Jump to content
Do Not Sell My Personal Information


Picking up car


Derek.w
 Share

Recommended Posts

Tbh I'm a bit worried by the tech in cars now, not much for a home mechanic to do, and perhaps more complex if things go wrong. But at the same time i wouldn't mind getting a new one if i could afford it. Someone is confused 😕 😆

I do like my basic T sport!

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, corradovr6 said:

Tbh I'm a bit worried by the tech in cars now, not much for a home mechanic to do, and perhaps more complex if things go wrong. But at the same time i wouldn't mind getting a new one if i could afford it. Someone is confused 😕 😆

I do like my basic T sport!

Yes, though u need to plan for a change due to ulez coming in covering the whole of London. https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/ultra-low-emission-zone/ulez-expansion-2023

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mojo1010 said:

though u need to plan for a change due to ulez coming in

As the Ulez regulations are at the moment, the T-Sport is probably compliant, isnt it? 

Our 51 reg Corolla is. I was so surprised, I checked twice. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


On 11/25/2022 at 9:57 PM, Derek.w said:

I returnd to pick up car while waiting my phone informed me that I was Driving but I was not in the car!!

That Hi tech for you glad I was not reported for speeding Ha Ha.

While waiting.  While waiting for what?  Perhaps someone else was driving it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Should still be okay - The requirements haven't changed so it's still Euro4 for Petrol and Euro6 for diesel, and I believe the T-Sport is Euro4 compliant.

Hopefully we can vote in someone who isn't a money-grubbing scumbag before he feels expanding it still isn't making him enough money and moves the goalposts for the compliance levels too...

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mojo1010 said:

Yes, from August next year it won't be.  Need to be 2006 petrol, so start planning for the change unfortunately. 

Not sure where I read this?! Probably my mistake, it just expanding, the euro 4 remained the same. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they do say something like that on their website, as a rough guideline, but it just confuses people further, esp. with manufacturers like Toyota who were ahead of the curve with emissions.

It still sucks tho' as many classic car clubs and owners have their cars up here and I don't know what they're going to do as their cars will fall foul of this blatant money making scheme.

I have a feeling classic car events in London like the Enfield Car Pagent are going to be a lot smaller in the future...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have the same issue with the corrado. Its a 2.9 v6, 1994 technology so i just cant drive east of where i live into London.

Ironically, my office is literally 500 yards inside the ULEZ zone, but i either take the train or the yaris

Surely the mayor should know that not everyone can afford an EV, and certainly classic car owners aren't going to dump their pride & joys

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Roy124 

I was waiting for Toyota to return my car after a service.

The waiting area is a porta cabin as show room is closed for a facelift so we are just 2 meters away from road going in/out of service area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Derek.w said:

Roy124 

I was waiting for Toyota to return my car after a service.

The waiting area is a porta cabin as show room is closed for a facelift so we are just 2 meters away from road going in/out of service area.

Are you sure it was not on a road test?  My dealer takes it a mile down the road and back.  I often get that in motion. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


On 11/27/2022 at 1:17 PM, Cyker said:

I think they do say something like that on their website, as a rough guideline, but it just confuses people further, esp. with manufacturers like Toyota who were ahead of the curve with emissions.

It still sucks tho' as many classic car clubs and owners have their cars up here and I don't know what they're going to do as their cars will fall foul of this blatant money making scheme.

I have a feeling classic car events in London like the Enfield Car Pagent are going to be a lot smaller in the future...

To be honest, paying a one off £12.50 for a car event shouldn’t deter classic car owners.  I don’t consider myself a tree hugger but I’m very conscious of climate change - it’s real and it’s happening.   I personally think that emissions charging should be national and anybody running less than an E6 vehicle should be paying some sort of daily fee until a defined period that says you either stop running the car or you pay the full £12.50 a day even if you live way out in the sticks.  If you can’t afford it then don’t drive a car.  

  • Like 1
  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, anchorman said:

To be honest, paying a one off £12.50 for a car event shouldn’t deter classic car owners.  I don’t consider myself a tree hugger but I’m very conscious of climate change - it’s real and it’s happening.   I personally think that emissions charging should be national and anybody running less than an E6 vehicle should be paying some sort of daily fee until a defined period that says you either stop running the car or you pay the full £12.50 a day even if you live way out in the sticks.  If you can’t afford it then don’t drive a car.  

So....what you are really saying....is that only the well off, should have access to private transport and are allowed to pollute the atmosphere?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Bob66 said:

So....what you are really saying....is that only the well off, should have access to private transport and are allowed to pollute the atmosphere?

Nobody should be allowed to pollute the atmosphere any more than can be avoided.  That applies to cars, bulbs, boilers etc.  A Euro 4 engine isn’t a third more polluting than a Euro 6, it is many times.  That shouldn’t entitle someone on a lower income to use one.   It’s my opinion, it doesn’t have to be yours.  

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, anchorman said:

Nobody should be allowed to pollute the atmosphere any more than can be avoided.  That applies to cars, bulbs, boilers etc.  A Euro 4 engine isn’t a third more polluting than a Euro 6, it is many times.  That shouldn’t entitle someone on a lower income to use one.   It’s my opinion, it doesn’t have to be yours.  

So space tourism, private jets, gas guzzling cars and vintage cars are fine.....but if you're on a low income...it's not !

I imagine most people want to save the planet.....but I suspect people on a lower income ,have a much smaller carbon / polluting footprint.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We apparently live in a democracy where everyone is supposedly treated fairly. ??????? I believe the truth is somewhat different may be. The truth is whatever happens in our world (democracy or not) there is always going to be a difference of financial status between the occupants. It also , by definition, is fact that there will always be those that have and those that do not. 

Best Wishes and Regards, John

  • Like 4
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bob66 said:

So....what you are really saying....is that only the well off, should have access to private transport and are allowed to pollute the atmosphere?

It's more a case of no-one should be allowed to pollute but of course richer people will have more ability to comply without compromising their way of life. Same thing with high fuel prices.

Private transport isn't a divine right (well, except perhaps in the USA).

Home heating OTOH perhaps should be.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JARC1 said:

We apparently live in a democracy where everyone is supposedly treated fairly. ??????? I believe the truth is somewhat different may be. The truth is whatever happens in our world (democracy or not) there is always going to be a difference of financial status between the occupants. It also , by definition, is fact that there will always be those that have and those that do not. 

Best Wishes and Regards, John

This is evident and plainly obvious dad .....so what's your point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Big cities are changing like it or not and it’s in the right direction.
I am not an eco activist and I don’t support those saving the planet nonsense that is currently going on but seriously any older and polluting car should not be allowed nor free or for paid charge anywhere near populated areas just because of the people’s health and air that we breathe.
Been in London Paddington few nights ago for work and was watching many cars are now full, evs, phev and hev, especially in the taxi trade as me been working previously in that business i can see the change and it’s good. However there are more thing to be done, improving the roads and infrastructure, removing all speed bumps, changing speed limits and introduction of variable speed limits, widening the roads and removing all dedicated cyclists lanes that has caused havoc in the last 10 years or so.  
This £12.50 a day collected should go for schemes help to buy an ev if you live in a big city. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't believe it - This isn't about emissions or pollution: It's about money.

The reason he's pushing so hard for the 2nd extension is because there is a massive hole in his finances and he sees motorists as the golden goose. The original extension to the A406 didn't bring in anywhere near the amount of revenue required because, despite his attempts to not publicise it, we managed to alert everyone through word of mouth and the majority were able to swap the diesels - that HIS party convinced them to buy in the first place! - to more compliant cars, despite getting no scrappage or other assistance that the inner London ULEZ residents got.

Instead of being happy about this - After all, if the number of fines (And they are fines) their wretched cameras have been able to issue are so low, surely that means that the level of pollution is better because everyone is driving lower polluting cars?

No no no he says, the pollution is EVEN WORSE and we must MUST extend the zone EVEN FURTHER  to stop ALL THIS TOXIC AIR WON'T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN AND BABY ANIMALS ignore the fleet of diesel 4x4s we flounce about in and all the diesel busses and taxis we're still licensing.

By swallowing the BS about it being about pollution you're giving that scumbag the moral high-ground to impose even more onerous charges carte blanche.

The next part of his plan is either per-mile charging, or charging vehicles to enter London. Probably both. For *all* vehicles. Still think it's about emissions?

Stop buying into his BS. This is all just a thinly veiled way to gouge money out of motorists, like all the inappropriate CPZs, LTNs, 20 zones etc.

The worst thing is he has trumped up figures to show increased emissions, but really they've not increased, they're just more concentrated *because of what they have done*!!! It is these idiot schemes forcing traffic into fewer and fewer roads that is increasing traffic, congestion and emissions in those specific places.

Cars are most efficient and least polluting when they are free-flowing, not then they are crawling at 5mph or stationary, but they've done everything they can to make traffic worse - Blocked off streets, changed signal timings to slow traffic flow, removed lanes from busy roads and turned them into cycle lanes that cyclists don't even use, removed bus laybys so buses have to stop *in the middle* of busy roads with no way for following traffic to go around them safely, creating more jams.

If they really wanted to reduce emissions, they could do it by optimizing traffic flow and undoing a lot of these restrictions and blockages - That would reduce journey times and congestion which would in turn reduce the time cars are on the road producing emissions in the first place.

But that wouldn't generate revenue.

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bob66 said:

So space tourism, private jets, gas guzzling cars and vintage cars are fine.....but if you're on a low income...it's not !

I imagine most people want to save the planet.....but I suspect people on a lower income ,have a much smaller carbon / polluting footprint.

I never mentioned space tourism or private jets and I did say that classic not vintage cars should pay an emissions charge like any other none compliant vehicle.   They could be scaled accordingly.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, anchorman said:

That shouldn’t entitle someone on a lower income to use one.

9 hours ago, anchorman said:

If you can’t afford it then don’t drive a car.

I don't really understand as to why you would mention income...the rich elite would love to have the roads to themselves.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share





×
×
  • Create New...




Forums


News


Membership