On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 22:39:38 +0000, Fredxx, the brain dead troll-feeding
senile idiot, babbled again:


Show us how you work out you can stop and all UK legal speeds in less
than 2 seconds?

I said you can't.

I say you still haven't worked out that you have become a troll's prey,
senile idiot! BG

On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 09:57:29 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH more of the two sociopathic cretins' endless sick **** unread

--
Typical retarded "conversation" between the Scottish ****** and the senile
Ozzietard:

Birdbrain: "Horse **** doesn't stink."

Senile Rodent: "It does if you roll in it."

Birdbrain: "I've never worked out why, I assumed it was maybe meateaters
that made stinky ****, but then why does vegetarian human **** stink? Is it
just the fact that we're capable of digesting meat?"

Senile Rodent: "Nope, some cow **** stinks too."

Message-ID:

On 27/01/2020 23:04:06, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 22:38:30 -0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 27/01/2020 20:05:36, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 19:56:57 -0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 27/01/2020 19:40:03, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 19:17:49 -0000, NY wrote:

"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
newsp.0e18vcyvwdg98l@glass...
It's not dangerously close, I can see taillights easily in the fog.
If I
can't, then I'm going so fast I'm going to run off the road anyway.

How close do you have to get before you can see the taillights of the
car in
front? Fog lights allow you still to see the car at a much greater
distance - to allow for the normal 2-second rule

If you need 2 seconds to stop, please surrender your license.

That shows how clueless you are.

Come back with the true stopping times, I know you can't.

It's less than it says in the highway code, since I don't have drum
brakes.

Have you read the Highway Code recently? Are you illiterate? Where does
it give stopping *times*?

It gives distances at specific speeds.* Speed = distance over time, hope
this helps.

You're not very bright.

1) We have established the Highway Code does not give stopping times.

2) We have also established you don't have a clue to calculate stopping
times.

3) BTW You ought to be calculating time, not speed. Do you know the
difference?

"NY" wrote in message
...
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Roger Hayter wrote:
I think what you do is exactly the right thing to do with torque
converter transmission. I've no idea about the newer systems. Perhaps
if they disengage completely when stopped there is no reason to take
them out of "drive".

There's generally no need to put a TC transmission in neutral under heavy
traffic conditions, as the TC is designed to handle vastly more heat than
this generates. Like when going up hill, etc.

With a conventional clutch type, the clutch only 'slips' when moving off
from rest. With idling in a traffic jam in drive, it is slightly engaged
to provide the creep function. And since many are multi plate wet types,
may also drag slightly at all times when nominally disengaged, generating
some heat. But in neutral or park, any drag will simply spin the
layshaft(s)

I was thinking more of avoiding the need to keep my foot on the brake,
rather than "wear" (heating up) of the torque converter. I imagine that
most handbrakes aren't enough to prevent an auto creeping in drive - or at
least, can't be *guaranteed* to avoid it...

The one in my Getz does. If I try to drive off with the handbrake
still on the car sort of just squats, doesn’t move at all.

"bert" wrote in message
...
In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
bert wrote:
In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
What
it doesn't seem to like is the handbrake on and being in drive for long
periods on a hot day. BTW, I left foot brake on an auto.
"Normal" autos should not be held in drive with brake on for long
periods esp. on a hot day - hydraulic fluid overheats.

Just how much heat to you think it generates lugging a caravan up a hill?
I'll give you a clue. A lot more than when idling.

All my car manufacturers of the autos I've had must have got it wrong in
the handbooks then. Perhaps I should write to them all and tell them
Plow**** says you are all wrong. That would be BL, Renault, VW, LR, Jeep,
Suzuki. Don't think I've missed anyone.

Hyundai has never said that.

On 27/01/2020 19:04, polygonum_on_google wrote:
Does a fraction of a second make a scrap of real world difference?

Yes.

A car coming towards you at 70mph is covering 31 meters in a second.

A third of a second hesitation brings it 10 meters closer to impact.


--
Truth welcomes investigation because truth knows investigation will lead
to converts. It is deception that uses all the other techniques.

On 27/01/2020 20:20, mm0fmf wrote:
On 27/01/2020 19:51, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Â*Â*Â* NY wrote:
I was thinking more of avoiding the need to keep my foot on the brake,
rather than "wear" (heating up) of the torque converter. I imagine that
most handbrakes aren't enough to prevent an auto creeping in drive - or
at least, can't be *guaranteed* to avoid it...

Not deserving the name of brake if it can't prevent an auto creeping.

+1
And an automatic MOT failure.


--
"Women actually are capable of being far more than the feminists will
let them."

On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 11:06:13 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


I was thinking more of avoiding the need to keep my foot on the brake,
rather than "wear" (heating up) of the torque converter. I imagine that
most handbrakes aren't enough to prevent an auto creeping in drive - or at
least, can't be *guaranteed* to avoid it...

The one in my Getz does. If I try to drive off with the handbrake
still on the car sort of just squats, doesn¢t move at all.

Who knows, you clinically insane auto-contradicting senile pest!

--
Sqwertz to Rot Speed:
"This is just a hunch, but I'm betting you're kinda an argumentative
asshole.
MID:

On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 15:04:48 +1100, Ray, better known as cantankerous
trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:

All my car manufacturers of the autos I've had must have got it wrong in
the handbooks then. Perhaps I should write to them all and tell them
Plow**** says you are all wrong. That would be BL, Renault, VW, LR, Jeep,
Suzuki. Don't think I've missed anyone.

Hyundai has never said that.

LOL He did it, again!

--
Kerr-Mudd,John addressing senile Rot:
"Auto-contradictor Rod is back! (in the KF)"
MID:

On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 23:56:40 +0000, Fredxx, the brain dead troll-feeding
senile idiot, babbled again:



You're not very bright.

....says the senile fool wriggling on the sociopath's hook! G

In article ,
bert wrote:
In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
bert wrote:
In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
What
it doesn't seem to like is the handbrake on and being in drive for long
periods on a hot day. BTW, I left foot brake on an auto.
"Normal" autos should not be held in drive with brake on for long
periods esp. on a hot day - hydraulic fluid overheats.

Just how much heat to you think it generates lugging a caravan up a hill?
I'll give you a clue. A lot more than when idling.

All my car manufacturers of the autos I've had must have got it wrong in
the handbooks then. Perhaps I should write to them all and tell them
Plow**** says you are all wrong. That would be BL, Renault, VW, LR,
Jeep, Suzuki. Don't think I've missed anyone.

Good to know you do everything it says in your handbook to the letter.

Now answer my point about the heat generated by the TC under heavy use,
rather than idling. I'm sure you'll find the answer in that handbook which
is the source of all your knowledge.

--
*A nest isn't empty until all their stuff is out of the attic

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

In article ,
Ray wrote:
Seems there is no 100% perfect solution if you don't want the brake
lights on all the time you're stopped. ;-)

There is with the best dual clutch systems that apply the brake auto
when stoped and auto disconnect the clutch so it never gets overheated.

Mine does use the brakes to hold the car on a hill.
One which applies the parking brake automatically is also going to need
some throttle to start creeeping. Rather than just using the footbrake to
control that - when say parking.

I've not driven an auto with an auto parking brake. So not sure which is
best.

--
*There are two sides to every divorce: Yours and **** head's*

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

In article ,
Ray wrote:


"bert" wrote in message
...
In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
bert wrote:
In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
What
it doesn't seem to like is the handbrake on and being in drive for long
periods on a hot day. BTW, I left foot brake on an auto.
"Normal" autos should not be held in drive with brake on for long
periods esp. on a hot day - hydraulic fluid overheats.

Just how much heat to you think it generates lugging a caravan up a
hill? I'll give you a clue. A lot more than when idling.

All my car manufacturers of the autos I've had must have got it wrong
in the handbooks then. Perhaps I should write to them all and tell
them Plow**** says you are all wrong. That would be BL, Renault, VW,
LR, Jeep, Suzuki. Don't think I've missed anyone.

Hyundai has never said that.

He's certainly got quite a memory, our bert. Must devour his handbooks
avidly.

But of course it make sense for safety reasons not to leave the car in
drive when not needed. It also wastes fuel on an auto.

--
*Bills travel through the mail at twice the speed of cheques *

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

On 27/01/2020 22:39:38, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/01/2020 20:06:20, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 19:59:58 -0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 27/01/2020 19:48:47, bert wrote:
In article op.0e12ges3wdg98l@glass, Commander Kinsey
writes
On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 12:04:17 -0000, Jim GM4DHJ ...
wrote:

Is it OK for rear fog lights to go off when the ignition is turned
off?....

Who cares?* I never ever use mine.* They look like brake lights.* So
when you brake, the person behind doesn't know and slams into you.* A
very dangerous invention.* Tail lights are enough for the following
car to see you.* If they aren't, they're driving too fast for the
conditions and it's their problem.
*
Which bit of "fog" do you not understand?

P Hucker understands very little.

Next he'll be saying he can always stop in less than 2 seconds.

How old is your car that it takes that long?* That rule was made
before disk brakes and ABS were invented.

Show us how you work out you can stop and all UK legal speeds in less
than 2 seconds?

I said you can't.

QED

On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 20:03:48 -0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 27/01/2020 22:39:38, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/01/2020 20:06:20, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 19:59:58 -0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 27/01/2020 19:48:47, bert wrote:
In article op.0e12ges3wdg98l@glass, Commander Kinsey
writes
On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 12:04:17 -0000, Jim GM4DHJ ...
wrote:

Is it OK for rear fog lights to go off when the ignition is turned
off?....

Who cares? I never ever use mine. They look like brake lights. So
when you brake, the person behind doesn't know and slams into you. A
very dangerous invention. Tail lights are enough for the following
car to see you. If they aren't, they're driving too fast for the
conditions and it's their problem.

Which bit of "fog" do you not understand?

P Hucker understands very little.

Next he'll be saying he can always stop in less than 2 seconds.

How old is your car that it takes that long? That rule was made
before disk brakes and ABS were invented.

Show us how you work out you can stop and all UK legal speeds in less
than 2 seconds?

I said you can't.

QED

Why are you talking to yourself?

On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 22:39:38 -0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 27/01/2020 20:06:20, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 19:59:58 -0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 27/01/2020 19:48:47, bert wrote:
In article op.0e12ges3wdg98l@glass, Commander Kinsey
writes
On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 12:04:17 -0000, Jim GM4DHJ ...
wrote:

Is it OK for rear fog lights to go off when the ignition is turned
off?....

Who cares? I never ever use mine. They look like brake lights. So
when you brake, the person behind doesn't know and slams into you. A
very dangerous invention. Tail lights are enough for the following
car to see you. If they aren't, they're driving too fast for the
conditions and it's their problem.

Which bit of "fog" do you not understand?

P Hucker understands very little.

Next he'll be saying he can always stop in less than 2 seconds.

How old is your car that it takes that long? That rule was made before
disk brakes and ABS were invented.

Show us how you work out you can stop and all UK legal speeds in less
than 2 seconds?

I said you can't.

Top Gear proved them wrong.

On 28/01/2020 20:12:53, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 22:39:38 -0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 27/01/2020 20:06:20, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 19:59:58 -0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 27/01/2020 19:48:47, bert wrote:
In article op.0e12ges3wdg98l@glass, Commander Kinsey
writes
On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 12:04:17 -0000, Jim GM4DHJ ...
wrote:

Is it OK for rear fog lights to go off when the ignition is turned
off?....

Who cares?* I never ever use mine.* They look like brake lights.* So
when you brake, the person behind doesn't know and slams into you.* A
very dangerous invention.* Tail lights are enough for the following
car to see you.* If they aren't, they're driving too fast for the
conditions and it's their problem.
*
Which bit of "fog" do you not understand?

P Hucker understands very little.

Next he'll be saying he can always stop in less than 2 seconds.

How old is your car that it takes that long?* That rule was made before
disk brakes and ABS were invented.

Show us how you work out you can stop and all UK legal speeds in less
than 2 seconds?

I said you can't.

Top Gear proved them wrong.

Proved you wrong?

You're the idiot who says he can always stop in less than 2 seconds.

Top Gear never said they can stop in 2 seconds from all legals speeds.
If they did then do provide details of the episode.

On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 22:57:29 -0000, Rod Speed wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
newsp.0e2o8ko6wdg98l@glass...
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 22:03:14 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
newsp.0e2gq0spwdg98l@glass...
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 19:04:43 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
newsp.0e2a04mwwdg98l@glass...
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 17:18:06 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
newsp.0e18vcyvwdg98l@glass...
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 15:44:44 -0000, NY wrote:

"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
newsp.0e12ges3wdg98l@glass...
On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 12:04:17 -0000, Jim GM4DHJ ...
wrote:

Is it OK for rear fog lights to go off when the ignition is
turned
off?....

Who cares? I never ever use mine. They look like brake lights.
So
when
you brake, the person behind doesn't know and slams into you. A
very
dangerous invention. Tail lights are enough for the following car
to
see
you. If they aren't, they're driving too fast for the conditions
and
it's
their problem.

Or, to look at it another way, they need to get dangerously close
to
you
before they even know you are there. And while it may be their
*fault*
if
they run into the back of you, there's still damage to your car
even
if
their insurance pays for it.

It's not dangerously close, I can see taillights easily in the fog.
If
I
can't, then I'm going so fast I'm going to run off the road anyway.

As for damage, when the front of a car hits the back of a car, the
front
gets 10 times more damage (due to health and softy regulations).. I
have
in fact had nothing more than a chip of paint on the back of my car,
whereas the woman (it's always a woman) that rear ended me lost a
radiator, both headlights, the bumper, and the bonnet.

But you can see loss of lights and the hatch unusable with hatches.

No big deal to fix,

Depends on how badly damaged the surround
metal is and its not that easy to get it back to
what it used to be with those corners.

Never had that happen,

Most have.

Maybe you should drive better.

Not possible with being rear ended unless
you regularly do crash stops for no reason.

Easy to avoid most rear ends. don't you have mirrors?

even when the colliding car was completely ****ed. The rear end of a
car is way stronger.

But those folded corners arent in the sense of
what it takes to move the metal enough so that
you can't just replace the smashed light easily.

Never happened to me, and I've had about 8 idiots hit me.

Because you drive so badly.

No, they do, an their insurance agreed.

In spades with hatches.

and since it's their insurance paying, I usually make a whacking big
profit.

But a lot more convenient if they don't hit you.

Who cares if I make £100s?

Not everyone is such a desperate unemployable pov.

The point is, when you make several hundred quid, it ain't an
inconvenience.

Corse it is over no accident at all.

Bull****. I get several hundred quid and it costs me one hundred. Easy money.

And not everyone who runs into you has insurance anyway.

They usually have with me. If they don't, you get cash off them as
they're worried they'll get into ****.

Only possible if they have that much cash.

Few do with hundreds of quid.

They find it when you threaten them.

And even when they do have insurance, its
still a lot of farting around making the claim.

Very easy actually.

I'd much rather not have the accident in the first place.

Like I'm going to buy new parts.... I was once paid £700 by a woman's
insurance for hitting the side of me reversing out of a car park. It
cost me £75. I kept the rest.

Sure but much more convenient if they don't hit you.

Same answer as above. Doh.

See above, dumb.

Try not answering the same thing twice,

Corse you didn't do that yourself, eh ?

No.

it makes you sound like a child.=

Yes it did make you look like your usual pathetic excuse for a troll.

No, it made you look like a child.

"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
newsp.0e4euqelwdg98l@glass...
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 22:57:29 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
newsp.0e2o8ko6wdg98l@glass...
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 22:03:14 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
newsp.0e2gq0spwdg98l@glass...
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 19:04:43 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
newsp.0e2a04mwwdg98l@glass...
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 17:18:06 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
newsp.0e18vcyvwdg98l@glass...
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 15:44:44 -0000, NY wrote:

"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
newsp.0e12ges3wdg98l@glass...
On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 12:04:17 -0000, Jim GM4DHJ ...
wrote:

Is it OK for rear fog lights to go off when the ignition is
turned
off?....

Who cares? I never ever use mine. They look like brake lights.
So
when
you brake, the person behind doesn't know and slams into you. A
very
dangerous invention. Tail lights are enough for the following
car
to
see
you. If they aren't, they're driving too fast for the
conditions
and
it's
their problem.

Or, to look at it another way, they need to get dangerously close
to
you
before they even know you are there. And while it may be their
*fault*
if
they run into the back of you, there's still damage to your car
even
if
their insurance pays for it.

It's not dangerously close, I can see taillights easily in the
fog.
If
I
can't, then I'm going so fast I'm going to run off the road
anyway.

As for damage, when the front of a car hits the back of a car, the
front
gets 10 times more damage (due to health and softy regulations).
I
have
in fact had nothing more than a chip of paint on the back of my
car,
whereas the woman (it's always a woman) that rear ended me lost a
radiator, both headlights, the bumper, and the bonnet.

But you can see loss of lights and the hatch unusable with hatches.

No big deal to fix,

Depends on how badly damaged the surround
metal is and its not that easy to get it back to
what it used to be with those corners.

Never had that happen,

Most have.

Maybe you should drive better.

Not possible with being rear ended unless
you regularly do crash stops for no reason.

Easy to avoid most rear ends.

Nope, nothing you can do when someone coming
up behind you clearly isnt paying attention.

Happened to me when stopped at a pedestrian
crossing. The stupid taxi driver was clearly ogling
the bimbo in a very short mini in the 1960s and
ran right up the arse of the beetle. Wasn't cheap
fix either, not feasible to diy,, bent the engine
mount part of the body quite a bit.

don't you have mirrors?

Corse I do and use them all the time, but
they are no use when you can't get out of
the way of the stupid that is about to ram
you up the arse in their car.

Ditto with the other bimbo who demolished
the front of her car on my tow bar. Even me
stopping didn't stop her doing that.

even when the colliding car was completely ****ed. The rear end of a
car is way stronger.

But those folded corners arent in the sense of
what it takes to move the metal enough so that
you can't just replace the smashed light easily.

Never happened to me, and I've had about 8 idiots hit me.

Because you drive so badly.

No, they do, an their insurance agreed.

Fat lot of good that is if they arent insured.

In spades with hatches.

and since it's their insurance paying, I usually make a whacking big
profit.

But a lot more convenient if they don't hit you.

Who cares if I make £100s?

Not everyone is such a desperate unemployable pov.

The point is, when you make several hundred quid, it ain't an
inconvenience.

Corse it is over no accident at all.

Bull****.

Fact for all but unemployable povs.

I get several hundred quid

Only if the metalwork isnt bent and that's uncommon.

and it costs me one hundred. Easy money.

Most arent unemployable povs stuck
with shoving catalogs thru letterboxes.

And not everyone who runs into you has insurance anyway.

They usually have with me. If they don't, you get cash off them as
they're worried they'll get into ****.

Only possible if they have that much cash.

Few do with hundreds of quid.

They find it when you threaten them.

Bull****.

And even when they do have insurance, its
still a lot of farting around making the claim.

Very easy actually.

Bull**** and a mate of mine has just had to do it.

Lot of farting around with multiple quotes and
making sure the work gets done properly.

I'd much rather not have the accident in the first place.

Like I'm going to buy new parts.... I was once paid £700 by a
woman's
insurance for hitting the side of me reversing out of a car park.
It
cost me £75. I kept the rest.

Sure but much more convenient if they don't hit you.

Same answer as above. Doh.

See above, dumb.

Try not answering the same thing twice,

Corse you didn't do that yourself, eh ?

No.

You just did, stupid.

it makes you sound like a child.=

Yes it did make you look like your usual pathetic excuse for a troll.

No, it made you look like a child.

You too, stupid,

....and much better air in here again!

--
Sqwertz to Rot Speed:
"This is just a hunch, but I'm betting you're kinda an argumentative
asshole.
MID:

On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 20:31:38 +0000, Fredxx, the brain dead troll-feeding
senile idiot, babbled again:

Proved you wrong?

You're the idiot who says he can always stop in less than 2 seconds.

He is! But YOU are the idiot who keeps feeding him nevertheless! tsk

On 27/01/2020 14:31, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jan 2020 11:20:39 -0000, Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
** Robin wrote:
They don't make fog like they used to.* I've done about 30,000 miles a
year from 1980 to 2010 and I really only recollect a couple of
occasions
when rear foglights weren't a positive nuisance.** OTOH I remember 2
weeks of freezing fog in Leeds in the 1960s when you couldn't see a
lamp
post at arm's length.

I'm surprised you did not in those 30 years meet falling snow which
reduced visibility well below 100m.* I did just while commuting 16 miles
a day in London!

Quite. Calling them fog lights is stupid. You're just as likely to have
the same poor visibility due to heavy rain or snow. I'd say heavy rain
far
more common than fog these days.

If you can't see through rain, go to specsavers or replace your
windscreen wipers.


If you can't see through rain , then you are travelling too fast for
the conditions.

You know what would really help in heavy rain?* The re-invention of
mudguards.* Why do cars not have them anymore?* They should be a legal
requirement.

On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 17:47:47 +0000, Andrew, the brain dead, troll-feeding,
senile idiot, blathered:



If you can't see through rain , then you are travelling too fast for
the conditions.

If you can't see it when you are dealing with a troll, you'd really better
**** off from Usenet, senile twit!

On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 17:47:47 -0000, Andrew wrote:

On 27/01/2020 14:31, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jan 2020 11:20:39 -0000, Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
Robin wrote:
They don't make fog like they used to. I've done about 30,000 miles a
year from 1980 to 2010 and I really only recollect a couple of
occasions
when rear foglights weren't a positive nuisance. OTOH I remember 2
weeks of freezing fog in Leeds in the 1960s when you couldn't see a
lamp
post at arm's length.

I'm surprised you did not in those 30 years meet falling snow which
reduced visibility well below 100m. I did just while commuting 16 miles
a day in London!

Quite. Calling them fog lights is stupid. You're just as likely to have
the same poor visibility due to heavy rain or snow. I'd say heavy rain
far
more common than fog these days.

If you can't see through rain, go to specsavers or replace your
windscreen wipers.

If you can't see through rain , then you are travelling too fast for
the conditions.

Impossible, rain doesn't block vision. Spray might. But see below about mudguards....

You know what would really help in heavy rain? The re-invention of
mudguards. Why do cars not have them anymore? They should be a legal
requirement.

In article op.0e54u5h9wdg98l@glass,
Commander Kinsey wrote:


Impossible, rain doesn't block vision.

it can if it's heavy enough.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
newsp.0e54u5h9wdg98l@glass...
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 17:47:47 -0000, Andrew
wrote:

On 27/01/2020 14:31, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jan 2020 11:20:39 -0000, Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
Robin wrote:
They don't make fog like they used to. I've done about 30,000 miles
a
year from 1980 to 2010 and I really only recollect a couple of
occasions
when rear foglights weren't a positive nuisance. OTOH I remember 2
weeks of freezing fog in Leeds in the 1960s when you couldn't see a
lamp
post at arm's length.

I'm surprised you did not in those 30 years meet falling snow which
reduced visibility well below 100m. I did just while commuting 16
miles
a day in London!

Quite. Calling them fog lights is stupid. You're just as likely to have
the same poor visibility due to heavy rain or snow. I'd say heavy rain
far
more common than fog these days.

If you can't see through rain, go to specsavers or replace your
windscreen wipers.

If you can't see through rain , then you are travelling too fast for
the conditions.

Impossible, rain doesn't block vision.

It can do when it is deluging against the windscreen
faster than the wipers can move it off the windscreen.

Spray might. But see below about mudguards....

You know what would really help in heavy rain? The re-invention of
mudguards. Why do cars not have them anymore? They should be a legal
requirement.

On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 19:41:53 +0000 (GMT), charles, another absolutely brain
dead troll-feeding senile asshole, blathered again:


Impossible, rain doesn't block vision.

it can if it's heavy enough.

Your vision is obviously blurred because you are SENILE enough,
troll-feeding senile idiot!

On Thu, 30 Jan 2020 06:49:58 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the two clinically trolling cretins' endless bull**** again

--
Another typical retarded conversation between our two village idiots,
Birdbrain and Rodent Speed:

Birdbrain: "You beat me to it. Plain sex is boring."

Senile Rodent: "Then **** the cats. That wont be boring."

Birdbrain: "Sell me a de-clawing tool first."

Senile Rodent: "Wont help with the teeth."

Birdbrain: "They've never gone for me with their mouths."

Rodent Speed: "They will if you are stupid enough to try ****ing them."

Birdbrain: "No, they always use claws."

Rodent Speed: "They wont if you try ****ing them. Try it and see."

Message-ID:

On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 19:41:53 -0000, charles wrote:

In article op.0e54u5h9wdg98l@glass,
Commander Kinsey wrote:


Impossible, rain doesn't block vision.

it can if it's heavy enough.

Then slow down. You really are not aided by lights in poor visibility. Think of the unlit objects....

On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 20:31:38 -0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 28/01/2020 20:12:53, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 22:39:38 -0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 27/01/2020 20:06:20, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 19:59:58 -0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 27/01/2020 19:48:47, bert wrote:
In article op.0e12ges3wdg98l@glass, Commander Kinsey
writes
On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 12:04:17 -0000, Jim GM4DHJ ...
wrote:

Is it OK for rear fog lights to go off when the ignition is turned
off?....

Who cares? I never ever use mine. They look like brake lights. So
when you brake, the person behind doesn't know and slams into you. A
very dangerous invention. Tail lights are enough for the following
car to see you. If they aren't, they're driving too fast for the
conditions and it's their problem.

Which bit of "fog" do you not understand?

P Hucker understands very little.

Next he'll be saying he can always stop in less than 2 seconds.

How old is your car that it takes that long? That rule was made before
disk brakes and ABS were invented.

Show us how you work out you can stop and all UK legal speeds in less
than 2 seconds?

I said you can't.

Top Gear proved them wrong.

Proved you wrong?

You're the idiot who says he can always stop in less than 2 seconds.

Top Gear never said they can stop in 2 seconds from all legals speeds.
If they did then do provide details of the episode.

They proved the stopping distance is half what the highway code says.

On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 19:49:58 -0000, Rod Speed wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
newsp.0e54u5h9wdg98l@glass...
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 17:47:47 -0000, Andrew
wrote:

On 27/01/2020 14:31, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jan 2020 11:20:39 -0000, Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
Robin wrote:
They don't make fog like they used to. I've done about 30,000 miles
a
year from 1980 to 2010 and I really only recollect a couple of
occasions
when rear foglights weren't a positive nuisance. OTOH I remember 2
weeks of freezing fog in Leeds in the 1960s when you couldn't see a
lamp
post at arm's length.

I'm surprised you did not in those 30 years meet falling snow which
reduced visibility well below 100m. I did just while commuting 16
miles
a day in London!

Quite. Calling them fog lights is stupid. You're just as likely to have
the same poor visibility due to heavy rain or snow. I'd say heavy rain
far
more common than fog these days.

If you can't see through rain, go to specsavers or replace your
windscreen wipers.

If you can't see through rain , then you are travelling too fast for
the conditions.

Impossible, rain doesn't block vision.

It can do when it is deluging against the windscreen
faster than the wipers can move it off the windscreen.

Fit a Binford 2100 motor.

"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
newsp.0e6ggue7wdg98l@glass...
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 19:49:58 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
newsp.0e54u5h9wdg98l@glass...
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 17:47:47 -0000, Andrew
wrote:

On 27/01/2020 14:31, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jan 2020 11:20:39 -0000, Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
Robin wrote:
They don't make fog like they used to. I've done about 30,000
miles
a
year from 1980 to 2010 and I really only recollect a couple of
occasions
when rear foglights weren't a positive nuisance. OTOH I remember
2
weeks of freezing fog in Leeds in the 1960s when you couldn't see
a
lamp
post at arm's length.

I'm surprised you did not in those 30 years meet falling snow which
reduced visibility well below 100m. I did just while commuting 16
miles
a day in London!

Quite. Calling them fog lights is stupid. You're just as likely to
have
the same poor visibility due to heavy rain or snow. I'd say heavy
rain
far
more common than fog these days.

If you can't see through rain, go to specsavers or replace your
windscreen wipers.

If you can't see through rain , then you are travelling too fast for
the conditions.

Impossible, rain doesn't block vision.

It can do when it is deluging against the windscreen
faster than the wipers can move it off the windscreen.

Fit a Binford 2100 motor.

Not even possible with most cars.

On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 23:38:17 -0000, Rod Speed wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
newsp.0e6ggue7wdg98l@glass...
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 19:49:58 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
newsp.0e54u5h9wdg98l@glass...
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 17:47:47 -0000, Andrew
wrote:

On 27/01/2020 14:31, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jan 2020 11:20:39 -0000, Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
Robin wrote:
They don't make fog like they used to. I've done about 30,000
miles
a
year from 1980 to 2010 and I really only recollect a couple of
occasions
when rear foglights weren't a positive nuisance. OTOH I remember
2
weeks of freezing fog in Leeds in the 1960s when you couldn't see
a
lamp
post at arm's length.

I'm surprised you did not in those 30 years meet falling snow which
reduced visibility well below 100m. I did just while commuting 16
miles
a day in London!

Quite. Calling them fog lights is stupid. You're just as likely to
have
the same poor visibility due to heavy rain or snow. I'd say heavy
rain
far
more common than fog these days.

If you can't see through rain, go to specsavers or replace your
windscreen wipers.

If you can't see through rain , then you are travelling too fast for
the conditions.

Impossible, rain doesn't block vision.

It can do when it is deluging against the windscreen
faster than the wipers can move it off the windscreen.

Fit a Binford 2100 motor.

Not even possible with most cars.

How can you not manage to replace a motor?

"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
newsp.0e6hy9smwdg98l@glass...
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 23:38:17 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
newsp.0e6ggue7wdg98l@glass...
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 19:49:58 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
newsp.0e54u5h9wdg98l@glass...
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 17:47:47 -0000, Andrew
wrote:

On 27/01/2020 14:31, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jan 2020 11:20:39 -0000, Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
Robin wrote:
They don't make fog like they used to. I've done about 30,000
miles
a
year from 1980 to 2010 and I really only recollect a couple of
occasions
when rear foglights weren't a positive nuisance. OTOH I
remember
2
weeks of freezing fog in Leeds in the 1960s when you couldn't
see
a
lamp
post at arm's length.

I'm surprised you did not in those 30 years meet falling snow
which
reduced visibility well below 100m. I did just while commuting 16
miles
a day in London!

Quite. Calling them fog lights is stupid. You're just as likely to
have
the same poor visibility due to heavy rain or snow. I'd say heavy
rain
far
more common than fog these days.

If you can't see through rain, go to specsavers or replace your
windscreen wipers.

If you can't see through rain , then you are travelling too fast for
the conditions.

Impossible, rain doesn't block vision.

It can do when it is deluging against the windscreen
faster than the wipers can move it off the windscreen.

Fit a Binford 2100 motor.

Not even possible with most cars.

How can you not manage to replace a motor?

You arent replacing it, you are changing it to a different
one which is very unlikely to be a drop in replacement.

On Thu, 30 Jan 2020 10:38:17 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the two abnormal trolling assholes' troll****

--
Another typical retarded conversation between our two village idiots,
Birdbrain and Rodent Speed:

Birdbrain: "You beat me to it. Plain sex is boring."

Senile Rodent: "Then **** the cats. That wont be boring."

Birdbrain: "Sell me a de-clawing tool first."

Senile Rodent: "Wont help with the teeth."

Birdbrain: "They've never gone for me with their mouths."

Rodent Speed: "They will if you are stupid enough to try ****ing them."

Birdbrain: "No, they always use claws."

Rodent Speed: "They wont if you try ****ing them. Try it and see."

Message-ID:

In article ,
charles wrote:
In article op.0e54u5h9wdg98l@glass,
Commander Kinsey wrote:


Impossible, rain doesn't block vision.

it can if it's heavy enough.

I doubt he's old enough to drive Or perhaps too old to remember?

--
*A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well*

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

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
charles wrote:
In article op.0e54u5h9wdg98l@glass,
Commander Kinsey wrote:


Impossible, rain doesn't block vision.

it can if it's heavy enough.

I doubt he's old enough to drive

He does in fact hoon around and has done for years.

Or perhaps too old to remember?

That’s not due to his age, it’s due to the drug abuse

He's in his 30s.

On Thu, 30 Jan 2020 18:25:52 -0000, Ray wrote:



"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
charles wrote:
In article op.0e54u5h9wdg98l@glass,
Commander Kinsey wrote:


Impossible, rain doesn't block vision.

it can if it's heavy enough.

I doubt he's old enough to drive

He does in fact hoon around and has done for years.

Correct.

Or perhaps too old to remember?

Thats not due to his age, its due to the drug abuse

********. Huge amounts of alcohol and the occasional marijuana. So pretty similar to you.

He's in his 30s.

44.

On Thu, 30 Jan 2020 18:04:20 -0000, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
charles wrote:
In article op.0e54u5h9wdg98l@glass,
Commander Kinsey wrote:


Impossible, rain doesn't block vision.

it can if it's heavy enough.

I doubt he's old enough to drive Or perhaps too old to remember?

So, no idea and covering all the bases eh? I'm either too young or too old....

You sound like the climate alarmists. Global warming? No, let's call it climate change, then that covers warmer or colder so we're right either way....

On Thu, 30 Jan 2020 19:17:40 -0000, Rod Speed wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
newsp.0e7ze7uvwdg98l@glass...
On Thu, 30 Jan 2020 18:25:52 -0000, Ray wrote:



"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
charles wrote:
In article op.0e54u5h9wdg98l@glass,
Commander Kinsey wrote:


Impossible, rain doesn't block vision.

it can if it's heavy enough.

I doubt he's old enough to drive

He does in fact hoon around and has done for years.

Correct.

Or perhaps too old to remember?

Thats not due to his age, its due to the drug abuse

********. Huge amounts of alcohol and the occasional marijuana. So
pretty similar to you.

Nothing like me. I'm not actually stupid enough to consume
huge amounts of alcohol

You have stated how much you brew at home on many occasions.

or any marijuana or other illegal
drugs.

Being illegal doesn't make it worse. Alcohol is way more damaging.

I dont even bother with caffeine anymore and have
never been stupid enough to bother with nicotine either.

Caffeine a drug, right....