The Weather?

Where I live is on a hill near the sea so we get salty sea mists. My current car is kept in the barn to shelter it. I have to avoid Fords, Vauxhalls and Rovers (Especially Fords and Rovers) as they just rust to quickly. Is why I used to try to get German or Sweedish cars as the bodywork would last. My Dad had a nearly new Ford Sierra. It was immaculate. Not a spot of rust. I had a Volvo 360 GLT at the time. Two years later after replacing all 4 doors on the Sierra, the Sierra was a complete MOT failure with the top front suspension mounts completely rusted through. It was basically scrap. The Volvo? Well. It did have two rust holes which just got a little larger, but that was it. They were there when I bought the car. 

In my area, I noticed that the majority of Rovers were rusting after about two to three years and not many lasted over 10 years old. Most of the older Rovers (Along with MG's) were bought in secondhand from other areas of the country. Vauxhalls tended to last longer then Rovers and Fords, but they still did not last long. Actually, of all the older Vauxhalls I have seen around here, it is the Astra and Carltons that seemed to last, though most Astras didn't make it past 15 years old. 

Volvos kept on going. Most Volvos were scrapped with good bodies but as their prices had dropped so low, even minor repairs were not worth doing as it was cheaper to get another secondhand car. If well serviced a proper Volvo manufactured Volvo engine would last around 250,000 milss before new sleeves were fitted, and they could easily exceed 400,000 miles or more. It was more that most were simply scrapped because the labour costs of changing parts was more then the car was worth. One Volvo in the USA was just short of 3 million miles and it looked immaculate! (A Volvo built P1800). The 360's and the 740's had engines that if the cam belts broke, they would have no damage, and it took 75,000 miles to run them in. I would buy them at 100,000 to 120,000 miles if I could as the car really came alive at those milages. A young Volvo engine wasn't as quick.

Though I found the 5 cylinder engines they later made to be thirsty and a bit of a let down compared to the previous 4 cylinder engines, (But it was more because they were in a large can and had front wheel drive transmission so they just sat there and span the wheels with no go... Front tyres lasted just 2000 to 4000 miles!) but I did find the 5 cylinder engines hardly gave any exhaust emission readings. The T5 had 200,000 miles on the clock and during its MOT the tester kept asking if I had put a new engine in it. He said the reading of 0.0005 was lower then a brand new city car and he had not seen a car with such a low reading. 

Believe it or not, the 1965 Volvo Amazon I had which needed leaded petrol... Well. I took it for an MOT, and I noticed that the young man testing it started to put the exhaust emissions testing equipment in the exhaust of the car. I told him that older cars were exempt from passing the emissions test. He didn't seem to know. He said "It has passed anyway!" It had leaded petrol in it!

I'm not brave enough to buy 'off-piste' cars - I do most of my own mechanics so the simpler main-stream cars are well documented among enthusiasts / boy racers.      Solutions to any fault can be found on the internet.      I mostly stick to Ford, Vauxhall, BMW etc.       I've had a Suzuki Liana, a Chevrolet Tacuma and a Renault Safrane - there's no knowledge anywhere for them so you're compelled to be screwed by the dealer.

It pains me to say it but my current old Astra is possibly the 'best' car I've owned - it's fully loaded and owes me nothing - I've used it to carry 1/2 ton of bricks a few times and I don't need to worry about minor parking dings.        It's mechanically perfect.    I normally keep cars for 6-months to a year - I've had this for 2 1/2 years and I can't see a reason to change it..

I had to change a front wheel bearing last year (ABS fault) so I put new brakes on it at the same time.

I've had faster, bigger, more powerful cars but the Astra ticks all the boxes right now - it's a 1.8 - around 120bhp.    

I really like the Omegas - I've had 4 - so much car for so little money - but they're too old now - the V6 engines have 2 universal faults - leaking oil from the cam covers onto the exhaust manifolds - lots of smoke!  (all the top of the engine and the inlet plenum has to come apart - a real pain) and the other fault is there's a leaking oil cooler built inside the block in between the cylinder banks - the oil leaks into the coolant - a massive job to replace - you have to practically strip the engine down to a short block!   About £2000 at the dealer - so many special tools needed.

I've had so fun cars - Triumph Spitfire and a GT6, a Seat Ibiza Cupra, a Fiat X1/9, Lotus Excel, TVR 350, Rover SD1 V8 VDP, MGBGT etc.     Mostly British cars - all easy/cheap to fix.

Ford sold Volvo a good few years ago now. The prices of parts for Volvos (Even older ones like the 740) skyrocketed as the new company class the brand as a premium brand. 

Sometimes using the technical skills of two or more manufacturers works well. My little Mitsubishi has a Mercades diesel engine. It's ace! The GLT versions of the 360 and the 740 have porsche input and they are ace! (They are good even before they hired Porsche to help them. The handling on the 360 after Porsche engineers made adjustments transformed a good handling car into an amazing handling car! And an example is that when the Volvo Owners Club track day event had to be combined with another event, a Volvo 360 GLT was consistently lapping just two seconds behind a Dodge Viper).

I have had other cars that had great handling which may have been better but they were not so entertaining and to be honest, a little boring to drive. For example, I had one of the last of the Audi 80 saloons which had the A4 floorplan and sports suspension. It had a V6 2.6 engine which in my oppinion was better then the 2.8. They both had the same barrel size, and though the 2.6 was only 150bhp compared to 180bhp with the 2.8, the shorter stroke 2.6 (Which was easy to stall at low revs) would rev its socks off. It was absolutely amazing in the high revs. But it was soo glued to the road... I would take it to a 90 degree bend when I was a bit too tired after a night shift, and forget to slow down, and I would just turn the stering wheel and it would not even drift. It was as if the corner wasn't even there. Boring to drive though!

My last car I did not keep for that long was a bit like that. A Citroen C2 GT. Slightly touch the brakes and it was like dropping an anchor. Accelerated quicker then I could change gear (The Volvo 740 was like that too!) and handled... Well. If it was not such a light weigt car, it would handle like the Audi, but as it was too light it would drift, but it was nearly there. I sold it because it is a claustrophobic car to drive with the two massive pillars, and "Awkward".. Was either go flat out or a dead stop type of car. 1600cc engine in a little lightweight version of the C2 is bound to have some go! (110 bhp). But as a practical car.. I could not even get my bicycles to fit with the wheels off. I don't mind small but this was just a tad too small. 

It needed a few things doing to it, and I thought either to do it up or part exchange it. I sold some of my model trains to get the money and due to the limited money I had, It basically came down to a choice of three cars. Two were little Renault Clios which were quite tatty and... The older tattyier one was more attractive (1200cc) as the other newer one (1400cc) had the low suspension and blackened out windows. I hate black windows. Soo depressing. The car had just come in and how people can send their car in for part exchange without cleaning it? It was in a real state. Manky old food in the footwells. It was.. I opened the door and the smell! Yuck! Forget it! (If the previous owner was like that then what would the mechanics be like?)

Anyway. I saw Mitsi. The only other car in my price range. And only because diesels have dropped in price. Well. I do not like driving in cities. I do not intend to drive in cities. Is the only time when driving I can start to shut down is in a traffic jam, as driving relaxes me and is my number one way to de-stress. But I will drive 50 to 100 miles in the other direction to avoid a traffic jam! Thankfully here in Wales they are rare as long as one does not live in the south east of Wales. If we get more then 25 cars queueing we call it a jam, but as long as the traffic is moving I am ok. 

But Mitsi. She has been looked after. I can tell. Probably by an elderly owner. Not quite perfect as she has a few small issues, one of which we fixed but has started playingnup (Rear window is catching on something. Managed to close it for now. Will get the door panel off again ad ease it when I have the enthusiasm to do it). But as a cheap to run little car that is large enough to get a bicycle in or the weekly shopping (Even if I use a back seat when the boot is full) she is great. 

I'm surprised that Jensen didn't make a P1800 convertible - it would have been an interesting car - but Volvo's safety policy didn't go for that sort of thing - the recent drop-heads in their range don't fit with their history.

Ford ruin everything they touch.     The current Focus-based Volvos don't really have the spirit of Volvo - it even looks like a Ford in a skirt.      Same with their Mondeo/Jaguar mash-up a few years ago.     GM did the same to SAAB - took a company with an individual style and trashed it with a mediocre platform and parts-bin fittings,

Yes. Most of the P1800's had the exact same engine as mine. The Amazons came with 1600cc, 1800cc 2000cc twin carb and 2000cc fuel injection. The first had drum brakes but a few years later they had discs. The first few were 1600's. Volvo never supported any rally events even though they made rally prepared Amazons and the previous PV's straight from the factory. 

Volvo never ever made a convertible as it was againat their policy, and they used to keep parts for all cars up to 40 years old as part of their company policy. 

All changed then when Ford took Volvo over (And now a new company again). They are nice cars but they have really lost their edge as far as the character goes. The only modern Volvo I like is the C30.

Yes!! Actually called dialectic - as desrcibed in Platos Republic. 

You're into Volvos then       I was put off them because of the cost of parts - the 440 was just the right car at the right time.       We had a 940 estate as a pool car at work - it was big for shifting things around but it was gutless - the sport mode just made the engine louder.but the car was no faster.  

Didn't the Amazon donate it's mechanicals for the P1800S?

The big Volvos are good value now - and rear wheel drive is best.

I've had lots of different makes but mostly Vauxhalls - 4 Omegas, 2 Senators, a Carlton, 4 Astras, 5 Vectras, 3 Cavaliers etc.     The fastest was the Senator 24V 225bhp - rear drive with a limited slip diff - endless opposite-lock fun!     I had it up to 138mph.        The Omegas don't have limited slip diffs so they just wheelspin and then the traction control grabs the wheels - a real pain when you're trying to get out of a junction in the rain. 

Used to have a Volvo 480ES. Cool looks but as Volvos go, it is not Volvos better cars. Had a Renault 1700cc engine and an early computer, which the displays were known to give issues, so most of the time I did not know how much fuel it had. 

It was glued to the road like a limpit and excellent in snow, but very lightweight (Plastic bonet etc) and the Renault engine was somewhat thirsty. (Why is it Renault engines are thirsty things when in Volvos but they are boosted up compared to Renault engines in Renaults which are just fine?

The 360's had proper Volvo engines. Volvo lost their edge when they changed them to the 5 cylender engines like used on the T5, as in my oppinion, though those 5 cylinder engines had go, the older 4 cylinder engines were so free revving that though on paper the 5 cylinder enginss appeared more powerful, in reality it was the other way around. 

Example, the T5 I used to have was 225bhp. The 740GLT was 155bhp and would leave te T5 standing in a straight line. Rear wheel drive and the back went down and the front came up and you were away! The T5 with the front wheel drive handled well enough if one didn't try to accelerate while cornering, but it just could not get the power down. All show and no go... And in any snow or slippery conditions you may as well walk! My T5 would drink the petrol and was even more costly on tyres! 

Also had the non T5 version and that was the same. Worse thing Volvo did was to change to front wheel drive on their large cars. 

And handling... Well. The 940 I had which was under powered (Was a non turbo 2000cc de-tuned petrol... De-tuned so they could qualify for tax reliefe in Germany? The British ones were supposed to have turbos but many found their way here. But where it lacked a little go and due to engine needing to work hard they were slightly thirsty, the handling was good. Back wheel drive, for handling they were great. 

It was the sheer fun and handling of the 360's that I loved. Back end out and yet soo predictable. They just went where you put them. I could go down a straight road at a 45 degree angle with rear wheels spinning and hold it there for as long as the road was straight. They were incredible cars once you were used to them. Took a little getting used to the unusual driving position. And the top speed was a fair 20mph in excess of the 120mph the speedometer showed. Very underrated cars in the write ups. 

The 740GLT had 4 gears and overdrive. (Manual). If I accelerated, I could not physically change gear fast enough to match its acdeleration. It wasn't happy in overdrive unless one was cruising at above 80mph as the revs were not high enough. Good for the autobahn though it had a 155mph speed limiter on it. But less practical for the UK, but the mpg figures of both the 360GLT's and the 740GLT's were good. The 740 had the Porsche designed twin overhead cam version of the Volvo 4 cylinder engine and I was getting 43mpg towing a 17.5 ft caravan from South Wales up to North Walss ans back, and few cars could keep up with it on the hills even when towing! The 360's I had woule easily get similar fuel consumption figures even when towing a caravan.

The 740's gears were wierd. First gear on the 740 was where second gear is on most cars, and fourth was close to being around  where fifth is on most cars, so when I heard that a 740GLT with overdrive had touched 175mph befoee they were speed restricted  I now can believe it, as those engines rev!

The 940's were basically better handling 740's, and all they did was to weld little metal gussets to firm up the topnof te front suspesion support, and the car really changed! If I could have had a 940 with the same engine as I had in the 740, it would not only be a T5 beater in acceleration, it would handle just as well as well. (And they did make them with that engine but they are rare. They also made a few with the T5 engine in rear wheel drive form inside the 9 series body. Another rare car).

The oldest car I had was a 1965 Volvo 131 (Amazon) which again was a rather suprizingly quick car with god handling. Even though it has a long gear lever, I could change gear in that thing far quicker then most cars if I wanted to. It also had the best most practical windscreen wipers and rear demister I have seen. The demister put warm air from the heater onto the back window. The body panels underneath were galvanized. It had three speed wipers if I remember, and slow was lovely and slow... Far better then most intermettent wipes, and the wipers somehow didn't obscure my view. Had survo disc brakes (Huge drums on the back) so stopping at speed was not an issue. The non overdrives could touch 120mph (Very free revving engines which could easily accelerate) and I was told 135 to 140 was possible from the overdrive versions. Despite their elderly heavy looks, they were ligtweight cars. 

Cool - I've had a Volvo 440 - which is a Mitsubishi in a skirt.- nicely engineered.   The only fault it had was the ignition key barrel disintegrated inside - I took all the broken parts out - there's a semi-circular piece that had sheared.   I reassembled what was left and it worked fine - no idea what the broken part did.

I have an old Astra right now - got it off an old guy with 50k miles on it - immaculate top of the range car and it does everything I need and it was only £500 - it's got cruise, climate, auto with sport - basically everything except leather - which I don't like anyway.

It has to be the Volvo 360GLT 3 door hatchback. I have owned many cars and most of them were Volvos. I love Volvos. Nothing compares to the 360... 

But I have an incredible little car now even though shes not a Volvo. Is a 2005 Mitsubishi Colt DID. I am not really into my diesels, though this is my fourth diesel. But somehow, the little Mercades diesel engine in this lovely little zoomy car just works well together. It is soo odd, as both my brothers have Mitsubishis, and my youngest brother has the same make, model and age as mine, though his has a little revvy 3 cylinder 1100cc engine, and that goes well too.

Mine currently needs its front shocks changing. I have the parts. I have the tools but I looked to undo the top nuts of the suspension, saw that they were not easy to get to with my big hands, and now we are on lockdown and it will take me about an hour and a half to two hours to cycle back from the garage... And we are only allowed 10 minutes to exercize, I have to drive my car as it is. It still handles well. The guy at the garage will say it will handle better afterwards. And strangely, my car handles a little better then my brothers does and he has had new parts on his suspension. 

But they are great little cars and economical too. I call mine "Mitsi". She lives in the barn, nice and dry.

Actually cheaper than a party!

What cars are you into?     I've had lots - from Mk1 Escorts to TVR 350 - what's your favourite?

Wow. Those are some experiences!

I'd have to agree with you - most 'parties' seem to be like a 3D version of Facebook or Twitter made real.      It's a living hell.      Most of the people are trying to out-do each other one way or another.    Way too noisy & chaotic.

When I was working, I'd have to endure the social side of it too - but I can fake being NT for long enough to hide in plain sight.   

My wife is NT - but we've been together so long that she feels she has a foot in both camps - she can see how frustrating it is to deal with NTs all the time.

For our birthdays, we have experiences - things that are memorable.     My daughter's birthday this year is meeting a pack of wild wolves and we'll go for a meal afterwards.       We've fed red pandas, swum with Dolphins, done predator experiences, driven traction engines, attended stunt driving school and had aerobatic flying lessons etc.   

I just don't understand what socializing actually is. I assumed it was all about pubs and drinking as in my area I am one of the few who does not go in pubs. (Or rarely and the few times I have been in, it has been for a meal at lunchtime if someone insists... Nice food though!). But whatever they do while drinking, it involves socializing. 

Somehow socializing is different from a conversation? I just don't really get it myself. Maybe I do it? Maybe I don't? 

Where I last worked I took a temp part time job before Christmas the year before this Christmas (Couldn't do it this Christmas as I hit burnout with a summer part time job there). I was asked if I wanted to come to a Christmas party. I said I prefer not to. Nothing personal. I aant the other guys to have fun, but it is not for me. Not my idea of what I like. 

He then asked me what sort of things I liked as they had a certain amount of money to spend on us. (Staff bonuses went into fund which was spent on a Christmas party). I said "I don't like partys. But if we all met on a beach or went to visit a castle it sounds fun! E said "It could be arranged for a party on the beach in the summer..." Uhmm. Ok. Is far nicer then in a building. I would MUCH rather just walk along the tideline or something... Even if it was raining and cold... I could always wear something warm. But the noise and crowded in feeling of parties... Nope. Not doing it! I have done it to be polite... But...

Well. Put it this way. On my birthday I like the food but don't like the fuss.

Last year I had the best most fantastic birthday present I have ever had in my life. My youngest brother and his wife wanted to take me and my Mum to the local steam railway for a birthday present, and I love railways! But I don't like crowds even though I used to work on a railway... (Luckily if things got too much I had the back cab to get a quiet time to recover). 

The railway was not open so we went to a local beach instead... And it was tantastic! The nearby touristy shops were open but hardly anyone there as it was an overcast and windy day. And I was in my element. Went in the shops. Went and had chips in a little restauraunt. (Cant do it in that one if it is crowded as it is too crampt). And we went for a cliffside walk. I was actually able to unmask and be my real self! Something I can rarely do. And I absolutely loved it! It HAS to be one of the best days of my whole life! 

I've found that what you're doing is similar to me - it's an Aspie search.    You're subconsciously looking for like-minded individuals who can engage your brain with something interesting.

I'm in my 50s and I suspect most of my friends are undiagnosed Aspies too  (I can't mention it to them - that's not my place)  but they are all very similar to me - they know tons of stuff about tons of stuff - they are interesting and mentally stimulating to chat with.     I can spend all say with them - but NTs wear me out in an hour.       The blank faces you meet are just NTs - they skim across the world and *see* nothing.    Their world is all about social status and materialism so they don't 'deep-dive' into any subjects.

I like trains too.