3
was the same. As I have stated in the past, they are a compromise in
handling and ride but the coils are easy to *tune* and the kinematics
of the trailing arms are simple but effective. They are not new. Fiat
has used the torsion beam rear since the early 80s on the Uno since
it gives a good *space* configuration in compact wagons, hatches and
SUVs but still provide good handling. For instance, Peugeot 308 uses
the torsion beam for its handling characteristics. Even the moose
test wasn't a problem;
http://youtu.be/jMzaufUquys
Handling has come a long way.

Lift of oversteer is a well known characteristic of older Porsches,
anyone who has half a brain should know about that well before they got
behind the wheel, when driven with that in mind not much of a similar
vintage will keep up.

--
Daryl

Keithr0

2024-09-24 10:19:51 UTC

Post by Keithr0
Older Porsches got a reputation as widow makers, hanging on like glue
through corners until suddenly they didn't. A fellow Australian expat
told me that his teenage son, who had just got his licence, had his
eye on an old 911, my advice was, if he was attached to the boy, don't
allow it, if he wasn't, just make sure that he was well insured

Trouble is that 911s are rich mens toys, but money doesn't buy skill or
common sense.

Daryl

2024-09-24 10:35:25 UTC

Post by Keithr0
Older Porsches got a reputation as widow makers, hanging on like glue
through corners until suddenly they didn't. A fellow Australian expat
told me that his teenage son, who had just got his licence, had his
eye on an old 911, my advice was, if he was attached to the boy,
don't allow it, if he wasn't, just make sure that he was well insured

Lift of oversteer is a well known characteristic of older Porsches,
anyone who has half a brain should know about that well before they
got behind the wheel, when driven with that in mind not much of a
similar vintage will keep up.

Trouble is that 911s are rich mens toys, but money doesn't buy skill or
common sense.

Pretty much, same goes for almost any exotic car.
At least Porsche engineered the snap oversteer problem out of 911's many
years ago.

--
Daryl

Noddy

2024-09-24 11:37:37 UTC

Post by Daryl
Lift of oversteer is a well known characteristic of older Porsches,
anyone who has half a brain should know about that well before they
got behind the wheel, when driven with that in mind not much of a
similar vintage will keep up.

Trouble is that 911s are rich mens toys, but money doesn't buy skill or
common sense.

You could say the exact same thing about any other overpriced exotic.
The difference being that every other overpriced exotic isn't anywhere
near as fragile in the handling department as a 911 Porsche :)
--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

Xeno

2024-09-24 12:03:41 UTC

Post by Keithr0
Older Porsches got a reputation as widow makers, hanging on like glue
through corners until suddenly they didn't. A fellow Australian expat
told me that his teenage son, who had just got his licence, had his
eye on an old 911, my advice was, if he was attached to the boy,
don't allow it, if he wasn't, just make sure that he was well insured

Lift of oversteer is a well known characteristic of older Porsches,
anyone who has half a brain should know about that well before they
got behind the wheel, when driven with that in mind not much of a
similar vintage will keep up.

Trouble is that 911s are rich mens toys, but money doesn't buy skill or
common sense.

That's pretty much it. The Porsche 911, by default, is an understeerer.
All cars are designed thus. What changes that equation is the *power*
delivered to the rear wheels which *changes* (increases) the slip angles
and that results in an effective *power oversteer*. Plenty of video
clips on youtube showing hoons losing control once they've booted their
cars. They boot it, start losing control, then lose their shit and back
right off, and worsen the situation.

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

Noddy

2024-09-24 11:36:04 UTC

Lift off oversteer was a problem that affected many cars, but it wasn't
the 911's biggest problem. The 911's biggest problem was weight bias. On
the early cars it was appallingly bad towards the rear, which made them
great for acceleration traction, but terrible for high speed cornering.
Having a big chuck of weight behind the rear axle meant that the rear
tyres got *very* heavily loaded on turns, and when they reached their
limit the back came around *very* quickly and was almost always
unrecoverable.

It was a consequence of their design, being based on one of the worst
handling cars ever made, the Volkswagen Beetle, and it's precisely why
Porsche wanted to drop the overhanging rear engine for decades.The only
reason they didn't was because the fans revolted.
--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

Daryl

2024-09-25 07:00:58 UTC

Post by Keithr0
Older Porsches got a reputation as widow makers, hanging on like glue
through corners until suddenly they didn't. A fellow Australian expat
told me that his teenage son, who had just got his licence, had his
eye on an old 911, my advice was, if he was attached to the boy,
don't allow it, if he wasn't, just make sure that he was well insured

Lift of oversteer is a well known characteristic of older Porsches,
anyone who has half a brain should know about that well before they
got behind the wheel, when driven with that in mind not much of a
similar vintage will keep up.

Lift off oversteer was a problem that affected many cars, but it wasn't
the 911's biggest problem. The 911's biggest problem was weight bias. On
the early cars it was appallingly bad towards the rear, which made them
great for acceleration traction, but terrible for high speed cornering.
Having a big chuck of weight behind the rear axle meant that the rear
tyres got *very* heavily loaded on turns, and when they reached their
limit the back came around *very* quickly and was almost always
unrecoverable.
It was a consequence of their design, being based on one of the worst
handling cars ever made, the Volkswagen Beetle, and it's precisely why
Porsche wanted to drop the overhanging rear engine for decades.The only
reason they didn't was because the fans revolted.

At least they started making mid engined cars as well as 911's.
Later model Boxsters and Caymans got more powerful engines so they are
pretty much as quick as a 911 at a lower price, they also handle much
better than a 911.
The sales figures I found shows 911's outselling Boxster/Cayman about 2
to 1 but Cayenne SUV sales are approx double the other models combined.

--
Daryl

Noddy

2024-09-25 08:01:43 UTC

Post by Keithr0
Older Porsches got a reputation as widow makers, hanging on like
glue through corners until suddenly they didn't. A fellow Australian
expat told me that his teenage son, who had just got his licence,
had his eye on an old 911, my advice was, if he was attached to the
boy, don't allow it, if he wasn't, just make sure that he was well
insured

Lift of oversteer is a well known characteristic of older Porsches,
anyone who has half a brain should know about that well before they
got behind the wheel, when driven with that in mind not much of a
similar vintage will keep up.

Lift off oversteer was a problem that affected many cars, but it
wasn't the 911's biggest problem. The 911's biggest problem was weight
bias. On the early cars it was appallingly bad towards the rear, which
made them great for acceleration traction, but terrible for high speed
cornering. Having a big chuck of weight behind the rear axle meant
that the rear tyres got *very* heavily loaded on turns, and when they
reached their limit the back came around *very* quickly and was almost
always unrecoverable.
It was a consequence of their design, being based on one of the worst
handling cars ever made, the Volkswagen Beetle, and it's precisely why
Porsche wanted to drop the overhanging rear engine for decades.The
only reason they didn't was because the fans revolted.

At least they started making mid engined cars as well as 911's.

They did.

Post by Daryl
Later model Boxsters and Caymans got more powerful engines so they are
pretty much as quick as a 911 at a lower price, they also handle much
better than a 911.

I always hated the driving position in the 911. Particularly the earlier
models. The pedals felt wrong, the steering wheel came out of the dash
at a funny angle, and the steering feel itself was odd. They got better
as they got newer, but to me the early ones always felt like a kit car.

Post by Daryl
The sales figures I found shows 911's outselling Boxster/Cayman about 2
to 1 but Cayenne SUV sales are approx double the other models combined.

They appeal to a broader audience I expect.
--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

alvey

2024-09-26 00:59:42 UTC

Post by Noddy
I always hated the driving position in the 911. Particularly the earlier
models. The pedals felt wrong, the steering wheel came out of the dash
at a funny angle, and the steering feel itself was odd. They got better
as they got newer, but to me the early ones always felt like a kit car.

I suppose all the pix of Gibbons behind the wheel of those Porsches are
in that sea-trunk marked 'EMPTY'.

What a clown he is.

alvey

Xeno

2024-09-26 08:56:01 UTC

Post by Noddy
I always hated the driving position in the 911. Particularly the
earlier models. The pedals felt wrong, the steering wheel came out of
the dash at a funny angle, and the steering feel itself was odd. They
got better as they got newer, but to me the early ones always felt
like a kit car.

I suppose all the pix of Gibbons behind the wheel of those Porsches are
in that sea-trunk marked 'EMPTY'.
What a clown he is.
alvey

Darren would have been lucky to have ever sat his arse in a VW chassis
with a pretend Porsche body kit on it.

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

Mighty Mouse

2024-10-05 04:22:15 UTC

Post by Noddy
I always hated the driving position in the 911. Particularly the
earlier models. The pedals felt wrong, the steering wheel came out of
the dash at a funny angle, and the steering feel itself was odd. They
got better as they got newer, but to me the early ones always felt
like a kit car.

I suppose all the pix of Gibbons behind the wheel of those Porsches
are in that sea-trunk marked 'EMPTY'.
What a clown he is.

and another to add to the long list of never to be seen photos.. his
Honda sponsored trip to Japan. one would think there would be a group
shot of attendees at least, and some happy touristy shots.

Post by alvey
alvey

--
Have a nice day!..
stay sane, be happy, and enjoy living.

Xeno

2024-10-05 04:45:38 UTC

Post by Noddy
I always hated the driving position in the 911. Particularly the
earlier models. The pedals felt wrong, the steering wheel came out of
the dash at a funny angle, and the steering feel itself was odd. They
got better as they got newer, but to me the early ones always felt
like a kit car.

I suppose all the pix of Gibbons behind the wheel of those Porsches
are in that sea-trunk marked 'EMPTY'.
What a clown he is.

and another to add to the long list of never to be seen photos.. his
Honda sponsored trip to Japan. one would think there would be a group
shot of attendees at least, and some happy touristy shots.

Happy touristy shots? With Darren there? Not a hope, grimaces all round.

Post by alvey
alvey

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

Keithr0

2024-10-05 09:31:40 UTC

Post by Noddy
I always hated the driving position in the 911. Particularly the
earlier models. The pedals felt wrong, the steering wheel came out of
the dash at a funny angle, and the steering feel itself was odd. They
got better as they got newer, but to me the early ones always felt
like a kit car.

I suppose all the pix of Gibbons behind the wheel of those Porsches
are in that sea-trunk marked 'EMPTY'.
What a clown he is.

and another to add to the long list of never to be seen photos.. his
Honda sponsored trip to Japan. one would think there would be a group
shot of attendees at least, and some happy touristy shots.

Why do you assume that people would have photos of everything that they
ever did, especially from the days before mobile phones with cameras.

Mighty Mouse

2024-10-05 11:20:54 UTC

Post by Noddy
I always hated the driving position in the 911. Particularly the
earlier models. The pedals felt wrong, the steering wheel came out
of the dash at a funny angle, and the steering feel itself was odd.
They got better as they got newer, but to me the early ones always
felt like a kit car.

I suppose all the pix of Gibbons behind the wheel of those Porsches
are in that sea-trunk marked 'EMPTY'.
What a clown he is.

and another to add to the long list of never to be seen photos.. his
Honda sponsored trip to Japan. one would think there would be a group
shot of attendees at least, and some happy touristy shots.

Why do you assume that people would have photos

usually on those corporate ventures lots of photos are taken, if for no
other reason than publicity and advertising.

Post by Keithr0
of everything that they ever did, especially from the days before
mobile phones with cameras.

I have taken photos my entire life, and have heaps dating to early childhood

--
Have a nice day!..
stay sane, be happy, and enjoy living.

Keithr0

2024-10-05 11:47:06 UTC

Post by Noddy
I always hated the driving position in the 911. Particularly the
earlier models. The pedals felt wrong, the steering wheel came out
of the dash at a funny angle, and the steering feel itself was odd.
They got better as they got newer, but to me the early ones always
felt like a kit car.

I suppose all the pix of Gibbons behind the wheel of those Porsches
are in that sea-trunk marked 'EMPTY'.
What a clown he is.

and another to add to the long list of never to be seen photos.. his
Honda sponsored trip to Japan. one would think there would be a group
shot of attendees at least, and some happy touristy shots.

Why do you assume that people would have photos

usually on those corporate ventures lots of photos are taken, if for no
other reason than publicity and advertising.

Post by Keithr0
of everything that they ever did, especially from the days before
mobile phones with cameras.

I have taken photos my entire life, and have heaps dating to early childhood

I've taken 10s of thousands of photos but virtually none relate to my
work life partly because cameras were not welcome in the workplace in a
number of cases.

Noddy

2024-10-05 13:58:25 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
usually on those corporate ventures lots of photos are taken, if for
no other reason than publicity and advertising.

And how exactly would this idiot know this? ↑↑↑↑↑ :)

Post by Keithr0
I've taken 10s of thousands of photos but virtually none relate to my
work life partly because cameras were not welcome in the workplace in a
number of cases.

In the days before phones with built in cameras I hardly ever took any
photos. In fact I never owned a camera until the mid 90's or so, and
hardly ever used it other than to take photos of the WWII Jeep I was
restoring at the time, which was the reason I bought the thing in the
first place. I was never really much into photography and never really
cared for photos, but wanted to photo document that car as it was kind
of "historic". For me, anyway.

Since the advent of phones with high class cameras built in I take
*hundreds* of pictures of virtually everything I do, and 99 times out of
100 it's to help me remember how shit goes back together or how I
performed some particular task so I remember how to go about doing it
next time :)

--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

Xeno

2024-10-05 14:29:39 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
usually on those corporate ventures lots of photos are taken, if for
no other reason than publicity and advertising.

And how exactly would this idiot know this? ↑↑↑↑↑ :)

Post by Keithr0
I've taken 10s of thousands of photos but virtually none relate to my
work life partly because cameras were not welcome in the workplace in
a number of cases.

In the days before phones with built in cameras I hardly ever took any
photos. In fact I never owned a camera until the mid 90's or so, and
hardly ever used it other than to take photos of the WWII Jeep I was
restoring at the time, which was the reason I bought the thing in the
first place. I was never really much into photography and never really
cared for photos, but wanted to photo document that car as it was kind
of "historic". For me, anyway.
Since the advent of phones with high class cameras built in I take
*hundreds* of pictures of virtually everything I do, and 99 times out of
100 it's to help me remember how shit goes back together or how I
performed some particular task so I remember how to go about doing it
next time :)

But no document(s) to prove your trade qualification claims.

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

Mighty Mouse

2024-10-05 23:40:16 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
usually on those corporate ventures lots of photos are taken, if
for no other reason than publicity and advertising.

And how exactly would this idiot know this? ↑↑↑↑↑ :)

Post by Keithr0
I've taken 10s of thousands of photos but virtually none relate to
my work life partly because cameras were not welcome in the
workplace in a number of cases.

In the days before phones with built in cameras I hardly ever took
any photos. In fact I never owned a camera until the mid 90's or so,
and hardly ever used it other than to take photos of the WWII Jeep I
was restoring at the time, which was the reason I bought the thing in
the first place. I was never really much into photography and never
really cared for photos, but wanted to photo document that car as it
was kind of "historic". For me, anyway.
Since the advent of phones with high class cameras built in I take
*hundreds* of pictures of virtually everything I do, and 99 times out
of 100 it's to help me remember how shit goes back together or how I
performed some particular task so I remember how to go about doing it
next time :)

But no document(s) to prove your trade qualification claims.

I have always been into photography. used to develop my own photos. the
Agfa Clack was one of my first cameras

http://www.alexluyckx.com/blog/2022/07/04/camera-review-blog-no-145-agfa-clack/

Agfa was a big name in photography at the time

--
Have a nice day!..
stay sane, be happy, and enjoy living.

Xeno

2024-10-06 02:17:26 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
usually on those corporate ventures lots of photos are taken, if
for no other reason than publicity and advertising.

And how exactly would this idiot know this? ↑↑↑↑↑ :)

Post by Keithr0
I've taken 10s of thousands of photos but virtually none relate to
my work life partly because cameras were not welcome in the
workplace in a number of cases.

In the days before phones with built in cameras I hardly ever took
any photos. In fact I never owned a camera until the mid 90's or so,
and hardly ever used it other than to take photos of the WWII Jeep I
was restoring at the time, which was the reason I bought the thing in
the first place. I was never really much into photography and never
really cared for photos, but wanted to photo document that car as it
was kind of "historic". For me, anyway.
Since the advent of phones with high class cameras built in I take
*hundreds* of pictures of virtually everything I do, and 99 times out
of 100 it's to help me remember how shit goes back together or how I
performed some particular task so I remember how to go about doing it
next time :)

But no document(s) to prove your trade qualification claims.

I have always been into photography. used to develop my own photos. the
Agfa Clack was one of my first cameras
http://www.alexluyckx.com/blog/2022/07/04/camera-review-blog-no-145-
agfa-clack/
Agfa was a big name in photography at the time

I have one of those in a cupboard here somewhere - if I haven't tossed
it out. Still in its original leather case too.

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

Mighty Mouse

2024-10-06 05:06:44 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
usually on those corporate ventures lots of photos are taken, if
for no other reason than publicity and advertising.

And how exactly would this idiot know this? ↑↑↑↑↑ :)

Post by Keithr0
I've taken 10s of thousands of photos but virtually none relate to
my work life partly because cameras were not welcome in the
workplace in a number of cases.

In the days before phones with built in cameras I hardly ever took
any photos. In fact I never owned a camera until the mid 90's or
so, and hardly ever used it other than to take photos of the WWII
Jeep I was restoring at the time, which was the reason I bought the
thing in the first place. I was never really much into photography
and never really cared for photos, but wanted to photo document
that car as it was kind of "historic". For me, anyway.
Since the advent of phones with high class cameras built in I take
*hundreds* of pictures of virtually everything I do, and 99 times
out of 100 it's to help me remember how shit goes back together or
how I performed some particular task so I remember how to go about
doing it next time :)

But no document(s) to prove your trade qualification claims.

I have always been into photography. used to develop my own photos.
the Agfa Clack was one of my first cameras
http://www.alexluyckx.com/blog/2022/07/04/camera-review-blog-no-145-
agfa-clack/
Agfa was a big name in photography at the time

I have one of those in a cupboard here somewhere - if I haven't tossed
it out. Still in its original leather case too.

$60 on ebay. more with the case

--
Have a nice day!..
stay sane, be happy, and enjoy living.

alvey

2024-10-05 20:53:51 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
usually on those corporate ventures lots of photos are taken, if for
no other reason than publicity and advertising.

And how exactly would this idiot know this? ↑↑↑↑↑ :)

Post by Keithr0
I've taken 10s of thousands of photos but virtually none relate to my
work life partly because cameras were not welcome in the workplace in
a number of cases.

In the days before phones with built in cameras I hardly ever took any
photos.

I believe you Fraudster. Honest.

snip bullshit

Clocky

2024-10-06 08:02:00 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
usually on those corporate ventures lots of photos are taken, if for
no other reason than publicity and advertising.

And how exactly would this idiot know this? ↑↑↑↑↑ :)

Post by Keithr0
I've taken 10s of thousands of photos but virtually none relate to my
work life partly because cameras were not welcome in the workplace in
a number of cases.

In the days before phones with built in cameras I hardly ever took any
photos.

I believe you Fraudster. Honest.

If you look hard enough there will most likely be a post by Mr. Diabetes
that directly contradicts what he said.

Daryl

2024-10-06 03:47:51 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
usually on those corporate ventures lots of photos are taken, if for
no other reason than publicity and advertising.

And how exactly would this idiot know this? ↑↑↑↑↑ :)

Post by Keithr0
I've taken 10s of thousands of photos but virtually none relate to my
work life partly because cameras were not welcome in the workplace in
a number of cases.

In the days before phones with built in cameras I hardly ever took any
photos. In fact I never owned a camera until the mid 90's or so, and
hardly ever used it other than to take photos of the WWII Jeep I was
restoring at the time, which was the reason I bought the thing in the
first place. I was never really much into photography and never really
cared for photos, but wanted to photo document that car as it was kind
of "historic". For me, anyway.
Since the advent of phones with high class cameras built in I take
*hundreds* of pictures of virtually everything I do, and 99 times out of
100 it's to help me remember how shit goes back together or how I
performed some particular task so I remember how to go about doing it
next time :)

Last photo I took was a week or so ago and it was of the rotor button
position on one of Les's race cars so I could put it back in exactly the
same place after removing the distributor.
Had to remove the engine to get the gearbox out to replace all the
syncros, finished it yesterday and the box now shifts perfectly:-)
Photo before that was of Hilux gearbox selectors from the box I was
replacing 3rd gear syncos on.
Thank fuck for youtube and Google, when I was putting the Hilux box back
together I had one small pin leftover that I couldn't find a spot for,
found a good video and was then able to work out where it went:-)

--
Daryl

Noddy

2024-10-06 04:10:40 UTC

Post by Noddy
Since the advent of phones with high class cameras built in I take
*hundreds* of pictures of virtually everything I do, and 99 times out
of 100 it's to help me remember how shit goes back together or how I
performed some particular task so I remember how to go about doing it
next time :)

Last photo I took was a week or so ago and it was of the rotor button
position on one of Les's race cars so I could put it back in exactly the
same place after removing the distributor.

Phones are *great* for that. Especially as you get older and are less
likely to remember everything in exact detail. More so when there is a
considerable length of time between the dismantling and reassembly as is
often the case with me.

Post by Daryl
Had to remove the engine to get the gearbox out to replace all the
syncros, finished it yesterday and the box now shifts perfectly:-)

Nice :)

Post by Daryl
Photo before that was of Hilux gearbox selectors from the box I was
replacing 3rd gear syncos on.
Thank fuck for youtube and Google, when I was putting the Hilux box back
together I had one small pin leftover that I couldn't find a spot for,
found a good video and was then able to work out where it went:-)

Yeah, some of the vids can be a life saver. Some are just amusement value :)

My kid's school has a metal working shop where they teach kids basic
machining operations on lathes and mills, and one of the teachers has
asked me to put photos up of some of the stuff I do on a publicly
accessible picture hosting site so they can be used for educational
purposes. It's not just me. They do it with a few locals. A couple of
engineering companies with bigger projects, and a couple of privateers.
They get to look at a wide variety of projects and see things being done
from a few different perspectives. It's educational and I don't have a
problem with it, but I find myself taking a *lot* of photos as a result.

The last one was only a few days ago which was repairing a broken cast
iron crank pulley using tig welded Silicone Bronze which was a first for
me. It turned out well and I'm pretty happy with it, and I'll upload the
photos in a day or two and hopefully the kids will get some benefit out
of it as well.

--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

Daryl

2024-10-06 05:47:44 UTC

Last photo I took was a week or so ago and it was of the rotor button
position on one of Les's race cars so I could put it back in exactly
the same place after removing the distributor.

Post by Daryl
Had to remove the engine to get the gearbox out to replace all the
syncros, finished it yesterday and the box now shifts perfectly:-)

Nice :)

Post by Daryl
Photo before that was of Hilux gearbox selectors from the box I was
replacing 3rd gear syncos on.
Thank fuck for youtube and Google, when I was putting the Hilux box
back together I had one small pin leftover that I couldn't find a spot
for, found a good video and was then able to work out where it went:-)

Yeah, some of the vids can be a life saver. Some are just amusement value :)
My kid's school has a metal working shop where they teach kids basic
machining operations on lathes and mills, and one of the teachers has
asked me to put photos up of some of the stuff I do on a publicly
accessible picture hosting site so they can be used for educational
purposes. It's not just me. They do it with a few locals. A couple of
engineering companies with bigger projects, and a couple of privateers.
They get to look at a wide variety of projects and see things being done
from a few different perspectives. It's educational and I don't have a
problem with it, but I find myself taking a *lot* of photos as a result.
The last one was only a few days ago which was repairing a broken cast
iron crank pulley using tig welded Silicone Bronze which was a first for
me. It turned out well and I'm pretty happy with it, and I'll upload the
photos in a day or two and hopefully the kids will get some benefit out
of it as well.

Sounds like fun, so many different welding techniques available now.
I've never been much of a welder so I'm amazed with what some people can
weld.
Les and I recently helped out a bloke who had crashed his Lotus 7 race
car, we pulled it apart to see what needs replacing or repairing, one of
the things that broke was the RHF suspension upright which is cast
aluminum, it snapped just above the bottom ball joint.
Its a fairly rare part so he's been asking around about it and several
people have suggested welding it, the owner doesn't like the idea and
neither do I but one of the people who suggested welding has apparently
done it successfully before.
Does welding an upright sound feasible to you?
I'd be too scared of it breaking at high speed on the track?
Is it possible that the weld could be stronger than the OE casting?

--
Daryl

Xeno

2024-10-06 09:18:04 UTC

Post by Noddy
Since the advent of phones with high class cameras built in I take
*hundreds* of pictures of virtually everything I do, and 99 times
out of 100 it's to help me remember how shit goes back together or
how I performed some particular task so I remember how to go about
doing it next time :)

Last photo I took was a week or so ago and it was of the rotor button
position on one of Les's race cars so I could put it back in exactly
the same place after removing the distributor.

Post by Daryl
Had to remove the engine to get the gearbox out to replace all the
syncros, finished it yesterday and the box now shifts perfectly:-)

Nice :)

Post by Daryl
Photo before that was of Hilux gearbox selectors from the box I was
replacing 3rd gear syncos on.
Thank fuck for youtube and Google, when I was putting the Hilux box
back together I had one small pin leftover that I couldn't find a
spot for, found a good video and was then able to work out where it
went:-)

Yeah, some of the vids can be a life saver. Some are just amusement value :)
My kid's school has a metal working shop where they teach kids basic
machining operations on lathes and mills, and one of the teachers has
asked me to put photos up of some of the stuff I do on a publicly
accessible picture hosting site so they can be used for educational
purposes. It's not just me. They do it with a few locals. A couple of
engineering companies with bigger projects, and a couple of
privateers. They get to look at a wide variety of projects and see
things being done from a few different perspectives. It's educational
and I don't have a problem with it, but I find myself taking a *lot*
of photos as a result.
The last one was only a few days ago which was repairing a broken cast
iron crank pulley using tig welded Silicone Bronze which was a first
for me. It turned out well and I'm pretty happy with it, and I'll
upload the photos in a day or two and hopefully the kids will get some
benefit out of it as well.

Smart man! Don't let Darren near it either.

Post by Daryl
neither do I but one of the people who suggested welding has apparently
done it successfully before.

Welding cast aluminium will give you problems. Welding *any* suspension
parts is a really bad idea.

Post by Daryl
Does welding an upright sound feasible to you?

The term you use is confusing. To me it sounds like you are talking
about the *steering knuckle*. (What did you learn in your
apprenticeship? Not much I'll wager!) Anyway, welding a steering knuckle
is *never a good idea*. Ditto for control arms and steering arms.

Post by Daryl
I'd be too scared of it breaking at high speed on the track?

I was hoping you would be too wise to do something as stupid as welding
up a steering knuckle in the first place. More so on a *track car*!

Post by Daryl
Is it possible that the weld could be stronger than the OE casting?

Short answer - no. It will be weaker. The reason is simple - the
steering knuckle and upper and lower control arms are not usually *cast*
alloy. Instead they are *forged* and, as such, they will have a much
improved grain structure in the metal which will also be finer than
anything done by casting. That grain structure also gives the component
a lot of its strength. If the part is broken, you can make two
assumptions - the component was *overstressed* and/or it was subjected
to fatigue failure. It happens to suspension parts you know! All that
stress, all that bouncing up and down, not good for longevity! What
caused it to break before - stress, fatigue - will still be present and
you will, by welding it, create a weaker component by screwing up the
grain structure and the temper of the part. What's more, suspension
components are *heat treated *at the factory*. You weld anywhere and you
will totally screw up any factory heat treatment - and that even applies
to forged steel components.
On that score, think of *forged steel steering arms*. You are not
supposed to heat them at all. If you need to bend a steering arm at all
in order to straighten it, it has to be done *cold* and there's a *hard
limit* on the number of degrees it can be bent. Yes, I know, people heat
and bend these steering arms at times, I get that, but it won't be
happening on any car I'm driving or fixing. Just think what is likely to
happen when a steering arm snaps off at high speed. I guarantee you
won't be casually rolling to a stop! Now think what would happen if the
steering knuckle breaks at high speed.

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

Mighty Mouse

2024-10-06 12:30:09 UTC

Post by Noddy
Since the advent of phones with high class cameras built in I take
*hundreds* of pictures of virtually everything I do, and 99 times
out of 100 it's to help me remember how shit goes back together or
how I performed some particular task so I remember how to go about
doing it next time :)

Last photo I took was a week or so ago and it was of the rotor
button position on one of Les's race cars so I could put it back in
exactly the same place after removing the distributor.

Phones are *great* for that. Especially as you get older and are
less likely to remember everything in exact detail. More so when
there is a considerable length of time between the dismantling and
reassembly as is often the case with me.

Post by Daryl
Had to remove the engine to get the gearbox out to replace all the
syncros, finished it yesterday and the box now shifts perfectly:-)

Nice :)

Post by Daryl
Photo before that was of Hilux gearbox selectors from the box I was
replacing 3rd gear syncos on.
Thank fuck for youtube and Google, when I was putting the Hilux box
back together I had one small pin leftover that I couldn't find a
spot for, found a good video and was then able to work out where it
went:-)

Yeah, some of the vids can be a life saver. Some are just amusement value :)
My kid's school has a metal working shop where they teach kids basic
machining operations on lathes and mills, and one of the teachers
has asked me to put photos up of some of the stuff I do on a
publicly accessible picture hosting site so they can be used for
educational purposes. It's not just me. They do it with a few
locals. A couple of engineering companies with bigger projects, and
a couple of privateers. They get to look at a wide variety of
projects and see things being done from a few different
perspectives. It's educational and I don't have a problem with it,
but I find myself taking a *lot* of photos as a result.
The last one was only a few days ago which was repairing a broken
cast iron crank pulley using tig welded Silicone Bronze which was a
first for me. It turned out well and I'm pretty happy with it, and
I'll upload the photos in a day or two and hopefully the kids will
get some benefit out of it as well.

Smart man! Don't let Darren near it either.

Post by Daryl
neither do I but one of the people who suggested welding has
apparently done it successfully before.

Welding cast aluminium will give you problems. Welding *any*
suspension parts is a really bad idea.

even I know that

Post by Daryl
Does welding an upright sound feasible to you?

The term you use is confusing. To me it sounds like you are talking
about the *steering knuckle*. (What did you learn in your
apprenticeship? Not much I'll wager!) Anyway, welding a steering
knuckle is *never a good idea*. Ditto for control arms and steering arms.

Post by Daryl
I'd be too scared of it breaking at high speed on the track?

I was hoping you would be too wise to do something as stupid as
welding up a steering knuckle in the first place. More so on a *track
car*!

Post by Daryl
Is it possible that the weld could be stronger than the OE casting?

it's the same with golf iron heads. forged irons can to bent to change
loft and lie angles. cast heads can sometimes be bent a little,
depending on the design, but it's very risky as they break easily, as I
discovered many years ago.

Mizuno make the finest forged iron head ..
https://mizunogolf.com/au/art-of-forging/

Post by Xeno
If the part is broken, you can make two assumptions - the component
was *overstressed* and/or it was subjected to fatigue failure. It
happens to suspension parts you know! All that stress, all that
bouncing up and down, not good for longevity! What caused it to break
before - stress, fatigue - will still be present and you will, by
welding it, create a weaker component by screwing up the grain
structure and the temper of the part. What's more, suspension
components are *heat treated *at the factory*. You weld anywhere and
you will totally screw up any factory heat treatment - and that even
applies to forged steel components.
On that score, think of *forged steel steering arms*. You are not
supposed to heat them at all. If you need to bend a steering arm at
all in order to straighten it, it has to be done *cold* and there's a
*hard limit* on the number of degrees it can be bent. Yes, I know,
people heat and bend these steering arms at times, I get that, but it
won't be happening on any car I'm driving or fixing. Just think what
is likely to happen when a steering arm snaps off at high speed. I
guarantee you won't be casually rolling to a stop! Now think what
would happen if the steering knuckle breaks at high speed.

welding steering parts is a big no-no

--
Have a nice day!..
stay sane, be happy, and enjoy living.

Noddy

2024-10-06 11:33:44 UTC

Post by Noddy
The last one was only a few days ago which was repairing a broken cast
iron crank pulley using tig welded Silicone Bronze which was a first
for me. It turned out well and I'm pretty happy with it, and I'll
upload the photos in a day or two and hopefully the kids will get some
benefit out of it as well.

Sounds nasty.

Post by Daryl
Its a fairly rare part so he's been asking around about it and several
people have suggested welding it, the owner doesn't like the idea and
neither do I but one of the people who suggested welding has apparently
done it successfully before.
Does welding an upright sound feasible to you?

It's something I'd need to look at before making a call. It could be. It
would depend a hell of a lot on the composition of the component.

Post by Daryl
I'd be too scared of it breaking at high speed on the track?
Is it possible that the weld could be stronger than the OE casting?

I'm not sure about it being stronger, but it could possibly be as strong
as an original part. It would all depend on whether the part was a
casting or a forging.

Cast alloy is reasonably strong, but it can be a complete pig to weld
well because of the typically horrendous make up of the material itself.
Apart from Aluminium, you get other materials in the mix such as tin,
iron, copper, Silicone, magnesium and zinc, which all exist as alloying
elements. They do their job in melding it all together to allow the part
to be cast and machined, but the material is quite "dirty" from a
welder's standpoint making it quite difficult to get a good, solid weld.

Forgings on the other hand are quite different. Forged alloy components
tend to be fairly pure which makes weld integrity a lot easier to
achieve. I would suspect that as cast alloy can be quite brittle and
doesn't like a lot of shock loading that the part is most likely a
forging, in which case the success rate of a weld repair is
significantly greater. As to how effective that repair would ultimately
be would depend entirely on the person doing the repair :)

Would I do it? Short answer is "dunno".

I'd need to look at it and see where it's broken, if it could be pinned
to support the weld or if it's installed state would allow for any
reinforcement laid over the top as a "backup". They're a fairly light
car and used on a smooth track I would think the loads would be mostly
in the vertical and not outrageous, so there's a reasonable chance that
it could be repaired provided it's not completely mangled.

If it were my car I'd probably look long and hard for a replacement
first though :)

--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

Xeno

2024-10-06 12:13:46 UTC

Post by Noddy
The last one was only a few days ago which was repairing a broken
cast iron crank pulley using tig welded Silicone Bronze which was a
first for me. It turned out well and I'm pretty happy with it, and
I'll upload the photos in a day or two and hopefully the kids will
get some benefit out of it as well.

Sounds nasty.

Post by Daryl
Its a fairly rare part so he's been asking around about it and several
people have suggested welding it, the owner doesn't like the idea and
neither do I but one of the people who suggested welding has
apparently done it successfully before.
Does welding an upright sound feasible to you?

It's something I'd need to look at before making a call. It could be. It
would depend a hell of a lot on the composition of the component.

Post by Daryl
I'd be too scared of it breaking at high speed on the track?
Is it possible that the weld could be stronger than the OE casting?

You probably find it would be *unethical* if not downright illegal.

Post by Noddy
I'd need to look at it and see where it's broken, if it could be pinned
to support the weld or if it's installed state would allow for any
reinforcement laid over the top as a "backup". They're a fairly light
car and used on a smooth track I would think the loads would be mostly
in the vertical and not outrageous, so there's a reasonable chance that
it could be repaired provided it's not completely mangled.

What? Loads *mostly in the vertical*? WTF are you smoking? It's a
*steering knuckle* and, as such, it has loadings every which way! Think
about the loadings when *cornering*! The fact it snapped right above the
lower ball joint should be *more than enough* to indicate that the
knuckle is subjected to severe lateral loadings.

Post by Noddy
If it were my car I'd probably look long and hard for a replacement
first though :)

Man, the motor trade really needs licencing to keep lying fraudulent
pricks like you out of it.

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

Mighty Mouse

2024-10-06 12:35:48 UTC

Post by Noddy
The last one was only a few days ago which was repairing a broken
cast iron crank pulley using tig welded Silicone Bronze which was a
first for me. It turned out well and I'm pretty happy with it, and
I'll upload the photos in a day or two and hopefully the kids will
get some benefit out of it as well.

Sounds nasty.

Post by Daryl
Its a fairly rare part so he's been asking around about it and
several people have suggested welding it, the owner doesn't like the
idea and neither do I but one of the people who suggested welding
has apparently done it successfully before.
Does welding an upright sound feasible to you?

It's something I'd need to look at before making a call. It could be.
It would depend a hell of a lot on the composition of the component.

Post by Daryl
I'd be too scared of it breaking at high speed on the track?
Is it possible that the weld could be stronger than the OE casting?

You probably find it would be *unethical* if not downright illegal.

Post by Noddy
I'd need to look at it and see where it's broken, if it could be
pinned to support the weld or if it's installed state would allow for
any reinforcement laid over the top as a "backup". They're a fairly
light car and used on a smooth track I would think the loads would be
mostly in the vertical and not outrageous, so there's a reasonable
chance that it could be repaired provided it's not completely mangled.

What? Loads *mostly in the vertical*? WTF are you smoking? It's a
*steering knuckle* and, as such, it has loadings every which way!
Think about the loadings when *cornering*! The fact it snapped right
above the lower ball joint should be *more than enough* to indicate
that the knuckle is subjected to severe lateral loadings.

LOL! noddy proves (again) why as an automotive repairer he should be
avoided like the plague.

Post by Noddy
If it were my car I'd probably look long and hard for a replacement
first though :)

Man, the motor trade really needs licencing to keep lying fraudulent
pricks like you out of it.

--
Have a nice day!..
stay sane, be happy, and enjoy living.

Xeno

2024-10-07 00:17:12 UTC

Post by Noddy
The last one was only a few days ago which was repairing a broken
cast iron crank pulley using tig welded Silicone Bronze which was a
first for me. It turned out well and I'm pretty happy with it, and
I'll upload the photos in a day or two and hopefully the kids will
get some benefit out of it as well.

Sounds nasty.

Post by Daryl
Its a fairly rare part so he's been asking around about it and
several people have suggested welding it, the owner doesn't like the
idea and neither do I but one of the people who suggested welding
has apparently done it successfully before.
Does welding an upright sound feasible to you?

It's something I'd need to look at before making a call. It could be.
It would depend a hell of a lot on the composition of the component.

Post by Daryl
I'd be too scared of it breaking at high speed on the track?
Is it possible that the weld could be stronger than the OE casting?

You probably find it would be *unethical* if not downright illegal.

Post by Noddy
I'd need to look at it and see where it's broken, if it could be
pinned to support the weld or if it's installed state would allow for
any reinforcement laid over the top as a "backup". They're a fairly
light car and used on a smooth track I would think the loads would be
mostly in the vertical and not outrageous, so there's a reasonable
chance that it could be repaired provided it's not completely mangled.

What? Loads *mostly in the vertical*? WTF are you smoking? It's a
*steering knuckle* and, as such, it has loadings every which way!
Think about the loadings when *cornering*! The fact it snapped right
above the lower ball joint should be *more than enough* to indicate
that the knuckle is subjected to severe lateral loadings.

LOL! noddy proves (again) why as an automotive repairer he should be
avoided like the plague.

The upper joint is a friction joint, non load carrying, and is purely
for location of the upper end of the knuckle. It will have some side
thrust loads but nothing like that experienced by the lower ball joint.

Here's a good schematic of a typical steering knuckle;

Loading Image...

Note how the axle is biased to the lower joint. That lower joint has the
force of the spring applied to it whereas the top joint is free floating
- purely for location. Look at the pic and just imagine where the forces
are being applied when cornering at high speed *on the track*. The
steering knuckle in question broke right near the ball joint - exactly
wher I would expect it to - given the forces acting upon it.

Post by Noddy
If it were my car I'd probably look long and hard for a replacement
first though :)

Man, the motor trade really needs licencing to keep lying fraudulent
pricks like you out of it.

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

Mighty Mouse

2024-10-07 04:52:10 UTC

Post by Noddy
The last one was only a few days ago which was repairing a broken
cast iron crank pulley using tig welded Silicone Bronze which was
a first for me. It turned out well and I'm pretty happy with it,
and I'll upload the photos in a day or two and hopefully the kids
will get some benefit out of it as well.

Sounds nasty.

Post by Daryl
Its a fairly rare part so he's been asking around about it and
several people have suggested welding it, the owner doesn't like
the idea and neither do I but one of the people who suggested
welding has apparently done it successfully before.
Does welding an upright sound feasible to you?

It's something I'd need to look at before making a call. It could
be. It would depend a hell of a lot on the composition of the
component.

Post by Daryl
I'd be too scared of it breaking at high speed on the track?
Is it possible that the weld could be stronger than the OE casting?

You probably find it would be *unethical* if not downright illegal.

Post by Noddy
I'd need to look at it and see where it's broken, if it could be
pinned to support the weld or if it's installed state would allow
for any reinforcement laid over the top as a "backup". They're a
fairly light car and used on a smooth track I would think the loads
would be mostly in the vertical and not outrageous, so there's a
reasonable chance that it could be repaired provided it's not
completely mangled.

What? Loads *mostly in the vertical*? WTF are you smoking? It's a
*steering knuckle* and, as such, it has loadings every which way!
Think about the loadings when *cornering*! The fact it snapped right
above the lower ball joint should be *more than enough* to indicate
that the knuckle is subjected to severe lateral loadings.

LOL! noddy proves (again) why as an automotive repairer he should be
avoided like the plague.

For sure he never studied steering and suspensions at TAFE during any
apprenticeship ever. The absolute epitome of a little knowledge being
a dangerous thing. Anyone who says this of a steering knuckle;
"They're a fairly light car and used on a smooth track I would think
the loads would be mostly in the vertical and not outrageous" simply
has no idea of the loads generated at the steering knuckle. The lower
ball joint is, typically, the load carrying joint so, yes, it will
carry vertical compression or tension loads but it will be subjected
to extreme side thrusts during any cornering - and race cars do
extreme cornering on *the track*. What's more, the axle axis is biased
towards the lower ball joint;
https://scdn.autodoc.de/catalog/categories/300x300/10687.png
The upper joint is a friction joint, non load carrying, and is purely
for location of the upper end of the knuckle. It will have some side
thrust loads but nothing like that experienced by the lower ball joint.
Here's a good schematic of a typical steering knuckle;
https://www.carparts.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/traditional-non-strut-suspension-1024x694.jpg
Note how the axle is biased to the lower joint. That lower joint has
the force of the spring applied to it whereas the top joint is free
floating - purely for location. Look at the pic and just imagine where
the forces are being applied when cornering at high speed *on the
track*. The steering knuckle in question broke right near the ball
joint - exactly wher I would expect it to - given the forces acting
upon it.

so what kind of suspension is this then. I've been looking for a clearer
illustration

https://au.pinterest.com/pin/different-types-of-suspension-systems--144115256820933267/

Post by Noddy
If it were my car I'd probably look long and hard for a replacement
first though :)

Man, the motor trade really needs licencing to keep lying fraudulent
pricks like you out of it.

--
Have a nice day!..
stay sane, be happy, and enjoy living.

Keithr0

2024-10-07 01:31:49 UTC

Post by Noddy
The last one was only a few days ago which was repairing a broken
cast iron crank pulley using tig welded Silicone Bronze which was a
first for me. It turned out well and I'm pretty happy with it, and
I'll upload the photos in a day or two and hopefully the kids will
get some benefit out of it as well.

Sounds nasty.

Post by Daryl
Its a fairly rare part so he's been asking around about it and
several people have suggested welding it, the owner doesn't like the
idea and neither do I but one of the people who suggested welding
has apparently done it successfully before.
Does welding an upright sound feasible to you?

It's something I'd need to look at before making a call. It could be.
It would depend a hell of a lot on the composition of the component.

Post by Daryl
I'd be too scared of it breaking at high speed on the track?
Is it possible that the weld could be stronger than the OE casting?

You probably find it would be *unethical* if not downright illegal.

Post by Noddy
I'd need to look at it and see where it's broken, if it could be
pinned to support the weld or if it's installed state would allow for
any reinforcement laid over the top as a "backup". They're a fairly
light car and used on a smooth track I would think the loads would be
mostly in the vertical and not outrageous, so there's a reasonable
chance that it could be repaired provided it's not completely mangled.

What? Loads *mostly in the vertical*? WTF are you smoking? It's a
*steering knuckle* and, as such, it has loadings every which way!
Think about the loadings when *cornering*! The fact it snapped right
above the lower ball joint should be *more than enough* to indicate
that the knuckle is subjected to severe lateral loadings.

LOL! noddy proves (again) why as an automotive repairer he should be
avoided like the plague.

LOL like flies to a honey pot.

Post by Noddy
If it were my car I'd probably look long and hard for a replacement
first though :)

Man, the motor trade really needs licencing to keep lying fraudulent
pricks like you out of it.

Mighty Mouse

2024-10-07 05:06:06 UTC

Post by Noddy
The last one was only a few days ago which was repairing a broken
cast iron crank pulley using tig welded Silicone Bronze which was
a first for me. It turned out well and I'm pretty happy with it,
and I'll upload the photos in a day or two and hopefully the kids
will get some benefit out of it as well.

Sounds nasty.

Post by Daryl
Its a fairly rare part so he's been asking around about it and
several people have suggested welding it, the owner doesn't like
the idea and neither do I but one of the people who suggested
welding has apparently done it successfully before.
Does welding an upright sound feasible to you?

It's something I'd need to look at before making a call. It could
be. It would depend a hell of a lot on the composition of the
component.

Post by Daryl
I'd be too scared of it breaking at high speed on the track?
Is it possible that the weld could be stronger than the OE casting?

You probably find it would be *unethical* if not downright illegal.

Post by Noddy
I'd need to look at it and see where it's broken, if it could be
pinned to support the weld or if it's installed state would allow
for any reinforcement laid over the top as a "backup". They're a
fairly light car and used on a smooth track I would think the loads
would be mostly in the vertical and not outrageous, so there's a
reasonable chance that it could be repaired provided it's not
completely mangled.

What? Loads *mostly in the vertical*? WTF are you smoking? It's a
*steering knuckle* and, as such, it has loadings every which way!
Think about the loadings when *cornering*! The fact it snapped right
above the lower ball joint should be *more than enough* to indicate
that the knuckle is subjected to severe lateral loadings.

LOL! noddy proves (again) why as an automotive repairer he should be
avoided like the plague.

LOL like flies to a honey pot.

many thanks for your interesting and informative comment re automotive
steering design. much appreciated.

Post by Noddy
If it were my car I'd probably look long and hard for a replacement
first though :)

Man, the motor trade really needs licencing to keep lying fraudulent
pricks like you out of it.

--
Have a nice day!..
stay sane, be happy, and enjoy living.

Clocky

2024-10-06 20:45:26 UTC

Post by Noddy
The last one was only a few days ago which was repairing a broken
cast iron crank pulley using tig welded Silicone Bronze which was a
first for me. It turned out well and I'm pretty happy with it, and
I'll upload the photos in a day or two and hopefully the kids will
get some benefit out of it as well.

Sounds nasty.

Post by Daryl
Its a fairly rare part so he's been asking around about it and several
people have suggested welding it, the owner doesn't like the idea and
neither do I but one of the people who suggested welding has
apparently done it successfully before.
Does welding an upright sound feasible to you?

It's something I'd need to look at before making a call. It could be. It
would depend a hell of a lot on the composition of the component.

Post by Daryl
I'd be too scared of it breaking at high speed on the track?
Is it possible that the weld could be stronger than the OE casting?

The only correct answer is "no, no way in the world".

It fucking snapped you idiot, think about it. Jesus wept...

so there's a reasonable chance that

Post by Noddy
it could be repaired provided it's not completely mangled.

Are you serious? Stay away from cars.

Post by Noddy
If it were my car I'd probably look long and hard for a replacement
first though :)

Xeno

2024-10-07 00:20:01 UTC

Post by Noddy
The last one was only a few days ago which was repairing a broken
cast iron crank pulley using tig welded Silicone Bronze which was a
first for me. It turned out well and I'm pretty happy with it, and
I'll upload the photos in a day or two and hopefully the kids will
get some benefit out of it as well.

Sounds nasty.

Post by Daryl
Its a fairly rare part so he's been asking around about it and
several people have suggested welding it, the owner doesn't like the
idea and neither do I but one of the people who suggested welding has
apparently done it successfully before.
Does welding an upright sound feasible to you?

It's something I'd need to look at before making a call. It could be.
It would depend a hell of a lot on the composition of the component.

Post by Daryl
I'd be too scared of it breaking at high speed on the track?
Is it possible that the weld could be stronger than the OE casting?

The only correct answer is "no, no way in the world".

Post by Noddy
I'd need to look at it and see where it's broken, if it could be
pinned to support the weld or if it's installed state would allow for
any reinforcement laid over the top as a "backup". They're a fairly
light car and used on a smooth track I would think the loads would be
mostly in the vertical and not outrageous,

It fucking snapped you idiot, think about it. Jesus wept...

Doesn't it make you laugh? But then you remember that these clowns are
out there fraudulently operating in the trade.

Post by Clocky
so there's a reasonable chance that

Post by Noddy
it could be repaired provided it's not completely mangled.

Are you serious? Stay away from cars.

If only!

Post by Noddy
If it were my car I'd probably look long and hard for a replacement
first though :)

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

Daryl

2024-10-06 22:12:06 UTC

Post by Noddy
The last one was only a few days ago which was repairing a broken
cast iron crank pulley using tig welded Silicone Bronze which was a
first for me. It turned out well and I'm pretty happy with it, and
I'll upload the photos in a day or two and hopefully the kids will
get some benefit out of it as well.

Sounds nasty.

Post by Daryl
Its a fairly rare part so he's been asking around about it and several
people have suggested welding it, the owner doesn't like the idea and
neither do I but one of the people who suggested welding has
apparently done it successfully before.
Does welding an upright sound feasible to you?

It's something I'd need to look at before making a call. It could be. It
would depend a hell of a lot on the composition of the component.

Post by Daryl
I'd be too scared of it breaking at high speed on the track?
Is it possible that the weld could be stronger than the OE casting?

I'm not sure about it being stronger, but it could possibly be as strong
as an original part. It would all depend on whether the part was a
casting or a forging.
Cast alloy is reasonably strong, but it can be a complete pig to weld
well because of the typically horrendous make up of the material itself.
Apart from Aluminium, you get other materials in the mix such as tin,
iron, copper, Silicone, magnesium and zinc, which all exist as alloying
elements. They do their job in melding it all together to allow the part
to be cast and machined, but the material is quite "dirty" from a
welder's standpoint making it quite difficult to get a good, solid weld.
Forgings on the other hand are quite different. Forged alloy components
tend to be fairly pure which makes weld integrity a lot easier to
achieve. I would suspect that as cast alloy can be quite brittle and
doesn't like a lot of shock loading that the part is most likely a
forging, in which case the success rate of a weld repair is
significantly greater. As to how effective that repair would ultimately
be would depend entirely on the person doing the repair :)
Would I do it? Short answer is "dunno".
I'd need to look at it and see where it's broken, if it could be pinned
to support the weld or if it's installed state would allow for any
reinforcement laid over the top as a "backup". They're a fairly light
car and used on a smooth track I would think the loads would be mostly
in the vertical and not outrageous, so there's a reasonable chance that
it could be repaired provided it's not completely mangled.
If it were my car I'd probably look long and hard for a replacement
first though :)

That's what the owner is doing, he is against welding so it won't be
welded unless there is no other option.
Someone said that Mazda MX5 uprights can be adapted to fit and there
isn't any shortage of those so we'll be leaving it to the owner to sort
it out.

--
Daryl

Xeno

2024-10-07 00:17:00 UTC

Post by Noddy
The last one was only a few days ago which was repairing a broken
cast iron crank pulley using tig welded Silicone Bronze which was a
first for me. It turned out well and I'm pretty happy with it, and
I'll upload the photos in a day or two and hopefully the kids will
get some benefit out of it as well.

Sounds nasty.

Post by Daryl
Its a fairly rare part so he's been asking around about it and
several people have suggested welding it, the owner doesn't like the
idea and neither do I but one of the people who suggested welding has
apparently done it successfully before.
Does welding an upright sound feasible to you?

It's something I'd need to look at before making a call. It could be.
It would depend a hell of a lot on the composition of the component.

Post by Daryl
I'd be too scared of it breaking at high speed on the track?
Is it possible that the weld could be stronger than the OE casting?

I'm not sure about it being stronger, but it could possibly be as
strong as an original part. It would all depend on whether the part
was a casting or a forging.
Cast alloy is reasonably strong, but it can be a complete pig to weld
well because of the typically horrendous make up of the material
itself. Apart from Aluminium, you get other materials in the mix such
as tin, iron, copper, Silicone, magnesium and zinc, which all exist as
alloying elements. They do their job in melding it all together to
allow the part to be cast and machined, but the material is quite
"dirty" from a welder's standpoint making it quite difficult to get a
good, solid weld.
Forgings on the other hand are quite different. Forged alloy
components tend to be fairly pure which makes weld integrity a lot
easier to achieve. I would suspect that as cast alloy can be quite
brittle and doesn't like a lot of shock loading that the part is most
likely a forging, in which case the success rate of a weld repair is
significantly greater. As to how effective that repair would
ultimately be would depend entirely on the person doing the repair :)
Would I do it? Short answer is "dunno".
I'd need to look at it and see where it's broken, if it could be
pinned to support the weld or if it's installed state would allow for
any reinforcement laid over the top as a "backup". They're a fairly
light car and used on a smooth track I would think the loads would be
mostly in the vertical and not outrageous, so there's a reasonable
chance that it could be repaired provided it's not completely mangled.
If it were my car I'd probably look long and hard for a replacement
first though :)

That's what the owner is doing, he is against welding so it won't be
welded unless there is no other option.

Welding a critical steering component like that alloy steering knuckle
is *not an option*.

Post by Daryl
Someone said that Mazda MX5 uprights can be adapted to fit and there

FFS, they aren't "uprights", they are steering knuckles. Just do a
Google search on the term "steering knuckle" and you'll get the idea.
It's easy to tell you couldn't survive in the motor trade.

Post by Daryl
isn't any shortage of those so we'll be leaving it to the owner to sort
it out.

Good idea. Last time an owner left you two clowns to sort something out,
Les' 4AGE(20) engine got grenaded through incompetence.

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

Xeno

2024-10-05 12:43:30 UTC

Post by Noddy
I always hated the driving position in the 911. Particularly the
earlier models. The pedals felt wrong, the steering wheel came out
of the dash at a funny angle, and the steering feel itself was odd.
They got better as they got newer, but to me the early ones always
felt like a kit car.

I suppose all the pix of Gibbons behind the wheel of those Porsches
are in that sea-trunk marked 'EMPTY'.
What a clown he is.

and another to add to the long list of never to be seen photos.. his
Honda sponsored trip to Japan. one would think there would be a group
shot of attendees at least, and some happy touristy shots.

Why do you assume that people would have photos

usually on those corporate ventures lots of photos are taken, if for no
other reason than publicity and advertising.

It's Ok, Darren has never been to Japan, with Honda or independently.
All he's doing is repeating shit he's heard from others. He does this
all the time. I mean, just look at how he channels John Cadogan every
single time he posts yet he claims never to watch Cadogans VLogs.

Post by Keithr0
of everything that they ever did, especially from the days before
mobile phones with cameras.

I have taken photos my entire life, and have heaps dating to early childhood

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

Noddy

2024-10-05 13:51:41 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
and another to add to the long list of never to be seen photos.. his
Honda sponsored trip to Japan. one would think there would be a group
shot of attendees at least, and some happy touristy shots.

Why do you assume that people would have photos of everything that they
ever did, especially from the days before mobile phones with cameras.

Or even that they would feel compelled to show them to anyone even if
they did? :)

This constant crying for "photographic evidence" from these fucktards is
a safety net for them. They know I couldn't give a shit about anything
they piss & moan about and will give them nothing, and they use *that*
as the basis to form their ridiculous theories.

They're retarded, but then you can't expect much from a group of people
with a collective intelligence of a dishwasher tablet.

--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

Xeno

2024-10-05 14:27:49 UTC

Why do you assume that people would have photos of everything that
they ever did, especially from the days before mobile phones with
cameras.

Or even that they would feel compelled to show them to anyone even if
they did? :)

You can't show what you don't have and never did have. Your fraudulently
claimed trade qualifications for one. You don't possess them, the ITC
has no record of *your name* and there are no records at PROV.

Post by Noddy
This constant crying for "photographic evidence" from these fucktards is
a safety net for them. They know I couldn't give a shit about anything
they piss & moan about and will give them nothing, and they use *that*
as the basis to form their ridiculous theories.
They're retarded, but then you can't expect much from a group of people
with a collective intelligence of a dishwasher tablet.

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

alvey

2024-10-05 21:07:06 UTC

Why do you assume that people would have photos of everything that
they ever did, especially from the days before mobile phones with
cameras.

Or even that they would feel compelled to show them to anyone even if
they did? :)
This constant crying for "photographic evidence" from these fucktards is
a safety net for them. They know I couldn't give a shit about anything
they piss & moan about and will give them nothing, and they use *that*
as the basis to form their ridiculous theories.

lol! Soooo many larfs there!
So tell me Fraudster, why did you used to stridently demand proof of
others claims? Buffoon.

Post by Noddy
They're retarded, but then you can't expect much from a group of people
with a collective intelligence of a dishwasher tablet.

Keep at it Fraudster! One day you'll fluke a decent metaphor. You know.
Monkeys, typewriters, Shakespeare...

Hint: Dishwasher tablets perform an essential service. ie. They get rid
of dirt, scum etc... They clean-up mess Buffo.

Mighty Mouse

2024-10-05 23:48:13 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
and another to add to the long list of never to be seen photos..
his Honda sponsored trip to Japan. one would think there would be a
group shot of attendees at least, and some happy touristy shots.

Why do you assume that people would have photos of everything that
they ever did, especially from the days before mobile phones with
cameras.

Or even that they would feel compelled to show them to anyone even if
they did? :)
This constant crying for "photographic evidence" from these fucktards
is a safety net for them. They know I couldn't give a shit about
anything they piss & moan about and will give them nothing, and they
use *that* as the basis to form their ridiculous theories.

lol! Soooo many larfs there!
So tell me Fraudster, why did you used to stridently demand proof of
others claims? Buffoon.

Post by Noddy
They're retarded, but then you can't expect much from a group of
people with a collective intelligence of a dishwasher tablet.

Keep at it Fraudster! One day you'll fluke a decent metaphor. You
know. Monkeys, typewriters, Shakespeare...
Hint: Dishwasher tablets perform an essential service. ie. They get
rid of dirt, scum etc... They clean-up mess Buffo.

LOL

--
Have a nice day!..
stay sane, be happy, and enjoy living.

Daryl

2024-10-06 03:38:37 UTC

Post by Noddy
I always hated the driving position in the 911. Particularly the
earlier models. The pedals felt wrong, the steering wheel came out
of the dash at a funny angle, and the steering feel itself was odd.
They got better as they got newer, but to me the early ones always
felt like a kit car.

I suppose all the pix of Gibbons behind the wheel of those Porsches
are in that sea-trunk marked 'EMPTY'.
What a clown he is.

and another to add to the long list of never to be seen photos.. his
Honda sponsored trip to Japan. one would think there would be a group
shot of attendees at least, and some happy touristy shots.

Why do you assume that people would have photos of everything that they
ever did, especially from the days before mobile phones with cameras.

No reason they should have photos, I take very few photos despite having
a camera in my pocket most of the time.
Noddy's description of older Porsche pedal and steering wheel positions
and them having an odd driving position is spot on, its the first thing
you notice when you sit in the drivers seat of an old 911.
They are quirky cars which you either like or dislike, I happen to like
their quirkiness but I get why not everyone agrees.

--
Daryl

Ronnie

2024-10-06 21:06:59 UTC

Post by Daryl
Noddy's description of older Porsche pedal and steering wheel positions
and them having an odd driving position is spot on, its the first thing
you notice when you sit in the drivers seat of an old 911.

Well that settles the issue folks! Because Fraudster accurately
described the eccentric driving position of old 911s this unequivocally
proves that the Bumhole (Vic) Boofhead has driven some. Case closed.
Move along. Nothing to see here.

Jaysus Deryl! Given that your little mate is a *proven* serial liar, did
the possibility that he's plagiarised that little fact ever rattle
around your skull??

If Fraudster wasn't such a tight-arse I'd suspect that he pays you for
your 'support' Deryl.

Now, back to photos & phraud... Ok Fraudster, as you're so
security-aware you really should have some pix of your fabled Grange
collection saved somewhere handy for insurance purposes, so it should
be an absolute doddle for you to post 'em to settle that challenged
claim. Let's see 'em!

alvey
Waiting for the inevitable, "I sold them a while ago".

Mighty Mouse

2024-10-07 01:11:06 UTC

Post by Ronnie

Post by Daryl
Noddy's description of older Porsche pedal and steering wheel
positions and them having an odd driving position is spot on, its the
first thing you notice when you sit in the drivers seat of an old 911.

Well that settles the issue folks! Because Fraudster accurately
described the eccentric driving position of old 911s this
unequivocally proves that the Bumhole (Vic) Boofhead has driven some.
Case closed. Move along. Nothing to see here.
Jaysus Deryl! Given that your little mate is a *proven* serial liar,
did the possibility that he's plagiarised that little fact ever rattle
around your skull??
If Fraudster wasn't such a tight-arse I'd suspect that he pays you for
your 'support' Deryl.
Now, back to photos & phraud... Ok Fraudster, as you're so
security-aware you really should have some pix of your fabled Grange
collection saved somewhere handy for insurance purposes, so it should
be an absolute doddle for you to post 'em to settle that challenged
claim. Let's see 'em!

or more likely just crickets..

Post by Ronnie
alvey
Waiting for the inevitable, "I sold them a while ago".

--
Have a nice day!..
stay sane, be happy, and enjoy living.

Keithr0

2024-09-26 11:36:34 UTC

Post by Noddy
It was a consequence of their design, being based on one of the worst
handling cars ever made, the Volkswagen Beetle, and it's precisely why
Porsche wanted to drop the overhanging rear engine for decades.The only
reason they didn't was because the fans revolted.

I don't think that the overhanging engine was necessarily the worst
decision in the Beetle, the swing axles were just as bad.

Noddy

2024-09-26 12:29:31 UTC

Post by Noddy
It was a consequence of their design, being based on one of the worst
handling cars ever made, the Volkswagen Beetle, and it's precisely why
Porsche wanted to drop the overhanging rear engine for decades.The
only reason they didn't was because the fans revolted.

I don't think that the overhanging engine was necessarily the worst
decision in the Beetle, the swing axles were just as bad.

The swing axles were the number one reason why Beetles could be sat on
their roof with ridiculous ease as it was an *appallingly* bad
suspension arrangement that was outright dangerous. The rear overhang
engine didn't bother the average Beetle as they never made enough power
to be dangerous. However add a few hundred more horsepower in a very
similar chassis arrangement and it could be a handful for even the most
experienced driver :)
--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

Daryl

2024-09-24 09:55:25 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
the MG corners better/faster than the Lancer did. I guess that's due
to the short wheel base and wider tyres.

In part. Suspension kinematics play a greater role these days. Your
current MG has a torsion beam rear suspension, a type that could not
be designed before the advent of computer modelling. IIRC, your MG3
was the same. As I have stated in the past, they are a compromise in
handling and ride but the coils are easy to *tune* and the kinematics
of the trailing arms are simple but effective. They are not new. Fiat
has used the torsion beam rear since the early 80s on the Uno since it
gives a good *space* configuration in compact wagons, hatches and SUVs
but still provide good handling. For instance, Peugeot 308 uses the
torsion beam for its handling characteristics. Even the moose test
wasn't a problem;
http://youtu.be/jMzaufUquys
Handling has come a long way.

What an odd thing to say, I've driven a 1979 911 SC in the wet and never
had an issue but I wasn't driving like I stole it.

--
Daryl

Clocky

2024-09-22 03:59:07 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
the MG corners better/faster than the Lancer did. I guess that's due
to the short wheel base and wider tyres.

In part. Suspension kinematics play a greater role these days. Your
current MG has a torsion beam rear suspension, a type that could not be
designed before the advent of computer modelling.

What computer designed the torsion bar rear suspension on my old 1969
Renault?

Mighty Mouse

2024-09-22 05:05:42 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
the MG corners better/faster than the Lancer did. I guess that's due
to the short wheel base and wider tyres.

In part. Suspension kinematics play a greater role these days. Your
current MG has a torsion beam rear suspension, a type that could not
be designed before the advent of computer modelling.

What computer designed the torsion bar rear suspension on my old 1969
Renault?

I read what Xeno wrote as meaning a particular type of torsion bar
suspension because he said 'a type'.

--
Have a nice day!..

Xeno

2024-09-22 10:55:54 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
the MG corners better/faster than the Lancer did. I guess that's due
to the short wheel base and wider tyres.

In part. Suspension kinematics play a greater role these days. Your
current MG has a torsion beam rear suspension, a type that could not
be designed before the advent of computer modelling.

What computer designed the torsion bar rear suspension on my old 1969
Renault?

I read what Xeno wrote as meaning a particular type of torsion bar
suspension because he said 'a type'.

I said a type of torsion *beam* suspension. Totally different animal.
Yours is a torsion beam but it has *coil springs*. The torsion beam
suspension is, in reality, a modified version of a trailing arm
suspension - with some disadvantages removed or mitigated.

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

Clocky

2024-09-22 23:30:42 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
the MG corners better/faster than the Lancer did. I guess that's
due to the short wheel base and wider tyres.

In part. Suspension kinematics play a greater role these days. Your
current MG has a torsion beam rear suspension, a type that could not
be designed before the advent of computer modelling.

What computer designed the torsion bar rear suspension on my old 1969
Renault?

I read what Xeno wrote as meaning a particular type of torsion bar
suspension because he said 'a type'.

Yes I know, I was being facetious but I guess that's lost in a text only
realm.

Xeno

2024-09-23 00:24:21 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
the MG corners better/faster than the Lancer did. I guess that's
due to the short wheel base and wider tyres.

In part. Suspension kinematics play a greater role these days. Your
current MG has a torsion beam rear suspension, a type that could
not be designed before the advent of computer modelling.

What computer designed the torsion bar rear suspension on my old
1969 Renault?

I read what Xeno wrote as meaning a particular type of torsion bar
suspension because he said 'a type'.

Yes I know, I was being facetious but I guess that's lost in a text only
realm.

And I was being precise. I could have used the term *twist beam* but
torsion beam is less of a slang term and more of an engineering term.
Sure, the beam twists, but so does a torsion bar and, it has to be said,
so does a coil spring - if you think carefully about it.

I notice Keith went to Google to check up on my bona fides. I saw that
article but declined to use it as it merely listed the total of pros and
cons without much of an explanation. The book from which I quoted gave
the precise advantages and disadvantages that were *relevant* to this
discussion. It's a book that I used as a text reference in my teaching
days and it still comes in handy today. Pity there isn't a pdf version
on-line, would make citing bits and pieces much easier.

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

Keithr0

2024-09-22 11:36:58 UTC

Post by Mighty Mouse
the MG corners better/faster than the Lancer did. I guess that's due
to the short wheel base and wider tyres.

In part. Suspension kinematics play a greater role these days. Your
current MG has a torsion beam rear suspension, a type that could not
be designed before the advent of computer modelling.

What computer designed the torsion bar rear suspension on my old 1969
Renault?

16TS?

Post by Mighty Mouse
I read what Xeno wrote as meaning a particular type of torsion bar
suspension because he said 'a type'.

Torsion BEAM suspension (also known as twist beam) is not torsion BAR
suspension. It's a semi independent suspension cheaper than the real thing.

wikipedia.org/wiki/Twist-beam_rear_suspension

Pro
- Low cost
- Can be durable
- Fewer bushings than multi-link suspension, and bushings are less prone
to stress and wear
- Simplicity
- Reduces clutter under floor
- Fairly light weight
- Springs and shocks can be light and low cost
- May not need a separate anti-roll bar, as the axle itself may be made
to perform that function, up to a point
- Road handling can be excellent, often to the detriment of comfort
(examples: Honda Civic Type R FK2, Suzuki Swift Sport, Renault Clio III
RS, Peugeot 308 II GTi)

Cons
- Basic toe vs. lateral force characteristic is oversteer
- Since toe characteristics may be unsuitable, adding toe-control
bushings may be expensive
- Camber characteristics are very limited
- Not very easy to adjust for reduced roll stiffness, but increasing it
is easily done by adding an anti-roll bar
- Welds see a lot of fatigue, may need a lot of development
- Not much recession compliance: can be poor for impact harshness, and
will cause unwelcome toe changes (steer effects)
- Wheel moves forward as it rises; can also be poor for impact harshness
(this can be negated by designing the beam with the mounts higher than
the stub axles, which impacts on the floorpan height, and causes more
roll oversteer)
- Need to package room for exhaust and so on past the cross beam
- Camber compliance may be high
- No redress for wheel alignment. Alignment geometry is factory-set and
not generally adjustable. Any deviation from factory
specifications/tolerances could mean a bent axle or compromised mounting
points.

My 1993 Pontiac Grand Am had similar rear suspension, I wouldn't say
that that was in any way an endorsement of the design.

Noddy

2024-09-23 00:34:49 UTC

Post by Keithr0
Torsion BEAM suspension (also known as twist beam) is not torsion BAR
suspension.

It is *exactly* the same principal as any torsion bar suspension system
with the exception that a torsion bar system usually links the two
wheels of an axle together mechanically and relies on the flex of the
link to supply the spring medium, as opposed to a torsion bar system
where each wheel is usually sprung independently of each other.

It's little more than an extension of your average sway bar, and is
about as cheap and nasty a suspension system as you can get. It's been
around for over 50 years. There is nothing "computer specific" about
it's design, and claiming that it couldn't have existed before computer
modelling is an absolute nonsense :)
--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

Xeno

2024-09-23 01:08:19 UTC

Post by Keithr0
Torsion BEAM suspension (also known as twist beam) is not torsion BAR
suspension.

It is *exactly* the same principal as any torsion bar suspension system

Totally different *principle*! Torsion beam suspensions typically use
coil springs as their suspension medium.

Post by Noddy
with the exception that a torsion bar system usually links the two
wheels of an axle together mechanically and relies on the flex of the
link to supply the spring medium, as opposed to a torsion bar system
where each wheel is usually sprung independently of each other.

You really don't understand the torsion bar system on a VW, do you? Your
above bullshit comments proves that beyond a shadow of doubt. The
torsion bar system, any of them, have a single torsion bar for each
wheel, even the VWs and Porsches of this world. Each torsion bar has an
*anchor* at one end and a free swivel at the other. Seems you've never
worked on them. Note, there are two torsion bars at the rear of VWs and
Porsches, one for each side - it's a true IRS system.

Post by Noddy
It's little more than an extension of your average sway bar, and is

Uh, no! It's an extension of your typical trailing arm suspension - the
addition of a *connecting link* that limits some of the nastier
*handling* aspects of a trailing arm suspension.

Post by Noddy
about as cheap and nasty a suspension system as you can get. It's been
around for over 50 years. There is nothing "computer specific" about
it's design, and claiming that it couldn't have existed before computer
modelling is an absolute nonsense :)

I said the designs required computer modelling - and they did. Still do
to this day. A lot of the technology you see on cars today used and
relied on computer modelling in its design stages.

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

Xeno

2024-09-23 04:37:29 UTC

Post by Keithr0
Torsion BEAM suspension (also known as twist beam) is not torsion BAR
suspension.

It is *exactly* the same principal as any torsion bar suspension system
with the exception that a torsion bar system usually links the two
wheels of an axle together mechanically and relies on the flex of the
link to supply the spring medium, as opposed to a torsion bar system
where each wheel is usually sprung independently of each other.
It's little more than an extension of your average sway bar, and is
about as cheap and nasty a suspension system as you can get. It's been

but cost effective, light weight and with improved handling over
traditional trailing arm suspension systems.

Post by Noddy
around for over 50 years. There is nothing "computer specific" about

Actually Darren - not over 50 years. The first Golf was introduced in
1974 and it was the *first* mass production model to have a torsion beam
rear suspension. That makes it exactly 50 years so your *claim* is, as
always, fake. It must be said that the 1969 Audi 100 production car was
the absolute first car to be fitted with a torsion beam suspension but
this was the test bed for VW before they deployed the torsion beam out
more widely across the VW range beginning in 1974 with the Golf.

FWIW, the computer modelling used *finite element analysis* and this was
the basis for the *simulation software* that the design engineers used
and it helped them find the weak spots, the tension areas, etc. in their
designs. Without the simulation software and CAD, the design task was
far too onerous.

Post by Noddy
it's design, and claiming that it couldn't have existed before computer
modelling is an absolute nonsense :)

See above. Your problem, you don't have a clue yet, here you are, trying
to tell us how design engineers do their job. You, a person who couldn't
even qualify to enter into any *mechanical apprenticeship* ever. Get
outta here Darren, you're full of shit.

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

Mighty Mouse

2024-09-24 01:39:23 UTC

Post by Keithr0
Torsion BEAM suspension (also known as twist beam) is not torsion
BAR suspension.

It is *exactly* the same principal as any torsion bar suspension
system with the exception that a torsion bar system usually links the
two wheels of an axle together mechanically and relies on the flex of
the link to supply the spring medium, as opposed to a torsion bar
system where each wheel is usually sprung independently of each other.
It's little more than an extension of your average sway bar, and is
about as cheap and nasty a suspension system as you can get. It's been

but cost effective, light weight and with improved handling over
traditional trailing arm suspension systems.

Post by Noddy
around for over 50 years. There is nothing "computer specific" about

Actually Darren - not over 50 years. The first Golf was introduced in
1974 and it was the *first* mass production model to have a torsion
beam rear suspension. That makes it exactly 50 years so your *claim*
is, as always, fake. It must be said that the 1969 Audi 100 production
car was the absolute first car to be fitted with a torsion beam
suspension but this was the test bed for VW before they deployed the
torsion beam out more widely across the VW range beginning in 1974
with the Golf.
FWIW, the computer modelling used *finite element analysis* and this
was the basis for the *simulation software* that the design engineers
used and it helped them find the weak spots, the tension areas, etc.
in their designs. Without the simulation software and CAD, the design
task was far too onerous.

Post by Noddy
it's design, and claiming that it couldn't have existed before
computer modelling is an absolute nonsense :)

what's absolute nonsense is whatever he posts about cars. he always gets
it wrong

Post by Xeno
See above. Your problem, you don't have a clue yet, here you are,
trying to tell us how design engineers do their job. You, a person who
couldn't even qualify to enter into any *mechanical apprenticeship*
ever. Get outta here Darren, you're full of shit.

--
Have a nice day!..

Keithr0

2024-09-24 10:14:18 UTC

Post by Keithr0
Torsion BEAM suspension (also known as twist beam) is not torsion BAR
suspension.

The big difference is that, in torsion bar suspension, the torsion
element actually provide the suspension, in a torsion beam suspension
the actual suspension is provided by coil springs, and the torsion
element is simply an anti-roll car of a sort.

Post by Noddy
It's little more than an extension of your average sway bar, and is
about as cheap and nasty a suspension system as you can get. It's been
around for over 50 years. There is nothing "computer specific" about
it's design, and claiming that it couldn't have existed before computer
modelling is an absolute nonsense :)

Noddy

2024-09-24 11:43:04 UTC

Post by Keithr0
Torsion BEAM suspension (also known as twist beam) is not torsion BAR
suspension.

Pretty much. As I said, they're little more than an extension of your
average sway bar, and like *you* said they're a cheap and nasty
suspension system. They do nothing particularly well, other than make
cheap cars cheaper.

The point I was objecting to was the claim that the system used in the
crappy little MG ZS had to wait for "computer modelling" to be invented
before it could exist, which is complete and utter bullshit :)
--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

Xeno

2024-09-24 12:08:08 UTC

Post by Keithr0
Torsion BEAM suspension (also known as twist beam) is not torsion
BAR suspension.

Pretty much. As I said, they're little more than an extension of your
average sway bar, and like *you* said they're a cheap and nasty
suspension system. They do nothing particularly well, other than make
cheap cars cheaper.
The point I was objecting to was the claim that the system used in the
crappy little MG ZS had to wait for "computer modelling" to be invented
before it could exist, which is complete and utter bullshit :)

You stupid little tool. You didn't even know what kind of suspension I
was referring to! And computer modelling has been around for some 70
plus years. Go look into the design of the torsion beam and you will see
what I meant.

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

Xeno

2024-09-25 13:25:52 UTC

Post by Keithr0
Torsion BEAM suspension (also known as twist beam) is not torsion
BAR suspension.

Pretty much. As I said, they're little more than an extension of your
average sway bar, and like *you* said they're a cheap and nasty
suspension system. They do nothing particularly well, other than make
cheap cars cheaper.
The point I was objecting to was the claim that the system used in the
crappy little MG ZS had to wait for "computer modelling" to be invented
before it could exist, which is complete and utter bullshit :)

Ah, poor desperate Darren, lost your street cred and are now desperately
seeking some. Sorry, not here Darren, you're just a *confirmed* bullshitter!

It took me a while to find a relevant book on the topic but let me quote
a pertinent paragraph from it here;

The optimization of a compound-beam design, where the trailing
arms must be laterally and torsionally elastic as well, cannot
be achieved by manual techniques and depends heavily upon
finite element stress analysis (see chapter 6) of the complete
welded assembly. The selection of the geometry for bump steer,
roll steer, roll camber, deflection steer and the roll-centre
height also requires the use of advanced, dynamic computer
modelling.

The above paragraph is from the book;

Chassis And Suspension Engineering
Road and Track Theory and Practice
By Geoffrey Howard 1987

I have the 1989 reprint so I've had it for quite a while.

Now, in the above cited text, chapter 6 is referenced. What is chapter 6
all about? Well, the title is "Computer aids and design techniques".
I'll cite a few pertinent paragraphs on the first page of the chapter;

Although the first use of computers in suspension
design and development dates back 20 years, rapid and
recent advances in graphic displays, measurement
techniques and processing time are putting a new
emphasis and value on the results of interactive studies.
Today, the visual display unit linked to a powerful,
high speed computer running advanced, dynamic suspension
and vehicle models are the basic tools of the
suspension-design trade.
Computer aids in suspension design eliminate much of
the guesswork, empirical measurement and practically all
the tedious calculations that were required previously
to determine safe stress levels and acceptable durability
standards as the preliminary stages to a new system
design. Carefully-developed programmes allow the
thousands of simultaneous equations of dynamic movement
to be solved rapidly, and advanced computer graphics are
used regularly to simulate actual parts in action under
strain, showing differences in stress levels, by keyed
colour graduations, like a thermal-image picture of heat
radiation. Three-dimensional representations also act as
valuable visual aids to the experienced eye of a
component engineer working on a new design, with
light-source angle of view and magnification all under
keyboard control.
This kind of computer-aided design (cad) is currently
being integrated with computer-aided manufacture (cam)
into a new operating science known as computer-integrated
engineering (cie). It is having dramatic effects on the
whole process of creating new vehicles and components,
and updating existing models.
Stress analysis for both the supporting elements of
the integral body/chassis unit and each component part
of the suspension system is performed with impressive
accuracy by a mesh of finite elements (fe) built up into
a framework of several thousand, finely-detailed,
interlinked struts forming triangles, squares and
rectangles. From the first application of fe programmes,
used to handle only discrete parts of a full system, new
tools have been developed that can simulate the
considerably more complex models required to represent
authentic dynamic behaviour.
Early fe work was limited originally to stress and
strain calculations by the inability of the computer
systems to handle the non-linear events and relatively
large displacements typical of vehicle suspensions under
dynamic loads. Setting up representative mathematical
equations of motion for the interrelated parts was too
complex and time consuming for the skills and abilities
of the engineering department staffs. However, with the
new generation computers came automated and
user-friendly programming interfaces that eliminated
the tedium and lowered the threshold of acceptance by
traditional mechanical engineers.

As I said in a previous post, my first experience of fe stress analysis
suspension modelling work was at the GM Development Labs in Fishermans
Bend. It was on a Camira which had a *ram* under the left front wheel
and the ram was pumping the suspension as if the car were running on a
corrugated outback road and the results of the effects displayed as a
wireframe graphic on a large monochrome monitor. At the time I was
amazed to see just how far and wide the vibrations travelled throughout
the car body. At the time what I was seeing was cutting edge technology,
the colour displays, mentioned in the text above, yet to appear.

So Darren, in all his ignorance, can shout from the treetops that what I
said was bullshit but, unlike him, I have the proof right here at my
fingertips. I have another text on the same topic but I have yet to
locate that but this will suffice.

BTW, the software used by the engineers was this and is referenced in
the book, obviously a much earlier version

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSC_Adams

The original creator of the software was a company called Mechanical
Dynamics Inc. and they were taken over/bought by MSC in 2002.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSC_Software

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

Xeno

2024-09-24 12:03:33 UTC

Post by Keithr0
Torsion BEAM suspension (also known as twist beam) is not torsion BAR
suspension.

I beg to differ here. The *primary function* of the torsion beam is to
control the kinematics of the rear trailing arm suspension elements.
That it provides a form of anti-roll bar is mere happenstance. If you
have a separate anti-roll bar, you can tune the handling. The compliance
in the torsion beam has just one setting - that which is *engineered in*
at the design stage. If you want to tune the rear end handling from
stock, you need to add a separate anti-roll bar. The system has limits
which is why some are fitted with kinematic toe control bushings at the
primary pivot.

Darren is obviously only just learning about torsion beam suspensions,
hence his mistaking them for torsion bar suspensions, despite them being
fitted to *many* mass manufactured cars over the past 50 years. Poor
sod, he actually thought I was referring to a torsion bar suspension.
Should have studied harder in year 9 and he may just have qualified to
sign up for an apprenticeship.

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

Xeno

2024-09-22 10:57:07 UTC