mikeyv

Another little task for your wife then.....it's good to keep them busy, point her at the racks when leaving the supermarket, loads of free newspapers, and no need to read them. Happy to help.

Firstly, glad your son is ok. It strikes me that there seems to be no damage to either front wheel/tyre, is that the case? If so, I think you'll be hard pushed to blame the pothole for such a dramatic outcome, or to be more accurate, to prove liability. We are, however, missing the most important image, which is the pothole, in the dry, with previously mentioned ruler. I can see why you'd be reluctant to take that risk though.

I've bought a few brand new vehicles. My first was a 1970 Ford Escort, having part exed my first ever car, a 66 Ford Anglia. I remember being excited going to pick it up, but being disappointed within a very short distance, that it felt like just another car. The same has been true of my other two brand new vehicles, very nice, but no different to the various "nearly new" cars I've bought. As an aside, and an indication of how cars have evolved over the years, my 1966 Anglia failed it's first mot in 1969, with corroded rear spring hangers, then, not long after getting the welding done and an mot issued, the engine gave up the ghost. I have to admit I was a bit of a lunatic back then, so maybe the engine was down to me, but the corrosion was a shocker really.

Hate to break it to you Steve, but you're even older than you thought. I was a computer operator, then programmer from 1969 to 1978, and even in 69, they had moved on to punch cards at ICI, where I worked.

I was talking about something less than 4K, but, as you say, we can agree to disagree, it's all about choice.

As Rayaans said, there is tax, insurance, landlord certificates plus maintenance costs, and the possibility of a non paying tenant who also causes damage. But, really, your argument is more about leasing, or pcp etc, against buying outright, rather than new against old. Buying an older car leaves you even more money to invest than leasing.

Agree with the above. This is what put me off an LS600 I saw at auction a year or so back. Looked a lovely car, and was good value in the low teens. The potential was there though, for some big bills, several thousands of pounds per job. You'd have no option but to spend the money, which makes the car now seem very poor value. One important point though, if going the bangernomics route, give yourself a sporting chance by choosing Japanese....... Lexus, Toyota or Honda imo.

Ok, maybe I'm a tad cynical, but that would leave two ways of nicking your car, kidnap you, or chop off just the bit they need, in which case you'd better hope you have the finger print option. At one time, I'd have thought that was unlikely, now, I'm not so sure. There are some horrible sods about.

I'm the same, I can reel off loads of numbers from my distant past, but the more recent stuff escapes me.

I've started a new thread in the lounge, so as not to take this one too far off track.

Thought I'd start a new topic, rather than take the thread about classics, in the ISF section, off track. I was conversing with bigrat about 3 litre Capris, and the reg no of my old one sprang in to my otherwise empty mind. I visited this excellent site LINK , and found that it was no longer on the road. As other numbers, from my many previous cars sprung to mind, I also looked them up, including my 1961 frogeye sprite, bought as a stop gap banger, in 1972 ish. Here's the result Registration: 172JTX Make: AUSTIN Vehicle status Not taxed Tax status Tax due: 01 January 2008 MOT status Expired: 09 November 2007 First registered February 1961 Year of manufacture 1961 Engine size 1100 cc CO2 emissions Not available Fuel type Petrol Colour Red So, it looks like it was on the road till at least 2007, so 46 years, with a chance to reappear again maybe. By the way, regisearch is much better than the official vehicle check, for old vehicles, as my frogeye never appeared on the government site. What's the longest life you can find for one of your old motors?

Mine was blue, with black vinyl roof. Checked reg online, and looks like it died in 86, though must have been resprayed red at some stage. Registration: OAK52M Make: FORD Vehicle status Not taxed Tax status Tax due: 01 August 1986 MOT status No details held by DVLA First registered October 1973 Year of manufacture Not available Engine size 2994 cc CO2 emissions Not available Fuel type Petrol Colour Red My first MGB did better, though changed from harvest gold to green. Registration: PWR701K Make: MG Vehicle status Not taxed Tax status Tax due: 01 May 2014 MOT status Expired: 17 July 2013 First registered May 1972 Year of manufacture 1972 Engine size 1798 cc CO2 emissions Not available Fuel type Petrol Colour Green

Good question, I think you may be right, mine was 73 'M' plate, twin round headlamps. Didn't the 'E' have single oblongs? EDIT:- Just googled capri 3000E, and it looks like you were right, just the earlier version of the top spec model.

I had two MGBs in the 70s, both roadsters, both reliable, and, the crucial bit, great fun with the hood down. Hood up, in bad weather, not so great. They were a bit of a heavy steer, but so were a lot of it's contempories. I never understood the popularity of the GT, as there were far better cars, at the time, for the money. My Capri 3 litre GXL springs to mind, huge fun.

You're all forgetting the biggest cause of flat batteries, the dreaded clip on parking light.

Opening post ^^^^^^^^^^^^, coupled with the thread title, would suggest that IS-F would not figure much in the thread. By the way, Pecker, I don't understand what the wheelchair smiley is about?

To be fair Steve, I think she chose the right pedal to move it, her problem was stopping it!!

The last one I had like this, I used an angle grinder, to carefully make a slot, then used a chisel, as close to parallel to the face of the plug as possible, and a hammer to shock it free. Obviously, do as Steve says first, and make sure the filler plug is free.

Denis, not for the first time, I find your lack of understanding impenetrable. I'll leave it there.

Please stop putting words in my mouth. You said he was a dealer, posing as a private seller. You said that you think that is fine. I said that he reckons not to be a dealer.

It was a short sentence, easy enough to understand. He says he's not a dealer, you clearly think he is.

He says he's not a dealer.

I can guess who that was, he said the same to me, when he did my exhaust a couple of years ago.

Second item no coming up blank, but I can tell you that the number was one of oldbaz's, so I assume he sold that car and the other one in the pic, is the one he's selling now. Who knows though, he moves in mysterious ways.

I've just been to Spain in my camper, and I'm not totally convinced that the suggested position was correct, but at least I was legal, as far as plod was concerned. Next time, I think I'll do some trial and error at night, up against the garage door, before the final fix.