I wouldn’t, not now…

… I don’t think* – just too old.

Mk 2 GTi / 205 / 309 etc are great examples of why modern cars are so dull.

The couple of Peugeots I had in the early / mid 90s were 115bhp and 130bhp respectively. Today that sort of power output would be regarded as mediocre, but both were huge, huge fun. The 130 horse 1.9 (309) was the most fun car I have ever owned, although the 1.6 was definately sweeter handling on twisty roads. Huge fun at 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80 mph.

“GTi” equivalents today are up in the 200bhp range. The Mk5 Golf GTi we had a few years ago was an incredibly accomplished and quick car – but to get to the sort of fun that the older, lighter, less powerful hatches had at legal(ish) speeds required deeply illegal speed, and hence wasn’t really used as a GTi.

Shame really.
.
.
.
.
.
.
* qualified by continued attempts to get currently unused 309GTi Goodwood from my dad…

… just like this

One reason why “economically productive” folks were quite disappointed about the child benefit cuts…?

I remember mols posting his power output calcs… on a thread about climbing times / rider / bike weight???

On the the same thread I posted average commute times for the bikes I had run over the last 5 or so years. Two of those bikes were similar weight hardtails – a lightly built L / 19.5″ Pace RC305 and a similar weight 21″ Airborne Lucky Strike. Both weighed in at between 23-25lbs depending on wheel / tyre combos fitted at any given time.

Airborne always felt way faster than the Pace, except on more technical descents, where the very long stretched out geometry became too prone to over the bars moments…

Commute timings bear this out too. Airborne was 5-10 mins per hour quicker than the Pace.

I’m not arguing all for geometry – just countering the “geometry doesn’t affect efficiency” trolling 😉

5lbs difference on the bike is huge – 5lbs on the body / in the Camelback will be more tiring over the day, but doesn’t affect the ride in any way the same manner.

Yes, brilliant bike. I’ve got an X3. Changed the saddle to a Fizik Gobi for long days out (the standard spec was fine for 1-2 hrs).

Very quick bike.

For very, very quick I swap the standard (heavyish) wheels for a pair of Cobalts / 1.8 TrailBlasters that hang in the garage. Rode to work this week with the TrailBlasters, but it’s getting a bit slippy for that set up now!!!

Keep an eye open for the Taff trail at a place called “Coopers Fields”.

Harsh…. 😮

The trailside brambles and holly help keep my cycle top breathable 🙄

Really??

I guess that could well be the letter of the law, but for folks I know who’ve done it, they had to get there and back for business, therefore the flights were a business expense. Would be different if taking partner or not paying for the extended hotel bill etc…???

Sadly, when I’ve worked abroad it’s been in, get the job done, out

There is that “Skin is waterproof” mentality

I don’t go along with this mentality – for the reasons you give, and despite my posting about getting wet and accepting it.

Being wet and not have a windproof outer layer is a recipe for hypothermia. Being wet and warm is fine – but relies on a windproof outer to stop the wind stripping the heat from your wet clothes.

Haa. Zoom in on the Apollo 11 site and it looks like someone has dropped the transparency film on the floor – and then walked on it with their trainers 😉

Suspicious circular “coffee mug” artefact also….

Pointless really – get used to the idea of getting wet.

Anything waterproof is going to be sweaty and comfortable, especially if you’re out moving about

I gave up on the idea of waterproff trousers about 20 years ago. They don’t work and they’re uncomfotable. Better off trying to find something that keeps you comfy when wet – staying with the lower half a good set og bib tights. Even when it’s chucking down they are warm and comfy, not damp and clammy.

MtbWales died when Caer stopped posting. There is no disputing that.

Not an argument to carry over onto here – but there are plenty who would dispute that.

So as a Surrey Hills rider am I going to be disappointed by the stuff near Cardiff then?

Depends what you are looking for, I guess. If you pedal up stuff as well as down, there should be plenty to keep you entertained.

No-one wanting a ride on Sunday am then?

I like the idea – not sure about the timing though. If the weather’s good we might take the kids out to Brechfa.

rkk01 is that you rob khoo!!??

Nah – another mtb-wales exile… 🙁

Well, I have to ride home – and it was slidy fun on the way in this morning 😆

But this morning’s sketchy descent is going to be this evening’s “no back wheel grip” uphill slog

Might have to do that, but generally can’t be @rsed to do the car / bike thing (with the exception of taking the kids to Brechfa)…

… even to the extent of riding the Gap from the front door

It’s true that the trail centres are more weatherproof, but it takes a lot to beat the wooded singletrack to the north of Cardiff.

I’m more familiar with the west side of the river (Gwaelod / Pentyrch / Garth / Tyn y Coed / Llantrisant Forest) as its closer to home / on my commute to Cardiff 😀 😀 , but there is some good stuff in the Castell Coch / Wenallt / Caerphilly / Coed Coesau whips / Rudry / Machen areas…

… enough to never (ok, rarely) bother going to one of the trail centres. Despite being close by I haven’t ridden at Afan for nearly three years, and longer since I’ve been to Cwmcarn

mtb-wales.com normally have an “all welcome” wednesday night ride around Castell Coch woods / North Cardiff area … Better than Cwmcarn

Easily accessed from the Taff Trail without need for the car (although if unfamiliar with the area car might be useful) I’m riding up the Taff Trail tonight from the centre of Cardiff – but commuting home rather than playing in the woods

Linky[/url]

Wouldn’t want to Google that at work….

Use a handspike and put your back into it.

Is it true it will have the Top Gear test track?

Yes

Have used several Hope headsets – had the throw away the Head Doctor on each occaision. Absolutely useless.

Pre-ordered with Game – looking forward to seeing what’s included on the car list

Kleine Matterhorn @ 3820m – the highest lift in Europe…

… but it wasn’t my bike I was riding 😀

The first “big” model that I built – was very special to me as the relative who gave it as a Christmas present used to fly them…

sorry, quite simply, anyone on 44 k per year is comparatively well off,

Someone on 44k should be comparatively well off – but if they’ve bought a house in the last (say) 10 years the picture isn’t that simple – as has been posted above…

With the “average” UK house price at something like 166k (189k in 2007), that is still well over the oft quoted 3.5x multiplier for the tax threshold earner. And the “live somewhere cheaper” argument only goes so far – property is notoriously more expensive where the jobs are, and cheaper where the jobs aren’t…

I’m not arguing against the cut, just the apparent lack of fairness in the application of it. Maybe keep the universal principle and scrap CB altogether – then adjust income tax rates accordingly.

Stopping the “career benefit culture” at the bottom end needs to be better addressed.

As per my first post – the cap still equates to a mid 30s salary 🙄

You are confusing families and earners. Poeple without children also earn money. Yes the top 5 % of earners are affected which affects 15 % of families [if your figure is correct]. Tory minister in Newsnight claimed the median wage of those affected was 77 k.

Don’t disagree with this – and suspected that this was the difference. And it plays to my comment re elective use of the stats to spin the story… (as ever).

Thinking it through, you’d expect families to be over represented (ie the 15% of families / 5% of earners). Most / many of us earn low wages at the start of our working lives (ie pre-family). Having a family triggers other needs, such as larger more expensive accomodation, that have to be paid for etc – a very strong motivation to maintain or increase income. Also the age range of those supporting a family tends to fit with one of the most productive age ranges of people’s careers.

ETA – The median 70ish figure also feels about right – for those families where both parents work.

There is also something iniquitous with the way the higher tax bracket withdrawal is being presented.

Yesterday (IIRC) this was presented as aimed at “high earners”, ie them, not us, the priveliged, the wealthy, the comfortably off. I believe a figure of 5% was being touted (not sure if by journos or by George / Gideon) to emphasis the small and priveliged proportion this applies too.

BUT, over my working career the higher rate of tax has not been increased in line with pay rates. Each year an ever lower level of the working population are cuaght by higher rate tax.

Last night’s news was talking about the “top 5%”, but also talking about 1.2M families affected, with a further 6.2M families that pay the lower rate being unaffected. By my mathematics, that is more like 15% than 5%…? As ever, statistics being skewed (an abused).

Have I missed something on the total benefits cap?

Most of the reporting and political comments has been aimed at the high tax btacket cut, but it is the total cap that has caught my eye…

£26k cap to be equivalent to an average salary. This looks to be a mix of money saving and ideology – ie it must be beneficial to work…

BUT, presumably 26k of benefits is net of tax and NI, and therefore equivalent to a £34k+ salary?

Monthly take home on 26k salary is going to be about £1650 – I know this as mrs rkk01 is a teacher. Monthly “take home” on 26k benefits is £2160 – ie £500 A MONTH higher….

That’s fine that you disagree but there is no need to be insulting about it.

I agree on one level. There really is no need to be insulting on a personal level.

However, it becomes rather difficult to avoid insult when believers put such faith in their beliefs that all rational analysis is abandoned. The biblical explanations that you cite regarding the origin of sin truly are an insult to rational 21st Century knowledge and thinking.

BUT, it is near impossible to state that without causing insult. BECAUSE it is belief, and therefore deeply held and PERSONAL, to criticise or question will almost inevitably cause insult. To question FACT should not cause personal insult, merely to seek further / convincing evidence.

I think men are probably better at salary negotiations whilst not necessarily being better at the job

Utter nonsense. I see no evidence of this at all.

Think about it. You’re saying that men have better negotiating skills…

Is that supposed to be ironic?

Could we all think about the question?

And what the various “answers” might actually represent…?

Firstly, is it an indisputable fact that men get paid more?

In my teams everyone will be paid on merit. Pay will vary within grades, based on ability, experience (which I know is a difficult topic in the current climate, but in a highly technical role, experience and capability are closely linked). There will absolutely not be any gender influence on an individual’s pay.

An answer based on population wide stats doesn’t really answer the question posed. As a body, average female salary is lower than average male salary – doesn’t mean that women are paid less. Women are over-represented in low paid jobs and under represented in top jobs.

Because lazy journos can get a cheap story out of easily manipulated statistics?

I do believe, and this is just a personal belief, that morales are created by God in the first place.

Ok, so lets explore that belief. Created by God, for whom? All of humankind? Just Christians, or all religions and races?

What about the other creatures on the planet? Did humans get morality because God created “man” in his own image? Does this mean that men are fundamentaly moral and women are fundamentally immoral?

It strikes me that, judged on a planetary / environmental impact level that humans are actually fundamentally amoral /immoral

TJ – but where did your “innate moral structure” come from in the first place?

For me, I believe it was God given.

🙄 🙄 🙄

Ohh FFS. So Christians were given morality, and others weren’t?

Was the religious identity of a child specified before conception / birth? As yes, this one gets the morality upgrade package – he / she is a Christian. Next, no, not this one – muslim, no – atheist, no, no, ahh yes moraility in this one please – another budding Christian.

What about those that were “born” Christian (and I firmly believe that no child is born to a particular religious tag) and then show(ed) an absolute absence of morality during their lifetime. Did they have it taken away again?, kept it for the weekend?, kept it for the afterlife?

What about animals? Do cats get morality? What about creatures that show clear social integration, communication, cooperation and reap the benefits of altruism? Wolves for example, come to mind….

Half a curly wurly… a bag of pickled onion monster munch and twos on a fagbutt rollie… £2.57 and some pocket fluff..

OK – good to see that you have your research ready to support your case…

Why only VAG on the selection list??

I bailed out of company car scheme yeasr ago, as the tax got too much. So, if you need / have to have a company car, I’d strongly recommend reducing your tax liability:

a) selecting lowest viable (for you) CO2 banding;
b) (the big one) minimising the list price.

Tax evasion, done by the very wealthy and those who run their own business, cost society far far more.

As a direct measure, in £, possibly. But what is the indirect cost and social impact of high child birth rates amongst young, single non-working women?

Why can’t religous people respect aetheists’ views?

Haven’t read the previous 5-6 paqes yet – so perhaps enlightment will have to wait until I have…

Anyhow, it is my belief that strongly held relious views are the antithesis of respect for other people’s views. Religion is a form of tribalism. Having no tribe or belonging to another tribe engenders distrust, dislike or outright hostility / hatred (get off this continuum where you like, or where your civilised sensibilities allow you to)

I hope they’re vented to the rear for a bit of extra boost, and have a button on the gearstick under a special cover that ignites the afterburners for special situations.

You’ll be wanting to check out the rear view then…