Safe Speed Forums

Oh, and another thing, I would also alter the rules about "Company Cars". to ensure that the majority of new vehicles are bought by individuals rather than companies.

If this sounds radical consider this, If a mechanic wants to work in a garage or a carpenter on a building site he is expected to provide his own tools at his own expence! Why shouldnt an aspiring sales exec be expected to do the same with his car??

_________________
"The road to a police state is paved with public safety legislation"

A few issues this might raise:

Taxation on the scale you propose would wipe out new car sales. I know that's kind of what you were hoping for, but the economic ramifications would be collossal. Also, the effect it would have is forcing people to keep their existing cars now, rather than buy these amazing new ones that are easy and cheap to fix. Net result would be that more people would be running around in badly repaired, lashed up old bangers.

Meanwhile the manufacturers would be starved of revenue, right at the time when your brave new plan requires them to invest heavily in re-designing their attractive high tech cars into spartan, unattractive utilitarian ones.

Who would trust this Government not to lay their hands on this invested bond? Even if you did, what would stop the next government from spending it (probably on bailing out the failing car industry).

Even if it all worked, and everyone dutifully went out and bought their premium new car, what would happen to the car industry in 5-10 years time when nobody now needs a replacement? Who pays for all the job losses?

The bottom line is that you can have policies based on eco-babble, or you can have a strong economy. This idea that we can all be "green" and save the planet was always destined to plunge us into recession; the only reason it hasn't happened sooner is because many of the "industry reducing" schemes actually lead to more industrialisation not less. Perhaps we should be glad of the way they've hoodwinked everyone about recycling and so on, else we really would be in a mess!

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

How does that make any difference?

The bottom line is that most miles are done on behalf of companies rather than individuals - who owns the vehicle doesn't really matter. It's only a neater way of dealing with the taxation issues and differentiation between private (taxable) and business (tax deductable) usage.

There's actually very little difference.

If a tradesman buys tools for his work then he can claim tax relief on them. If I buy a car and use it for business use I can claim tax relief on my expenses. If the company buys it they do the maths.

The point is that if you do 30,000 miles a year on behalf of you business you are going to want a reasonably new car for it, regardless of how miraculously well vehicles will age under your brave new world, or who's name is on the log book. That's why the majority of new cars will be bought for business use.

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

We all know it's free markets (formerly known as "Thatcherism", as you well know) that have caused this.

But your other points are reasonable, and I'll get back to you on those.

Nonsense, German cars were excellent.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Dem ... of_Germany

No it isn't.

It is what happens when people who don't really understand economics try to "cherry pick" the palatable and profitable parts from the Thatcher model, whilst leaving out the unpalatable (or perhaps politically incorrect) bits that actually made the whole system work.

For instance you can't simultaneously deregulate and privatise major industries, whilst at the same time deluging them with red tape and nanny state legislation that removes their profitability.

What we are seeing now is the result of a botched hybrid of Laissez Faire and Nanny State.

And the reason for the banking crisis is that there was apparently no-one in the Government who actually understood economics to the extent to be able to predict the obvious consequences of a credit spree.

I don't think it would have happened in Thatcher's day because her Government fully understood economics and would have quietly leaned on the right people at the right time to prevent the worst excesses; where New Labour just saw them as a way of generating more tax revenue to waste. Running a country is like running a business - you can go so far by applying rules but ultimately you need the flair, feel and subtle judgement so that you make the right calls more times than you make the wrong ones.

Thatcher had this judgement. This lot don't.

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

Ha, don't make me laugh, JT. She had a jumbo recession the start, and another one
at the end, with a few years between while she wrecked our manufacturing industries.
I'd rather give a state funeral to the Yorkshire Ripper!

Sorry, again, this is getting out of hand. Let's talk about cars, instead.

PS: the above is way too harsh. But you have to remember that I was born
in a northern steel mill town. We hate Mrs Thatcher, big time. It's just a
bit of fun, like some people hate Europe etc. Helps get you through the day etc.

But those German manufacturer' such a VW and Audi, had an advantage in that they were allowed Jewish slaves during the Nazi era. These slaves were worked to death, many dropped dead on th factory floor, and those that could no longer work were sent off for murdering - not exactly Schindler List!

The amazing thing is that today, these companies still have not made an appology for their actions, although forced to pay compensation. Would you want to buy a car from them?

If that's how they value a human life, how will they deal with your problems?

I'm all for forgive qnd forget, but I think a sorry would help things get startingin that direction or some gesture to show they have changed their ways.

So Besingwerk blames it all on Thatcher, whilst Lucy blames it all on the Nazis.

Time to invoke Godwin's law, methinks....

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

Well, it is surprising how the losers of the war kept their car industries, while ours went to pot.
Now even the Mini is German. If I had to guess why, I'd say it relates to the rational rebuilding
that comes after a great loss. The new infrastructure is so superior that it surpasses the
old infrastructure in a very short period.

We have been stuck with our class-ridden infrastructure for a long time now. Good
luck to the Scottish, who are close to dumping it. If things go well after
independence, it might give English people the guts to clean up our own act.

I'm not sure we can blame the war for our woes - not now anyway! The Bristol car company was offered BMW after the war but turned it down - no future, see?!

I'm afriad the British car industry's demise was down to a lot of things - and knackered tooling after the war was just one of them. Arrogance was another!

When you say "we", that's "you and Dusty" then?!

I think you need to understand that in the great car-buying scheme of things, you're a very small minority that doesn't want to spend much money. That's fine, of course, (I don't spend much on my cars either!) but neither you nor I are going to be targeted by manufactuers as potential customers whose tastes need to be catered for. There isn't a living to be had out of us!

It's happening more and more. There are all sorts of strategic partnerships to share "core" components and technologies that the punter doesn't see. Ford and Peugeot working are on diesel technology jointly...


Unless you're talking about moral standards, I'd have thought there were few industries more heavily regulated than the automotive industry!


I think that's happening at unprecedented levels these days. Peuget / Fiat / Citroen regularly share complete vehicles - never mind components. Fiat / Saab / Alfa / GM also share technologies. WV / Skoda / SEAT... Ford / Mazda...

Many of the budget priced Far Eastern offerings do precisely that - Ssangyong use Mercedes hand-me-downs etc etc.

14.25 years on the last stats I saw. Might have been 12 years 5 or 10 years ago. Cars really are more durable. The problem is that in times of plenty, people get rid of them quicker just to have the latest model. I think (but could never prove it) that a survey of scrapyards today might find MORE cars capable of being put back on the road than it would have done (say) 20 years ago.


(well, apart from the need for a complete change of engine design and engine management system to meet emissions requirements and a total structural redesign to meet current safety requirements)! You could still keep the lousy wind noise and poor refinement, wind-up windows, LW/MW push-button radio, sponge-like handling, and you'd have had to put up with a pretty awful paint finish if the exterior panels were hot-dip galvanised, it's just that nobody (except you and Abercrombie!) would buy one!



I can imagine. John DeLorean found out the hard way about the lousy fatigue properties of stainless! It really is the devil's own material! Your old P6 would have just fatigued to death instead of rusted.


Now there, we have to agree. It's pretty possible to galvanise a simple Landrover-type chassis and I think they COULD have altered the design such that this could have been done - that and the bulkhead. If I was looking for a Landie, I'd happily pay another £500 for that option if they offered it.



I think the cruel irony is that the list would be topped by the very vehicles you and Abercrombie despise so much!
Bugatti, McLaren, Lotus, TVR, Ferrari, Aston Martin...

.. all the really fancy collectable ones! In fact, it would be great - if I were lucky enough to find a basket case one, I'd have a nice little government restoration fund to spend on it)!

Things like Abercrombie's Fiat 500 would never be valuable enough to become collectable - but at least under your sceme, the owner wouldn't loose too much money!

I agree, its actually my point. unlike 20 years ago whn scrapped cars really were at the end of their lives modern scrappers rarely have anything serious wrong with them, Just expence because the design makes "simple" faults expensive to repair. If those "simple" faults were as cheap to repair (relativly spaking) as they were 25 years ago people would keep the modern ones untill they fell to bits too, which would take about 40 years (or more) with modern build quality. all those reasonably sound vehicles towed for scrap is a terrible waste and the campaigners bang on about a couple of MPG's



You miss my point. I am not suggesting that we build "new" P6's, simply that a had the base units been galvanised originally, a good many of the vehicles built back in 1970 would still be in use. Base unit corrosion was the vehicles only real weak point

Actually the handeling on the P6 was pretty good, it had a de-dion independent rear suspension, disks all round with inboard rear disks (to keep down unsprung mass) It had a safety cage design, they were actually quite refined and had nothing like the amout of road noise/vibration that you get on many modern vehicles. and Radios can be upgraded. (Oh and if I had wind up windows on my Jag I'd still be able to open them!)

Galvanising the base unit would not have affected the exterior appearance since all visible panels were attached to it as separate componats, and were also designed to be easily replaced in the event of minor damage (Rover oringinall stocked pre-painted wings so that damaged panels could be quickly swapped over without all that hassle with welders and paintshops)

I take your point about fategue, though my contack hasnt had any probs with his landie, rather the problem was that without surface corrosion to act as "glue" he had difficulty making the suspension bushes stay put!



I dont despise them, I dont despise technolgy

I despise planned obsilessance.

The vehicles you name are all from very low volume specialist manufacturers and as such they can afford to buck the current Post war economic model (henceforth I will use PWEM) by not building them with the intention that they should all be scrap after 15 years or so Obviously I am refering to volume producers (even listing Rolls Royce is a bit of a cheat) but Porche manufacture in significant numbers so their success in producing reasonably durable cars is worthy of note and it doesnt seem to have harmd thier buisness model too much has it?



And, rather more to the point, the owner will be far less likly to face the modern dilemma that any owner of a 7+ year old modern car with anything more serious than a blown headlight bulb of "Is it worth fixing" because it almost always will be! That is the aim of my scheme!

_________________
"The road to a police state is paved with public safety legislation"

Considering the way that present day Zionists are treating the displaced Arabs in Palestine it might well be time to re-evalute the Nazi era

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

Well rush out and buy a VW, one of Hitlers better ideas, with a little help from his chum Mr Porsche.

Do you remember in the 80s when it was cool to have "16V" on the boot of your car? Well in France the french translation was "SS" (sesiem souphlet or somthing like that) and all the French cars had "SS" on the boot - except VW who must have thought VW's entering France with "SS" badges on them might be a bit insensitive, after the last VW's entering France with "SS" on them 40 years previously, where driven by bit of a rough bunch! So VW used "16V" in France!

Then how come there are some many types of head light bulb, windscreen blade,
belt, radiator hose, tyre size, indicator glass, fuel cap, battery fittings,
speedo, instrument cluster, exhaust pipes, clamps, brake pads and shoes, steering
wheels, blah blah blah. You could go on all day. They all do the exact same thing on all cars,
yet they are all different. What a waste of time. Is it really necessary to have hundreds of
different types of hose clips? And all sorts of different starter motors, and alternators?
And all manner of different screws, bolts, fasteners, handles, catches, springs,
shock absorbers and what have you?

And is it necessary to change any of that with each new release of planned obsolescence?
Does a Audi XYZb really need different wheel nuts from the XYZa? They make me sick with
their pettiness.

Reminds about the difficulty that Toyota had with the MR2 n France

M-R-Deux sounds like something not very nice in French!

_________________
"The road to a police state is paved with public safety legislation"

I can actually get optional titanium wheel nuts for my car to save unsprung weight!!

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.