andym

Any excuse to play in the mud, Paul! :-)

Andy

 

Steam cars failing to catch on is a far more complicated than just fuel. Steam cars compared to petrol cars of the same period where a lot faster both in acceleration and top speed and almost silent (a friend of ours has just sold one that did 85mph and was still accelerating when he bottled it) and im sure that Antarmike will comment on them being silent lol. The maintenance cost were higher and they where expensive to produce, Stanley's were almost 10x more expensive than the Model T.

 

A viable alternative for a cheep car/ military vehicle to run would one with a multi fuel engine.

I had heard that some will run on vodka that's bloody cheaper by the litre than fuel in some places. anyone know of a multi fuel engine that would fit into a Series Landrover?

 

Pete Stevens-with-a-v

The basic problem with steam powered cars is that they've lost the sixty-odd years of development that internal combustion vehicles have had. Look at the recent steam car speed record to see how little we've progressed. As for multi-fuels, are we looking at a sharp rise in the price of K60s? :-)

Andy

I think I need what you're using Andy :blush: - what make/model are you using please?

 

edit: Hang on, is this the Xtreme xharge unit you're talking about? You say it is similar to the Optimate 6: their guy says other chargers of this type are sometimes described as Pulse type although that is not strictly correct - the short end-of-recovery cycle behaves like a pulse charge but the main recovery cycle is not.

 

I'm not sure I can get ny head around this at the moment, but if you believe the two chargers are similar I'm tempted to try a couple of Optima 6, or maybe one and one Xtreme? Maybe I'm not giving them enough time to recover - tried one for about 10 days and no sign of increased capacity (tested on a start cycle - I must confess I haven't been monitoring voltage).

Yes, it is indeed the Pulsetech Xtreme. It's a microprocessor controlled charger and pulses all through the charging cycle. When the battery is at 100% it stops charging and continues pulsing - there are LEDs on the front that show exactly what it's doing, together with the monitored state of the battery. The only downside is that the charging current is pretty low (2.5A) so recovery of a dead battery can take a long time. For maintenance and the odd recovery it's fine. If you have a lot of batteries to recover, something with a higher output would be better. I'd be tempted to try an Optima 6 and see how it behaves?

Andy

And do please learn from my mistake - if I had kept these batteries on maintenance charge I would probably have a full house of good gel batteries (only 7 chargers and far too many batteries - kept forgetting to alternate the ones on charge!!).

With a pulse charger you may be surprised at how many you can resuscitate. I've brought a Hawker back from 10V OCV to 100% (13V) and have another that's been on charge for a week now with the OCV rising from 12.1V to 12.5V. Fingers crossed ...

Andy

VNARMY.doc (Thanks, Clive!) says 52KJ95, 53KJ92 and 54KJ58 were all BV206s, so that would be a pretty good guess.

Andy

Yes, that Optimate 6 looks very similar to the Pulsetech Xtreme but with a higher output (5A against 2.5A) which could be useful.

Andy

The Accumate looks like a simple regulated charger rather than a pulse type. There's no mention of it doing anything to prevent or break up sulphation. The Pulsetech ones aren't cheap, and I'm sure there are other perfectly capable similar chargers around. I just know that the Pulsetech ones work!

To answer Chas' question, I suppose there's two things. Firstly each battery may have different charging requirements based on age and amount of sulphation so in an ideal world it's best to charge them as individual units. Secondly the "military" chargers are only really commercial units with an NSN stuck on and the number of commercial 12V applications probably greatly exceeds 24V ones. At least one of the bigger Pulsetech units is switchable 12/24V, IIRC.

Andy

We aim to please! :-)

Andy

anyone have the contact info for the UK importer of the xtreme charger

 

martin

It's USI: http:///www.usiltd.co.uk/products/battery_chargers/xtreme_charger

Andy

Welcome aboard!

Andy

I had heard of the Chinooks you mentioned being unable to fly due to computer problems; but assumed they would have overcome this long ago. I suppose they have to use the latest technology, but perhaps they should go back to whatever they used before. At least they will get some into service.

Sorry, I know little of aircraft, so if my comment seems a little silly; I apologise. I have a great deal of interest, and limited knowledge.

Not silly at all - the Mk 3s have been "reverted" to Mk 2s at Boscombe Down and are now either in service or will be very shortly.

Andy

Hi Cliffw,

 

Welcome to the forum! I seem to have lost the plot though,...I don't find your pics! Being a Saracen affectionado, I was hoping to find some pics..... Please???

That caught me out, too. I love the umbrella pic!

Andy

After a false start with the 433 that was advertised on Milweb for £6k, I found myself another one thanks to Sharkey who tipped me off. The pack was removed to fix a gearbox problem but never found its way back again, so I've got an interesting jigsaw job to reassemble the pack with the guts of a 432 one.

Once I've got the pack sorted I'll think about the gun, which is currently deactivated. I've heard of people holding these on a FAC and it would be nice to put blanks up the breech for shows.

The company I bought this from has another 433 for sale, in roughly the same sort of state but a runner. PM me for contact details if you're interested.

Andy

..next was the floor & under the seats

How come you haven't got four inches of smelly oily mud under the floor like everyone else? :cool2:

Andy

I certainly couldn't see the scrapyard being in the UK, not in the last twenty years anyway. I haven't seen scrapyard piles like that since I was a boy - the last vehicle one I visited had the cars sat in a giant rack like an overgrown shoe shop!

Andy

Do VOSA really mean "built before" or "first used"? The latter is the term that normally appears in legislation and for an MV is defined as the date they entered MOD service.

Andy

Thanks Richard - a quick Google for MJs has thrown up a pic of 10KH71, so that sounds about right.

Andy

These vehicles are normally guarded by the royal marines ,as they carry nuclear warheads and other hardware ,someone will be here soon to give you a definate answer

Obviously need to be careful with this one, so here's what CND say about it:

http://www.cnduk.org/index.php/campaigns/trident/nuclear-convoys.html

Andy

Could one of the cognescenti tell me what sort of vehicle 10KH29 is or was? Someone took the time and trouble to write it in welding rod on the side of a solid towing bar I bought yesterday ...

Andy

I personally am gonna give up driving when fuel gets to £2 a litre that'll show em ...

sharky:box::drive::box:

I was going to stop when it reached £2 a gallon! :-)

Andy

Phil -

Don't forget to check the governor oil level before venturing out! :-)

Andy

It is not, I do not think, to be read in terms of which type of plate can be fitted. It relates directly to the Finance act where it is tying up loose ends as to which taxation class a vehicle falls into, (and hence VED rate is to be paid) if that vehicle was constructed before 1.1.73 but not registered until later.

I agree that may well have been the intention, but its inclusion ensures that any vehicle constructed before 1 January 1973 is automatically viewed as having been registered before 1 January 1973, regardless of the actual date of first registration. Accidental loophole or not, that's what the words say!

Andy

Is it not the case that where age related numbers are issued, whether with suffix / prefix letter or not, a fictitious 'assumed' date of first registration is allowed ?

I refer you to paragraph 18 of the Act quoted previously in this thread. Vehicles constructed before 1 January 1973 shall be treated as though they were first registered before that date. In other words, there is no requirement for reflective plates on a vehicle constructed (not first registered!) before 1 January 1973.

Andy

If a 432 had been available to civilians at its original time of manufacture it would have been fitted with B&Ws.

 

On another tack, does the law specify 'registered by whom'? The British armed services operate registration systems. Does this not mean a 432 has been registered on or before X date? Does the law specify 'registered in the UK by DfT' ?

 

- MG

There are several pictures in existence of civilian registered 430s with B&W plates, usually for prototype or other testing purposes.

The law defines "registered" as the date a vehicle was first registered under the Vehicle Excise Act, so military registration doesn't count.

Andy

 

However on re-consideration, a lot of Automotive law is based on "first used on or before", (seat belt law, Lighting regs, MOT Exemptions, HGV driving licence exemptions amongst others)

 

Registration plate law is defined in terms of "first registered on or before".

 

These two terms are not the same.

 

 

.. and just to add confusion, this piece of legislation uses the term "first constructed before". Wonderful, isn't it? :-)

Andy