Slashdot Mirror

I was looking at older Ford Mondeos, which mostly come as diesels. I decided against it due to seemingly endless reports of dual mass flywheel failure & injector failure.

Particulate filters becoming clogged is a well known problem, particularly for cars used for town driving so the exhaust doesn't get hot enough to burn off carbon deposits in the filter. Probably the worst problem I heard of in this respect was the Mazda 6, where the engine's attempts to burn excess fuel to try to clear it could result in diesel contaminating & overfilling the engine oil, potentially causing severe damage.

Maybe it's all just the inevitable trouble you get with a new technology and the new ones are better, I don't know. But I prefer to buy second hand and let someone else take the big depreciation hit in any case.

Really? I've seen cars which pre-dated the Model T and are still road-legal (at least in the UK) at vintage/veteran car events.

It is expensive to maintain (and run, if you drive long distances - at least compared to modern cars which are vastly more fuel-efficient) older cars properly if you're used to something <3 years old - but compared to the cost of maintaining an average 1980s (ie 30-year old) car, there's not a huge amount of difference. The main difficulty with replacement parts is you need to find an engineering shop which will do one-offs for those more often than not. But there are a *lot* of people (not owners) who will do this as (at least in part) a labour of love, just for the pleasure of seeing these machines continue to run.

Fuel also isn't a real issue. Leaded petrol (and additives for unleaded) are still available, at least in the UK, from specialist suppliers. For older cars, it was never an issue anyway - as they were never built for leaded petrol anyway and the move back to unleaded petrol was actually a positive for those owners if they hadn't converted their cars. Have a look here for example.

It's important not to confuse equality with fairness though. The calculation of car insurance premiums based on risk is by definition fair, but is incompatible with gender equality.

It's important not to confuse equality with fairness though. The calculation of car insurance premiums based on risk is by definition fair, but is incompatible with gender equality.

It's important not to confuse equality with fairness though. The calculation of car insurance premiums based on risk is by definition fair, but is incompatible with gender equality.

It's important not to confuse equality with fairness though. The calculation of car insurance premiums based on risk is by definition fair, but is incompatible with gender equality.

Diesel is more expensive than petrol here in the UK : http://www.theaa.com/motoring_advice/fuel/index.html

Presumably the idea is that if one in (say) N people who drive past X brand coffee shop would be tempted to buy a coffee that they otherwise would not have. Let's do some arithmetic:

1. * Cost of driving a car (petrol, tyres, servicing) is about 20p/mile
2. * Assume that the sub optimal route adds 1 mile to the journey, so the extra cost is 20p (about 13 cents for the guys on the wrong side of the pond)
3. * Profit by the retailer? Well run cafes should operate on around 25% profit margin, so they make 50p on a £2 cup of coffee
4. * What is the value of N above (the ratio of extra people who stop & buy a coffee) ? I guestimate 30 (ie 1 in 30)
5. * Assuming that the motorist is sane enough to break even, then the coffee shop needs to spend 30*20p = £6 just to earn an extra 50p profit
6. * If 10 local businesses club together to pay for people to take a sub optimal route, then they still pay 60p to earn an extra what .... ?

I suspect that 30 is far too low a number, many people are busy, driving to get somewhere to do something else, ... this just makes the return to the shop keeper even worse.

SUMMARY: it just doesn't add up

I've worked in similar organisations where everything goes on the server for backup purposes. I got called to someone's office once because the hard drive had failed. When I told him what had happened, he said "Take it away! I don't want anything that's unreliable!"
I asked him if he had AA cover on his car, and he said of course he did.
I then pointed out that the only reason he had AA cover was because he believed that at some point his car might fail - and asked why he had a car that was so unreliable. He didn't have an answer for me - and I bet he saved everything to the server from then on in.

I suspect he was just trying to vent his frustration on me because he'd lost all his work when his drive failed.

These days with sub-$100 NAS on the market, there really is no reason to save work on local hard drives in a SMB.

This list only covers models made in Japan, the NHTSA has huge lists of US manufacturer recalls and the AA europe has lists of European manufacturers. As someone who works with car recalls and these lists as a matter of course I must warn that these lists are usually updated with new recalls about 5 years after they happen so for the average number of recalls that happen per year you need to look at 2005 or before.
My point is that though the recent Toyota debacle might have illustrated the shortcomings of the NHTSA's recall evaluation capabilities this is a problem that has been around for years and the massive media attention this particular recall is getting seems at best somewhat hypocritical, and at worst a deliberate smear campaign against Toyota and by extension Japan's entire automotive industry.

For additional hilarity see if you can find the rolls royce who's doors would explode when you hit the window switch, or the large number of models who had problems with seat warmers malfunctioning and catching fire.

Crashes every time in vista x86 when trying to visit this site. http://www.theaa.com/breakdown-cover/european-breakdown-cover.jsp

People taking a car from the UK or Ireland (drive on the left) by ferry/train to the rest of Europe (usually France, as it's nearest) have to buy special stickers to put on the headlights. I don't know if it reduces the effectiveness of the lights though.

Scroll down to "Headlights".

Lets get one thing straight- by coasting (putting the clutch down and rolling) the engine is using the same amount of fuel as idling which is high MPG but isn't the best. By engine braking (using your gears to deaccelerate slowly) you are effectively using zero fuel- at least in most modern cars.

Obviously you could argue that the most fuel effective way to drive is to actually turn the engine off when going down slopes. PLEASE DON'T DO THIS. The reason being (my little anecdote)- I was in a car once my friend turned his engine off at the top of the slope. Stupidly not realising that the breaks are dependant on the pressure which is maintained by an engine running. Needless to say when we needed to brake properly we couldn't- luckily we realised before it was too late and switched it back on.

There are many factors which you can consider to save fuel:

- Keep tire pressure high - by doing this you are creating less resistance on the road.
- Remove unnecessary objects like roof racks which would effect the aerodynamics increasing resistance of the vehicle.
- Unnecessary luggage/weight in general.
- Use higher gears as much as possible. - Windows as cooling are better at saving money than using A/C at speeds under 50mph if my memory serves me correctly.

Fueling up

- Only fuel up half a tank - by doing this you could save yourself a lot because the weight of half a tank of fuel unnecessarily being carried around especially when you do the same route every day and can easily predict the best times to refuel.
- Use www.petrolprices.com (UK) to check for local prices if your wanting to save money.
- I met someone who once said that they only fuel up at night because at night it's colder and fuel expands therefore they get more from the pump. I'm not sure how the pump system actually works but I thought it was an interesting point.
AA tip website: http://www.theaa.com/motoring_advice/fuels-and-environment/drive-smart.html

You can just imagine them changing the taxes so you are taxed more the more you drive.

We are taxed the more we drive... for each mile, I consume fuel, the cost of which is more than 75% tax in the UK. In fact, the UK government charge VAT (=~ value added tax, i.e. sales tax at the point of sale) on top of the excise duty already charged on the fuel, which means that the cost of the VAT is more than the actual value of the fuel!

Stats sources:
http://www.see-search.com/business/fuelandpetrolpr iceseurope.htm
http://www.bts.gov/publications/journal_of_transpo rtation_and_statistics/volume_04_number_01/paper_0 6/html/table11.html
http://www.theaa.com/allaboutcars/fuel/

Here in Europe the fuel prices are vastly different. Where in the US the price this year was between 37.9 and 26.82 UK pence / litre, in the UK it is currently 91 . So you would have to multiply the savings in petrol by 3 or so.
Fortunately in Europe we also have a system of public transport which most environment minded people (like myself) prefer to use rather than pretend we are doing our bit through the purchase of a new car.

Alternatively, you could have bought a diesel. Even less fuel consumption than a hybrid.

Diesel is cheaper than petrol too.

The trouble with hybrids is that they simply don't make ecomomic sense.

Actually, taking into account the total cost of ownership (fuel and maintenance costs, depreciation and other factors), hybrids may save enough money over the long term to more than make up for the "cost" of the hybrid drive system ($2,500 to $3,000, in the case of the Prius).

They've a fair bit to go on this yet, there is no real map data outside of Belfast and it can't even give me directions from Belfast to Dublin at the minute.

Certainly doesnt compare to the AA's Route Planner but has a lot of potential. Would be nice to get some good hi-res sat images of Ireland too.

They've a fair bit to go on this yet, there is no real map data outside of Belfast and it can't even give me directions from Belfast to Dublin at the minute. Certainly doesnt compare to the AA's Route Planner but has a lot of potential. Would be nice to get some good hi-res sat images of Ireland too.

Don't think it'd be illegal, though.

I wonder if his accelerator pedal got stuck under the carpet? e.g. early Lexus IS200s were recalled for this - recall notice

Here in the UK we pay stupid prices for our fuel. Our Diesel costs a tiny fraction more than than unleaded petrol (read Gasoline).

Now for some maths (not my best subject so please correct me if I'm wrong)

We pay on average of 0.80p per litre.

1 us gallon = 3.785 uk litres

Per US gallon we pay 3.03GBP

3.03GBP = aprox 5.30USD (if these rates are correct)

So we pay around 3 times what you guys pay.

This is all thanks to our government who have decided to tax our fuel at a rate of 340%. Our government must be laughing with the looming oil crisis as this is going to be a great extra revenue generator for them.

The Automobile Association (AA) - one of the UK's major roadside assistance organisations - has the following advice:

"There is a perception that a 'lone female' is at risk of being attacked on a motorway hard shoulder. Research shows that the risk of being hit by another vehicle is much greater."

Ditto here in the UK, we have been using this system for at least three years.

Trafficmaster

This data feeds most of the radio, TV, PDA, satnav and breakdown agency traffic reports. You can view live reports here:

Royal Automobile Club
Automobile Association

A network of cameras, which look like blue lampposts on trunk roads (highways) and fly-swatters on motorway bridges (interstates) digitally capture registration numbers (licence plates) and time how long it takes to get from A to B, or A to C etc. If a significant portion of numberplates arrive at A but don't arrive at B or C, then the computer presumes that there is a blockage somewhere near A. It also uses averaging to spot changes in normal traffic flow which indicate delays rather than blockages.

Interestingly, the trunk road system can be easily socially hacked with very major results. There are many classic cases of Trafficmaster being confused by temporary major changes in traffic flow, particularly infrequent events such as village fetes, town picnic days, jousting re-enactments, fireworks etc. If a bunch of cars all go past camera A and then turn off to park in a field for two hours to watch fireworks, the system will flag up point A as a traffic blockage!

I've known some mischevious parish council members specifically plan their event parking arrangements around buggering up Trafficmaster, making sure that the parking entrance is *after* the blue lamp camera... :-)

When cars were introduced, the same thing happened. Eventually, when people understand the issues, reasonable accomodations can be made.

There are no "reasonable accomodations" for cars. They have no speed inhibitors. They can be stolen and driven by anyone too easily. They don't detect if the driver is too young, too drunk, high on drugs etc.

And what is the cost ? The cost is 41,000 American lives each year (US stats). It costs the EU 40,000 lives (EU stats).

That's the equivalent of a Sept 11th every month in the US and every month in Europe ! When is the war against cars going to begin ??

In the UK, perhaps the most expensive place to by fuel in Europe, about 80% of the pump price of unleaded petrol is tax, according to the Automobile Association (note; 'gallons' on the site refer to UK gallons at 4.454litres/gallon as compared to US gallons at, IIRC, 3.8litres/gallon). They also have comparison chart of worldwide fuel prices - compare 21.33 pence/litre in the US against 71 pence/litre in the UK.

In the UK, perhaps the most expensive place to by fuel in Europe, about 80% of the pump price of unleaded petrol is tax, according to the Automobile Association (note; 'gallons' on the site refer to UK gallons at 4.454litres/gallon as compared to US gallons at, IIRC, 3.8litres/gallon). They also have comparison chart of worldwide fuel prices - compare 21.33 pence/litre in the US against 71 pence/litre in the UK.