invacar LightBulbFun's Invacar & general ramble thread, index on page 1, survivors lists on Pages 24/134 & AdgeCutler's Invacar Mk12 Restoration from Page 186 onwards, still harping on...

[warren t claim]

1 hour ago, LightBulbFun said:

I was just simply arguing regardless of myself,

that I dont think that the Model 70 is particularly unreliable in any such matter, compared to any other old car that someone would use regularly

especially once you apply some proactive maintenance to know weak spots, and that can be seen in that @Zelandeth has done over 3000 miles in TPA, in fairly harsh conditions, and its only ever left him stranded once and that was due a consumable wear item which was well past its sell by date

 

I did say I was not going to argue the Sanity of trying to daily a Model 70, but since you have brought it up anyways! LOL

 

I very much appreciate the concern, however I am well aware of the valid points and concerns that you bring, I have been since I started this endeavour, I never went into this thinking it would be a walk in the park

but for fuck sake, I am not going to let life shit on me yet again, its not taking this away from me! that I am determined 

 

and thats the thing, I have mentioned it time and time again that I am well aware of the challenges and that this is very much a passion project of mine 

but yet again it always goes in circles! 

this mini-rant is not directed at you personal, you yourself have been fairly understanding/restrained/genuinely well meaning in the whole scheme of things which I appreciate  

but there are other people who bring this up always and again, especially when I do find myself struggling with something and always goes in circles!

 

and as an aside we all gotta start somewhere on our shitter career no?   by never getting involved in shite, I would never learn the skills and get the tools I need to keep shite going in the first place  

 

I mean you no harm. I was young once and don't want you to make a mistake that will ruin your ownership experience. 

[Mr Pastry]

10 minutes ago, Zelandeth said:

Unfortunately I'm rather short on that just now as we're in the process of having the whole roof on our house replaced! 

Fully understood - life has its priorities!

[warren t claim]

2 hours ago, Talbot said:

The number of breakdowns he's had vs the number of miles driven is pretty terrible IMO.  Plus you have to take into account the amount of work he's had to do just to keep it vaguely mobile, and all the issues that have happened that were pretty serious, but didn't actually stop the journey.

The very fact that these vehicles are starting to need the sort of specialist attention that needs lathe time speaks volumes about the sort of maintenance and reliability you're looking at.  You simply can't ignore the fact that they are 40-50 years old and based on 60+ year old technology.  Cars in the 60s and 70s were just horribly unreliable even when they were new, had service backup all over the place and parts weren't hard to come by.

And no, that's not me being nasty or rude or negative or anything else.  It's intended as a reality check.  Watching someone else on youtube run an I*****r is one thing.  Actually having to maintain one yourself is radically different, especially when you don't have a garage, driveway, appropriate tooling, experience, or (as you've stated yourself) the physical capability to work on it.  If a belt shreds on you while driving up to the FoD, even if you've got a spare with you, will you be able to change it at the roadside?  Even if you have AA/RAC cover, they're not going to have a clue what to do, and (it being a 3-wheeler) probably can't recovery you for several hours either.

I consider myself fairly* mechanically competent, and very experienced at keeping tatty old snotters on the road, but I wouldn't even remotely consider driving an I******r further than I could walk back, or have at least 2 numbers in my phone of people with flatbed recovery vehicles who could come and rescue me when it all goes horribly wrong.

You do not want to find yourself broken down in a dangerous spot on a minor road when it's pissing down with rain on a cold march evening and you can't get any mobile reception.  Yes, that could happen with any car, but the chances of it happening in your I******r are orders of magnitude higher than if you were in a 2008 ford fiesta.

tl:dr.   DOOOOOM and GLOOOOM

Edit:  I'm genuinely not trying to be negative here.  My real concern is that you have absolutely no experience of keeping an old car on the road and have slightly* underestimated the amount of time, effort, skill and backup you will need.  It would be unfair of me not to make you aware of all this.

https://www.theargus.co.uk/news/19914707.widow-recalls-fatal-crash-london-brighton-veteran-car-run/

 

Probably no more crash worthy than a Model 70.

[Zelandeth]

21 hours ago, warren t claim said:

https://www.theargus.co.uk/news/19914707.widow-recalls-fatal-crash-london-brighton-veteran-car-run/

 

Probably no more crash worthy than a Model 70.

Nearly 120 year old car doing <30mph getting rear ended by a HGV on a major road they were on by mistake...that really doesn't seem relevant. 

If you get hit by a HGV at anything over walking pace in anything other than a really modern car you have a significant chance of being a gonner.  Even in a modern it's largely down to luck of the draw if a HGV at speed is involved.

I really don't think there's any comparison between the two.  Yes the Model 70 is a death trap compared to anything made vaguely recently, but where you're largely mixing with low speed traffic around town I don't think I'd be worried.  The chassis is surprisingly sturdy, you're actually quite a distance from all sides of the vehicle, you've got a proper 3-point seat belt, and while it disintegrates impressively, fibreglass is actually a lot better at absorbing energy in an impact than a lot of people think.

Ask a mate of mine who hit black ice on the A90 in a Reliant and vaulted the crash barrier at significant speed.  By the time he came to rest there basically wasn't any bodywork left, but aside from a few scrapes and bruises he was unhurt.  Yes, he was incredibly lucky, but the car has to take some credit for protecting the occupant a lot better than people would tend to expect.

Comparing it to something from the 1890s though which is basically a horse drawn card that someone has bolted an engine onto really isn't fair though.  It's a heck of a lot safer than that.  Having things like doors, seatbelts, mirrors, the ability to change direction something resembling quickly to try to avoid trouble, oh, brake lights - those seem relevant for this one too.

 

-- -- --

One for you @LightBulbFun, I'm just about finished the Invacar page for my website, but am putting together an associated FAQ.  This is basically a crib sheet of all the mistruths I hear on a day to day basis and what (by my understanding at least) the facts of those statements is.

Motorway driving.  We know that you can - though unless you're bloody sure what you're doing and the conditions favour it, probably should not unless it's a matter of necessity - take a Model 70 on the motorway.  For the love of God don't even try it on a windy day.

Yes I know that technically that's always been true of the Model 70 as it's too heavy to fall under the invalid carriage definition I know - but I'm not getting hung up on that at this stage.

With legislation as it stands now, is that true for all Invacars?  Are they all treated as lightweight three wheelers all the same, hence able to use motorways.

Now I'm not suggesting for a millisecond that taking a Villiers engined Invacar even *near* a motorway is even vaguely sane - I'm purely interested in the legalities of it here as I know it's a question that will come up if I don't answer it.

[LightBulbFun]

8 hours ago, Zelandeth said:

Nearly 120 year old car doing <30mph getting rear ended by a HGV on a major road they were on by mistake...that really doesn't seem relevant. 

If you get hit by a HGV at anything over walking pace in anything other than a really modern car you have a significant chance of being a gonner.  Even in a modern it's largely down to luck of the draw if a HGV at speed is involved.

I really don't think there's any comparison between the two.  Yes the Model 70 is a death trap compared to anything made vaguely recently, but where you're largely mixing with low speed traffic around town I don't think I'd be worried.  The chassis is surprisingly sturdy, you're actually quite a distance from all sides of the vehicle, you've got a proper 3-point seat belt, and while it disintegrates impressively, fibreglass is actually a lot better at absorbing energy in an impact than a lot of people think.

Ask a mate of mine who hit black ice on the A90 in a Reliant and vaulted the crash barrier at significant speed.  By the time he came to rest there basically wasn't any bodywork left, but aside from a few scrapes and bruises he was unhurt.  Yes, he was incredibly lucky, but the car has to take some credit for protecting the occupant a lot better than people would tend to expect.

Comparing it to something from the 1890s though which is basically a horse drawn card that someone has bolted an engine onto really isn't fair though.  It's a heck of a lot safer than that.  Having things like doors, seatbelts, mirrors, the ability to change direction something resembling quickly to try to avoid trouble, oh, brake lights - those seem relevant for this one too.

 

to further add to this REV is an Model 70 Mark B, and a Post march 1976 one at that  so not only does she have a strengthened chassis to further protect the occupants in a front or rear end end impact (which was introduced with the Mark B revision) but also a roll over bar to protect in the event of a rollover incident, I dont think many cars from the 1970's had any sort of rollover protection full stop!

contrary to popular belief the Model 70 was actually crash tested a fair few times and data from these tests where used to improve the safety of the design during the production run

all of this is something that can be clearly seen in the comparison of a Mk A chassis

and a Mk B chassis (this is from the other side so the bulkhead upright is not visible) perticularly, note the much larger front out riggers and extra strengtheners on the rear

as you say the Model 70 is not a crash worthy design in any stretch of the imagination by modern standards, but to say its only as crash worthy as a 1900's car is just complete nonsense, or to even say the Model 70 is not in any way crash worthy in any regard, given that they did actually specifically test for crash worthiness and got the Model 70 to meet the 30Mph front impact requirements of the time for example, and then went one step beyond that implementing rollover protection, I also believe changes where made to keep the engine from entering the cabin in the event of nasty shunt, and not to mention that every invalid vehicle from the Ministry came by default with a fire extinguisher going back to the 1960s at least, again thats not something you get even on modern cars! so again, im not saying the Model 70 is a safe design by modern parlance, but its a far better design then people realise, given most people seem to think no thought was given to crash worthiness at all! 

and if you compare the Model 70 Chassis to a Reliant Robin chassis for example theres just nothing in it! 

8 hours ago, Zelandeth said:

-- -- --

One for you @LightBulbFun, I'm just about finished the Invacar page for my website, but am putting together an associated FAQ.  This is basically a crib sheet of all the mistruths I hear on a day to day basis and what (by my understanding at least) the facts of those statements is.

Motorway driving.  We know that you can - though unless you're bloody sure what you're doing and the conditions favour it, probably should not unless it's a matter of necessity - take a Model 70 on the motorway.  For the love of God don't even try it on a windy day.

Yes I know that technically that's always been true of the Model 70 as it's too heavy to fall under the invalid carriage definition I know - but I'm not getting hung up on that at this stage.

With legislation as it stands now, is that true for all Invacars?  Are they all treated as lightweight three wheelers all the same, hence able to use motorways.

Now I'm not suggesting for a millisecond that taking a Villiers engined Invacar even *near* a motorway is even vaguely sane - I'm purely interested in the legalities of it here as I know it's a question that will come up if I don't answer it.

feel free to PM me a link to the web page before you publish it so I can read through it and throughly nit pick at it as I do  

 

as for Invacars and Motorways

contrary to popular belief the legislation in that regard has never changed, Invalid Carriage legislation was first introduced (with the RTA 1930) way before the government run scheme was even a thing, and continued along merrily afterwards!

trying to find it can be fun because some genius decided that mobility scooters should also be called "Invalid Carriage", so often a lot of the Actual invalid carriage stuff is buried and forgotten about underneath rules for mobility scooters, but its still very much there!

 

so a true invalid carriage is still banned from the Motorway network, like this Invacar Mk8 (user training vehicle) is not allowed on the Motorway

but anything over 254Kg, aka pretty much anything with an actual body on it (apart from the Invacar Mk10) is allowed on the motorway because they are not legally classed as Invalid carriages for the purposes of the RTA 1988 etc

Quote

3.  If an invalid carriage exceeds 254 kg in unladen weight it will not be classified as an "invalid carriage" for the purposes of the RTA 1988, the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 (the "RTOA") and the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 (the "RTRA") and of the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986 (SI 1986/1078) (the "Construction and use Regulations"). It will, instead be a motor car or, if it has less than four wheels and the weight does not exceed 410 kg, a motor cycle.
  4.  Therefore a carriage for invalids over 254 kg is not an "invalid carriage" but will fall within whatever category is appropriate for the particular vehicle and the RTA 1988 the RTOA, the RTRA and the Construction and use Regulations will apply, for example, the requirement that drivers of motor vehicles have driving licences and compulsory insurance against third-party risks.[1] (Section 143(4) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 provides that Part VI of that Act, which includes provisions relating to compulsory insurance requirements, does not apply to invalid carriages. However, the Department strongly encourages individuals to take out insurance on a voluntary basis).

so this Mk12 is legal on the Motorway, if you have a death wish LOL (it is worth noting that no electric Invalid vehicle is legal on the motorway simply by way of not being able to do 25Mph on level ground)

anything over 254Kg, like Invacar Mk12 or an Model 70, is only considered an Invalid Carriage, for Taxation purposes and driving test/licensing purposes (in this case anything below  10 Cwt/508Kg is considered an invalid carriage)

all Invalid vehicles fall under the B/B1 Licensing sub category these days, again contrary to popular belief, you very much did/do need a licence to drive an Invalid carriage and take a test to get said licence, in old Money it was Category J  

also worth noting that all Invalid vehicle weighing no more then 306Kg are MOT exempt, this is basically anything thats not a Model 70, (Category e on the V112 form)

thats why if you look at the V5 for a full bodied Villiers Machine the revenue weight will be specifically listed as 305Kg in most cases

 

and again all of this is why, the body type on V5 of an Invacar etc, specifically states "INVALID VEHICLE" rather than Invalid carriage, because when it is/is not an invalid carriage very much varies depending on a whole load of factors! LOL

and is also why you must never change the body/vehicle type to Tricycle, as has sadly been done to a few in the past

[Zelandeth]

3 minutes ago, LightBulbFun said:

to further add to this REV is an Model 70 Mark B, and a Post march 1976 one at that  sonot only does she have a strengthened chassis to further protect the occupants in a front or rear end end impact (which was introduced with the Mark B revision) but also a roll over bar to protect in the event of a rollover incident, I dont think many cars from the 1970's had any sort of rollover protection full stop!

contrary to popular belief the Model 70 was actually crash tested a fair few times and data from these tests where used to improve the safety of the design during the production run

all of this is something that can be clearly seen in the comparison of a MkA chassis

and a MkB chassis (this is from the other side so the bulkhead upright is not visible) perticularly, note the much larger front out riggers and extra strengtheners on the rear

as you say the Model 70 is not a crash worthy design in any stretch of the imagination by modern standards, but to say its only as crash worthy as a 1890's car is just complete nonsense, or to even say the Model 70 is not in any way crash worthy in any regard, given that they did actually specifically test for crash worthiness and got the Model 70 to meet the 30Mph front impact requirements of the time for example, and then went one step beyond that implementing rollover protection, I also believe changes where made to keep the engine from entering the cabin in the event of nasty shunt, and not to mention that every invalid vehicle from the Ministry came by default with a fire extinguisher going back to the 1960s at least, again thats not something you get even on modern cars! so again, im not saying the Model 70 is a safe design by modern parlance, but its a far better design then people realise, given most people seem to think no thought was given to crash worthiness at all! as is clearly evidenced above!

and if you compare the Model 70 Chassis to a Reliant Robin chassis for example theres just nothing in it! 

feel free to PM me a link to the web page before you publish it so I can read through it and throughly nit pick at it as I do  

 

as for Invacars and Motorways

contrary to popular belief the legislation in that regard has never changed, Invalid Carriage legislation was first introduced (with the RTA 1930) way before the government run scheme was even a thing, and continued along merrily afterwards!

trying to find it can be fun because some genius decided that mobility scooters should also be called "Invalid Carriage", so often a lot of the Actual invalid carriage stuff is buried and forgotten about underneath rules for mobility scooters, but its still very much there!

 

so a true invalid carriage is still banned from the Motorway network, like this Invacar Mk8 (user training vehicle) is not allowed on the Motorway

but anything over 254Kg, aka pretty much anything with an actual body on it (apart from the Invacar Mk10) is allowed on the motorway because they are not legally classed as Invalid carriages for the purposes of the RTA 1988 etc

so this Mk12 is legal on the Motorway, if you have a death wish LOL

anything over 254Kg, like Invacar Mk12 or an Model 70, is only considered an Invalid Carriage, for Taxation purposes and driving test/licensing purposes (in this case anything Bellow  10 Cwt/508Kg is considered an invalid carriage)

all Invalid vehicles fall under the B/B1 Licensing sub category these days, again contrary to popular belief, you very much did/do need a licence to drive an Invalid carriage and take a test to get said licence, in old Money it was Category J  

also worth noting that all Invalid vehicle weighing no more then 306Kg are MOT exempt, this is basically anything thats not a Model 70, (Category e on the V112 form)

thats why if you look at the V5 for a full bodied Villiers Machine the revenue weight will be specifically listed as 305Kg in most cases

 

and again all of this is why, the body type on V5 of an Invacar etc, specifically states "INVALID VEHICLE" rather than Invalid carriage, because when it is/is not an invalid carriage very much varies depending on a whole load of factors! LOL

and is also why you must never change the body/vehicle type to Tricycle, as has sadly been done to a few in the past

Egads, I knew it would be more complicated than I remembered!

Yeah, my intention was to ping the text your way once done before it's published.  Still a fair bit of work at this point anyhow as it's just plain text without images etc added.  Make sure everything is as best as we know factually correct.

There's enough garbage floating around out there, the least I can do is try not to add to that.

Things I'm directly addressing on the FAQ page:

[] Were they or were they not banned?

[]  They were all two stroke weren't they?

[] They fall over if you look at them wrong.

[] Are they legal on motorways?

[] What's the process for getting one (legally speaking) back on the road?  I'm going to separate that out into "most Model 70s where it's just a V62 and covering letter job" and "older cars which never made it onto the computer" as I know the process is different.

If you can think of anything else I should add on that page - which is literally just an FAQ, not intended to include major history lessons etc let me know.

[RED2stroke]

Thought you might like to see my eastern bloc 3 wheeler, UK reg and currently being put back together after being bought as a partly stripped renovation project, I do have the doors and full interior.

[LightBulbFun]

48 minutes ago, Zelandeth said:

Egads, I knew it would be more complicated than I remembered!

Yeah! its one of the many reasons I find these machines so fanscinating! 

given how so often their just dismissed off hand, its amazing just how much there is to them under the surface!

 

even the Ministry themselves fell fowl of these rules at times, for example I recently managed to win a General instructions and servicing manual for the AC (All weather) Invalid Tricycle Mk1 and Mk2

and note how much of a heavy bastard it is at 343Kg! this was a real PITA for the Ministry at the time! as none of the legislation had yet been amended for these heavier vehicles!

(as an aside this manual is really fascinating and really surprisingly detailed, I must get it scanned in at some point!)

48 minutes ago, Zelandeth said:

Yeah, my intention was to ping the text your way once done before it's published.  Still a fair bit of work at this point anyhow as it's just plain text without images etc added.  Make sure everything is as best as we know factually correct.

There's enough garbage floating around out there, the least I can do is try not to add to that.

Indeed I am very much looking forward to seeing it all go up! because it will be awesome to finally have a nice reliable source of info that I can point people to  

(that does not involve them in trudging through nearly 300 pages of my ramblings!)

48 minutes ago, Zelandeth said:

 

[] Were they or were they not banned?

[]  They were all two stroke weren't they?

[] They fall over if you look at them wrong.

[] Are they legal on motorways?

[] What's the process for getting one (legally speaking) back on the road?  I'm going to separate that out into "most Model 70s where it's just a V62 and covering letter job" and "older cars which never made it onto the computer" as I know the process is different.

If you can think of anything else I should add on that page - which is literally just an FAQ, not intended to include major history lessons etc let me know.

looks good for the most part! 

tho I would suggest adding a bit that, anyone looking to apply for the V5 for an invalid vehicle, do please still contact me (via the ICR) 

because especially with Model 70's as you know, often shenanigans where had with the identities of these vehicles, both by lazy repair people while they where still with the ministry, and after they had escaped from the ministry

and the DVLA will get VERY arsey with you if you happen V62 for something with the wrong chassis number or registration number

and land you and the vehicle record in question in a world of pain!

thats why when someone approaches me with a Model 70 they have and wish to get the Logbook for, I check the identity in both locations! 

 

so indeed while the process is in most cases just a V62 and a covering letter if you wish, before that however you need to very much verify the identity of the machine first!

just because the registration or chassis plate says ABC123, does not necessarily mean thats what it actually is! 

20 minutes ago, RED2stroke said:

Thought you might like to see my eastern bloc 3 wheeler, UK reg and currently being put back together after being bought as a partly stripped renovation project, I do have the doors and full interior.

oooh a velorex! aptly fitting on this thread, because as you, probably know! they where initally built/designed as an invalid carriage for disabled people in Czechoslovakia to use, but also found popularity as a cheap and simple runabout with the abled bodied as well  

I look forward to seeing more on it! 

[Zelandeth]

8 minutes ago, LightBulbFun said:

Yeah! its one of the many reasons I find these machines so fanscinating! 

given how so often their just dismissed off hand, its amazing just how much there is to them under the surface!

 

even the Ministry themselves fell fowl of these rules at times, for example I recently managed to win a General instructions and servicing manual for the AC (All weather) Invalid Tricycle Mk1 and Mk2

and note how much of a heavy bastard it is at 343Kg! this was a real PITA for the Ministry at the time! as none of the legislation had yet been amended for these heavier vehicles!

(as an aside this manual is really fascinating and really surprisingly detailed, I must get it scanned in at some point!)

Indeed I am very much looking forward to seeing it all go up! because it will be awesome to finally have a nice reliable source of info that I can point people to  

(that does not involve them in trudging through nearly 300 pages of my ramblings!)

looks good for the most part! 

tho I would suggest adding a bit that, anyone looking to apply for the V5 for an invalid vehicle, do please still contact me (via the ICR) 

because especially with Model 70's as you know, often shenanigans where had with the identities of these vehicles, both by lazy repair people while they where still with the ministry, and after they had escaped from the ministry

and the DVLA will get VERY arsey with you if you happen V62 for something with the wrong chassis number or registration number

and land you and the vehicle record in question in a world of pain!

thats why when someone approaches me with a Model 70 they have and wish to get the Logbook for, I check the identity in both locations! 

 

so indeed while the process is just a V62 and a covering letter if you wish, before that you need to very much verify the idenity of the machine! 

just because the registration or chassis plate says ABC123, does not necessarily mean thats what it actually is! 

Aye, that's a good idea for an addition.  I had stated "that you already know the identity" of, but as you say that's not always just a case of looking at the reg plates (if you're lucky enough to have them) and the ID plate!

Think I'm at a point that I should be able to ping a first draft over to you tomorrow once I've transferred it off the development machine and onto something with web connectivity.

Still bugs the heck out of me how crap the display on that looks in photos!  It really isn't!

[Zelandeth]

20 minutes ago, RED2stroke said:

Thought you might like to see my eastern bloc 3 wheeler, UK reg and currently being put back together after being bought as a partly stripped renovation project, I do have the doors and full interior.

That looks in equal parts awesome and terrifying...

[LightBulbFun]

6 minutes ago, Zelandeth said:

Aye, that's a good idea for an addition.  I had stated "that you already know the identity" of, but as you say that's not always just a case of looking at the reg plates (if you're lucky enough to have them) and the ID plate!

Think I'm at a point that I should be able to ping a first draft over to you tomorrow once I've transferred it off the development machine and onto something with web connectivity.

 

Oh that reminds me! another one for the FAQ/Debunking list is of course the whole

"they are all government owned" spiel that gets spouted about! 

6 minutes ago, Zelandeth said:

That looks in equal parts awesome and terrifying...

there is one going to Auction from the Hammond collection, Just saying

[RED2stroke]

Def, both, it has a steel tube frame, similar to first world war aircraft with a vinyl skin stretched over it, 350 cc two stroke engine in the rear, to go backwards you stop the engine and start it running in the opposite direction,  so you have four forward gears and four reverse. Cable operated brakes front and rear.

 

[Zelandeth]

9 minutes ago, LightBulbFun said:

Oh that reminds me! another one for the FAQ/Debunking list is of course the whole

"they are all government owned" spiel that gets spouted about! 

there is one going to Auction from the Hammond collection, Just saying

That's a good point on government ownership.  I did go over that on the main page but it bears repeating on the FAQ.

[Remspoor]

11 hours ago, LightBulbFun said:

she have a strengthened chassis to further protect the occupants in a front or rear end end impact

What you have more than one person in the vehicle?🤔🙂

[Remspoor]

Why are folks so worry about how safe one is in an older car? We all know the risks and accept them.

Also a new vehicles can purchase that are not exactly crash protecting the occupants.

https://www.euroncap.com/en/ratings-rewards/quadricycle-ratings/

https://unece.org/DAM/trans/doc/2016/wp29/WP29-170-38e.pdf

[Cavcraft]

[LightBulbFun]

24 minutes ago, Cavcraft said:

hah yeah I noticed that one has been doing the rounds again  I first became aware of it a good few years ago  

 

On 28/06/2019 at 13:29, LightBulbFun said:

for those wondering I came across the JPH-K (JPH251K-JPH450K) block via this chod-tastic picture I discovered while trying to find any new to me P plate Model 70s to try ID the Unknown Spares car LOL (I know its somewhere between the KPC-P and KPK-P blocks)

 

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/71592768@N08/6939378661

 

 

 

[Remspoor]

6 hours ago, Cavcraft said:

Mini in matching blue, who would have guessed?

[brummiejon]

On 10/22/2022 at 7:49 PM, RED2stroke said:

Thought you might like to see my eastern bloc 3 wheeler, UK reg and currently being put back together after being bought as a partly stripped renovation project, I do have the doors and full interior.

That’s lovely, well jell

[High Jetter]

2 hours ago, Remspoor said:

Mini in matching blue, who would have guessed?

Matching? Nah. Not even sure it's a blue, maybe snowberry white?

[LightBulbFun]

On 17/10/2022 at 16:51, LightBulbFun said:

in Model 70 news!

after an impressively quick cosmetic restoration, MPH759P is back on the road and looking awesome  (£20 number plates aside!)

its really awesome to see and how far she has come along from Q plates, brown paint and electrical tape eye-lashes!

I was also quite pleased to see the restoration, as I was quite worried for this Model 70 at times, but seeing the owner give her some proper TLC like this, will hopefully mean he will look after it a bit better now  

and like that! he is back to being papped again!  awesome to see she is back on the road proper

https://www.facebook.com/groups/carsyoudontseeanymore/posts/3500315463623327

Its a really awesome photograph on the move in the evening light! looking splendid with the fresh repaint  

[LightBulbFun]

 

@Talbot I am curious just from a technical POV, how does an image end up with 0 views? I would have thought the moment its uploaded and posted, it gets a view if nothing else from the person who uploaded it? so the computer nerd side of me is curious how something can be uploaded with no views

is it a case of someone uploading a picture to a post they are about to make but then abandon the post thus creating an uploaded but un viewed /posted picture/file?

 

im just worried thats it not a case of actually the file view counter has broken or such LOL

2 hours ago, Talbot said:

• Please don't keep uploading the same image.  If you've already uploaded an image, it can be used over and over again, by using the "other media" drop down to the right of the new post window.

on this note, for those not aware, if you are digging up a particularly old file from the old forum software days where it has been bugged by the small thumbnail issue

theres no need to re-uploaded it or delete it (which would remove it from older threads!)

just simply open the image in another tab/window and copy its URL back into the thread, where it will auto embed itself in the right size  

like so  (and you can see from the URL that this is still the original 2018 upload!)

Quote

There are clearly a massive number of orphaned and unused images/videos and other files on the server which have not been and in many cases cannot be viewed again on the forum.  THESE are the ones I am suggesting are deleted, not ones that are in use or are active in any way.

as a side note

I dont know if anyone is able to view the Orphaned files, in any quick look capacity but if there is a way and there are any Invacar ones which have somehow ended up Orphaned can you please let me know about it/PM me about it! so I can make sure they are saved before deletion!

these days i do make sure to back up all Invacar Images I find on the interwebs to my computer, but I was not so good about that in my early days, and I know I lost a few in posts which have sadly been deleted, so I fear some of those may be orphaned files now

 

[High Jetter]

That's an application for an admin role, right there!

[GR8 PL8 M8]

8 hours ago, LightBulbFun said:

@Talbot I am curious just from a technical POV, how does an image end up with 0 views? I would have thought the moment its uploaded and posted, it gets a view if nothing else from the person who uploaded it? so the computer nerd side of me is curious how something can be uploaded with no views

is it a case of someone uploading a picture to a post they are about to make but then abandon the post thus creating an uploaded but un viewed /posted picture/file?

im just worried thats it not a case of actually the file view counter has broken or such LOL

If I had to guess I'd say that a view is only registered when an image is clicked/tapped on and opened full screen, simply viewing inline doesn't count.

Not an IT expert and also not who you asked, but since the pinned post is locked I figured I'd spitball here.

[Zelandeth]

This was pointed out to me just now.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/carsyoudontseeanymore/permalink/3500315463623327/

[egg]

95a invacar spares lot went for a Monkey (£500) at the Hammond auction....

[brummiejon]

@LightBulbFun I have inboxed you regarding your kind offer to help me with the registration of RDE 346.

thanks

Jon

[egg]

MC1 just sold for £500...

[egg]

Reliant Robin....£380!!

[egg]

Watching auction live here...

https://www.easyliveauction.com/catalogue/e52841f4a9b47c27c356c4c77c9ebfef/0af8d24542e81eb9357e7ef448a6646f/the-hammond-microcar-museum-kent-auction-online-from-our-s/bid-live/