Phil-540i

I'm cracking up - you're moving outa Auckland, to Welly, so Darren can move to Auckland.............1 out, 1 in, both ways.........

You'll be right - Darren will leave ya his coat & gloves..........

Now that I am a diesel owner and work in the RUC industry I want to get behind having RUC dropped or significantly reduced for light vehicles. A light vehicle is considered anything under 3.5tons.

RUC was designed for heavy vehicles. Vehicles of which do extra damage to the roads. So your 318D's are being taxed for damage to the roads just because they run a more efficient fuel type which is not as heavily taxed at the pump as petrol.

So would you be happy paying a little more at the pump but nothing in RUC charges?

I feel that a motor vehicle under 3.5 tons that is registered as Private vehicle and not used as a trade vehicle should not be subject to RUC.

Whats your thoughts fellow diesel owners. 4WD's, Utes, Cars. Is there any current action against this?

I've always had diesel 4WDs & utes for over 20yrs, & still do. Your first sentence astounds me in that its not something you've considered or probably given a rats a$$ about until umm, you've become a light diesel owner yourself......... but yes, its not a totally fair system, but its the system we've got........

All light vehicles now pay the same rate for RUC's, something else that changed around 18 months ago, regardless of whether its a 3 series BMW, or a Landcruiser or whatever. Somewhat unfairly IMO, I'm lead to believe trucks are now further penalised by having to buy their RUC's at whatever the vehicle's GVM rating is, irrespective of their maybe running at a consistently lighter weight.........

Dutchy would have better info, but theres some units out there paying more than $1 per km on RUC's.........

19" rims on older vehicles = "I wear my cap backwards........"

Dotcom is into Merc's...........which might explain a few things............

Yea, she was the best bit............both with & without bourbon.........

On ya Andy - lols...........

Hmmm, WTF is the English version of that $hit^^^^^^^^ Andy.................??? My decoder seems to be on the pi$$............

Yea, just wasted 3.20secs of my life I won't get back before I 'weakest linked' it.....................

One less Mitsi on the road could be seen as a bonus for all of us............... Having owned 2 new utes in the past, my local dealer has definitely put me off Mitsubishi as a brand for life.......

Good score that it lives again.....................

Know the feeling - I've just had a quad click up a eye-watering bill in a shop due to electrical gremlins.............

I'm back from being away for work, & will probably just chuck it on Trademe............

Brilliant..............

Its not even 4k on the std rims.......but yea, I'm somewhat surprized its still taking up space in my shed........

Hmmm, preference would be given to having it paid for, picked up & gone this weekend..........and I need to be on the road again early Sunday.......

Interior pics as per below..........

Bump.................

Just found a article - http://www.theprovince.com/sports/Michael+Schumacher+exploding+helmet/9514824/story.html

Dunno, I'm just going off what the paper said, but it is logical in that if a camera gets caught between a rock & a helmet, momentum and force will drive the camera into the weaker object, ie in this case, the helmet........

Same thing would likely happen with a push-bike helmet and ATV Ag-hat too...............

Was reading a paper today where they were saying he's still in a coma. Same article reckoned his helmet disintergrated / failed during the ski accident, due to the camera he had mounted on it.

I guess in someways that's maybe something we should all consider, in relation to how / where Go-Pro's etc are mounted at times............

Hmm, I'll see if I get back early enough tomorrow to grab some. Realistically, its mint inside - no rips, tears, stains or anything really....dash is mint leather looks like new......its got a heel wear hole in drivers mat & that's it for interior blemishes............

That motor pic on the 530 showing it getting a water top-up / check would slightly worry me............

Edit - specially with the 'no comebacks, as is, where is' bit there too, but yea, certainly cheap, & could be well worth a punt, even for wrecking out......

Some jap bucket of pus ambling aimlessly down the road the other day that I was stuck behind, wearing the non-personalised plate BLU540 - that bit made me do a double-take, a head shake, & did smile though......

apparently this cop has some problems. Saw him park and everything - there were no other cars parked that aren't there in the photo/he had the opportunity to park in one space. At New World Chafers Park too. I can assure you they weren't grocery shopping either.

tumblr_n12bd4poN81rw19cyo1_500.jpg

Well to be fair, the steel police rims do turn them into a 'wide-track' Commydore, thus they take a bit more room than usual. Besides which, I don't blame them for not wanting to park right next to that people mover, (even though they're in a company car) - would you........??

Totally agree, that's a nice looking unit.............GLWS...........

I'd say it depends on your inspector. Some of them (especially VTNZ) will kick up a fuss about it being modified from stock and they can also fail it if there are things that could potentially cause harm if not covered. But as Slybma said, there's no set standard so you can argue it if they cause a fuss.

http://vehicleinspection.nzta.govt.nz/virms/in-service-wof/general/vehicle-interior/interior-impact

I'd agree with this - my son's E36 'treasure' got pinged on a missing doortrim, even though the door still opened & shut from both sides.........realistically that door-trim was probably the least of its issues, but its a 'E36 thing'.......

my favourite are the "BMW 318i M3" that come in

Specially the auto versions..........

I think that's ^^^^^ a very valid point...............