Totally reliant on a 21 year old 110 with 234k on the clock!!

Last one that ran up the back of my 110 was when an elderly man with a white cane stepped off the footpath in front of me! I stopped, the corolla behind me didn't - well it did when the bonnet hit my tow bar. Left a nasty patch of white paint on the towbar, but it scrubbed off.

Moving> Bloody well said that man -- John Lubran

Agreed.

I'd add that I don't want to be responsible for some else's death or injury, however much they deserve it.

Yes, I've been tempted too. Most lately by the f*ckwit in a corsa who objected to the fact that I have bright HID headlights - (s)he was driving at 15mph flashing their foglights at me. I could *so* easily have nipped past them and then stood on the brakes, leaving their car a steaming crunched mess, and perhaps a scratch on my bumper.

Tempting, yes. Worse the hassle? No.

Andy

Nige has alot to answer for! It's all down to his 21 year old with alot of digits on his clock.

Lee D

No, not at all I'm afraid. First you have to 'prove' the cause.

Secondly you have to determine the 'charge'.

Finally, you have to provide the evidence in a Court of Law. In the case given, any cheap-as-chips lawyer would quite easily have it thrown out.

Being in the UK, (it may be different in New Zealand) there would be an interesting investigation should someone make such a public statement. It is still somewhat unlikely that it would be taken as far as the court, though.

On or around Mon, 12 Sep 2005 20:53:14 +0100, Dougal enlightened us thusly:

It will do. You can fit either the early type single-circuit master cylinder, or the twin circuit one, or the twin-plus-servo one, depending on what you're fitting it to. However, later SWB *may* have had the same master cylinder - I think they standardised on 11" brakes on everything eventually.

The non-servo 109" brakes with 11" drums work quite well. Putting 'em on a SIII with a servo would get you brakes something like modern discs in stopping power, but you'd still have the risk of brake fade if you use 'em too long at a stretch.

On or around Mon, 12 Sep 2005 23:02:56 +0100, Mother enlightened us thusly:

In the case given, you'd be hard put to it to claim that the vehicle in front should NOT have stopped at a stop sign... apart from anything else.

I dunno, if for instance some one was a Fireman (who should really know better because they spend alot of time cutting people out of cars) and they were putting trade in the direction of a particualr recovery company, then I think there would be quite a few other recovery companies happy to see their day in court. At least thats what would happen here (UK). Just an observation.

Lee D

On or around Mon, 12 Sep 2005 19:59:57 +0100, "Richard Brookman" enlightened us thusly:

OK, fair enough when just on the road in general. But in the circumstances described, approaching a stop sign, AFAIK in this country, STOP signs don't have the same judgment call that an amber traffic light (which also means stop) has where you're allowed to ignore it if to stop would be likely to cause an accident. Assuming it's the same in NZ, you *have* to stop there, and the bloke behind, if half-awake, should see the junction coming up and KNOW that the vehicle in front is likely to stop, and in those circumstances to tail-end the thing in front at all is not good, and to do so sufficiently hard as to cause major damage is basically incompetent at the very least.

It's not as if EMB has deliberately blocked the road, then accelerated, then stood on the anchors with the intent of "catching" the bloke behind.

Granted, he was out of order for braking deliberately late. But to cause the damage described, the bloke behind must have been a lot too [fast|close], not just a bit [fast|close], or else asleep, in which case he'd have hit EMB anyway...

Assuming, of course, that I've read the description correctly.

And yes, buggrit, you're all right, he should have controlled himself better.

On or around Mon, 12 Sep 2005 15:32:59 GMT, Alex enlightened us thusly:

I trust you change the filter regularly, too.

LMAO

-- Mark.

................................................................ Posted via TITANnews - Uncensored Newsgroups Access >>>> at

totally reliant on the

interesting............

I'm totally reliant on a 21 year old today too, her name is Amber and she better ruddy show-up.

-- Mark.

................................................................ Posted via TITANnews - Uncensored Newsgroups Access >>>> at

In news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com, Mother"

Bastard!!

On or around Mon, 12 Sep 2005 19:59:57 +0100, "Richard Brookman" enlightened us thusly:

Just one more "what if" in this thread and then I'll leave it.

If you observe truly crap and dangerous driving and let him go and have his accident elsewhere, what will you feel like if the accident he then has involves your family?

In an ideal world, I guess you'd pick a good point (such as the junction and stop sign mentioned originally) then brake hard enough that the chap behind ends up stopping about 1" too late, such that no noticeable damage is done but he gets enough of a shock to drive the message home... quite honestly, the sort of bloke who habitually drives that fast/close is not going to be impressed by stopping with an inch of space left - he'll just think how clever he is to have judged it so well.

apropos of being nudged from behind... I once had a car which would, when cold, tend to die when pulling off. It did this trick on a roundabout in Birmingham, and the bloke behind, not realising that I hadn't actually departed, went into the back of me at all of 5 mph. He was most embarrassed.

On or around Tue, 13 Sep 2005 10:43:08 +0100, MVP enlightened us thusly:

I reckon I could live with dodgy toerags if I had your job... :-)

She's here and she's naked, you all hate me don't you...

-- Mark.

................................................................ Posted via TITANnews - Uncensored Newsgroups Access >>>> at

naaaaa !!!! ;~)

well if she ever needs taking for a walk give me a shout