Modern trucks are an enigma !

[eggsarascal]

Is that 5 new power stations and 40 new hospitals?

[Doug Tait]

5 minutes ago, eggsarascal said:

Is that 5 new power stations and 40 new hospitals?

If you vote for me I'll build 10 power stations and 80 hospitals, and I'll deliver them in 5mins 

[Bolt]

13 minutes ago, eggsarascal said:

Is that 5 new power stations and 40 new hospitals?

Nope, 5 power stations and 40 new hospital workers.

[Bolt]

12 minutes ago, Doug Tait said:

If you vote for me I'll build 10 power stations and 80 hospitals, and I'll deliver them in 5mins 

 

 

[openspaceman]

4 hours ago, Ian C said:

Personally I would go petrol if they were available, petrol is a bit cheaper and it gets rid of all the shite on a modern diesel  which when working really only mask a problem and at worst is a nightmare when they go wrong.

I've nothing against diesels, still have a pre dpf car, it's the fuel that makes the problem.

 

Back in the day I mostly ran petrol work vehicles (pug 504, LR and hilux), true they used more fuel (about 1/5th) but they were cheaper to buy and service but then  I always aimed to work withing 20 miles of home.

[GarethM]

The green types will lament about it's all about the emmisons, which when you think back old diesels did 70+mpg and smoked a little. New diesels are what 50mpg with all this dpf, variable and multiple electronic injection per stroke Vs the old one injection per stroke.

 

Whilst it might be cleaner exhaust is it really better to be burning for the sake of argument 20% more fuel ?.

 

They have been saying particulate sizes have gotten smaller and as a result more dangerous, but I'm unsure if they measured that small in the past ?.

[openspaceman]

20 minutes ago, GarethM said:

 

They have been saying particulate sizes have gotten smaller and as a result more dangerous, but I'm unsure if they measured that small in the past ?.

Well I doubt they did, originally when testing smoke you drew it through a paper filter and compared the greyness against a chart, then they started talking about PM10 (microns) and then PM2.5 as the equipment got to be able to discriminate better. My cheap PM meter takes snapshots of the air and counts the size and amount of reflections off particles in just the same way a CD player responds to the pits in the CD. The PM values are a subset of the overall particulates and the smaller particulates are a yet different subset.

 

BTW I think petrol engines emit more ultra fine particulates but they are too small to impact on mucous tissues and get exhaled.

[GarethM]

They had said the smaller pm 2.5 is able to get into the bloodstream.

 

Think that might have been from the fireplace regulations, but you get the rough idea.

Edited September 3, 2022 by GarethM

[doobin]

14 hours ago, Mark Bolam said:

I reckon you semi-joke Con, but I’m with you.

Mine’s an 06 with 110k miles.

 

Very, very few issues considering how hard it’s worked.

 

What do we do when they die?

Literally every alternative is worse than a 20 year old truck.

I found myself a clean 50k mile 2011 Ford Ranger for this very reason. With tipper.

 

I've no interest in the modern poser vehicles. I'll save 30k purchases for things like loaders that actually make money.

[GarethM]

Only problem is things like the clean air in cities meant euro 6, think it meant a L200 after 2016.

 

Greater Manchester have paused it but that was 493 square miles charging zone but Andy Burnham had wanted an even larger zone, but the wheels are always turning so know they'll do something else.

Edited September 3, 2022 by GarethM