Welcome Nigel but E85 ? Eeeeek !
Seriously no doubt you know that the recent change in UK petrol from E5 to E10 has upset the Classic Car Community quite a bit, Ethanol is Hygroscopic and so - potentially - leads to water in the fuel pipes and thus corrosion, and it also attacks rubber pipes. (Some of this may just be over-reacting but at 85% these issues may actually be quite real). Not sure quite how it would affect Emissions either.... Keep us posted !
PS: Looks like you get 33% less 'bang for your buck too': https://www.dynojet.com/blog/e85-fuel-more-power-or-more-problems
PPS: And it gets worse..... https://fuelandfriction.com/weekend-warrior/e85-dont-do-it-unless-you-know/
Looks good but states 'engine damage' in the ad: Can anyone recall the details of that ?
Yes Richard, I am aware of the limitations at Halfords; Quite good for bikes/bits/e-scooters though (apparently) !
(I remember that CEO too: Much more interested in a fast-track career that anything even remotely technical.)
Lpgc/Brian: As stated/posted earlier:
Sloth wrote:
Natural selection is underrated.
Just so long as they don't take anyone else out with them, preferably.
Indeed, anyone else including me (and god knows they have tried a few times...)
Edit: Just as i sent that I received a "429 too many requests" message....
Maybe Halfords is trying to 'nobble' the site ?
Thankyou Sloth, seriously. You have certainly removed the ambivalence there.
Unfortunately Common Sense seems to have been rather eroded, mainly by the unregulated nature of SM,
I have lost count of the number of odd 'car' things I have encountered and/or been sent too...
Err No Sloth... in fact I know quite a lot about cars myself.... not just P38s and again I really don't owe anyone explanations about that either.
Lost count of the number of times I have had cars A/C charged though and they also performed a vacuum test too, is that better for you than the RAC link ? Beyond the criticisms it seem that a pressure test is advisable too..
I would also take issue about suggesting DIY dangerous stuff in the A/C: Whilst You/Richard are obviously technically very competant, indeed the majority of us on here are, but not everyone who reads this is of course
Incidentally my R134a comment was also partly for Lpgc's benefit too, no need for the hostility....
No Sloth you did not say anything about butane/propane being (un)safe - which is why I did ! The point is that R134a is the stuff legally sold at Halfords and will happily work without all the possible dangers of your mix of course.
Anyway relax, and no doubt Richard will also castigate me too in due course....
Yes, as in #12 Halfords sell R134a and no loopholes are involved.
R134a is chemically very similar to R134, the latter has a NBP of -19C (compared -26C for the 'a' version, thus making this more suitable for (lower pressure) car A/C purposes). The mixture you suggested Sloth could not be sold of course. it is not safe !!
Mind you when I was in Halfords buying a can of this I asked for a Torx T-25 for my P38 - but they refused to sell me one unless I showed them my C&G LR Skills Certificate first .... !!
Well then perhaps you should get straight onto Halfords' case too then Richard !
Thank you for your allegation that I may have committed an offence. You may be wrong too !
Surely their "should" implies choice there Richard, ie. not "mandatory", otherwise they would say "must" ? .....
or is Sloth demanding we must use our A/C all the year ?!
-Seriously I suspect you are just wearing your professional hat there, I have certainly re-gassed from a can,
without breaking any rules and/or having to eat any porridge...
Richard; Please advise the RAC - as i suspect you know more than they do (or the rules changed) !
"They should also perform a vacuum test to check for any cracks or leaks that could prevent your air-con working in the future."
https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/advice/car-maintenance/air-con-regassing/
Part of the problem is if you don't use the A/C the seals/o-rings can shrink of course (and just re-gassing may not fully resolve that issue). If you have not run the A/C for a while a vacuum test is advised before re-gassing too.
For those thinking the A/C is not needed in the winter running it now and again (eg. every week) can be important.
Yes, that may be a part of it Richard but the 315Mhz band is pretty crowded there with all their RKE devices etc too:
There has to be something else in the US Rcvr. design that either makes it more selective or the front end is less
easy to saturate (?). P38 problems existed way before the 433Mz weather-stations etc were ubiquitous here.....
(Yes, it's academic anyway and I am sure LR won't ever tell us.....!)
EDIT: (For those actually interested, eg. not for any Wifi-wafflers...); In the US the FCC-permitted power levels for RKE are some 5dB lower for 315Mhz than 433Mhz; Initially that seems to explain the difference in P38 Rcvr. interference problems - as compared to the UK.
However in general 315Mhz RKE manufacturers thus tend to raise their Rcvr. sensitivity by 2 or 3dB to 'compensate' for this ...
Maybe LR US didn't do that though ??
Richard, I was simply referring to CDMA as opposed to TDMA (but even the latter has 'dynamic' power levels); We can get into RF technologies/Cell size (and resultant power levels) but P38-vintage Cellular effects are/were different in the US of course (and that means different interference effects too, as per the OPs concerns....).
Such esoterics apart, my actual question/point above relates to why they did not seem to have the Rcvr. issue in the US. (?)
Morat; ?? Wifi/802.11etc did/does come in different (power) levels, which are Regulated anyway.
These discussions always make me wonder how the useless Rcvr. in our rigs did not attract a huge Class Action in the US.
Their Cell towers can pump out some serious Wattage so the problem should/must have been much worse there.....?
Interesting conversion there unimog: Knew the 4.0/4.6 difference was stroke not bore but are the conrods also interchangable too ? Wondering about the ECU map differences now too....
No problem Craig, but you can't get the glass out without opening the door first.....
Yes, removing the rear door and cutting etc is another way, but as access is (still) restricted you may do more damage if
not careful.. I recall some have removed the card with the door closed (by removing the seat first).
Have a look when it's dark (!) if you are going the bash the top of the lock off wrap some foam round the rod/implement
to protect the glass... as well as bits of plastic there is a lever and a spring inside the lock. Once the lock is smashed like
this it is also U/S for locking the door too of course. When this happened to me it then 'just' involved entering the car via
another door and clambering about inside.....
Anyone still have the original Brabyn info. where this process is explained ?
First Craig it would have been best to post in the 'Electrickery' section, but that's the least of your problems.
Sounds like your 'Superlock' is permanently engaged, probably the servo/solenoid for this has failed or the electrical circuit to it has malfunctioned...
If so the 'butchery' necessary involves first winding the window fully down and breaking open the top of the (plastic) lock module...
A two-foot 1/4" sharpened rod works well.. Hints; You can see it all better at night, and protect the glass !
BrianH; Unfortunately TfL have a reputation for saying "We are considering it" as a pre-cursor to 'bad news' (so don't hold your breath wrt any LPG concessions). Their ULEZ was (primarily) supposed to discourage diesels, but, as I understand it LPG has ~5% of the NOx diesels produce. Perhaps if the various LPG organisations presented empirical evidence of that then concessions could have been made ? .... However their "LPG only" remark is their 'preference' ?
The 'joke' of course is that you pay your £12.50 and you can then drive around the ULEZ all day....!