phelpsa
|
| posted on 22/10/04 at 09:11 PM |
|
|
Most of us got board 8 pages ago!
|
|
|
|
|
Ian Pearson
|
| posted on 22/10/04 at 09:13 PM |
|
|
quote:
david - think you will find there are only really 30 or so posters that post that often.
I don't see the relevance. I have been a member of this forum since 17/1/02 and have 300 odd posts. I have long been of the opinion that some
people are building reputations not cars. I try and read as many posts as my job and time will allow, and post if I think that I've something
constructive to say or add to a topic. No doubt I am sometimes off the mark, but I do know that being a mass poster is no proof of expertise. I think
David Jenkins makes a good point, this topic has outrun it's usefullness.
|
|
|
phelpsa
|
| posted on 22/10/04 at 09:17 PM |
|
|
Ian, some of us have too much time on our hands, thats why I hate half term!
Look at my signiture
Adam
|
|
|
Ian Pearson
|
| posted on 22/10/04 at 09:35 PM |
|
|
Oooops, post 387!!
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 22/10/04 at 10:10 PM |
|
|
it says we'e sad bastards steve! im here cos i like most of the people on here. its a laugh, and im lucky enough to have free time and an
understanding missus. (she send me out to the garage sometimes!)
as for the topic of this thread, i couldnt care less. i love it when they go O/T!
and yes, i know i shouldnt post on political threads etc, but i just cant help myself...
just noticed you've gone sailing pask 5k posts! that came and went fast...
[Edited on 22/10/04 by JoelP]
|
|
|
stephen_gusterson
|
| posted on 22/10/04 at 10:26 PM |
|
|
i have to admit there is a bit of devils advocacy as well as seriousness in my posts in this thread
in the the words of basil fawlty
'dont mention the post count'
atb
another saddo
in common with all the high posters, being on here keeps us out of the womens clothing and gay bars. so it cant be a bad thing 
[Edited on 22/10/04 by stephen_gusterson]
|
|
|
Hugh Paterson
|
| posted on 23/10/04 at 12:44 AM |
|
|
Ah Gay bars, better nites entertainment value than sitting in front of a gogglebox watching Eastenders.
Shug.
|
|
|
dozracing
|
| posted on 23/10/04 at 12:46 AM |
|
|
No one chose to respond to my point that anyone who is that worried about the strength of their wishbones that they feel the need to make checks for
signs of bending every 100 miles, ought to take responsibility for removing them and replacing them with some that allow them to sleep at night. Not
wait for it to fail as they expect it will and then moan about it.
I agree with the principle that once a problem is known then alerting the customers who are likely to have an issue with them is a good thing to do.
But the other point i made that no one responded to was that the manufacture might sell them fit for a purpose, but, you the builder always make your
cars very individual. Different wheels, tyres, driver, springs, shocks, weight, brakes etc, all effect the loadings in the wishbones and we
can't always know what effects this will have on our components. In this case the customer needs to make a judgement and live with the
consequences of whether the parts are fit for their car, if they can't make an informed judgement they should seek expert advice.
Insurance companies are aware of the effect of these kind of modifications, and it effects your premiums if you mod the car. Therefore i see nothing
wrong with putting the responsibility on the kit car builder in these circumstances to determine for themselves whether the specification of the
equipment they use to build the car is suitable.
Luckily in 8 years of F1 design i didn't once have a part fail in a race, and since i have been in kitcar world i have not yet had a part break.
At some stage no doubt if things are successful and the number of parts sold increases then i may have to address the problem in the same way that
Martin has to at the moment. I hope that the customer i'm dealing with at that time is supportive and understandind, because the kit car
industry will die if people take legal action as a matter of course. Overall that is not of benefit to any of us.
Apparently Formula 27 was sold, to pay the legal fees of an action brought against them by a customer that claimed the kit couldn't be built,
and the customer won, despite other builders testifying that they had successfully complete a car. This is bizarre and damages the industry and will
eventually bring and end to it.
Kind regards,
Darren
|
PLEASE NOTE: This user is a trader who has not signed up for the LocostBuilders registration scheme. If this post is advertising a commercial product or service, please report it by clicking here.
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 23/10/04 at 07:33 AM |
|
|
without critising anyone, surely public indemnity insurance is quite important? in my work as a kitchen fitter we have a million pounds of cover, and
a well fitted kitchen (though i say so myself...!) is less dangerous than a kit car! then again, the general public at large are probably more
litigatious (or whatever the word is...)
i personally would never sue a kit car manuf, or indeed anyone really, unless they had directly caused me a specific loss. ie, RTA claim for damage
and expense but no whiplash etc.
[Edited on 27/10/04 by JoelP]
|
|
|
marc n
|
| posted on 23/10/04 at 07:55 AM |
|
|
surely public indemnity insurance is quite important? in my work as a kitchen fitter we have a million pounds of cover, and a well fitted kitchen
(though i say so myself...!) is less dangerous than a kit car! then again, the general public at large are probably more litigatious (or whatever
the word is...)
Hi joel quite agree, our policy includes cover for public indemnity insurance to a value of 4 million !!!!, we have an all in one policy that includes
premises tools cars trucks personal injury flood damage etc, but at nearly 5 1/2 k a year it does take some swallowing sometimes, but better to be
safe than sorry ! because of cost i do wonder how many are properly covered because like i say 5 1/2 k on insurance takes some paying for??
regards
marc
|
NOTE:This user is registered as a LocostBuilders trader and may offer commercial services to other users
|
Rob Lane
|
| posted on 23/10/04 at 08:37 AM |
|
|
I wholeheartedly agree with Darren.
The builder of a car has to take responsibility for his build, for both safety and suitability.
It's why the SVA was first introduced, to at least obtain some kind of standard.
Each and every build is different, in the case of wishbones on an open suspension car they are very exposed.
Different loadings on suspension caused by different rate springs, shocks, wheel size, leverage points, further welding of parts can all contribute to
a possible failure of some description. However in the case of wishbones I doubt whether it would be sudden and dramatic.
This has not been a major issue, one or two 'racing' wishbones maybe bent in use under race conditions. As far as I'm aware none
failed completely.
Just the same happened to me, I hit a large pothole mid corner at speed and the wishbone bent severely, no accident, no loss of control.
Cause: Bottomed spring on shocker left suspension with no further movement. This, a standard book chassis and wishbones with usual limited suspension
movement range.
I've had a well publicised accident whereby I managed to write off a Rover when I hit it in 'B' pillar. The Rover faired worse.
(Not my fault and admitted by driver)
My wishbones were damaged but only the top wishbone was destroyed, even then not fully until I pulled it off.
The bottom wishbone was bent on both rails but still intact. I still have the photos and they were in Locost Club newsletter at the time. They took
the major brunt of the impact.
As far as mainstream manufactured cars such as Ford go, they are designed to accept a wide range of abuse, from drivers who go 'offroad'
to 'kerbers'.
The Locost was built as a performance enthusiasts car with racing heritage. It was probably not designed for any of the above abuse. That appears
self evident.
It's virtually impossible for any driver to state catagorically that he did not hit a heavy bump during a journey, he did not hit a pothole, he
did not kerb the car.
Pure driving concentration and a familiarity with 'normal' driving incidents mean that such occurances are forgotten within seconds of
them fleetingly entering our conciousness.
If you have new tyres fitted and travel out of the depot and cover say approx 5 miles home. Then notice a 'bleb' in tyre sidewall and
return to depot to complain. They will not entertain the claim, as the wishbone issue, they have no way of knowing from the moment you leave what
happens to that car in normal road use.
I'm surprised that a person that checks his wishbones every 100 miles hasn't changed them. He was obviously concerned about them and as
such has only himself to blame if he didn't change the wishbones.
[Edited on 23/10/04 by Rob Lane]
|
|
|
Rob Lane
|
| posted on 23/10/04 at 10:03 AM |
|
|
Rubber bump stops were fitted to shocks
They are OK as cornering lean is accomodated but not for a sudden heavy load change which transfers all loading to wishbone.
I'm currently making oval heavy wall tube lower wishbones.
I'm not sure this is a good idea really, as should the above occur again the shock loads are transferred to chassis. This would cause the whole
car to lift and loose traction.
To be honest, it's not been a factor but I like the look of the oval tube, so I'm going that way. I would quite happily make another set
using round tube as before.
When my original wishbone bent it did so upwards in a linear fashion, as all will do when both arms bend.
It did not cause loss of control but added further negative camber to front wheel and caused car to take on a lean.
Locosts have very limited suspension travel in book form, especially droop front and rear.
This is due to lower chassis rails fouling lower wishbones and trailing arms respectively in both instances.
|
|
|
dozracing
|
| posted on 23/10/04 at 11:28 AM |
|
|
My GTS shock kits are all supplied with a rubber bump stop.
I don't know the ins and out of the F27 case, but, i guess that either the offer of a refund was turned down, or that as you said it
wasn't offered. If you come up against arseholes like this though, refund aren't good enough for them they want blood.
For Marc Nordens benefit and others, the insurance won't cover you if they bring a claim of negligence, which most times is the only case they
will try to bring against you. You can't even escape by being LTD, if its negligence they get you for they will come after the directors.
|
PLEASE NOTE: This user is a trader who has not signed up for the LocostBuilders registration scheme. If this post is advertising a commercial product or service, please report it by clicking here.
|
Metal Hippy
|
| posted on 23/10/04 at 10:53 PM |
|
|
Nice to see things don't change in the enforced absence of the hippy...
Cock off or cock on. You choose.
|
|
|
phil2
|
| posted on 24/10/04 at 07:11 PM |
|
|
HI GUYS I THINK YOU VE GONE WRONG SUM WHERE AS I AM NOT MARTINS BROTHER AND DO NOT WORK FOR HIM EITHER. SO GET YOUR FACTS RIGHT
CHEERS
|
|
|
Jon Ison
|
| posted on 24/10/04 at 07:26 PM |
|
|
Ide worked that one out pretty quick, that was unless some people had changed there names on the quiet,
|
|
|
mookaloid
|
| posted on 25/10/04 at 10:35 AM |
|
|
Phil at MK signs his emails phil2 have we got 2 phil2's?
|
|
|
Syd Bridge
|
| posted on 26/10/04 at 08:48 AM |
|
|
I wasn't going to continue this, but couldn't pass this one up..........
Read Darren's 'Terms and Conditions'.
Guess who's just sh*t himself about liability????
All the guff says that you are responsible for what you put on your car, regardless of who you bought it from, and what they told you it can do.
He even goes so far as to say you have got to test it yourself, prior to fitting!!!!.
And he says he can sell you what he wants, of any standard and suitability, then wash his hands of it.
Your 'terms and Conditions' don't absolve you from your Statutory Obligations, Darren, no matter how officious and daunting your
'T&C's' may appear to be.
The only thing you can do is put a Big sticker on your parts, just like Wilwood.
WARNING: FOR RACING USE ONLY. or WARNING: NOT FOR USE ON PUBLIC ROADS.
Get some Product Liability Insurance, then engineer your stuff properly! Are you a member of STATUS? Dr.George and Denzil and the team would be more
than happy to test and certify your products.
All that guff wouldn't stand up in court. Get a refund from the solicitor who told you it will.
You make it. You sell it. You're responsible for it.
Cheers,
Syd.
Just wait until Euro Law gets its grubby hands on us. You won't be able to 'pass wind', without taking responsibility for emissions
and standards!!!!
|
|
|
flyingkiwi
|
| posted on 26/10/04 at 11:16 PM |
|
|
Dunno why but I thought I would add my two pence worth.
The aircraft world takes failure of components rather seriously. Guess we have too. And having just spent the two week's fixing a duff sea
harrier that just happened to lose a drop tank during a flight for no apparent reason has really annoyed me. The release unit took it apon itself to
open it's jaw's and BOMBS AWAY! releasing the tank, trashing half of the plane and then nearly falling onto the A303. The point is the
whole Sea harrier fleet was grounded within minutes of this accident happening, just in case. The inquiry has only just worked out that the release
unit cocking handle was 1 degree out of alignment. 4 other harriers were found with the same problem.
I'm all up for people advertising possible serious fault's with vehicle's on this website, regardless whether they have been covered
before, as I don't have the time to trawl through 4 year's of past post's to see if my wishbone's, engine mount's or any
other part of the car will fail, and the last thing I want to do is go around a corner, have a component fail then trash some innocent family on a
drive.
My wishbone's are not from MK but are based apon their design. And if anything on my car (when it's eventually finished) seriously failed,
regardless of whether I brought it from someone or made it myself I will stick it up here so it my help other people. Safey should be
everyone's issue, because if you turn a blind eye to it, it will come back and bite your ass. I doubt anyone on here has the money or resources
to fully test the locost design to the same standard as manufactures can, but if we all pool together then serious/potentially fatal problem's
can be indentified and rectified.
I thought this was the whole point of this forum. Not a venue for people bashing.
Cheers
Kiwi
It Runs!!!!! Bring on the SVA!
|
|
|
David Jenkins
|
| posted on 27/10/04 at 08:00 AM |
|
|
One way to deal with this...
As far as I can see, we have:
- 1 poster (Syd) ranting at every opportunity, and throwing his toys out of the pram as often as possible.
- A small number of posters who have concerns, but post reasonable comments.
- A very small number of rabid manufacturer supporters who will accept no criticism, even if accurate or justified.
- A dozen or so people who feel that builders should take some responsibility for the parts they buy.
- Several hundred less active posters who couldn't give a stuff.
This is not an evenly balanced argument! I fear that Syd's comments are receiving unwarranted publicity, in the way that 'he who shouts
loudest gets his way'. He writes well, and is obviously literate, so it is not a case of someone saying something he hadn't intended - he
knows exactly what he has written.
Perhaps the best way to deal with this is to not react to Syd's posts, unless he says something reasonable and fair. Otherwise, treat him in
the same way as you would treat a blatent troller in a newsgroup - ignore him and don't respond. Skip over his topics and pay attention to the
real, sociable world of Locosts.
Best regards,
David
[Edited on 27/10/04 by David Jenkins]
|
|
|
Hugh Jarce
|
| posted on 27/10/04 at 08:38 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by David Jenkins
Perhaps the best way to deal with this is to not react to Syd's posts, unless he says something reasonable and fair. Otherwise, treat him in
the same way as you would treat a blatent troller in a newsgroup - ignore him and don't respond. Skip over his topics and pay attention to the
real, sociable world of Locosts.
Best regards,
David
[Edited on 27/10/04 by David Jenkins]
I've been desparately trying to do just that since first seeing one of Syd's posts. He's so antagonistic and provocative through his
sheer ignorance and ill manners that it makes the task painfully difficult.
I promise to try harder.
I disagree with you about Syd's literacy though.
The pay isn't very good , but the work's hard.
|
|
|
David Jenkins
|
| posted on 27/10/04 at 09:45 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Hugh Jarce
I disagree with you about Syd's literacy though.
I was comparing him with some regular posters (who I will not name) who obviously find it hard to put words together, and sometimes unintentionally
say things they shouldn't. Invariably those people correct their errors one they are pointed out.
SYd's words are thought out, and clearly convey his meaning, however inflamatory or malicious.
DJ
|
|
|
Syd Bridge
|
| posted on 27/10/04 at 10:18 AM |
|
|
snoopy you most definitely know the car is not mine as you have already spoken to the owner and seen pictures as relayed to me your reply was not
considerate caring or polite if it were mine you surely would have seen pictures on this forum i wanted to take pictures but was not allowed due to
possible impending action
For the rest of the forum,
Snoopy, you most definitely know the car is not mine, as you have already spoken to the owner and seen pictures. As relayed to me, your reply was not
considerate, caring, or polite. If it were mine, you surely would have seen pictures on this forum. I wanted to take pictures, but was not allowed due
to possible impending action.,
[quote
Syd's words are thought out, and clearly convey his meaning, however inflamatory or malicious.
DJ
Thank you David, I do try and think about what I say. Unfortunately,( for whom I am not sure!) I still speak and think my colloquial, rural
Australian. But was taught to write English. And therein lies the difference. What I write appears to come across with a vastly different meaning to
this forum, from that which I wrote it with.
Where I come from, I could call you a 'bastard', and mean two completely opposite things. Tone of voice and facial expression cannot be
conveyed in print. ( At least not without a script like film director's notes. )
If I meant malice, my words would be very different, indeed.
Regards,
Syd.
|
|
|
David Jenkins
|
| posted on 27/10/04 at 10:39 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Syd Bridge
Thank you David, I do try and think about what I say.
It was an observation, not a compliment.
DJ
|
|
|
Micael
|
| posted on 27/10/04 at 11:01 AM |
|
|
Just sitting and enjoing my after lunch coffe at the same time browsing the forum. Suddely i find this thread which i have toally missed.
So what to do guys? Should i throw my wishbones away and buy/make new once?
[Edited on 27/10/04 by Micael]
Micael Moose Åman
Petrolhead and all around nice guy
"Don't leave the duck there. It's totally irresponsible. Put it on the swing, it'll have much more fun." //Sleep Talkin Man Dec 23
2009
|
|
|
