tobyd

I'm deluded and clueless but I occasionally wondered if a 2T diesel + CVT wouldn't be an interesting combo. The engine spins at pretty much tickover the entire time and you just tool around on masses of torque until the CVT gives up a few miles down the road. Unexciting but perhaps economical and fast? That said I was taken around the block in an I3 'S' the otherday and my are they quick...

This old rascal is in for its MOT on thursday. Not ridden it in a while and whilst checking it over found both fork seals have popped. Hottest day of the year...changing fork seals outside. I'd be lying if i said i wasn't in my pants... Not a hard job but took 5 times longer with breaks to cool* off inside.

I jammed a spanner on the nut end, jammed it up against something convenient and bruted it out with the impact gun like an absolute amateur pro. Your welcome to try your luck with lidls finest if you'd like?

Jack up the rear wheel slightly to remove the load from it. The crudded up bolts on my SV needed a lot of attention from the (minimum) 90,000nm lidl impact gun i have to free them off.

Have you seen my daughter?

Any recommendations for Tank Pads? I have a new bike and never having such luxury before hadn't appreciated why tank pads exist and i've slightly scuffed the tank paint with my jacket zipper. I bought some Oxford 'transformer' pads which I feel won't last beyond tomorrow (at a push.)

https://arstechnica.com/cars/2022/04/new-ev-vs-old-beater-which-is-better-for-the-environment/ Was reminded of this article from the other day or week. It's all in American but they seem to think that its reasonably quick to have a new EV save the planet than keep driving your XUD 405. I'm not sure how the numbers work for cars than do more than 30 gallons to the mile nor whether the EPA can read or count. There is a further link in the article to a study in Reuters re: breakeven mileage but i've not read it. Also This made me cringe (as I stood next to my blue recycling bin.)

Now for sale at £3k

I'm not sure I agree with this - they were specificially chosen because £50 a month for the spec of machine and backup of the entire site and its content to another country (in case the datacenter burnt down) was a total steal at that price. They've since bought their prices inline with most of their competitors but gave a years grace to their existing customers so this increase should not have been news to you or any of the administrators. You might want to consider having Invision themselves host the site (currently $89/mo) - I can't tell if that offering does everything you currently have but you could ask them - this might also include the software license cost. I don't think you'll be able to get this site to run on a cheapo (£5.99/mo) webhost designed for peoples unread blogs or local interest websites written in Word '97 because they don't offer you full access to the underlying VM or have limits that the size of AS exceeds. All the smaller cloud hosts (Linode, Hetzner, OVH, whoever), as you currently use, are priced about the same. The larger ones (AWS, Azure) are all more expensive.