On 25/9/2023 11:40 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
> Clocky wrote:
>> On 25/09/2023 7:40 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>> Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>> Keithr0 wrote:
>>
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>> wrong. just the business registration certificates
>>>>
>>>>> The evidence point to the probability that the "Qualification" is
>>>>> just a certificate of completion of a Monster Cable sales course.
>>>>
>>>> wrong again
>>>
>>> p.s. and it's qualifications
>>>
>>
>> Why are you even entertaining the sliemey troll?
>>
>> This is a car group. Being a qualified mechanic and everything car
>> related is relevant here and questioning someone claiming to be
>> qualified when all the evidence points to them being an unqualified
>> and incompetent fraud as highlighted by real qualified trade
>> experienced mechanics is also very much on topic and relevant.
>>
>
> yeah he pipes up to take shots at me while ignoring a target the size of
> a jumbo jet!
>
He takes shots at you because he sees you as an easy target and, more
importantly, *a distraction* from the *real elephant in the room* - his
lack of proof to back up any and all of his grandiose claims

>> Much more so than anything that is off-topic.

--
Xeno

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

Xeno wrote:
> On 25/9/2023 11:40 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>> Clocky wrote:
>>> On 25/09/2023 7:40 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>> Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>>> Keithr0 wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>>> wrong. just the business registration certificates
>>>>>
>>>>>> The evidence point to the probability that the "Qualification" is
>>>>>> just a certificate of completion of a Monster Cable sales course.
>>>>>
>>>>> wrong again
>>>>
>>>> p.s. and it's qualifications
>>>>
>>>
>>> Why are you even entertaining the sliemey troll?
>>>
>>> This is a car group. Being a qualified mechanic and everything car
>>> related is relevant here and questioning someone claiming to be
>>> qualified when all the evidence points to them being an unqualified
>>> and incompetent fraud as highlighted by real qualified trade
>>> experienced mechanics is also very much on topic and relevant.
>>>
>>
>> yeah he pipes up to take shots at me while ignoring a target the size
>> of a jumbo jet!
>>
> He takes shots at you because he sees you as an easy target and, more
> importantly, *a distraction* from the *real elephant in the room* -
> his lack of proof to back up any and all of his grandiose claims

I was talking about sliemey

>
>>> Much more so than anything that is off-topic.
>

--
https://tinyurl.com/Yosemite-Sam

FUCK PUTIN!!
https://imgur.com/gallery/v4u4c15

On 25/09/2023 12:56 pm, Yosemite Sam wrote:
> Xeno wrote:
>> On 25/9/2023 11:40 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>> Clocky wrote:
>>>> On 25/09/2023 7:40 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>>> Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>>>> Keithr0 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>>>> wrong. just the business registration certificates
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The evidence point to the probability that the "Qualification" is
>>>>>>> just a certificate of completion of a Monster Cable sales course.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> wrong again
>>>>>
>>>>> p.s. and it's qualifications
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Why are you even entertaining the sliemey troll?
>>>>
>>>> This is a car group. Being a qualified mechanic and everything car
>>>> related is relevant here and questioning someone claiming to be
>>>> qualified when all the evidence points to them being an unqualified
>>>> and incompetent fraud as highlighted by real qualified trade
>>>> experienced mechanics is also very much on topic and relevant.
>>>>
>>>
>>> yeah he pipes up to take shots at me while ignoring a target the size
>>> of a jumbo jet!
>>>
>> He takes shots at you because he sees you as an easy target and, more
>> importantly, *a distraction* from the *real elephant in the room* -
>> his lack of proof to back up any and all of his grandiose claims

ROTFL! You're now an officially designated easy target by your mate,
doesn't say much for your abilities does it?

On Monday, 25 September 2023 at 10:40:57 UTC+10, Clocky wrote:
> On 24/09/2023 10:58 pm, Noddy wrote:
> > On 24/09/2023 9:23 pm, blofelds cat wrote:
> >> Daryl wrote:
> >
> >>>> yet those two qualified mechanics run rings around you on any
> >>>> automotive matter
> >>>
> >>> ROTFL, that is the funniest thing I've heard for years:-)
> >>>
> >>
> >> they have proved noddy wrong, I have never seen noddy prove them wrong
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
They prove fuckall,!! all those two are good for is running a counter argument to *anything and everything* that is uttered by certain PPl in here.
> >
> > You wouldn't know one way or the other :)
> >
> >
>
>
> The mechanics in here certainly do.

>
> You won't find any on your team, in fact you won't find anyone even
> remotely competent on your team.
>
> Yourself included :-)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Whils`t not being on any *team,* I *do* question *your* competency ms windscreen!. (Actually ms *runaway* windscreen..) You have accused myself of *lying* etc. on many occasions over the years, yet when asked for *proof* you vanish under yer rock for varying lengths of time. (Every time).
Yer an imposter!.
On another note, the monitor *you* condemned as *fucked, is *still* going well!. (A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.)
> --
> 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 25/9/2023 1:28 pm, Keithr0 wrote:
> On 25/09/2023 12:56 pm, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>> Xeno wrote:
>>> On 25/9/2023 11:40 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>> Clocky wrote:
>>>>> On 25/09/2023 7:40 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>>>> Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>>>>> Keithr0 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> wrong. just the business registration certificates
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The evidence point to the probability that the "Qualification"
>>>>>>>> is just a certificate of completion of a Monster Cable sales
>>>>>>>> course.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> wrong again
>>>>>>
>>>>>> p.s. and it's qualifications
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Why are you even entertaining the sliemey troll?
>>>>>
>>>>> This is a car group. Being a qualified mechanic and everything car
>>>>> related is relevant here and questioning someone claiming to be
>>>>> qualified when all the evidence points to them being an unqualified
>>>>> and incompetent fraud as highlighted by real qualified trade
>>>>> experienced mechanics is also very much on topic and relevant.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> yeah he pipes up to take shots at me while ignoring a target the
>>>> size of a jumbo jet!
>>>>
>>> He takes shots at you because he sees you as an easy target and, more
>>> importantly, *a distraction* from the *real elephant in the room* -
>>> his lack of proof to back up any and all of his grandiose claims
>
> ROTFL! You're now an officially designated easy target by your mate,
> doesn't say much for your abilities does it?
>
Aw gee, you invent so much. Felix is a non-tech when it comes to
automotive, and he would agree with that. That is why Darren assails
him. Darren runs away from those of us who are of a technical mind.
--
Xeno

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

On Monday, 25 September 2023 at 12:56:27 UTC+10, Yosemite Sam wrote:
> Xeno wrote:
> > On 25/9/2023 11:40 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
> >> Clocky wrote:
> >>> On 25/09/2023 7:40 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
> >>>> Yosemite Sam wrote:
> >>>>> Keithr0 wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> <snip>
> >>>
> >>>>> wrong. just the business registration certificates
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> The evidence point to the probability that the "Qualification" is
> >>>>>> just a certificate of completion of a Monster Cable sales course.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> wrong again
> >>>>
> >>>> p.s. and it's qualifications
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Why are you even entertaining the sliemey troll?
> >>>
> >>> This is a car group. Being a qualified mechanic and everything car
> >>> related is relevant here and questioning someone claiming to be
> >>> qualified when all the evidence points to them being an unqualified
> >>> and incompetent fraud as highlighted by real qualified trade
> >>> experienced mechanics is also very much on topic and relevant.
> >>>
> >>
> >> yeah he pipes up to take shots at me while ignoring a target the size
> >> of a jumbo jet!
> >>
> > He takes shots at you because he sees you as an easy target and, more
> > importantly, *a distraction* from the *real elephant in the room* -
> > his lack of proof to back up any and all of his grandiose claims
> I was talking about sliemey
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Edumacation gone wrong!.....<FBG>
> >
> >>> Much more so than anything that is off-topic.
> >
>
>
> --
> https://tinyurl.com/Yosemite-Sam
>
> FUCK PUTIN!!
> https://imgur.com/gallery/v4u4c15

On Monday, 25 September 2023 at 13:49:05 UTC+10, Xeno wrote:
> On 25/9/2023 1:28 pm, Keithr0 wrote:
> > On 25/09/2023 12:56 pm, Yosemite Sam wrote:
> >> Xeno wrote:
> >>> On 25/9/2023 11:40 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
> >>>> Clocky wrote:
> >>>>> On 25/09/2023 7:40 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
> >>>>>> Yosemite Sam wrote:
> >>>>>>> Keithr0 wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> <snip>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> wrong. just the business registration certificates
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The evidence point to the probability that the "Qualification"
> >>>>>>>> is just a certificate of completion of a Monster Cable sales
> >>>>>>>> course.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> wrong again
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> p.s. and it's qualifications
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Why are you even entertaining the sliemey troll?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This is a car group. Being a qualified mechanic and everything car
> >>>>> related is relevant here and questioning someone claiming to be
> >>>>> qualified when all the evidence points to them being an unqualified
> >>>>> and incompetent fraud as highlighted by real qualified trade
> >>>>> experienced mechanics is also very much on topic and relevant.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> yeah he pipes up to take shots at me while ignoring a target the
> >>>> size of a jumbo jet!
> >>>>
> >>> He takes shots at you because he sees you as an easy target and, more
> >>> importantly, *a distraction* from the *real elephant in the room* -
> >>> his lack of proof to back up any and all of his grandiose claims
> >
> > ROTFL! You're now an officially designated easy target by your mate,
> > doesn't say much for your abilities does it?
> >
> Aw gee, you invent so much. Felix is a non-tech when it comes to
> automotive, and he would agree with that. That is why Darren assails
> him. Darren runs away from those of us who are of a technical mind.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
He`s taken *you* to task *many* times!...(Oh wait *technical mind*!) scratch that. <FBG>
> --
> Xeno
>
>
> Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
> (with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

On 25/9/2023 11:12 am, alvey wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Sep 2023 10:15:05 +1000, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>
>> alvey wrote:
>>> On Mon, 25 Sep 2023 01:01:46 +1000, Noddy wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 24/09/2023 10:05 pm, Daryl wrote:
>>>>> On 24/9/2023 9:23 pm, blofelds cat wrote:
>>>>>> they have proved noddy wrong, I have never seen noddy prove them
>>>>>> wrong
>>>>>>
>>>>> ROTFL, just when I though that your previous post was the funniest
>>>>> then you go and do it again:-)
>>>> He should have his own late night TV show with crap like this :)
>>>>
>>>>> Only thing that Xeno proved was that he wasn't able to find what he
>>>>> was looking for which doesn't mean it doesn't exist, just that he
>>>>> can't find it.
>>>> So he claims. He also claimed that he took photos of the alphabetical
>>>> listings but has never shown them. He's fantastic at actually

Here is where Darren starts inventing shit again. I never said I took
photos of *lists*. What I did take photos of were some apprentice cards
of people with the name of Gibbens, none of whom had a first name of
Darren. I also took photos of a person either side of the Gibbens block
of names (only 4) and they were Gibbard and Gibbie respectively. Had
Darren actually commenced three (3) apprenticeships, as he claimed,
there should have been no less than 3 apprentice cards *in his name*,
one for each of the apprenticeships. I also took photos of the record
*boxes* which contained the fanfold paper listings - including their
location codes. At no time did I take a photo of the listings
themselves, there was no point in doing so. There were hundreds of boxes
of *listings* and I only requested ones relevant to my search. I
requested a total of, IIRC, 8 boxes and nowhere therein did I find
Darren's name among the records. All in all, I found exactly what I was
expecting to find - no records in Darren's name. The reason I expected
to find no records in his name was simple - his name does not appear in
the trade registration database under any trade - and that was
determined by the simple expedient of a phone call.

>>>> *claiming*
>>>> things are so, but spectacularly shit when it comes to backing it with
>>>> anything.
>>> Step right up and see one of the biggest PKBs in history folks.
>>
>> and he calls others stupid..
>
> It's all he can do felix, call people names.

Well, when everything else about Darren is a lie, he's not left with much.

--
Xeno

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

Xeno wrote:
> On 24/9/2023 1:10 am, blofelds cat wrote:
>> Noddy wrote:
>>> On 23/09/2023 10:28 pm, Daryl wrote:
>>>> On 23/9/2023 2:07 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Given your comments here about recognising that the MG is *not*
>>>>> the best car in it's field *and* combined with your previous
>>>>> ownership experience it's awfully hard to reach any conclusion
>>>>> other than you looking for the cheapest car you can find as being
>>>>> the most important selection criteria.
>>>>>
>>>>> Or, in other words, getting what you pay for.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What's going to be interesting with these cheap car brands is how
>>>> they depreciate, almost all cars depreciate but time will tell if a
>>>> cheap car works out as a good financial decision or not.
>>>
>>> If I remember correctly Felix claimed he was able to get out of his
>>> other MG at a decent price and not lose too much money, but then I
>>> imagine the main reason he was able to do so was because he bought a
>>> 2 year old "new old stock" car that was no longer in production that
>>> the dealer was desperate to move. Had he tried to trade the thing on
>>> something more desirable he may have found the going to be
>>> considerably different.
>>>
>>> With this one he's bought now I have no idea if resale means
>>> anything to him, but if Redbook values are anything to go by the
>>> picture is not very attractive.
>>>
>>> According to Redbook, a 2019 MG ZS Excite would have cost 21,990
>>> drive away when new, and have between 60-100 thousand km's on the
>>> dial. Today's values are between 10,800 being the minimum trade in
>>> value, and 15,650 being the high end private sale price. That's
>>> around a 30% depreciation hit at the high end of the private market,
>>> and 50% at the bottom of the trade in field.
>>>
>>> By the same token, a 2019 Kia Seltos S auto was sightly more
>>> expensive at $24,990 when new. With the exact same km range it would
>>> have a a bottom end trade in value of $18,200, and a high end
>>> private price of $24,050. That's a trade in depreciation hit of
>>> around 25% and a private sale high end loss of less than 5%.
>>>
>>> That's a pretty huge difference.
>>>
>>
>> fuck me! but I don't care, I still like the MG
>>
>>>> Early Great Wall utes were next to worthless in a very short time
>>>> so whilst they may have been cheap to buy but overall they were
>>>> expensive to own over time.
>>>
>>> Yep. Don't know if you've seen them around but there's a plumbing
>>> crew in Bacchus who use 3 or 4 of the things and they drive them
>>> into the ground and write them off as a total loss at the end of
>>> their 3 year leases. They're generally worth nothing but scrap value
>>> at the end of the term.
>>>
> IIRC, your primary objection to the MG3 you had was its harsh ride,
> something that would be expected on such a lightweight vehicle.

yes. as I recall you mentioned it was due to the design of the
suspension. (or someone did)

> Your new one shouldn't have that issue.
>

it's quite comfortable to drive

--
https://tinyurl.com/Yosemite-Sam

FUCK PUTIN!!
https://imgur.com/gallery/v4u4c15

On 25/09/2023 1:49 pm, Xeno wrote:
> On 25/9/2023 1:28 pm, Keithr0 wrote:
>> On 25/09/2023 12:56 pm, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>> Xeno wrote:
>>>> On 25/9/2023 11:40 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>>> Clocky wrote:
>>>>>> On 25/09/2023 7:40 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>>>>> Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>>>>>> Keithr0 wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> wrong. just the business registration certificates
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The evidence point to the probability that the "Qualification"
>>>>>>>>> is just a certificate of completion of a Monster Cable sales
>>>>>>>>> course.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> wrong again
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> p.s. and it's qualifications
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why are you even entertaining the sliemey troll?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is a car group. Being a qualified mechanic and everything car
>>>>>> related is relevant here and questioning someone claiming to be
>>>>>> qualified when all the evidence points to them being an
>>>>>> unqualified and incompetent fraud as highlighted by real qualified
>>>>>> trade experienced mechanics is also very much on topic and relevant.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> yeah he pipes up to take shots at me while ignoring a target the
>>>>> size of a jumbo jet!
>>>>>
>>>> He takes shots at you because he sees you as an easy target and,
>>>> more importantly, *a distraction* from the *real elephant in the
>>>> room* - his lack of proof to back up any and all of his grandiose
>>>> claims
>>
>> ROTFL! You're now an officially designated easy target by your mate,
>> doesn't say much for your abilities does it?
>>
> Aw gee, you invent so much. Felix is a non-tech when it comes to
> automotive, and he would agree with that. That is why Darren assails
> him. Darren runs away from those of us who are of a technical mind.

Twist all you like, I was quoting your exact words.

On 25/9/2023 2:34 pm, Yosemite Sam wrote:
> Xeno wrote:
>> On 24/9/2023 1:10 am, blofelds cat wrote:
>>> Noddy wrote:
>>>> On 23/09/2023 10:28 pm, Daryl wrote:
>>>>> On 23/9/2023 2:07 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Given your comments here about recognising that the MG is *not*
>>>>>> the best car in it's field *and* combined with your previous
>>>>>> ownership experience it's awfully hard to reach any conclusion
>>>>>> other than you looking for the cheapest car you can find as being
>>>>>> the most important selection criteria.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or, in other words, getting what you pay for.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What's going to be interesting with these cheap car brands is how
>>>>> they depreciate, almost all cars depreciate but time will tell if a
>>>>> cheap car works out as a good financial decision or not.
>>>>
>>>> If I remember correctly Felix claimed he was able to get out of his
>>>> other MG at a decent price and not lose too much money, but then I
>>>> imagine the main reason he was able to do so was because he bought a
>>>> 2 year old "new old stock" car that was no longer in production that
>>>> the dealer was desperate to move. Had he tried to trade the thing on
>>>> something more desirable he may have found the going to be
>>>> considerably different.
>>>>
>>>> With this one he's bought now I have no idea if resale means
>>>> anything to him, but if Redbook values are anything to go by the
>>>> picture is not very attractive.
>>>>
>>>> According to Redbook, a 2019 MG ZS Excite would have cost 21,990
>>>> drive away when new, and have between 60-100 thousand km's on the
>>>> dial. Today's values are between 10,800 being the minimum trade in
>>>> value, and 15,650 being the high end private sale price. That's
>>>> around a 30% depreciation hit at the high end of the private market,
>>>> and 50% at the bottom of the trade in field.
>>>>
>>>> By the same token, a 2019 Kia Seltos S auto was sightly more
>>>> expensive at $24,990 when new. With the exact same km range it would
>>>> have a a bottom end trade in value of $18,200, and a high end
>>>> private price of $24,050. That's a trade in depreciation hit of
>>>> around 25% and a private sale high end loss of less than 5%.
>>>>
>>>> That's a pretty huge difference.
>>>>
>>>
>>> fuck me! but I don't care, I still like the MG
>>>
>>>>> Early Great Wall utes were next to worthless in a very short time
>>>>> so whilst they may have been cheap to buy but overall they were
>>>>> expensive to own over time.
>>>>
>>>> Yep. Don't know if you've seen them around but there's a plumbing
>>>> crew in Bacchus who use 3 or 4 of the things and they drive them
>>>> into the ground and write them off as a total loss at the end of
>>>> their 3 year leases. They're generally worth nothing but scrap value
>>>> at the end of the term.
>>>>
>> IIRC, your primary objection to the MG3 you had was its harsh ride,
>> something that would be expected on such a lightweight vehicle.
>
> yes. as I recall you mentioned it was due to the design of the
> suspension. (or someone did)

Well, spring rates and the Torsion Beam rear suspension.
>
>> Your new one shouldn't have that issue.
>>
>
> it's quite comfortable to drive
>

--
Xeno

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

On Sunday, 24 September 2023 at 13:01:32 UTC+10, Yosemite Sam wrote:
> Xeno wrote:
> > On 24/9/2023 1:10 am, blofelds cat wrote:
> >> Noddy wrote:
> >>> On 23/09/2023 10:28 pm, Daryl wrote:
> >>>> On 23/9/2023 2:07 pm, Noddy wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>> Given your comments here about recognising that the MG is *not*
> >>>>> the best car in it's field *and* combined with your previous
> >>>>> ownership experience it's awfully hard to reach any conclusion
> >>>>> other than you looking for the cheapest car you can find as being
> >>>>> the most important selection criteria.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Or, in other words, getting what you pay for.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> What's going to be interesting with these cheap car brands is how
> >>>> they depreciate, almost all cars depreciate but time will tell if a
> >>>> cheap car works out as a good financial decision or not.
> >>>
> >>> If I remember correctly Felix claimed he was able to get out of his
> >>> other MG at a decent price and not lose too much money, but then I
> >>> imagine the main reason he was able to do so was because he bought a
> >>> 2 year old "new old stock" car that was no longer in production that
> >>> the dealer was desperate to move. Had he tried to trade the thing on
> >>> something more desirable he may have found the going to be
> >>> considerably different.
> >>>
> >>> With this one he's bought now I have no idea if resale means
> >>> anything to him, but if Redbook values are anything to go by the
> >>> picture is not very attractive.
> >>>
> >>> According to Redbook, a 2019 MG ZS Excite would have cost 21,990
> >>> drive away when new, and have between 60-100 thousand km's on the
> >>> dial. Today's values are between 10,800 being the minimum trade in
> >>> value, and 15,650 being the high end private sale price. That's
> >>> around a 30% depreciation hit at the high end of the private market,
> >>> and 50% at the bottom of the trade in field.
> >>>
> >>> By the same token, a 2019 Kia Seltos S auto was sightly more
> >>> expensive at $24,990 when new. With the exact same km range it would
> >>> have a a bottom end trade in value of $18,200, and a high end
> >>> private price of $24,050. That's a trade in depreciation hit of
> >>> around 25% and a private sale high end loss of less than 5%.
> >>>
> >>> That's a pretty huge difference.
> >>>
> >>
> >> fuck me! but I don't care, I still like the MG
> >>
> >>>> Early Great Wall utes were next to worthless in a very short time
> >>>> so whilst they may have been cheap to buy but overall they were
> >>>> expensive to own over time.
> >>>
> >>> Yep. Don't know if you've seen them around but there's a plumbing
> >>> crew in Bacchus who use 3 or 4 of the things and they drive them
> >>> into the ground and write them off as a total loss at the end of
> >>> their 3 year leases. They're generally worth nothing but scrap value
> >>> at the end of the term.
> >>>
> > IIRC, your primary objection to the MG3 you had was its harsh ride,
> > something that would be expected on such a lightweight vehicle. Your
> > new one shouldn't have that issue.
> >
> yes, and I found a manual too hard to live with. not because I couldn't
> use it, but simply because it's way more relaxing driving an auto. in
> this day and age in suburban driving there's so much needed to be
> focused on when speed limits change almost every 100 metres, pedestrians
> pop out from nowhere, and think they have as much right to the road as
> cars, and you need to watch what's behind you as much as what's infront,
> thanks to all the idiots and druggies on the roads, gear changing was a
> distracting task I didn't want to have to have.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
Always *someone else* eh?...Muscle memory should (mostly) take care of gear changing!. Face it yer a *non* driver, catch the bus!.
(Like to see you (and half the other *experts* on every thing in here) Wrangle an 18 speed Fuller, or even a 10 speed. ;)
> --
> https://tinyurl.com/Yosemite-Sam
>
> FUCK PUTIN!!
> https://imgur.com/gallery/v4u4c15

On Monday, 25 September 2023 at 11:40:40 UTC+10, Yosemite Sam wrote:
> Clocky wrote:
> > On 25/09/2023 7:40 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
> >> Yosemite Sam wrote:
> >>> Keithr0 wrote:
> >
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> >>> wrong. just the business registration certificates
> >>>
> >>>> The evidence point to the probability that the "Qualification" is
> >>>> just a certificate of completion of a Monster Cable sales course.
> >>>
> >>> wrong again
> >>
> >> p.s. and it's qualifications
> >>
> >
> > Why are you even entertaining the sliemey troll?
> >
> > This is a car group. Being a qualified mechanic and everything car
> > related is relevant here and questioning someone claiming to be
> > qualified when all the evidence points to them being an unqualified
> > and incompetent fraud as highlighted by real qualified trade
> > experienced mechanics is also very much on topic and relevant.
> >
> yeah he pipes up to take shots at me while ignoring a target the size of
> a jumbo jet!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~```
Prolly coz *you* tend to scream *pick me*!.
> > Much more so than anything that is off-topic.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> https://tinyurl.com/Yosemite-Sam
>
> FUCK PUTIN!!
> https://imgur.com/gallery/v4u4c15

On 25/9/2023 3:04 pm, jonz@ nothere.com wrote:

>>> IIRC, your primary objection to the MG3 you had was its harsh ride,
>>> something that would be expected on such a lightweight vehicle. Your
>>> new one shouldn't have that issue.
>>>
>> yes, and I found a manual too hard to live with. not because I couldn't
>> use it, but simply because it's way more relaxing driving an auto. in
>> this day and age in suburban driving there's so much needed to be
>> focused on when speed limits change almost every 100 metres, pedestrians
>> pop out from nowhere, and think they have as much right to the road as
>> cars, and you need to watch what's behind you as much as what's infront,
>> thanks to all the idiots and druggies on the roads, gear changing was a
>> distracting task I didn't want to have to have.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
> Always *someone else* eh?...Muscle memory should (mostly) take care of gear changing!. Face it yer a *non* driver, catch the bus!.
> (Like to see you (and half the other *experts* on every thing in here) Wrangle an 18 speed Fuller, or even a 10 speed. ;)

LOL, that would be a sight to see.
I get why people who drive a lot in heavy traffic think auto's are
easier but saying that driving a manual is a distraction is one of the
craziest things I've ever heard, might be true for someone who just got
their license but not for someone who has been driving for many years.

--
Daryl

On Monday, 25 September 2023 at 17:27:06 UTC+10, Daryl wrote:
> On 25/9/2023 3:04 pm, jonz@ nothere.com wrote:
>
> >>> IIRC, your primary objection to the MG3 you had was its harsh ride,
> >>> something that would be expected on such a lightweight vehicle. Your
> >>> new one shouldn't have that issue.
> >>>
> >> yes, and I found a manual too hard to live with. not because I couldn't
> >> use it, but simply because it's way more relaxing driving an auto. in
> >> this day and age in suburban driving there's so much needed to be
> >> focused on when speed limits change almost every 100 metres, pedestrians
> >> pop out from nowhere, and think they have as much right to the road as
> >> cars, and you need to watch what's behind you as much as what's infront,
> >> thanks to all the idiots and druggies on the roads, gear changing was a
> >> distracting task I didn't want to have to have.
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
> > Always *someone else* eh?...Muscle memory should (mostly) take care of gear changing!. Face it yer a *non* driver, catch the bus!.
> > (Like to see you (and half the other *experts* on every thing in here) Wrangle an 18 speed Fuller, or even a 10 speed. ;)
> LOL, that would be a sight to see.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sure would. ;)
> I get why people who drive a lot in heavy traffic think auto's are
> easier but saying that driving a manual is a distraction is one of the
> craziest things I've ever heard, might be true for someone who just got
> their license but not for someone who has been driving for many years.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Yep, exactly my point.

>
>
> --
> Daryl

On 25/09/2023 11:07 am, Keithr0 wrote:
> On 24/09/2023 5:01 pm, Xeno wrote:

>> As I've said, Darren is still in the *concrete* domain. Most people
>> have moved on from that and into the abstract by the time they enter
>> their teens. Sadly, Darren remains in that concrete limbo and so needs
>> to be dealt with as if he were a primary school child.
>
> That must rank as one of the most feeble excuses ever offered here.

He's a mental case. He *has* no legitimate excuse for his behaviour
other than being terminally stupid.

--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

On 25/09/2023 1:28 pm, Keithr0 wrote:
>> Xeno wrote:

>>> He takes shots at you because he sees you as an easy target and, more
>>> importantly, *a distraction* from the *real elephant in the room* -
>>> his lack of proof to back up any and all of his grandiose claims
>
> ROTFL! You're now an officially designated easy target by your mate,
> doesn't say much for your abilities does it?

Someone better give poor old Felix a roll of toilet paper, as his mental
mentor just shat all over him :)

--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

On Saturday, 23 September 2023 at 18:39:03 UTC+10, Yosemite Sam wrote:
> jonz@ nothere.com wrote:
> > On Saturday, 23 September 2023 at 15:00:03 UTC+10, Yosemite Sam wrote:
> >> jonz@ nothere.com wrote:
> >>> On Saturday, 23 September 2023 at 08:30:43 UTC+10, Yosemite Sam wrote:
> >>>> Trevor Wilson wrote:
> >>>>> On 23/09/2023 12:21 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
> >>>>>> Trevor Wilson wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 22/09/2023 3:49 pm, Yosemite Sam wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Trevor Wilson wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> * Environmental controls. Dumb, dumb, dumb. I expect to be able to
> >>>>>>>>> demist the windscreen with a single button push. Not so with the
> >>>>>>>>> MG. Multiple menus and, even then, impossible to achieve whilst on
> >>>>>>>>> the move. Similarly, air conditioning controls were just
> >>>>>>>>> cumbersome. Give me some buttons (like the Stagea) or some knobs
> >>>>>>>>> (like the Levorg). No need to take one's eye off the road.
> >>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>>
> >>> My `95 Jeep is like that, Air Con: Push slider to first detent, that's it, no need to look. Cruise: Get to req. speed and one button push. (On the wheel) No need to look!.
> >>> IIRC, The rule used to be that *any screen can`t be in the driver's line of sight* checked that, and the *wording* has been changed to allow use.
> >>> Still dangerous for mine, especially if you have to scroll thru a menu!. Some ppl`s car control is marginal at best, add all this complexity and it`s a case of *lookout now*...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>>>>> The MG
> >>>>>>>>> demands a front seat passenger to assist in operating various bits
> >>>>>>>>> of the car. Fuck me. Hopeless.
> >>>>>>>> nonsense. press the appropriate panel on the screen, and control
> >>>>>>>> everything from there. eg. just touch aircon icon to turn on/off.
> >>>>>>>> no passenger needed
> >>>>>>> **Bullshit. I can control the air con in the Stagea and the Levorg,
> >>>>>>> without taking my eyes off the road. The MG demands that you look at
> >>>>>>> the stupid screen in order to control the air con. However, my major
> >>>>>>> gripe lies with the demister. ONE button control on the Stagea,
> >>>>>>> Levorg and most other cars I've driven. In the MG, the demister is
> >>>>>>> buried in some su-menu on a touch screen. Stupid. You need a
> >>>>>>> passenger to assist when on the move. Dumb and dangerous.
> >>>>>> it's all in the climate control menu. if you can't drive and glance
> >>>>>> at a screen then I wonder how you've ever used a GPS unit.
> >>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>> I haven`t, (not a dedicated one.) but there is a *big* difference between a *Glance* and scrolling thru. a menu!.
> >> no scrolling is necessary, just icon tapping
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > No shit sherlock, since when would *Icon tapping* not also be described as *scrolling* thru *sub menus*??.
> when there's no scrolling involved. duh! (look up what scrolling is)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
UH-HUH.
> --
> https://tinyurl.com/Yosemite-Sam
>
> FUCK PUTIN!!
> https://imgur.com/gallery/v4u4c15