Scorpiorefugee

Go for it mate! There's loads of good deals on Ebay. You can get just the insert bit - used to be about

One thing for sure - It ain't a glow plug problem. Yes, If it were mine, I would be a bit worried but it sounds like some sort of emergency or safety bit of ECU programming that only the designer or someone really in the know would understand. I hope someone can come up with the answer.

I think you should check your next credit card statement for a mystery entry of about 100 Euros from a filling station in the vicinity of Paris. By my reckoning, You could just about manage this if you made the entire journey on tow while leaving the engine running to keep the brake servo active. Mind, it would be nice and, at a steady 50mph on the level in 6th gear with a strong tail wind, 80/90 mpg is just about possible. :ph34r: B) B)

Been there and got lucky. My pump failed on my 52 ghia and I survived a 200 mile homeward journey by using the heater to keep the engine cool and sticking to 55/60. Apparently and reading btween the lines this can be a major cause of gasket failure so you should get it fixed. My belt had been changed by Ford some 5000 miles earlier so my local independant just changed the pump. He did say that these are getting so common that it is worth getting it changed along with the cam belt every time, so the choice is yours. Be lucky. Ron.

This does seem to be a common problem. My S reg TDI occasionally refused to work (half a dozen times in 18 months) but now does nothing. The pump clutch doesn't operate unless I feed it with12V direct and still no cooling so I assume no or low gas which probably would account for the pressure sensor stopping the clutch being activated. Followng comments from this site I tried the halfords

Just for comparison, My '98 MkI reads about 4% fast and my '52 Ghia marginally better. The mileage readings are just about right. I have always believed that speedos are set to read 5% high and this seems to match every car I've had over the past 10 years or so. I did once have a Corsair 2000E that was absolutely bang on as could be checked when motorway emergency phones were exactly 1 mile apart, but that was a long long while ago. I also believe that speed cameras etc. should work on the basis of +5% + 3MPH but I have also heard of one person who claims to have been picked up for doing 33 in a 30 limit. It's all very worrying!

I got to the stage where I was using strong pipe tobacco in roll ups and one day they started taking X-rays and retiring into a corner and muttering. I've not touched one since and that was 20 odd years ago. It's a bit drastic but, God, it worked. It's the only thing that did. What's more, I feel fitter now than I did then and I'm half as old again than I was then. Whatever it takes to keep focussed - do it, imagine it, but stick with it and good luck. When you get to the stage when you really believe that people who smoke are prats, you've won. Ron.

Kev, Been there, done it! It seems that the "Daft rule" is that it has to look like an extension. I showed the plans, with very accurate computer generated images of the whole plot, to 2 senior planners on separate occasions and both said that it was no problem and would probably go through without even getting to committee stage. Also, a third senior planner did a drive past and expressed the same opinion. No-one who lives within sight of any part of the building has expressed anything but support. It exists in a small close of 5 houses within a larger close of about 60. It is not overlooked, does not overlook and affects no-one elses light or view. It increases the floor area of the building by about 7% and I intended to use weathered roof tiles to match the original. They all thought it was so insignificant that it was handed to a junior planning officer and all was going well until, at the last minute, someone on the parish council raised the issue of the "Subservience rule" which was introduced sometime in the last 3 years. I have raised all of the points above and I now get the answer which I interpret as "We just don't like it". Or perhaps it's like the voice from above in the old joke "I hate your F***ing guts" What is really annoying is that a new neighbour, some 4 doors away has just completed a doubling of his house size which does not follow the new rule, looks totally out of place and is so annoying that it caused another neighbour, a long standing friend, to move to a new house. Sorry, I feel better now! P.S. I like your little piece of history. :18:

This isn't a campaign against planning offices but I should like to hear caomments or stories from anyone else who's had a similar experience. We've lived in the same house from new for 28 years and for most of this SWMBO has wanted a bigger kitchen and it makes sense to extend the bedroom above by the same amount which (only just) means we need planning permission. I've spoken to several neighbours and broadcast the information and, as far as I can tell, not one of the 25 or so within visible range has a single problem with it and most think that it is a good idea. The planning office however have a rule that, instead of blending in nicely with the original, it has to be "subservient by 75cm each side which would give me an area of 6 ft square on the end of a bit 8ft x 12 ft and look bl00dy rediculous so we can have the kitchen but ruined by supports for the bedroom wall. My question is that, if everyone who has to live with it thinks it's OK, how can the planning office stop it and in respect of another much bigger comercial plan which has the universal condemnation of a much bigger group of people, they again ignore the public's wishes and support the interests of about half a dozen others? Is there something I'm missing here?

Thanks for your interest folks. Quick answers to points raised.... The original NS rear seemed to be set to outlast the car until it failed. I had done more than 40 k on it and it was far from new when I got it. It developed severe uneven wear quite suddenly. The replacement is showing rapid and identical uneven wear. I think that eliminates faulty tyres. It steers straight and true. As far as pressures are concerned, This is an S reg 110 but I also have a 52 115 ghia and recently replaced the front tyres. The tyre fitters chart indicated 33psi but when I checked he had put 32 in one and 29 in the other. I have now set them at 41 which is the lowest recommended in the handbook. A little irrelevant to this particular problem perhaps but it does raise serious questions about who we should believe and who we can trust. I keep the tyres on the older one at 39psi and even if this is not quite right it shouldn't cause sudden rapid uneven wear.

My favourite local did me a full job with all bits replaced for

Hi Raymac, That is a valid point but I am talking about a serious increase in tyre wear. The last rear tyres did 40k with little noticable change in condition then one almost disintegrated over a very short period. My new tyre looks as if it will struggle to last 5 - 10K. I would guess that the old rear tyres had done well over 70K before failing. It is worth thinking about tyre pressures and it may be worth looking at another current topic on fuel consumption where this has been discussed. It seems that moste tyre fitters settle for about 33psi when the correct pressure can be as high as 46. That has got to have serious implications on wear, fuel consumption and safety!

This is getting way off topic, but who's complaining. First, It is worrying how much difference there is in recommended tyre pressures. Haynes quotes Front/rear - Unloaded/Loaded 39/36 - 42/48 for 215/55s Hand book..................................................41/38 - 44/47 All of which means the tyre fitters are way out :lol: ;) :lol: What is more relevant to this topic is that by adding 6psi to the main dealer checked setting of 33 I got a good 20% improvement in fuel consumption which possibly answers a lot of questions on that topic. What effect it has on tyre wear and safety is another issue entirely. All that I can add on that is that mine now steers better, as would be expected, and the old front tyres were worn badly on both inside and outside edges. ;) On the subject of reinforced tyres, the concensus is that ALL MPVs must have reinforced tyres and there are no exceptions.

I've been a bit disappointed about the fuel consumption on my '52 Ghia diesel, usually settling at about 38 mpg on a long run. Having been nagged by SWMBO that the tyres looked a little low, I increased the presures fron 32 to 39 to match those on my old S reg. I was somewhat embarassed to find that on exactly the same 600 mile round trip that I made 6 months ago, it returned 47mpg as opposed to 38. I've since been getting up to 53MPG on longish runs and a lot of ear bending to boot. I've since replaced the front tyres and a check on the chart at the Tyre fitters and it seems that the tyres were about the right pressure originally so we shall have to wait and see what happens next. Back to the original problem, I share the view that anyhting added to fuel in a modern diesel is a risk. If you want to increase economy you might like to try what I am currently doing an getting about 15mpg above what I was a few months ago. Very simply, adding a bit of air to the tyres and dropping the motorway cruising speed down to just inside the limit is giving me a steady 51 mpg. On a busy motorway when the speed is reduced to 60ish, it goes up to nearly 60mpg. I do understand about over inflating tyres, so no comments about that please, but I am amazed at the improvement I am currently enjoying. The range on a full tank is now over 700miles as opposed to 450 ish a while ago. Obviously, getting stuck in traffic is a problem, but I still find that local trips with some town work still gives me economy in the upper 40s. Ron.

My old S reg has now done 190K and the previous set of rear tyres were about half worn when i got it. They lasted another 40k before the NS one suddenly looked badly scrubbed. Since it had probably done about 70K I wasn't too bothered and replaced the pair but the replacement is showing early but very definite signs of the the same problem. The front tyres did 45k+ and the replacements are fine. The OS rear is showing only slight signs of feathering. I've had my local garage check it over and they say that, for it's mileage, the bushes etc are all in good condition so, without throwing myself at the mercy of the local Fraud office, I am at a bit of a loss. My first thoughts are to get the rear and rebushed. I have been advised to try a four wheel alignment but my experience over the years has been that if there is a need for adjustment and it has not been tweaked before, it is best left alone and look for the real cause. I do accept that an alignment check couldt be a guide but, if the bushes are soft, it could be more of a dynamic problem. Has anyone else experienced a similar problem and can anyone suggest a possible cause please?

Zwavoo, It is impossible to be absolutely sure but, form what you say, I think the improvement will astound you. I waited a long time before I took the plunge but it was like changing from a 1 litre to a 2.5. Sadly, in many cases, there is no way of being sure without replacing it so the choice is yours. Ron

Hi Silver, If you say that the air con is pathetic you certainly have a problem. I've got 2 diesels and both air cons are fine ( when they are working :rolleyes: ) Aitually, the 115 BHP one is fine but my S reg has been a bit intermittent and has now failed completely. You do not show which model you have so that makes it a bit difficult and diagnosis is also difficult anyway because of all of the bits and pieces. I am sure that all will be revealed eventually but I had a look at mine over the weekend and tested the feed to the pump clutch solenoid - under the alternator on mine. Mine was not being activated but it may be a good place for you to check. Another indicator is the fans. It seems that they are switched on when you activate the air con. Mine were so that gives some encourragement. are yours? I forced a 12v feed to the clutch solenoid and ir geve a reassuring click but I still had no cooling. You may wish to try that but I suggest that you cut the lead rather than tap in to avoid risk of damage to other circuitry. I then gave up because it now seems probable that I have no gas or a US pump. My bet is no gas. Looking at the wiring diagram, there seems to be something called a pressure switch but there is no information as to what this is or where it is. My guess at the moment is that no gas = no pressure = pump solenoid not activated. From reading other posts it seems that low gas gives poor performance rather than intermittent so I am not convinced but if any of this gives you ideas of what to check - good luck. Ron

Sounds like you're looking for a lot of agro. I don't know how much mileage you do but if you're serious about replacing the engine, it might be worth doing some calculations on how much a diesel would save over a year or so and factoring that into your calculations. It's also worth bearing in mind that the power and efficiency you can get out of a non ECU unit won't even come close to the standard Gal oil burner. It's computer control that makes it all possible. I admire your ambition but I'd run a mile from what you're planning and I'll be very suprised if anyone on this site can find an ounce of encouragement. Nevertheless, I wish you every success if you do go ahead. Ron.

Hi Mum of 4, I'm really sorry to differ but I speak from experience. I have both 115 and 110 models and I have both pierburg and Bosch versions. The Pierburg is quoted as being a direct replacement and I have used both in both models with axxactly the same results. I wasted ages trying to find out if there was any difference and the only information I could get is that the Pierburg is more reliable and accurate than the Bosch. I can't comment on that other than that it has worked fine for so long that I cannot remember when I bought it. I did spend time trying to get reliable information but it was mostly smoke and mirrors or heresay. When you get close there are only two versions for all but the new current model diesels and they are quoted as being identical. If you have any information that defines how they are supposed to differ I should be interested but I think that it is more likely that you've been fed techno gobbledygook by people who don't really know themselves. Sadly, these days, that is what we all get 99% of the time and it is difficult to pick out the odd 1% that is reliable. The only difference that I could detect was that the old faulty Bosch one caused far worse symptoms in the 115 engine wheras in the 110 engine it was still quite usable and capable of getting a few penalty points. Ron.

Bingo, Sorry to hear about your compressor - sounds expensive! It sounds like you had the same problem with the connector but a bit more severe. It's reassuring to know that Halfords were so understanding.

I don't have any detail to hand but I looked on Ebay and found several. The one I got was not Bosch but an alternative type. It seems that the same one fits all diesel Gals and a lot of other makes and models so don't be too concerned about getting the wrong one. All suppliers seemed helpful and I had no problems. My decision was made easier once I bought my second Gal 'cos I just swapped over MAFs and it was obvious what the problem was. If it helps to identify the supplier I used, It came with a pair of torx scredriver tips for the fixing screws. All in all, a good deal. Ron.

Thanks for your interest. I'm using the same point as shown in the diagram in an earlier post. The connector on the kit seems to be like a garden hose connector and fits the access point perfectly but instead of having a recessed groove on the access point, there is a raised hexagonal bit that stops the connect sliding on far enough to seal. There is a similar raised bit on the picture so I can only assume that the two are not compatible. I think a trip back to Halfords is the best bet but I should be happier if someone who has used one of these thing successfully could comment. Ron.

I drove around for 20,000 mils with a faulty MAF before I found out that these things were capable of much more than I was quite satisfied with. It seemed that it would happily cruise at way above he legal limit 'cos I always had to watch the speed on long trips. It was, in retrospect, quite sluggish and difficult to coax up hills. When I finally got around to changing it I was astounded at the difference. I paid

I've just got a top up can from Halfords but the connector doesn't seem to fir. It goes on but will not latch down and the gas escapes when I press the button. Anyone had any experience please.

I seem to remember that when we changed to VAT we were told that it would never, under any cicumstances, rise above 8%. But, that was before the rate was set by someone other than our own elected government. :16: :16: :16: