On 31/07/2023 6:34 pm, Noddy wrote:
> On 31/07/2023 7:13 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 31/07/2023 5:16 pm, Keithr0 wrote:
>
>>>> IMO, RCA will become mandatory on ALL vehicles in the near future.
>>>> It's cheap and would save lives.
>>>>
>>> My 7 year old Mazda 3 has rear crossing alert.
>>
>> **There you go. It's a fabulous accessory.
>
> Indeed it is, and in my opinion it's as important as stability control
> or ABS brakes.
>
> We've had compulsory pool fencing for some time in this country to
> prevent backyard child drownings, and everyone has to comply even if you
> don't have kids. 7 child deaths and over 60 injuries occur from kids
> being accidentally backed over in their own driveways every year with
> reverse AEB having the potential to prevent every single one of them yet
> is currently no law to make it mandatory.
>
> To my mind that's a decision that is bordering on criminal.
>

Not putting a seat belt on your child is illegal.

Know anyone who neglects their child in such a manner, boy?

--
In thread "May need to buy petrol soon" Sept 23 2021 11:15:59am
Keithr0 wrote: "He made the assertion either he proves it or he is a
proven liar."

On Sept 23 2021 3:16:29pm Keithr0 wrote:
"He asserts that the claim is true, so, if it is unproven, he is lying."

On 31/07/2023 8:25 pm, Noddy wrote:
> On 31/07/2023 7:12 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 31/07/2023 5:18 pm, Keithr0 wrote:
>
>>> Again the 7 year old Mazda 3 has a reversing camera, maybe the base
>>> models didn't though.
>>>
>>
>> **My TWENTY TWO year old Nissan Stagea is fitted standard with a
>> reversing camera. And mirrors that angle down, when reverse parking.
>> Very cool. More useful than the Levorg's camera too.
>
> A lot of cars have the tilt mirrors, and they're completely useless in
> my opinion. Unless, of course, you're a bad enough parker that you
> actually need to see where your rear wheel is :)
>
>

**I like the tilt mirrors. They make parking a breeze and perfect every
time. In fact, my partner said this to me the other day: "You know, you
are a crap driver, but you can really reverse park with the best of them."

[Anecdote] A few years back, I was reverse parking on a modestly steep
gradient at the local shopping centre (reversing up the hill) in the
missus' manual gearbox Ford Telstar. Nailed it first time. 150mm from
the kerb and perfectly parallel. I was pretty pleased with myself, until
I saw this old guy (yeah, older than me) revering a clapped out old
(manual) Hiace, WITH A TRAILER into the spot behind me. He did a perfect
job. Fuck me. Very impressive. I could not do that to save my life.
Well, not in one go anyway.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

On 1/08/2023 4:20 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 31/07/2023 8:25 pm, Noddy wrote:

>> A lot of cars have the tilt mirrors, and they're completely useless in
>> my opinion. Unless, of course, you're a bad enough parker that you
>> actually need to see where your rear wheel is :)
>
> **I like the tilt mirrors. They make parking a breeze and perfect every
> time.

I don't have any trouble without them, and think they're more of a
hindrance than a help myself. I do like the way they're implemented on
some cars though. I don't know about your Stagea, but on the Santa Fe
the master window/mirror/door lock switch is on the door at the front
edge of the armrest, and if you move the mirror adjust switch from the
centre "neutral" position to either the left or right position it turns
on mirror tilt whenever reverse is selected. Move the mirror switch back
to the centre and it turns it off again.

In fact, my partner said this to me the other day: "You know, you
> are a crap driver, but you can really reverse park with the best of them."

ROTFL :)

At least your skills are recognised in *some* way :)

> [Anecdote] A few years back, I was reverse parking on a modestly steep
> gradient at the local shopping centre (reversing up the hill) in the
> missus' manual gearbox Ford Telstar. Nailed it first time. 150mm from
> the kerb and perfectly parallel. I was pretty pleased with myself, until
> I saw this old guy (yeah, older than me) revering a clapped out old
> (manual) Hiace, WITH A TRAILER into the spot behind me. He did a perfect
> job. Fuck me. Very impressive. I could not do that to save my life.
> Well, not in one go anyway.

It's like any other learned process. There's nothing mysterious about it
other than practice.

--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

On 1/08/2023 12:11 pm, Noddy wrote:
> On 1/08/2023 10:37 am, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 31/07/2023 4:51 pm, Noddy wrote:
>
>>> If I remember correctly AEB has been declared as mandatory on all new
>>> cars sold in this country by 2023 or 2025 (I can't remember which),
>>> and it won't be difficult to extend that to include reverse AEB.
>>
>>
>> **Although they are completely different systems, requiring different
>> sensors, it was certainly not difficult in 2017.
>
> There is not that much that's different about them Trev. They are both
> collision mitigation systems and both set out to achieve the same thing.
> The only real difference, apart from the physical location on the
> vehicle, is that the Rear AEB has a wider field of view.

**Sure, but it is extra stuff. In my car, there are cameras up front for
AEB and radar for RCA. Completely different systems.

>
> That said, it was an
>> option on all the Mercs ($25k option pack - fucking greedy arseholes)
>> I looked at back then. Ditto with Honda, VW and Toyota. I'm pretty
>> certain Hyundai had it as standard on the models I looked at.
>
> When I took my mother in law out to buy a new I30 hatch some years ago
> there was an optional safety pack which included front and rear AEB. It
> was around 1500 bucks if I remember correctly.

**Yeah, well, Merc wanted a fuck-load more than that.

>
>>> It's appalling to think that we need rules to force manufacturers to
>>> supply vehicles with such hardware when you consider the relatively
>>> low cost per vehicle to have it implemented versus the massive
>>> benefit it can provide, but that's how the world rolls. It's all
>>> about the dollar, and how much the manufacturers can get away with
>>> not having to spend.
>>
>> **Yep. Mercedes wanted $25k for the same stuff that Subaru fitted as
>> standard in my car.
>
> Your Subaru doesn't have rear autonomous braking, so you were getting
> something extra in the Benz, even if it was expensive.

**I don't know if the Merc applied the brakes or not. It was TWENTY FIVE
GRAND for something that Subaru fitted as standard equipment. As an
electronics guy, I would estimate that the cost to the manufacturer of
RCA would be around $100.00. Subaru's AEB would likely cost more, due
the specific hardware they use.

>>> It was only just before Covid that I remember seeing a press
>>> conference on the nightly news where the CEO of Mazda Australia who
>>> was at a function to talk about something else stood up at a press
>>> conference and criticised reverse cameras as not being the useful
>>> technology some people thought they were, after a few journalists
>>> criticised Mazda as being one of the few companies who supplied
>>> vehicles without them as an option :)
>>
>> **I believe you are wrong. Although most car manufacturers were way
>> behind Nissan (my 22 year old Stagea has a reversing camera as
>> standard fitment), Mazda was one of the earlier adopters. AEB was also
>> fitted to some Mazda models quite some time ago as well.
>
> Mazda was most certainly *not* one of the early adopters, and
> particularly at the low end of the market. It should have also been
> obvious to you that as I mentioned the CEO of Mazda *Australia* that
> grey imports like your Stagea were not the topic of conversation.
>
> However, I did happen to find a reference to the article that I
> remember, and it dates back to 2015 with Mazda's launch of the 3 Neo. As
> I said I saw the incident on TV as the responses from Mazda's boss were
> ridiculous enough to make the news, but you can read about it here:
>
>> https://www.drive.com.au/news/mazda-3-neo-boss-defends-lack-of-reverse-view-camera-says-kids-shouldnt-be-on-driveways/
>
> Clearly Mazda were not the leaders in low end tech as you like to think,
> and early criticism of the car not having a reverse camera while cheaper
> alternatives did was quite valid. But it was the ridiculous excuses
> offered up my Mazda's chief that grabbed the limelight, including his
> response to the suggestion that reverse cameras would go a long way to
> preventing children getting run over in their own driveways which he
> addressed with:
>
>> “I don’t see the driveway as being a place where kids should be
>> walking around in the first place,”

**Indeed. A poor excuse for cutting corners.

>
> Which was absolutely disgusting, and not worthy of anyone holding such a
> position. He handled himself very badly that day and made both himself
> and the product look like something to be avoided, and I hope the powers
> that be made a note of it and took the necessary action.
>
> He literally carried on like a fucking idiot who was *way* out of his
> depth. Like Clasener in fact, but with not as much irrational bullshit.
>
>> Correction: It seems that, apart from Buick that had fitted one to a
>> car in 1956, Toyota was one of the earliest adopters, with the mighty
>> Soarer:
>
> Lol :) Read the article Trev. It would seem that back in 2015 the
> *other* cheap-arsed car not to get a reverse camera as standard in
> Australia was the Toyota Corolla :)
>
> I nearly bought a Soarer once as I always found it to be a very
> attractive looking car. However one drive to get the feel of the thing
> left me wondering what all the fuss was about. The V8 engine was
> hopelessly lethargic and the cheesy interior made me never want to go
> anywhere near one ever again.
>
> The idea of calling one "mighty" is absolutely hilarious :)

**I drove the 2.5L turbo 6 and I liked it. The V8 is only marginally
less powerful and delivers marginally less torque, but I'm sure the 6
delivers it's power differently. For what the Soarers sold/sell for, I
reckon they're damned nice cars.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

On 1/08/2023 7:04 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 1/08/2023 12:11 pm, Noddy wrote:

>> I nearly bought a Soarer once as I always found it to be a very
>> attractive looking car. However one drive to get the feel of the thing
>> left me wondering what all the fuss was about. The V8 engine was
>> hopelessly lethargic and the cheesy interior made me never want to go
>> anywhere near one ever again.
>>
>> The idea of calling one "mighty" is absolutely hilarious :)
>
> **I drove the 2.5L turbo 6 and I liked it. The V8 is only marginally
> less powerful and delivers marginally less torque, but I'm sure the 6
> delivers it's power differently. For what the Soarers sold/sell for, I
> reckon they're damned nice cars.

As I said I always liked the look of them. Still do in fact. But once I
sat in that horrid Japanese interior and felt the totally underwhelming
sensation of the quad cam V8 my desire to own one instantly evaporated.

I'd much rather have an old Mustang.

--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

On Tue, 01 Aug 2023 17:34:40 +1000, Noddy wrote:

> On 1/08/2023 4:20 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:

>>
>> **I like the tilt mirrors. They make parking a breeze and perfect every
>> time.
>
> I don't have any trouble without them...snip

Of course you don't Fraudster! I can't imagine why anyone would think you
would. Even if you are a fat shortarse in tank with shithouse visibility
who lives in the sparse boonies and is a compulsive liar.

alvey

On 1/08/2023 7:53 pm, Noddy wrote:
> On 1/08/2023 7:04 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 1/08/2023 12:11 pm, Noddy wrote:
>
>>> I nearly bought a Soarer once as I always found it to be a very
>>> attractive looking car. However one drive to get the feel of the
>>> thing left me wondering what all the fuss was about. The V8 engine
>>> was hopelessly lethargic and the cheesy interior made me never want
>>> to go anywhere near one ever again.
>>>
>>> The idea of calling one "mighty" is absolutely hilarious :)
>>
>> **I drove the 2.5L turbo 6 and I liked it. The V8 is only marginally
>> less powerful and delivers marginally less torque, but I'm sure the 6
>> delivers it's power differently. For what the Soarers sold/sell for, I
>> reckon they're damned nice cars.
>
> As I said I always liked the look of them. Still do in fact. But once I
> sat in that horrid Japanese interior and felt the totally underwhelming
> sensation of the quad cam V8 my desire to own one instantly evaporated.
>
> I'd much rather have an old Mustang.
>
>

**My recollection is that the Toyota 4L V8 was voted one of the finest
V8 engines ever made. Perhaps I am mistaken, but I knew a guy who was
involved in the hot rod community and those old V8 were very highly
prized by hot rodders. Personally, I liked the turbo 6. Part of the
reason I bought the Stagea. I love the way it does it's thing.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

On 2/08/2023 8:28 am, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 1/08/2023 7:53 pm, Noddy wrote:

>> As I said I always liked the look of them. Still do in fact. But once
>> I sat in that horrid Japanese interior and felt the totally
>> underwhelming sensation of the quad cam V8 my desire to own one
>> instantly evaporated.
>>
>> I'd much rather have an old Mustang.
>>
>>
>
> **My recollection is that the Toyota 4L V8 was voted one of the finest
> V8 engines ever made.

Well, that's nice, but it's a bit like saying that Broccoli is the
finest vegetable. That doesn't make me hate it any less.

> Perhaps I am mistaken, but I knew a guy who was
> involved in the hot rod community and those old V8 were very highly
> prized by hot rodders.

Yeah, nah. I don't think so. They're not that old, and while some people
have used them, they're very much in the minority.

> Personally, I liked the turbo 6. Part of the
> reason I bought the Stagea. I love the way it does it's thing.

I've not driven the 6 cylinder Soarer, but I'm not a huge fan of 6
cylinder engines. Not that there's anything wrong with them, but the
overwhelming majority sound like a fart in a wetsuit.

--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

On Wed, 02 Aug 2023 08:28:05 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote:

> On 1/08/2023 7:53 pm, Noddy wrote:
>> On 1/08/2023 7:04 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>> On 1/08/2023 12:11 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>
>>>> I nearly bought a Soarer once as I always found it to be a very
>>>> attractive looking car. However one drive to get the feel of the
>>>> thing left me wondering what all the fuss was about. The V8 engine
>>>> was hopelessly lethargic and the cheesy interior made me never want
>>>> to go anywhere near one ever again.
>>>>
>>>> The idea of calling one "mighty" is absolutely hilarious :)
>>>
>>> **I drove the 2.5L turbo 6 and I liked it. The V8 is only marginally
>>> less powerful and delivers marginally less torque, but I'm sure the 6
>>> delivers it's power differently. For what the Soarers sold/sell for, I
>>> reckon they're damned nice cars.
>>
>> As I said I always liked the look of them. Still do in fact. But once I
>> sat in that horrid Japanese interior and felt the totally underwhelming
>> sensation of the quad cam V8 my desire to own one instantly evaporated.
>>
>> I'd much rather have an old Mustang.
>>
>>
>>
> **My recollection is that the Toyota 4L V8 was voted one of the finest
> V8 engines ever made. Perhaps I am mistaken...

Much more likely is that the Fraudster has never even been in one.

alvey
Again noting that while the Fraudster continually bleats about the number
of friends Xeno quotes, he himself claims to have driven just about every
vehicle that's ever mentioned here. An incredible achievement for the
friendless, former broom-pusher of a Honda dealership who has been
unemployed for 20 years.

On 2/8/2023 9:09 am, Noddy wrote:
> On 2/08/2023 8:28 am, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 1/08/2023 7:53 pm, Noddy wrote:
>
>>> As I said I always liked the look of them. Still do in fact. But once
>>> I sat in that horrid Japanese interior and felt the totally
>>> underwhelming sensation of the quad cam V8 my desire to own one
>>> instantly evaporated.
>>>
>>> I'd much rather have an old Mustang.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> **My recollection is that the Toyota 4L V8 was voted one of the finest
>> V8 engines ever made.
>
> Well, that's nice, but it's a bit like saying that Broccoli is the
> finest vegetable. That doesn't make me hate it any less.
>
>  > Perhaps I am mistaken, but I knew a guy who was
>> involved in the hot rod community and those old V8 were very highly
>> prized by hot rodders.
>
> Yeah, nah. I don't think so. They're not that old, and while some people

Yeah, yeah! They are *iconic*! A quick look on the net for the 1UZ-FE
engine brings up articles such as this;

https://www.autoevolution.com/news/toyota-1uz-fe-the-over-engineered-gem-that-became-one-of-the-worlds-most-reliable-v8s-176248.html

Not that old Darren? The 1UZ-FE has been around for 3 decades and more.
That means you *lied* in your statement above.

The 1UZ-FE has one thing that I prize in an engine, reliability.
I think that stems from this excerpt from the article linked above;

It turns out that this configuration was actually based on
a race-spec unit intended for CART (today’s IndyCar), a
detail confirmed by David Currier - then-vice president of
TRD USA - in a 2007 interview.

So, it's a *detuned* race spec engine. hmmm
No wonder they hang together and have no trouble getting up to and
beyond half a million miles - not kilometres, miles!

> have used them, they're very much in the minority.
>
>  > Personally, I liked the turbo 6. Part of the
>> reason I bought the Stagea. I love the way it does it's thing.
>
> I've not driven the 6 cylinder Soarer, but I'm not a huge fan of 6
> cylinder engines. Not that there's anything wrong with them, but the
> overwhelming majority sound like a fart in a wetsuit.
>
Oh, I see, you don't like something that sounds like *you*.

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

On 2/8/2023 8:28 am, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 1/08/2023 7:53 pm, Noddy wrote:
>> On 1/08/2023 7:04 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>> On 1/08/2023 12:11 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>
>>>> I nearly bought a Soarer once as I always found it to be a very
>>>> attractive looking car. However one drive to get the feel of the
>>>> thing left me wondering what all the fuss was about. The V8 engine
>>>> was hopelessly lethargic and the cheesy interior made me never want
>>>> to go anywhere near one ever again.
>>>>
>>>> The idea of calling one "mighty" is absolutely hilarious :)
>>>
>>> **I drove the 2.5L turbo 6 and I liked it. The V8 is only marginally
>>> less powerful and delivers marginally less torque, but I'm sure the 6
>>> delivers it's power differently. For what the Soarers sold/sell for,
>>> I reckon they're damned nice cars.
>>
>> As I said I always liked the look of them. Still do in fact. But once
>> I sat in that horrid Japanese interior and felt the totally
>> underwhelming sensation of the quad cam V8 my desire to own one
>> instantly evaporated.
>>
>> I'd much rather have an old Mustang.
>>
>>
>
> **My recollection is that the Toyota 4L V8 was voted one of the finest
> V8 engines ever made. Perhaps I am mistaken, but I knew a guy who was

Nope, you aren't!

https://www.autoevolution.com/news/toyota-1uz-fe-the-over-engineered-gem-that-became-one-of-the-worlds-most-reliable-v8s-176248.html

Darren is just being Darren and lying again. SOP for him.

> involved in the hot rod community and those old V8 were very highly
> prized by hot rodders. Personally, I liked the turbo 6. Part of the
> reason I bought the Stagea. I love the way it does it's thing.
>

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

On 2/08/2023 6:28 am, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 1/08/2023 7:53 pm, Noddy wrote:
>> On 1/08/2023 7:04 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>> On 1/08/2023 12:11 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>
>>>> I nearly bought a Soarer once as I always found it to be a very
>>>> attractive looking car. However one drive to get the feel of the
>>>> thing left me wondering what all the fuss was about. The V8 engine
>>>> was hopelessly lethargic and the cheesy interior made me never want
>>>> to go anywhere near one ever again.
>>>>
>>>> The idea of calling one "mighty" is absolutely hilarious :)
>>>
>>> **I drove the 2.5L turbo 6 and I liked it. The V8 is only marginally
>>> less powerful and delivers marginally less torque, but I'm sure the 6
>>> delivers it's power differently. For what the Soarers sold/sell for,
>>> I reckon they're damned nice cars.
>>
>> As I said I always liked the look of them. Still do in fact. But once
>> I sat in that horrid Japanese interior and felt the totally
>> underwhelming sensation of the quad cam V8 my desire to own one
>> instantly evaporated.
>>
>> I'd much rather have an old Mustang.
>>
>>
>
> **My recollection is that the Toyota 4L V8 was voted one of the finest
> V8 engines ever made. Perhaps I am mistaken,

You're not. Once again the fraud doesn't have a clue and is simply
saying something, anything, in order to appear relevant.

He isn't.

--
In thread "May need to buy petrol soon" Sept 23 2021 11:15:59am
Keithr0 wrote: "He made the assertion either he proves it or he is a
proven liar."

On Sept 23 2021 3:16:29pm Keithr0 wrote:
"He asserts that the claim is true, so, if it is unproven, he is lying."

On 31/07/2023 3:17 pm, Xeno wrote:
> On 31/7/2023 3:20 pm, Noddy wrote:
>> On 31/07/2023 2:17 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>> On 30/07/2023 4:59 pm, Keithr0 wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> **Absolutely. My MY18 Levvorg came with a rear camera, several
>>> forward facing cameras and a side camera. Fantastic for parking.
>>> However, cameras are only as good as the driver. A few weeks after I
>>> purchased the Levorg, I was parked at the local garden centre (front
>>> in). I came back to find a monster truck (Toyota Landcruiser) parked
>>> on the driver's side. Naturally, my view to the right was completely
>>> obscured. I put the car in reverse, checked the mirrors, checked the
>>> rear view TV screen. Nothing. I began reversing when all Hell broke
>>> loose. There was a VERY urgent beeping from the dash and the side
>>> mirror lights began flashing. I stomped on the brakes. Then, from the
>>> right side, two little kids (maybe 3 ~ 4 years old) ran across the
>>> path of my car. Rear Crossing Alert (RCA) is what Subaru calls it and
>>> I reckon it is fucking brilliant. It senses stuff that is well beyond
>>> the vision of the driver and cameras. I understand that some newer
>>> iterations of the system also automatically apply the brakes.
>>
>> Yes they will, and by & large they do a decent job, but it's far from
>> a new idea. Autonomous rear braking has been around for a while. Our
>> Santa Fe has it and it's coming up to 5 years old now. The Ranger has
>> it also, and it's interesting to see the differences in operation
>> between the two. The Santa Fe is somewhat more "refined" in that it
>> has less false triggers. The Ranger by comparison is somewhat more
>> aggressive in it's
>
> Somewhat more aggressive? Matches the clowns behind the wheel.
>
>> detection of objects that need to be avoided when moving in reverse,
>> and to the point where if you're backing into a parking bay a little
>> too quickly for it's liking it will get "spooked" by the kerb and slam
>> the brakes on while setting off every light and buzzer it can find.
>>
>> I believe the sensitivity can be adjusted and at the moment it's in
>> it's default setting, but when it works it certainly lets you know
>> about it.
>>
>>> IMO, RCA will become mandatory on ALL vehicles in the near future.
>>> It's cheap and would save lives.
>>
>> It should have been mandatory 5 years ago.
>
> What should have been mandatory in Victoria years ago is *trade
> licencing* to keep shonks like you out!
>>
>

Absolutely! He can't service his own cars under warranty because he
isn't qualified, so at least they're safe from his incompetent fiddling
for a few years.

--
In thread "May need to buy petrol soon" Sept 23 2021 11:15:59am
Keithr0 wrote: "He made the assertion either he proves it or he is a
proven liar."

On Sept 23 2021 3:16:29pm Keithr0 wrote:
"He asserts that the claim is true, so, if it is unproven, he is lying."