THE FUTURE vs THE PAST!!

DLax69

DLax69

Member
Messages
4,297
TimR said:
That's clear then..."Sporty" is off the menu !
:)
Click to expand...
iu

She'd like a word.
 
Oneball

Oneball

Member
Messages
11,121
TimR said:
Without any prescription of "properly" in that assertion, I think that it cannot be anything more than anecdotal. A mathematician will recognise a lack of robustness in the sample..
Ive seen an Alpine being road tested by some UTuber or other. Specifically, an S variant, with sub 1000 miles. He wasnt, I assure you, babying it. And remarked as to the willingness of the motor, speculating about the running in and further "freeing up" of the motor as it gets there....( equally anecdotal, perhaps. But I do wonder how Alpine approach the entire demo fleet running in dynamic?!?!)
Definitely agree running in makes sense. As to what that sense is, is less clear.
They dont make them like they used to. That surely is relevant..?
Click to expand...
"Properly" was as per the Porsche's instructions.
There's more to a car than its engine, I think there was a spate of gearbox failures on low mileage M5s that BMW blamed on not following their break in procedure.
 
T

TimR

Member
Messages
2,731
Absolutely. Which presumably means it has to be a compromise of sorts…!
( what’s good for a gearbox may not be the ideal for rings and so on- speculative n my part however…! )
 
Oneball

Oneball

Member
Messages
11,121
safrane said:
Prefer the past, both in cars, art and architecture. Modern stuff is mainly a fad, poorly designed and constructed to the lowest £, as well as made to meet the desires of those with little if any taste. It will never last more than a few years before looking like the **** it is.

Whilst I appreciate how energy is used has advanced significantly, why is it packaged so hideously ( and I am not just referring to cars). Upvc windows, Heat Pumps, energy efficient buildings as well as EVs just lack style.

We could learn so much from the past, but sadly we just run to the future with eyes closed to style, substance and longevity.
Click to expand...
Currently sitting in a modernist glass cube in Italy, looking at a traditional hotel and a brand new bright red fire station and it all works really well. Back home you'd have some stupid planning restriction about it being in keeping with some idiots idea of the 18th century and you'd end up with ****.

20240326_160033.jpg
 
lozcb

lozcb

Member
Messages
12,565
Works for me if they can put fires out when required , you put your feet up young man , why dont you
 
philw696

philw696

Member
Messages
25,467
Mr. Allen Swift: Born: 1908-Died 2010 This man owned and drove the same car for 82 YEARS. Can you imagine even HAVING the same car for 82 years? Mr. Allen Swift ( Springfield, MA ) received this 1928 Rolls-Royce Piccadilly-P 1 Roadster from his father, brand new - as a graduation gift in 1928. He drove it, up until his death in 2010 at the age of 102. He was the oldest, living owner of a car that was purchased new. Just thought you'd like to see it. It was donated to a Springfield museum after his death. It has 1,070,000 miles on it, still runs like a Swiss watch, dead silent at Any speed and is in perfect, cosmetic condition at 82 years of age. That's Approximately 13,048 miles per year, 1,087 miles per month. 1,070,000! That's miles, not kilometres! That's British engineering from a bygone era.FB_IMG_1711467283216.jpg
 
zagatoes30

zagatoes30

Member
Messages
20,945
Ewan said:
It has no affect on the warranty or finance. In fact I suspect it would fall foul of privacy laws if it did. So don’t panic, you’ve maybe just heard another conspiracy theory (that we can now debunk). By saying no it’s only the same as not accepting cookies when you visit a website. It just stops the harvesting of data.

As for the running in, I agree, a bit cheeky. Surely they‘ve run the engines in on a test bench already. And anyway, it’s not as if they advise an oil change after, say, 1000 miles. You can run until it’s end of year (free) service is due.
I intend to take it steady for while, and not stress the engine. Then have an oil change before slowly increasing the work rate/load. Seems the sensible way to proceed.
It does 80mph at 3000rpm in 7th gear anyway (so I’ve read, Officer!).
Click to expand...
Reminds me of an Ferrari driver who was given a 288 GTO as his company car only to be told by the flunky handing it over to not use more than 5000rpm for the first 1500 miles. F1 driver was ****** of by said flunky telling him how to drive but later realised that 5000 rpm in top was 150mph.
 
lozcb

lozcb

Member
Messages
12,565
philw696 said:
Mr. Allen Swift: Born: 1908-Died 2010 This man owned and drove the same car for 82 YEARS. Can you imagine even HAVING the same car for 82 years? Mr. Allen Swift ( Springfield, MA ) received this 1928 Rolls-Royce Piccadilly-P 1 Roadster from his father, brand new - as a graduation gift in 1928. He drove it, up until his death in 2010 at the age of 102. He was the oldest, living owner of a car that was purchased new. Just thought you'd like to see it. It was donated to a Springfield museum after his death. It has 1,070,000 miles on it, still runs like a Swiss watch, dead silent at Any speed and is in perfect, cosmetic condition at 82 years of age. That's Approximately 13,048 miles per year, 1,087 miles per month. 1,070,000! That's miles, not kilometres! That's British engineering from a bygone era.View attachment 124620
Click to expand...
Now thats well worth a capital WOW
 
lozcb

lozcb

Member
Messages
12,565
dickygrace said:
Found that very interesting indeed, considering the contributors.
Click to expand...
Not sure if many on here like Mark Steyn , but his court case in the US against the fraudulent climate claims made by certain individuals including some highly paid eminent scientists ( regarding the hockey stick curve ) is just about to come to a head ...........and looks to be decided in his favour ( pinkies crossed ) now who would have thought
 
Scaf

Scaf

Member
Messages
6,583
Today I was reading that EVs may be too heavy for current roads and multi story car parks.

I would like to think that in the same way ICE car owners have to pay a premium for emissions etc, EV owners will be paying extra to maintain our roads and reduced car parking spaces……….

Mmmmm ………. but somehow I doubt it !
 
Zep

Zep

Moderator
Messages
9,283
Scaf said:
Today I was reading that EVs may be too heavy for current roads and multi story car parks.

I would like to think that in the same way ICE car owners have to pay a premium for emissions etc, EV owners will be paying extra to maintain our roads and reduced car parking spaces……….

Mmmmm ………. but somehow I doubt it !
Click to expand...

The Guardian article?

Extra wear is “overwhelmingly caused by large vehicles – buses, heavy goods vehicles”.

On to bridges. Colin Walker, the head of transport at the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit thinktank, said in the UK there are very few roads or bridges with weight limits below 7.5 tonnes. (Anything heavier than 3.5 tonnes needs a lorry licence in the UK.

The increase in size could theoretically cause problems for some of the oldest car parks, according to Kelvin Reynolds, the chief technical services officer at the British Parking Association. He advised regular surveys by car park owners to make sure their buildings were up to scratch.

However, in the longer term, the assumption that electric cars will always be heavier is also open to question. Auke Hoekstra, an energy transition researcher at the Eindhoven University of Technology, estimates that batteries are cramming twice as much energy into the same weight every decade. If that continues, the weight problem will disappear before it has started.
 
midlifecrisis

midlifecrisis

Member
Messages
16,229
Add lightness as Colin used to say...

However a Merc SUV that a yummy mummy drives for the school run is miles away from the Corsa/Fiesta her equivalent of 20/30 years ago...it must exacerbate pothole damage.
 
Scaf

Scaf

Member
Messages
6,583
Zep said:
The Guardian article?

Extra wear is “overwhelmingly caused by large vehicles – buses, heavy goods vehicles”.

On to bridges. Colin Walker, the head of transport at the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit thinktank, said in the UK there are very few roads or bridges with weight limits below 7.5 tonnes. (Anything heavier than 3.5 tonnes needs a lorry licence in the UK.

The increase in size could theoretically cause problems for some of the oldest car parks, according to Kelvin Reynolds, the chief technical services officer at the British Parking Association. He advised regular surveys by car park owners to make sure their buildings were up to scratch.

However, in the longer term, the assumption that electric cars will always be heavier is also open to question. Auke Hoekstra, an energy transition researcher at the Eindhoven University of Technology, estimates that batteries are cramming twice as much energy into the same weight every decade. If that continues, the weight problem will disappear before it has started.
Click to expand...
I prefer the headline - no one cares about the factual detail ;)
 
Felonious Crud

Felonious Crud

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
21,184
midlifecrisis said:
Add lightness as Colin used to say...

However a Merc SUV that a yummy mummy drives for the school run is miles away from the Corsa/Fiesta her equivalent of 20/30 years ago...it must exacerbate pothole damage.
Click to expand...
Yeah, this is a topic that applies not just to EVs. Cars 20/30 years ago had nothing like the weight of cars now. Tech, safety, consumer choices (SU-fecking-what?) , have all pushed the weight from sub-1 ton to close on or beyond 2, even for 'normal' ICE cars.

That car parks, designed to for Cortina-sized cars that weighed half the weight of cars now, are now struggling to cope is hardly a surprise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.