Ekona

Driving a 911 once can be very hit and miss due to the location of the engine, and now with the myriad of drivetrain options too it's even worse. Assuming a basic 2WD coupe though, with either gearbox, I can fully understand people getting into one and either loving every second, or wondering what the hell all the fuss was about. It took me a good 8 months I would say at least before it finally clicked in my brain just how to drive one properly. Until then I'd been driving it like I would a mid-engined car, which meant I wasn't making anywhere near as much use of that weight distribution as I could. Once it did click in my brain though, it was a revelation and nothing ever seems quite the same, or as good. That feeling when you brake hard as hell for a corner, guide the nose in and feel everything go light as you come off the brakes, then jump on the throttle before you've even kissed the apex and feel the whole car squat down and shove you out is absolutely unique, and not even an Elise can touch it at that point for me. Above anything else, maybe Caterhams aside, I can see why people buy 911 after 911 after 911. Once you get it, you pretty much don't want anything else. I love my V8, but there's an aching part of me that wishes I'd just got a 996 C2 instead. It's not a case of if I'll have a 911 again, it's a case of when.

My holiday cost more

Blimey, I wrote that at lunchtime, it's always nice to look back with the benefit of full results Why is the BBC website showing a loss of seven seats for the SNP? Your numbers look right to me, so I'm confused there. However, given that the SNP either gained 6 or lost 7 is almost by-the-by, given that the Tories gained a massive 164 seats in comparison: Having a Tory in Glasgow is almost unbelievable! The SNP also have no control over a single council now, losing their single one they had. Labour now back in third place too, not going to be pretty for them in five weeks in Scotland I think.

Just think of the fleet of Teslas you could buy! Our accountants got bought out back end of last year, so I've a new guy doing ours now. I'm not sure that he's as good as the old one yet, will wait until I get my tax bill this year to make a decision on that I think.

Would I work at Sports Direct? I've no idea, but I've nothing against them in principle. So depending what the job was and my circumstances, yes. Why would I rule out a completely legitimate and legal source of income? Let's assume you're talking about the folks on the shop floor on minimum wage, I can only assume they're there because they're desperate for cash and can't get a job elsewhere. If I'm in that situation, I'll take money from any (legal!) means I can find. Rather there than McDonalds tbh. As I said, I'm not pretending they're the Google of the UK and a joy to work for, but people do have a choice to work for them or not. Unions should not be financing political parties, and neither should big businesses. There should be a limit on the amount any one entity can donate to political parties. Would you disagree with that?

Just get the 380RS accelerator pedal instead, much more effective.

What I meant was that 0-60 as a measurement of performance isn't interesting or relevant. 30-100 or even better 50-150 is a much better measurement to use, really sorts the men from the boys

No probs fella. Please let us know how you get on with them, will be very interested to see what they're like on a 350.

Nah, they're a bit rubbish really.

Probably is, but it weighs more so has to be slower. 0-60 means even less on FWD cars than it does on proper ones.

It'll be heavier, so slower.

Tyre pressures are set by the manufacturer based on using OEM tyres, so as soon as you stop using those then that pressure no longer applies. You wouldn't run 35psi if you put 888s on, would you?! So Strudel is kind of right, but only if you're using Bridgestones, which you're not. The correct thing to do is adjust pressure based on how the new tyres feel, which is mostly based on sidewall stiffness, and also how you intend to use them. For example, 888s on track would be around 26-28psi, but the MPSS work better with a couple extra psi in so about 37psi would be more appropriate. I've yet to try the MPS4, however given that Michelin sidewalls are usually a tad softer than other manufacturers (which is why you get good feedback from them), then I'd suggest the same 37psi as a starting point. However, as with all things they should be adjusted to suit the driver and how he feels they're performing for him. If you think they're a tad skittish, drop them back to 35 or even lower. As long as they're not ballooning massively in the middle which would be shown by excessive wear in the centre, or so floppy that the edges are wearing much quicker, there's no right or wrong. Just do whatever you feel makes the car feel happiest to you

I always use carb cleaner on MAFs, never anything else. Electrical contact cleaner would also work, dunno about brake cleaner.

A pressure drop is not a bad thing, it puts less stress on the pump for one as well as freeing up power as you're not creating the friction. You have to remember that modern engine are built to vastly different designs, and are designed (and built) with much thinner oils in mind specifically. Back in the old days you might run a 20w80 in your old Bentley or whatever which would be pure mineral oil, but you'd never dream of using that these days! When you make an engine with fine tolerances you reduce the space between parts, and by reducing that space it means you need a thinner oil to run between it. Running a thicker oil means it never thins up enough to enter those passageways, and you end up with surfaces not getting any lubrication at all. Obviously, that's not what we want to achieve. To give you a real-world example, some Porsche engines use oil to change cam profiles within the engine at various rpms depending on load, and if you try and run a thicker oil what happens is that the oil cannot travel down where it needs to operate the lobes etc, so you end up with an engine that simply doesn't work. Given the VQ is designed for 5w30, I see no reason to move from that spec unless you're running the engine miles out of intended purpose (i.e. couple of big turbos, or smashing it off the limiter all the time on track). I'm not saying you'll do any real harm by running a 10w40 over a 5w30, but I'm saying the reasoning behind it is purely a mental one that will provide minimal benefits and will lose you power as the pump has to work harder. I might run a quality 10w40 over a cheap 5w30 (so a Motul over a Magnatec), but that's about it. Given that Abbey have given you a clean bill of health, I really wouldn't worry about it and I'm 100% sure it's got nothing to do with your current woes Get the MAF cleaned up first, that's the most likely issue here.

I'm very surprised about how the LD have done, I'll be honest. SNP not making anywhere near the expected gains in Scotland either, with more Tory gains there as well. PC doing well in Wales though.

And I bet they taste absolutely disgusting too. I could never smoke cheap fags, I usually went for Embassy Blue when I smoked. Marlboro Lights were next best, or just plain Benson Gold if nothing else available.

Holy crap, they're only 9th in the list now apparently! http://ash.org.uk/files/documents/ASH_123.pdf Sterling are top. Never heard of them.

Would love to see just how they came to those figures, seems spectacularly high to me. Still could be achieved by refusing treatment, but I concede maybe it would be a good idea. As an aside, do we know if smoking numbers are still on the decline, and if so by how much? Just wondering how much difference all the new rules on bland packets with death pics on them and hiding them away has made any difference to falling numbers at all. Interestingly my local Co-op no longer even stocks Bensons, according to the guy on the till the other day which I just found bonkers given they must be one of if not the biggest seller in the UK. I still think the guy couldn't find them because all the packs look the same, tbh.

Almost certainly, can't argue with that there. That said, if they won't treat you unless you do something about your weight then you get the same result without an extra tax. I'm just against food taxes in general, like the sugar tax or the strong alcohol tax. I don't believe that you should punish those that choose to have a few things here or there that aren't necessarily going to kill you just because a few people can't stop eating everything in front of them. I should add that I struggle massively with my weight, as I have the appetite of a horse and am constantly hungry regardless of what I eat, so I understand the urge to EAT ALL TEH FOODS but I don't because I don't want to be a fat c*nt again. Yeah yeah, I know that just makes me a skinny c*nt instead

I was referring more to people who claim that they're mentally unwell and won't get better unless they get X surgery done, rather than just boob jobs for all. Although I'm not entirely against that policy... As regards the fatties, obese people should be made to lose weight before being given surgery. No effort made, then no going under the knife. Same with alcoholics who need a liver, smokers who need lungs etc. If people don't help themselves first and foremost, then why should anyone else bother? Disagree with a tax on fatty foods though. A burger once a week doesn't hurt anyone, unlike smoking. Quite where that attitude of mine leaves alcohol and the duty paid on that, I haven't a clue tbh!

Interesting stuff, well put fella Personally speaking I think the NHS covers too many things, and that's the biggest issue. Stuff like PReP, anything cosmetic not due to accidents, and even things like IVF; I don't feel the public should be funding these until such a time as we have the budget to do so. We should be charging £25 or whatever for missed appointments too, it's not hard to ring up and cancel if you're not going to make it. I fully support the NHS in terms of emergency treatment, but people need to stop treating it like a free pass: How many times do we see and hear people going to their GP because they're got the sniffles, or a bit of a headache, or other such nonsense? That has to stop, and we need to take a collective look at how we use our services. [GZ, this next bit isn't aimed at you personally] Private healthcare should not be seen as the root of all evil, and from personal experience I could not believe the change in attitudes in my fellow patients the other month when I got transferred from NHS to private. It was like I was the devil or something, despite me actually freeing up a bed and resources for someone who didn't have the option to go private like I did. That's an attitude I can't understand, as in theory the more people that go private the more space is available in the NHS for those who can't afford to. That would be the ideal system for me, perhaps a means-tested measure that says if you earn over X then you must have private healthcare. Sure, it would be seen as another tax, but I also can't see another way to free up space in the NHS system. Private insurance is relatively cheap these days anyway, I'm surprised that more people don't have it if I'm honest, it's actually quite cheap these days for the basic cover.

Huzzah! And about time too.

It'll be fine. I mean it's pretty crap stuff and I wouldn't use it for anything, but it won't damage anything.

Oh you have the old-fashioned way of actual discs, I forgot. Okay, that makes more sense now.

And is it wrong that I immediately knew the exact moment in the film that quote came from? Down the corridor, Picard chatting with Lily who is shocked he doesn't get paid.