On 03/10/2019 14:57, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 03/10/2019 09:36, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 03/10/2019 08:20, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/10/2019 08:17, Andy Burns wrote:
Max Demian wrote:

What if the nozzle is in the /middle/, cunningly concealed behind
the rear number plate, which hinges down for access?

Presumably safety provisions such as nCAP have put paid to that
sort of thing?Â* Or with more or less global car models, the laws
in the US are applied everywhere?

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/393.65

Its not that laws are global, but if you manufacture for your
tightest market, its is unlikely to make sense doing it differently
for any other

Well that's TNP saying one of the main reasons claimed for brexit,
being able to have different standards for different markets, out of
the window.
Remain voters have said this from the beginning.

Rubbish. Whether to do that or not, once we are out, becomes a
commercial matter for the company involved, rather than purposelessly
being forced upon them.

But the effect is the same and you have claimed they won't do it and
will manufacture shoddy goods for other markets, are you now saying
remainers were right all along like TNP said?

No it isn't as while we are in, we are obliged, for domestic
consumption, to manufacture to EU standards, regardless of whether or
not we export the item in question to the EU, and regardless of whether
our people think that standard is excessive.

If we export the same item to the US (say), we manufacture to *US*
standards. That should be obvious and already happens. If we didn't,
then the US wouldn't accept the import.

That would be because we manufacture to the higher standard.
Then the USA and the EU accept the goods.
Its not really worth doing two different ones as TNP stated.
So yet again your argument about EU standards is worthless.

On 03/10/2019 22:11, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 03/10/2019 14:57, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 03/10/2019 09:36, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 03/10/2019 08:20, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/10/2019 08:17, Andy Burns wrote:
Max Demian wrote:

What if the nozzle is in the /middle/, cunningly concealed
behind the rear number plate, which hinges down for access?

Presumably safety provisions such as nCAP have put paid to that
sort of thing?Â* Or with more or less global car models, the laws
in the US are applied everywhere?

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/393.65

Its not that laws are global, but if you manufacture for your
tightest market, its is unlikely to make sense doing it
differently for any other

Well that's TNP saying one of the main reasons claimed for brexit,
being able to have different standards for different markets, out
of the window.
Remain voters have said this from the beginning.

Rubbish. Whether to do that or not, once we are out, becomes a
commercial matter for the company involved, rather than purposelessly
being forced upon them.

But the effect is the same and you have claimed they won't do it and
will manufacture shoddy goods for other markets, are you now saying
remainers were right all along like TNP said?

No it isn't as while we are in, we are obliged, for domestic
consumption, to manufacture to EU standards, regardless of whether or
not we export the item in question to the EU, and regardless of whether
our people think that standard is excessive.

If we export the same item to the US (say), we manufacture to *US*
standards. That should be obvious and already happens. If we didn't,
then the US wouldn't accept the import.

That would be because we manufacture to the higher standard.
Then the USA and the EU accept the goods.
Its not really worth doing two different ones as TNP stated.
So yet again your argument about EU standards is worthless.

It won't be a question of whether the standard is higher or lower, but
of compatibility. The sort of thing I'm, talking about is e.g. the US
not accepting orange direction indicators or wanting stronger bumpers.
Remember those 5mph bumpers of the 70s? California only, but mandatory
none the less.


You can have orange indicators in the USA.
Bumpers aren't an issue its crush zones that matter as you will see if
you know anything about USA car construction.

What is stupid is that the USA allows the use of the brake lights as
indicators which some European manufacturers have adopted as its just a
software change and the saving of a 10p bulb. Some haven't as they go
for the safer option.

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
That would be because we manufacture to the higher standard.
Then the USA and the EU accept the goods.
Its not really worth doing two different ones as TNP stated.
So yet again your argument about EU standards is worthless.

It won't be a question of whether the standard is higher or lower, but
of compatibility. The sort of thing I'm, talking about is e.g. the US
not accepting orange direction indicators or wanting stronger bumpers.
Remember those 5mph bumpers of the 70s? California only, but mandatory
none the less.

They were only mandatory in the country which required them. Some UK
makers did fit them to UK cars, ruining both looks and sales. MG being the
obvious one.

--
*Never miss a good chance to shut up *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
dennis@home wrote:
What is stupid is that the USA allows the use of the brake lights as
indicators which some European manufacturers have adopted as its just a
software change and the saving of a 10p bulb. Some haven't as they go
for the safer option.

Pray tell what car for sale in the UK has this?

--
*If they arrest the Energizer Bunny, would they charge it with battery? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman wrote:

dennis@home wrote:

What is stupid is that the USA allows the use of the brake lights as
indicators which some European manufacturers have adopted as its just a
software change and the saving of a 10p bulb. Some haven't as they go
for the safer option.

Pray tell what car for sale in the UK has this?

I can't think if any in the UK and would doubt any in continental europe
either, though as dennis says, the light clusters are re-configurable
over CANBUS, so you can alter indicators to be amber running lights, or
pair reversing lights with indicators as a wig-wag pair, or make brake
and fog lights flash as indicators etc

The stupid light clusters are the ones where amber indicators surround
red brake lights or vice-versa making one merge into the other when lit.

On 04/10/2019 11:29, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
dennis@home wrote:
What is stupid is that the USA allows the use of the brake lights as
indicators which some European manufacturers have adopted as its just a
software change and the saving of a 10p bulb. Some haven't as they go
for the safer option.

Pray tell what car for sale in the UK has this?


I have seen a couple of american imports and some european cars where
the stupid driver has thought it was a good idea to change the settings
on his car.

It really is stupid as it takes a second or two to tell the difference
between someone braking and them indicating.

On 03/10/2019 22:11, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 03/10/2019 14:57, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 03/10/2019 09:36, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 03/10/2019 08:20, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/10/2019 08:17, Andy Burns wrote:
Max Demian wrote:

What if the nozzle is in the /middle/, cunningly concealed
behind the rear number plate, which hinges down for access?

Presumably safety provisions such as nCAP have put paid to that
sort of thing?Â* Or with more or less global car models, the laws
in the US are applied everywhere?

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/393.65

Its not that laws are global, but if you manufacture for your
tightest market, its is unlikely to make sense doing it
differently for any other

Well that's TNP saying one of the main reasons claimed for brexit,
being able to have different standards for different markets, out
of the window.
Remain voters have said this from the beginning.

Rubbish. Whether to do that or not, once we are out, becomes a
commercial matter for the company involved, rather than purposelessly
being forced upon them.

But the effect is the same and you have claimed they won't do it and
will manufacture shoddy goods for other markets, are you now saying
remainers were right all along like TNP said?

No it isn't as while we are in, we are obliged, for domestic
consumption, to manufacture to EU standards, regardless of whether or
not we export the item in question to the EU, and regardless of whether
our people think that standard is excessive.

If we export the same item to the US (say), we manufacture to *US*
standards. That should be obvious and already happens. If we didn't,
then the US wouldn't accept the import.

That would be because we manufacture to the higher standard.
Then the USA and the EU accept the goods.
Its not really worth doing two different ones as TNP stated.
So yet again your argument about EU standards is worthless.

It won't be a question of whether the standard is higher or lower, but
of compatibility. The sort of thing I'm, talking about is e.g. the US
not accepting orange direction indicators or wanting stronger bumpers.
Remember those 5mph bumpers of the 70s? California only, but mandatory
none the less.

Correct. The EU will not accept goods with a black live and a white
neutral and the US will not accept a brown live and blue neutral. Some
stardards are simply different and you cannot design and manufacture
something that satisfies both.

Of course voltage and frequency are also different, units of
measurement, each country bans certain chemicals, etc.

SteveW

In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
Correct. The EU will not accept goods with a black live and a white
neutral and the US will not accept a brown live and blue neutral.

Are you sure about that for the US?

--
*Acupuncture is a jab well done*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
This example perfectly illustrates Den's difficulty. He and Our Dave
and others imagine that "standards" refers to, and ONLY refers to,
"higher/lower quality".

You think standardising wire colours effect the quality of a product? Is
red PVC a better insulator than black, then?
Or are you simply talking ****e again?


As you point out "standards" can simply be
"different but mandatory".

--
*If vegetable oil comes from vegetables, where does baby oil come from? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 06/10/2019 10:47, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
This example perfectly illustrates Den's difficulty. He and Our Dave
and others imagine that "standards" refers to, and ONLY refers to,
"higher/lower quality".

You think standardising wire colours effect the quality of a product? Is
red PVC a better insulator than black, then?
Or are you simply talking ****e again?

No. He thinks that *you* can't think and in effect are thinking ****e again.



As you point out "standards" can simply be
"different but mandatory".

In article ,
Richard wrote:
On 06/10/2019 10:47, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
This example perfectly illustrates Den's difficulty. He and Our Dave
and others imagine that "standards" refers to, and ONLY refers to,
"higher/lower quality".

You think standardising wire colours effect the quality of a product? Is
red PVC a better insulator than black, then?
Or are you simply talking ****e again?

No. He thinks that *you* can't think and in effect are thinking ****e again.

Good response. For you. Now try reading and understanding the thread. If
you can.



As you point out "standards" can simply be
"different but mandatory".


--
*It's not hard to meet expenses... they're everywhere.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 07/10/2019 14:19, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Richard wrote:
On 06/10/2019 10:47, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
This example perfectly illustrates Den's difficulty. He and Our Dave
and others imagine that "standards" refers to, and ONLY refers to,
"higher/lower quality".

You think standardising wire colours effect the quality of a product? Is
red PVC a better insulator than black, then?
Or are you simply talking ****e again?

No. He thinks that *you* can't think and in effect are thinking ****e again.

Good response. For you.

Thank you.


Now try reading and understanding the thread. If
you can.

I did the first time. I will break it into small bits for you to get
your thinking gear around:
Tim responds to Steve's:
q
Correct. The EU will not accept goods with a black live and a white
neutral and the US will not accept a brown live and blue neutral. Some
stardards are simply different and you cannot design and manufacture
something that satisfies both.

Of course voltage and frequency are also different, units of
measurement, each country bans certain chemicals, etc.
/q

with this:
q
This example perfectly illustrates Den's difficulty. He and Our Dave
and others imagine that "standards" refers to, and ONLY refers to,
"higher/lower quality". As you point out "standards" can simply be
"different but mandatory".
/q

Nowhere in there is the slightest suggestion that, to quote you, "..
wire colours effect the quality of a product."




As you point out "standards" can simply be
"different but mandatory".

In article ,
Richard wrote:
This example perfectly illustrates Den's difficulty. He and Our Dave
and others imagine that "standards" refers to, and ONLY refers to,
"higher/lower quality". As you point out "standards" can simply be
"different but mandatory".
/q

Nowhere in there is the slightest suggestion that, to quote you, "..
wire colours effect the quality of a product."

Good to see you have to answer for our Timmy.

Now quote where I said standards *only* refer to quality...

Which is why I asked that question of Timmy...

--
*Why do they put Braille on the drive-through bank machines?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 07/10/2019 17:20, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Richard wrote:
This example perfectly illustrates Den's difficulty. He and Our Dave
and others imagine that "standards" refers to, and ONLY refers to,
"higher/lower quality". As you point out "standards" can simply be
"different but mandatory".
/q

Nowhere in there is the slightest suggestion that, to quote you, "..
wire colours effect the quality of a product."

Good to see you have to answer for our Timmy.

I don't have to answer for Tim (or your preferred endearment, Timmy),
just helping to improve your comprehension.


Now quote where I said standards *only* refer to quality...

Which is why I asked that question of Timmy...


Cue Tim (Timmy).