I've done two now (our original Swift and the current Bailey.) You want to go right the way through the polystyrene, so that you're re-laminating both the upper and lower layers to the polystyrene filling.
When you start to drill a hole, you will feel the ply resisting. Once through the top layer, you will feel the drill bit cut through the polystyrene pretty much instantly, and then it will hit the bottom layer of ply. That's when you want to stop drilling, as you don't want to go all the way through the bottom layer.
If the floor isn't one piece, then take the time to go underneath and tape up any joins. I wasted a lot of resin on the Bailey, and ended up with a solid lump of it on my drive under the caravan.
That's assuming that you're doing it from above (i.e. you are able to lift the carpet, or are planning to re-carpet when done.) If you're doing it from underneath to avoid damaging the carpet, then you'll just need to do the same in reverse (drill through the bottom layer and the polystryrene, but stop drilling as soon as you hit the upper layer.) I expect you will need to plug the holes once you've injected them if filling from the underside. When filling from the topside, I've never bothered with plugs, I've always just filled each hole until resin just begins to ooze out of the adjacent ones. If you're left with any resin protruding from holes, you can chip it off with a chisel once the resin has cured.
Sheer bloodymindeness on the part of both drivers. I think it was pretty obvious that the car driver thought he could intimidate the truck driver into letting him in, and the truck driver was having none of it. The car driver is ultimately to blame, but I wouldn't be surprised if they both end up being prosecuted, based on the evidence.
I only really feel sorry for anyone else who was trying to use that bit of the M6 and M5 that day.
Kudos for having the courage to admit it. Most Internet personas never, ever make a mistake on the road. The same ones also religiously hang up their car keys for 24 hours if they so much as have a half of shandy. It's very easy for Internet personas to do this, because Internet personas don't actually drive.
I've done things I'm not proud of over the years, both with and without the caravan on the back, usually out of frustration at being stuck behind a very slow vehicle for a very long time. It's been a while since I have, and I'm a lot more cautious these days, but when you've been stuck behind a slow vehicle for a long time, the temptation to take a risk is certainly there (it's about having the common sense not to) and this seems to have been a factor in this collision if the DM write-up is anything to go by.
Looking at this video, I can't see how the Mondeo driver could even have expected to overtake the truck in time. The driver either seriously underestimated the overall length of the outfit, or plain forgot that he was towing.
They were still running the HSS (Stena Explorer, I think) occasionally from Holyhead when I last went, but I opted for the regular ferry. Apparently the increase in fuel cost (tenfold, since they introduced the HSS craft) has been the killer, and even when they run them, the much boasted 99 minute crossing rose to 2.5 hours because they throttle right back on the engines. So 2.5 hours on a wobbly catamaran feeling seasick or 3.5 on a regular boat, with lots more room, much better stability, and a cabin to yourself if you're prepared to cough the extra. I think this service's fate is sealed.
Though with the price of crude dropping through the floor right now, you'd think now (if any time) would be the last ditch opportunity to actually get the craft to make the crossing in its original 99 minute time again.
I believe Irish Ferries have a catamaran on the route that makes the crossing a fair bit quicker than the Stena ferry. I didn't find that out until after I'd booked, unfortunately.
Practically every car made in the last 20 years runs 'drive by wire' and has electronic anti-lock brakes You're only a software glitch away from hurtling through the next wall at full throttle, with no way of stopping, whether you like it or not.
I've DIY resealed a couple of caravans now. This might be a viable approach if the mastic has only begun to dry out at the edges. If it has dried right through, then you're asking for trouble - you could well have a perfect seal along the edges, but be letting water in through the screw holes.
If I were to consider this, then I'd want to take off at least one small section of rail (perhaps the trim across the top of a window, or one of the roof lights) to get a good idea of the quality of the unexposed mastic. I'd carry out the rest of the resealing based on my findings there.
4 hours sounds about right if it's a broken down train in one of the tunnels. It happened last time I used the service and I think we were delayed for 4 hours from our scheduled departure, but since we'd turned up nearly 2 hours early (since you normally can, and get an earlier train) we were actually stuck at the terminal for about 6 hours.
I can't begin to explain the utter incompetence of whoever runs the show. Departures appearing and disappearing off the board. Some listed twice, both as 'please proceed' and 'wait for call.' At one point, there was a bit of a panic amongst some drivers when their departure went straight from 'wait for call' to 'departed.'
You couldn't swing a cat inside the terminal, and the queue for the information desk was massive. It came close to my definition of 'hell on Earth' and if it ever happens again, I'll turn around at the check-in and come back later.
Well I've had a look at mine, and noticed some scratches in the paint that are rusting a little. Perhaps that's an issue with the thinner steel. I've also weighed it and discovered that there's still 4.9 kilos of gas left in it. Between that, and the fact that there's going to be an immediate rush on them, I think I'll run the outdoor barbie off it for a bit. The cylinder is outdoors (so gas build up shouldn't be an issue) and I might as well get at least a couple of kilos of free gas for the hassle of having to return it.
Agreed: You are getting something for your money: A lighter bottle. Clearly there's a market for it (one introduced by the BP product no doubt) but if they're not going to see any return on investment, where's the incentive to purchase the new cylinders? Furthermore, if they charge the same price as the regular 6Kg bottles, everyone's going to want the new cylinders (which are lighter and have a built in gas level gauge.) As a result, there will be a shortage for the people who actually need them.
I'm not sure about the really big bottles, but with 13Kg and below, you always pay a lot more for the exchange than you do for the gas anyway. Just look at the price difference between the 6Kg and 13Kg exchanges on their website at present - £20.75 and £27.25 respectively. That's £3.46 per Kg for the 6 and £2.09 for the 13. Or if you look at it as a separate exchange fee and gas charge, 93p/Kg for the gas and £15.16 service charge for exchanging a bottle. (6 x 0.93 + 15.16 = 20.74 and 13 x 0.93 + 15.16 = 27.25)
I've seen this before with my Renaults: Basically, the high GVW works against you, and they calculate the maximum braked trailer by subtracting the GVW from the GTW. When I went through the documents, you could actually tow a heavier caravan with a 2 litre Clio than with a 2 litre Laguna.
Does it actually stipulate the 800Kg limit in the manual, or have you just calculated it the same way? If it's there in black and white, then you have to adhere to it, though you might be able to get a letter out of Ford stipulating that you can exceed the 800Kg (within reason) provided that the GTW is not exceeded.
Mine was a 'B grade' suitcase system from Maplin (I think they're ones that customers return, even though they're not faulty.) The nice thing about it is that it has a set-up mode that produces an audible tone, the pitch of which relates to the signal quality. So set-up is simply a case of turning on the tone and swinging the dish from side to side until you can hear the highest pitch. Once the dish is set up on the tripod, I can align it in a matter of seconds, even if I've absolutely no idea which direction it's supposed to be pointing in.
The Sky box, on the other hand, has you finding roughly the right spot using a compass, making small adjustments, and then checking the lock, signal strength and quality visually on the set-up screen. The update isn't instant, either, so you have to wait between each adjustment to see if it has improved matters. A signal meter can be useful on the Sky box, but unless you buy a really expensive meter, you'll have to rely on the receiver to tell you that you're pointing at the right satellite cluster.
Satellite doesn't guarantee you a TV signal. I've been on two pitches (including one seasonal) where satellite wasn't an option due to tall trees in the path of the signal. On a third (also seasonal) pitch, I was able to aim through a hole in the foliage not much bigger than the dish. It took some trial and error, and a clinometer proved very useful.
So don't bin your TV aerial. Take both and keep your options open.
I've no concerns with WhatsApp at all. Or at least I didn't, until Facebook paid well over the odds for it. But the app itself isn't at all intrusive. If you set a status message, then all of your friends can see it, but your conversations remain personal and private. If you're not on unlimited texts, then it's a cheap alternative to text messaging. It's definitely a cheap alternative to picture messaging.
Of course the clever thing about WhatsApp is probably also the thing that makes people uneasy: the fact that it uses your phone number as your ID (as do a few other services now) and automatically searches your phone book for other users. So once you install the app, anyone who also uses it (or has ever used it) is listed, without having to swap user ID's (like you always had to with Blackberry Messenger, for example.) But it begs the question of whether Facebook's interest is to try to interconnect you with more people by hijacking a copy of your phone book. Now that is an invasion of privacy, as far as I'm concerned.
Amazon have owned Lovefilm for several years, without making a song and dance about it, but there's a rebranding going on at present, with the Amazon name splashed all over Lovefilm, and a push to make you move over to using your Amazon sign in details. I fully expect Lovefilm to disappear over the next few years, and for the whole thing to be incorporated under the Amazon brand.
I have had both Lovefilm and Netflix for about 18 months, and rarely watch either. But when I do, I like the choice of having both, and they're really not that expensive. I think Lovefilm's presentation is better and easier to navigate, though Netflix have finally addressed the main annoyance, by letting you add interesting titles to a 'to watch' list. I reckon Netflix's picture quality is still better than Lovefilm's.
I'm seriously contemplating ditching Sky, unplugging my aerial and stopping paying my TV licence. You can legally do that with streaming services (as long as you don't watch anything that's simultaneously being broadcast via terrestrial or satellite TV.) Lovefilm + Netflix subscriptions together cost less than the monthly price of a TV licence.
Clarkson is right. It is all about power. But it's about the power curve, rather than a misleading peak power figure. The thing that makes conventional diesel engines so flexible is their very flat power curve (thanks to maximum torque being produced as soon as the turbo spins up, but tailing off markedly as the revs rise.) This means that there's often no great power advantage to being in a lower gear, whereas the power advantage is much more pronounced in a petrol engine, which needs to be red-lined to achieve the peak figure, and may be producing less than half of it at sensible engine speeds. A 200bhp petrol engine that hits peak power at 8000rpm is likely producing only 100bhp at 4000, and even less at lower engine speeds. A 200bhp old school turbodiesel is probably producing a minimum of 150bhp for the entire range between 2000 and 4000rpm. In the absence of a power curve, it's worth looking at both the peak torque and peak power figures, and perhaps even looking at the two as a ratio. An engine with a high peak torque figure relative to its peak power one will be a good, flexible cruiser, capable of delivering the goods without too much hunting through the gears. An engine with a low peak torque figure relative to its peak power figure will need to be thrashed in a low gear to get anything close to maximum potential.
Power is simply torque with speed factored in. Since you're rarely just 'accelerating', and instead are 'accelerating from 30mph' (as an example) torque without speed is meaningless for anything other than hill start ability in first gear.