Beyond Help?

That sounds like a problem with an inner CV joint to me. Look for excess play in the joints, they should be movable but not with a lot of slack.

It is in an awkward place but is simple enough to change. You remove the stay that holds the back of it to the block, the oil pipes, the exhausts flexi-pipe, the air pipe and then unbolt it. Other than a turbo to exhaust gasket you should not need any other parts as there is no gaskets onto the exhaust manifold etc. EDIT: You will need four new turbo to manifold nuts, and four exhaust bolts. A new turbo from Ford/VW comes on the manifold as a complete unit and costs about

There are plaenty that will reset fault codes and service warnings, read errors etc. Look for Ford OBDII tools. I don't know if there is a tool like VAG-COM where you can do keys, reprogram the ECUs etc.

Diesel cats are more resilient than their petrol counterparts, it will most likely be fine. In any case the MOT test for a diesel is for particulates (smoke) which the cat will have little or no effect on. The test standard is the same for cat and non-cat engines.

Not with VAG-COM, no. But you can just unplug the temperature sensor, which is clipped to the wiper mechanism on the right hand side as you look at it under the bonnet.

It is connected by coolant pipes to the engine cooling system, this causes the unit to warm up even if it is not running. If it is firing up the exhaust would be getting very hot, if it is only getting warm then it is not firing up.

Well my compressor clutch pulley bearing failed altogether. So faced with a

The air-con does work under 6 degrees, you can hear the clutch on mine engage in even the coldest weather. Perhaps this is different on models with climate control, but I feel sure that when I had a previous look, the wiring diagrams told me air-con/climate control does not even have a connector to a temperature sender. As for misting up, one of the best ways to deal with this is simply to open a window for the last minute of your journey to blow all the moist air out! And the 25 year patent on heated screens ran out about five years ago IIRC.

Does a 1997 model have a DMF? I thought it did not.

The VW version is

I don't think there are any pipes going down to the fuel tank, there are pipes to the rear heater if you have a diesel engine. I would be inclined to remove the clips and rubber pipes, clean the ally ones up and smear them with RTV and reassemble them. All cars always use more fuel in the winter. How much has you fuel consumption changed?

You should have a D3W heater. It does not really use much fuel, I do have the exact figures somewhere, I will look them out.

Is it a stop/tail light bulb (dual filament) that is blowing? If so then check it is the right way round. If not, check and make sure that it is not supposed to be a stop/tail bulb as a single filament will sometimes work until you press the brake pedal when it can then blow.

It is probably the oil cooler, not the head gasket, check that first. Don't forget to use a flush in the cooling system afterwards, as the oil will rot the inside of the rubber water pipes.

Your injectors are different, you have the PD engine. The injectors on a 110 BHP engine are spring loaded and use the injection pump pressure to open them.

The one you have bought, is it a cylinder shaped one with two coolant hose connector on it? If it is it is under the battery tray connected to the top of the gearbox. You need to remove the battery tray to get at it, HOWEVER the battery tray holds the gearbox up so you need to do more work first. If this is how yours is then let me know and I will supply you with instructions on how to do it.

What wattage are they? In most cases the switch is not relevent as it operates a relay. I would be more concerned about a wiring fire, but I don't know off the top of my head what the fuse rating for the headlights is.

Comet had some in two days ago for delivery only. It had 3 extra games and they were asking

I contacted a local dealer with the Imobilizer Serial Number (obtained by using VAG-COM) and Log Book and ID and they got the 4 digit security number for my car. I then used VAG-COM to program the keys in. It is a shame your so far away really, otherwise I would have been more than happy to help.

A lot of the problems with the foreign drivers is also down to the huge volume of traffic and different car driver attitude. When your driving a truck abroad and see a gap, you indicate and any car drivers see this and back off. Over here the opposite is true, you put your indicator on and the car driver will accelerate into the space blocking you in behind the slower vehicle you want to pass. This is why many lorry drivers either don't indicate or indicate as they start to move. As to the main topic of the thread the driver was charged with causing death by dangerous driving, that carries a custodial sentence so a jury trial is used for a not guilty plea. To remove the jury from the system because the can be 'bamboozled' by a clever defence barrister simply shows that the CPS's quality of barrister is poor or the evidence does not meet the strict and high standards of a jury trial. If the driver had simply been charged with dangerous driving then it would have been heard at a lower court before a bench of magistrates who require a much lower standard of evidence to secure a conviction. OK, he could not have received a custodial sentence, but would have got a ban at least.

Vag-Com will not give him any of his greabox or engine codes though as his car is a petrol engined Ford. Most garages use the Snap-On diagnostic box these days and you can get a read-out for under

Whilst I agree wholeheartedly about the danger of an insecure battery and having in the past had a car fail an MOT for that reason, the current MOT testers handbook does not include testing the security of the battery, and as it is not in there then your car cannot fail the MOT Test for having an unsecured battery. I will have to check this on the VOSA helpine though, it seems strange that a simple test that takes a second has been removed from the test.

The clicking noise and dash behavior is either a bad connection or a flat battery. And yes, the new battery should clamp in.

I really don't think party politics has much to do with it. It is not true that the truck was overloaded, that means that the MAM of the vehicle had been exceeded, more that his truck was badly loaded and too top heavy. There is nothing in any of the news stories to suggest that the driver even supervised the loading of the trailer, indeed it could have been done in his absence. His load did not shift, nor was it insecure as previous to the accident it all stayed in the trailer, so the possible charges with respect to the loading of the vehicle would have been exhausted. The CPS then decided to prosecute for causing death by dangerous driving. "A person drives dangerously when: The way he drives falls far below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver" (Wilkinson 5.04) In other words, The way he drives falls far below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver AND It would be obvious to a competent and careful driver that driving in that way would be dangerous. Both parts of the definition must be satisfied for the driving to be "dangerous" within the meaning of Section 2A(1) of the Road Traffic Act 1988. There is no statutory definition of what is meant by "far below" but "dangerous must refer to danger of personal injury or of serious damage to property: (Section 2A(3) RTA 1988). Additionally, (Section 2A(2) RTA 1988) provides that a person is to regarded as driving dangerously if it would be obvious to a competent and careful driver that driving the vehicle in its current state would be dangerous. When considering the state of the vehicle, regard may be had to anything carried by or attached to the vehicle: (Section 2A(4) RTA 1988). A defence to this is that under normal circumstances the driving would not have been dangerous and a sudden unexpected event took place, the toppling of the trailer. So the jury have to decide that, beyond all reasonable doubt that he knew that it was obvious the trailer would overturn. The driver had covered that route many many times and not had any problems previously. The jury (who heard ALL the evidence) could not decide, so were asked to consider a charge of Careless driving, which puts a lesser test on the drivers' actions: "This offence is committed when the accused's driving falls below the standard expected of a reasonable, prudent and competent driver in all the circumstances of the case." (Wilkinson, 5.41 to 5.82) So perversely, if the jury were unable to decide on a more clearly outlined charge of Causing Death By Dangerous Driving then they were highly unlikely if they behaved correctly to convict him of careless driving. They did not do so and he walked free from court. That is the legal aspect of the case as I see it. But was the outcome just? As 12 people who saw all the evidence could not decide that the driver was guilty then that really is not for us to say.