Something for everyone, it's nice to have a choice. Don't forget that if fleet operators had special requirements and wanted a certain configuration, that's a lot of orders at stake. So if the demand was there, it would be built.

Yes, and I can a wear a hat in it.

Whatever, the Jaguar had the 'sporting' edge, that's what Jags were about, but the Humbers, Armstrong-Siddeleys, Allards, Lea-Francises, Alvises and Rovers conferred other qualities upon their owners and weren't short of performance either. What interest do I have in fucking sport.

Likewise with the wheels. They always struck me as slightly bigger than normal but I thought nothing of it until I measured them against a standard wheel and discovered they are van wheels. Genuine LCV wheels carry a stamped "L917" on the flat adjacent to the valve hole. There were appare...

None of this strikes me as being a bad thing.

It explains why it can still do this, despite consuming a quart of oil for 70 miles.


You can't kill an A-Series engine (well, unless it's an 803 - ask me how I know). They just wear out.

The Reverend Bluejeans wrote: ↑Fri Aug 30, 2019 10:30 pm I'll race past you in my BRG 3.4, snarling twin cam, looking dastardly.

I'll just look restrained and stately and give you a mild 'whatever' expression.

It's what I like, I can wear a hat in one of those cars without it touching the headlining. That is more important to me than Down's syndrome.

Yes, but I don't need anything. It is the limousine version, i.e. has glass division, so is of little value as a car.

The '1100' tag was missing in this case. And the absence of the '950' mark gave no clues, so I just went off what it said on the log book.

Okay, it has since transpired that the block is a 1098 too. So a complete 1098 engine was fitted at some point. The engine number matches the logbook but the capacity is stated as 948, which threw me. The 1098 was identified only by its casting mark 12A497. I knew the 948 engines had '950' cast into...