Show us your Cars

[pseudoid]

Most (but not all) racers driving production based cars keep their hands fixed in a 3&9 position if the car has a true wheel. On the track, if you need to move your hands you’re likely about to go agricultural and/or hit something.

That is another thing: Wasn't there a time (like mid 1970s?) where they were teaching the "10&2" positions on the steering wheel?

Then, there are those cars where "1030&0230" is about the closest you are going to get 3&9 [well.... actually 9&3] because of the wheel spokes...
Maybe NOT keeping thumbs on the inside of the steering wheel is not being taught anymore, either!

FWIW: *F1 drivers have a myriad of adjustments and buttons on/around the steering wheel.
*When steering technology advanced far enough and became motorized (part of 'drive-by-wire'), first introductions were met by car critics as having no feeling of what the car/road would normally feedback via steering wheel. Those problems have been rectified and any lack of "feel-for-the-road" w/a yoke is not a big challenge...

 

[digitalfrost]

While steering wheels are an interesting aside, I thought I would bring us back on topic.
Even though this not my car, I enjoy visiting it often.

View attachment 248451

 

[EJ3]

View attachment 250556

Perfect lighting: not overly bright anywhere but bright enough where you need it!

 

[Suffolkhifinut]

 

[Somafunk]

What a waste of a mk2 golf having owned many of them they wouldn’t be my first choice of pool table illumination, the headlights suffer from poor wiring architecture/design leading to a 2volts + drop at the bulbs and an easy fix is to wire in a switching relay, or fit a full hps system and 4 ballasts for high beam/dip beam (Slightly non legal)

 

[EJ3]

What a waste of a mk2 golf having owned many of them they wouldn’t be my first choice of pool table illumination, the headlights suffer from poor wiring architecture/design leading to a 2volts + drop at the bulbs and an easy fix is to wire in a switching relay, or fit a full hps system and 4 ballasts for high beam/dip beam (Slightly non legal)

It used to be that European halogen headlights were illegal in the US. But I ran them for 20 years in my (modified to 105 HP) VW Beetle. I did adjust them properly though.
It was much better than the crappy USA legal lighting back in the day.

 

[bloodshoteyed]

It used to be that European halogen headlights were illegal in the US.

wasn't that more about a focused beam (almost everywhere else) vs unfocused (US)?

 

[Mr. Widget]

wasn't that more about a focused beam (almost everywhere else) vs unfocused (US)?

I think it was a misguided market protectionist policy that thankfully was finally ended.

 

[Doodski]

It used to be that European halogen headlights were illegal in the US. But I ran them for 20 years in my (modified to 105 HP) VW Beetle. I did adjust them properly though.
It was much better than the crappy USA legal lighting back in the day.

I did too. I ordered in a set of 2 Bosche halogen headlamps and the focusing of the beam was sharp and clearly defined compared to the cheap lamps. Much better lighting than was usually available on the shelves in Canada.

 

[beefkabob]

Now matrix lights have just become legal, but automakers haven't gotten them all approved yet. Coding a Jaguar is ridiculously expensive, but it's not so bad for the BMW, at least.

 

[EJ3]

I did too. I ordered in a set of 2 Bosche halogen headlamps and the focusing of the beam was sharp and clearly defined compared to the cheap lamps. Much better lighting than was usually available on the shelves in Canada.

I replaced the headlight lenses with Cibie units, the bulbs with Osram HIRs and had a custom wiring harness with relays built for all above to get full power to the lights and take any significant electrical draw away from the headlight stalk.
I ran this setup for 6 months and then upgraded to 90 watt bulbs. I owned the night with a 9500 ft reflective range (on high beam). I had to be at work far out in the country (40 miles from the city limits) at mid-night. It was my objective to stun the wandering deer into submission n(for them not to move until I passed due to the intense light coming out of the darkness at 85 MPH on the 2 lane black top. It seemed to work (this was in the early 1980's).

I think it was a misguided market protectionist policy that thankfully was finally ended.

They thought that we would not over drive the head lights (speeding) by not allowing us to have better lighting Just like Porsche 930's & Trans Ams having 85 or 100 MPH speedometers in 1979:

Joan Claybrook, who served as administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration from 1977 to 1981 told CNN Business that she was "absolutely infuriated" by high-speed speedometers during her tenure.

So NHTSA issued a rule in 1979 that speedometers should not indicate speeds over 85 mph.

"The auto industry went berserk," Claybrook recalled. "I wouldn't budge. I laid my body on the line on this one."

Claybrook said that high-speed speedometers are dangerous and can lead to young people testing the limits of their cars.

"For 16 to 25-year-olds, they always want to test," Claybrook said. "It's very tempting to kids to challenge and go that higher speed."

Speedometers were redone to adhere to the 1979 rule. But this was short-lived.

The limitation was abolished once the Reagan administration took power and Claybrook exited. Now you know the thought process of the U.S. Auto safety geeks: make it more dangerous for them and they won't do it.

 

[Blumlein 88]

I replaced the headlight lenses with Cibie units, the bulbs with Osram HIRs and had a custom wiring harness with relays built for all above to get full power to the lights and take any significant electrical draw away from the headlight stalk.
I ran this setup for 6 months and then upgraded to 90 watt bulbs. I owned the night with a 9500 ft reflective range (on high beam). I had to be at work far out in the country (40 miles from the city limits) at mid-night. It was my objective to stun the wandering deer into submission n(for them not to move until I passed due to the intense light coming out of the darkness at 85 MPH on the 2 lane black top. It seemed to work (this was in the early 1980's).

They thought that we would not over drive the head lights (speeding) by not allowing us to have better lighting Just like Porsche 930's & Trans Ams having 85 or 100 MPH speedometers in 1979:

Joan Claybrook, who served as administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration from 1977 to 1981 told CNN Business that she was "absolutely infuriated" by high-speed speedometers during her tenure.

So NHTSA issued a rule in 1979 that speedometers should not indicate speeds over 85 mph.

"The auto industry went berserk," Claybrook recalled. "I wouldn't budge. I laid my body on the line on this one."

Claybrook said that high-speed speedometers are dangerous and can lead to young people testing the limits of their cars.

"For 16 to 25-year-olds, they always want to test," Claybrook said. "It's very tempting to kids to challenge and go that higher speed."

Speedometers were redone to adhere to the 1979 rule. But this was short-lived.

The limitation was abolished once the Reagan administration took power and Claybrook exited. Now you know the thought process of the U.S. Auto safety geeks: make it more dangerous for them and they won't do it.

Well there was that time the officer asked, "Do you know how fast you were going?" and I honestly replied, "no, I don't." Fortunately for me, he didn't either as traffic prevented him from getting a good radar readout.

 

[EJ3]

Well there was that time the officer asked, "Do you know how fast you were going?" and I honestly replied, "no, I don't." Fortunately for me, he didn't either as traffic prevented him from getting a good radar readout.

Did he tell you "Whatever speed you were doing, don't do it again?

 

[Blumlein 88]

Did he tell you "Whatever speed you were doing, don't do it again?

He estimated, rather low I think, and wrote a ticket. He was hoping I suppose I would tell him something he could use. I wasn't happy, but he wrote it 1 mph below what would automatically be reckless driving. So I counted my small blessings and moved on. I imagine he did that to make it less likely I might actually challenge it.

 

[Inner Space]

Well there was that time the officer asked, "Do you know how fast you were going?"

Legally this is a very subtle inquiry by law enforcement. Many jurisdictions have "careless" or "reckless" gradations, and will use your "no" answer as evidence for an upgraded charge. Similarly, "Do you know why I pulled you over?" And so on. In most countries of the world, sadly, revenue has replaced jurisprudence as a goal.

 

[EJ3]

Legally this is a very subtle inquiry by law enforcement. Many jurisdictions have "careless" or "reckless" gradations, and will use your "no" answer as evidence for an upgraded charge. Similarly, "Do you know why I pulled you over?" And so on. In most countries of the world, sadly, revenue has replaced jurisprudence as a goal.

Here, "careless" is mostly toothless (you will pay a fine but get no points against your license and it won't affect your insurance). Reckless, on the other hand is half of your license points (6 here), a big hit on what you pay for insurance. Since the rate that yo get your points back is half per year, you step to 3 still a fair hit on your insurance, then (because they can't do 1/2s, 2 (no longer a hit on the insurance but if you get another ticket with points???), then 1 so you will hold at least one point of your total for 3 years. And, usually if you get reckless, there will be others along with that so...
Yes, If it wasn't a revenue raising device, their would be no unmarked traffic patrol cars.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Legally this is a very subtle inquiry by law enforcement. Many jurisdictions have "careless" or "reckless" gradations, and will use your "no" answer as evidence for an upgraded charge. Similarly, "Do you know why I pulled you over?" And so on. In most countries of the world, sadly, revenue has replaced jurisprudence as a goal.

Well I was raised to be honest. And lying to a police officer didn't seem like a good idea. Now I'd just use the 5th amendment. At the time it was an honest answer. My speed was 85 mph+, above that I could not say for sure so the honest answer was I don't know. I was aware that saying I didn't know could be used to say I was careless in operating the vehicle, but in this case he didn't know either. So he was fishing. A ticket for 85 mph or more was automatic reckless driving. In my state it was pretty much either a speeding ticket or reckless driving as they didn't have other things some states have. Again these days I'd simply not answer citing my 5th amendment rights. Didn't know enough to do that back then. So I took the ticket for 84 mph and moved on.

Since then once I was asked, "Do you know why I pulled you over?" My answer was I don't read minds and assume you will tell me. After a few more attempts to circle around that I did say I'll just use the 5th amendment and let you talk. Didn't get a ticket as they were confusing my car with one belonging to a drug dealer running a meth house nearby.

 

[Maginness]

My cars.
Jaguar XFS Sportbrake
Land Rover Discovery 2
And this thread made me realize I have no pics of my wife's car.

 

[tuga]

I am seriously considering not owning a car, and joining a subscription/share club.

 

[Purité Audio]

I just hire vehicles, we live in town, walk locally and get public transport into central London, don’t miss car ownership whatsoever.
Keith