My 2007 Ford automatically parks the wipers even if I turn off the ignition as soon as the wipers start the next cycle. However, the wiper blades cannot be changed when the wipers are parked because when I pull up the wiper arms, they hit the bonnet lip. To solve this problem, I can pull down the wiper lever on my steering column and hold it there for 5 seconds and they go to the "service" position, about 45 degrees from the park position. It's at this position the manual recommends leaving the wipers when freezing rain or heavy snow is expected. The only problem (as mentioned in the manual) with this is that when I turn on the ignition, the car will immediately attempt to park the wipers so I can't use the windscreen heaters or any accessories until I'm sure the wipers are free. Also have to remember to put the wipers back on the windscreen otherwise I'll have wipers on the bonnet!
Why is that strange? Ford competes with Peugeot yet my Ford has an Peugeot engine. GM competes with Fiat and Isuzu yet I used to have a GM car with a Fiat engine and I used to have a different GM car with an Isuzu engine. They all share a lot behind the scenes.
I'm deaf from birth with hearing parents, BSL is my first language, I'm immersed in deaf culture, I've got a cochlear implant at age 13 that was my own choice - my parents were against it, but they supported my decision. I identify as disabled. Even though I can communicate with hearing people, I much prefer signing and deaf culture even though I get mild abuse from a tiny minority of deaf people however it's rare and I usually set them right. Let me say...
1. I never heard music before age 13, and I have never loved music after the implant, I can live without it. I rarely use my car radio, if at all. I simply don't understand music - it's just a bunch of random noise to me. I use music when I want to drown out boring noises such as car engines, however I'm more likely to turn off my processor than to turn on the radio. I don't miss what I don't know. I derive pleasure from many other things, I'm happy.
2. Children laughing as they play? I can *see* them. I derive so much more joy from seeing them than hearing them.
3. Birds singing? When they sing, I want to shoot the fuckers. Their noise is irritating due to the nature of implants, they sound like monotonous bleeping.
4. There are deaf smoke alarms that wake me with shaking and flashing. There are technology workarounds. I'm as likely to die in a fire as you are. You realise processors are taken off at night, and deaf people remain deaf, the implant isn't a cure, it's a prosthetic - in fact, that's exactly what written in my medical notes.
5. Who cares?
My problem is that cochlear implants are touted as a perfect cure - it's not. Hearing aids are of massively better quality than cochlear implants. Implants will only truly benefit a minority of deaf people, such as myself. My deafness is so bad that audiograms are just a flat line at the "No Response" spot at the bottom, I can't hear jet engines when standing next to them with 140dB hearing aids turned up at 11. Before implants I couldn't speak for shit, I couldn't understand any hearing people, but now with the implant, I can hold reasonable conversations. I know a lot more deaf people who are fluent in spoken languages and isn't obviously deaf that many people refuse to believe that they're deaf - and they wear standard hearing aids! Hearing aids are more than good enough for MOST deaf people and implants will actually be a hindrance, than a benefit. The issue is that when doctors find a child is deaf, they immediately recommend implanting, no matter the severity of deafness of the child - most of the time, hearing aids are in fact a better option.
The world isn't black and white - not everyone are the same. Different solutions fit different people - some deaf people benefit better if they're not taught sign language, while others benefit more if taught sign language. If I wasn't taught sign language I wouldn't be the happy person I am now.
My car has this push button start thingy - when the car is in motion, a quick jab at the button won't kill the engine, however if you push it and hold it for 3 seconds it will turn off the engine no matter the conditions. Not great in my opinion, I'd prefer instant kill, but it's there. I know, I've tested it. At least the clutch and brake pedals both are still mechanical.
They seem to still be selling them here.
Is it really 2200 lb/ft? Or am I reading the chart wrong?
Issue is that it is really trivial to change the odometer.
My 2004 Opel (GM Europe) Astra had a problem with the ABS sensor. I saw online that I needed an op-com reader interface to be able to access the ABS computer to get the fault code, rather than an OBD-II code reader. So I brought one for £14 from China. I got the ABS fault code, including one other unrelated fault code I was unaware of from the engine cooling computer. I played around with op-com seeing what it could do, found I could enable features for free such as traction control, cruise control and total closure. I was shocked to find a page to edit the odometer reading - it wasn't even advertised!
If I can do this with something I brought for £14 that fits any Opel car with an op-com port - imagine the uptake of this sort of gizmo to avoid the gas tax.
Video showing changing of an odometer reading however I'd imagine this device costs a lot more than the op-com interface.
Okay, I'm wrong, I put my hands up, I apologise. I know I'm not always right.
No need to call me an idiot and a piece of shit.
Even "mph" is technically incorrect, the "correct" way to do it is mile/h but no-one does this.
Km/h not kph. "per" is not an unit (SI or otherwise), and "k" means nothing on its own.
Oh and fuel prices here in the UK is already well over $6 a gallon for diesel.
You just don't bother seeing what's on the market. I sold my 9 year old Honda Civic for $3,000 that gets 40mpg(imp)/30mpg(US) and brought a replacement car, a 6 year old small family car for $3000 that gets 80mpg(imp)/65mpg(US) - I made no overall loss and saved $3,000 a year in fuel costs. How is getting a fuel efficient car more expensive than a gas guzzler? Hint - fuel efficient cars are not just Prius. My car is a diesel Opel Astra (similar to the Saturn Astra) not quite an unusual or rare car, certainly not here in the UK. And no, the car isn't new, the second link goes to a review page dated 10th Oct 2002. I've never ever paid more than $5,000 for a car in my lifetime, and I drive one of the most fuel efficient cars in the small family category anyone can get.
What do you mean? I sold my 9 year old Honda Civic for $3,000 that gets 40mpg(imp)/30mpg(US) and brought a replacement car, a 6 year old small family car for $3000 that gets 80mpg(imp)/65mpg(US) - I made no overall loss and saved $3,000 a year in fuel costs. How is getting a fuel efficient car more expensive than a gas guzzler? Hint - fuel efficient cars are not just Prius. My car is a diesel Opel Astra (similar to the Saturn Astra) not quite an unusual or rare car, certainly not here in the UK. And no, the car isn't new, the second link goes to a review page dated 10th Oct 2002.
So yes, it's cheap to get a fuel efficient car, just don't get a hybrid, they guzzle more gas than my car.
I drive 20,000-30,000 miles a year here in the UK. 95% of that is on motorways in the leftmost lane (rightmost in your country) at 65mph bored shitless daydreaming. 20,000 miles at 65mph is 310 hours, which translates into almost 13 *full* days. 30,000 miles is 460 hours, more than 19 full days.
In my lifetime, I never have brought any car more than $5,000 and never will due to the mileage I drive causing steep deprecation, but I will buy the first reasonably priced car that has this tech brand new even though I'd have to take out a loan. I'd love to spend the time on more worthwhile activities. Daydreaming while driving is also dangerous.
Don't get me wrong, I love driving hard and fast like you, but fuel costs are prohibitively expensive in this country - no, yours is ridiculously cheap compared to ours - and I simply cannot afford to drive fast - I already pay $3,000 a year in fuel costs - if I had a fun car, that'd be $6,000 a year in fuel costs, at least, just for a few miles of fun driving.
 Car prices here tend to be inversely proportional to mileages - my car cost $24,000 brand new, but I paid $3,000 for it even though it was only 6 years old and in a good condition, the only reason why it was cheap was that it had 100,000 miles on the clock, even though this model of car with this specific engine is well known to run until at least 250,000 miles trouble-free before being scrapped due to failing safety tests on the bodywork, not from anything to do with the engine. The value of my car with 200,000 miles on the clock is literally $100 even if the car starts and runs good and is in excellent condition.
You get buffering times with 15mbps? I have a 16mbps package but I actually get 7mbps due to the distance to the exchange and crappy BT lines that they won't admit is faulty. My partner watches a lot of streamed online video, and I watch a bunch of 1080p HD streamed video and I rarely see any buffering. Do you really get 15mbps?
Before anyone says I should get a cheaper package to suit my line, this is already the cheapest my ISP offers, they have higher speed packages I obviously can't have. Truly unlimited bandwidth and no port blocking at Â£15 ($20) per month with a "no questions asked" policy, i.e. they don't care what I do with the bandwidth, I ain't complaining about the difference between advertised and actual speeds.