mistyblue82

Have you given it a good drive since sorting the wire? Could maybe be that the alternator wasn't giving the battery a full charge due to the friction caused by the PTU wires and it just needs a good blast now to fully charge it?

I've never seen a zed with it missing :)

Pretty sure you need to apply for a licence in order to run a raffle like that as well, remember someone getting in bother over doing the same thing with a house.

Stupedist thing I've done this week was pulling out of a junction too quick a couple of hours ago and had a big smash with an audi tt :ohmy: was in the merc ml430 rather than the zed thankfully but its made a right old mess of it, insurance said they were taking it to merc so it'll be a write off I guess :cursing:

here you go http://www.pexcom.com.au/z32cms/e107_images/Cruise_Control.pdf

My z31 sitting in the shaddows of somw mightier marques

Just in from watching it in the pub....the ball was defo over the line in the first half!

I've got one, there are two local to me that come up for sale regularly on gumtree but never seen any of those in the flesh

Regi users can't access that link mate so he won't be able to tell.

As it happens I was thinking about putting the z31 back on the road and got insurance quotes yesterday and of the cheapest quotes, it was £200 more for third party. Its happened to me in the past with ther cars but usually £20-30 of difference, never as big as £200

Pregnant woman made redundant a fortnight before xmas...not really a jokey type of thread mate.

I think what might be different here, but its not clear at the moment until she receives it in writing, is that we're not talking about a dismisal for poor performance in this case - they were looking at redundancies and gave notice (although maybe not enough, we don't know that yet) that they were doing this, they used a comparison of staff performance to decide...this is what makes me think this is a different scenario and wouldn't require warning etc because they aren't saying she isn't doing her job right, they're just saying we need to lose staff and (in their opinion, rightly or wrongly) they are claiming that other staff in the same/similar positions are performing better. i think its a case of requesting the reasonsw in writing and then speaking to ACAS etc and taking advice on the individual case.

Aye once its in writing it gives her something to review and question them on. I would assume that maternity pay must go ahea but the guidance wasn't clear, certainly said if they were on SML then it must continue, it also states if she is already on SML and the position no longer exists for her to return to then they need to look at offering her another position within the company, its worth checking with ACAS if that is also the case on the lead up to SML. Even if they did follow the proper process, I'd still say thay are really brave or really stupid to take a chance like that so close to maternity leave starting (that's from a employment law perspective never mind a moral perspective)....although if they HAD to lose two people to keep the business a float, and the other two girls went, then I'm sure they would have complained that zerocooled Mrs only got kept over them because the employer was too scared to do it to a pregnant woman....its a mind field!

They have to provide her with written reasons mate, but a business can still make someone redundant whilst pregnant or on maternity leave as long as the reasons for doing so do not relate to the pregnancy itself, the fact that they have paid someone else off doesn't really help your mrs case if this went to a tribunal I'm afraid. Link and quote from business.scotland.gov.uk (content writen by Government and partners, including ACAS for the business rather than the employee): "It is still possible for you to fairly dismiss an employee who is on - or who has recently returned from - SML. If the reason for the dismissal is: largely or wholly unrelated to her SML not for any other reason that is unfair or unlawfully discriminatory You must provide written reasons for dismissal to any woman you dismiss or make redundant while she is pregnant or on SML." http://www.business.scotland.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?itemId=1080903562&r.l1=1073858787&r.l2=1080898061&r.l3=1080898273&r.s=sc&site=202&type=RESOURCES

They don't list the VAT and delivery charges up front which brings it up t £600+ again so not quite the bargain it first seems

Couple of mine, think it really depends on the colour of the car as well though on whether it works or not.

...and his prices were VERY reasonable "...Ill say tweed areas of a zed around 65quid(door trim/rear quarter/console/lower dash/glovebox cover!) and dashtops 65 quid.Pillar trim 15 etc as a guide.Thats pretty much half price or there abouts to usual.This plus your post/carriage both ways,15-30quid average UK prices.Prefer if you try (without breaking clips etc)removing switches/air vents,basically things you dont want flock going on as this saves me time,keeping my prices lower for you.How much you need coating also makes a difference,the more you need,the better deal I can do it for you."

A member on here offers it as a service and there were some panels made up that members were posting around each other to see what it looked and felt like because its hard to tell with the pictures - see this thread...the test panels might still be available for posting by whoever had it last http://300zx.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=147738

I guess the point is that it helps us see better but without having the self levelling suspension then we'll be blinding oncoming traffic under certain circumstances, same goes for the washers I guess because the light will be fragmented off the dirt...but just because a new car is fitted with this, doesn't mean the owner is actually pushing the button to clean them on a regular basis. Might be an idea to keep a couple of standard bulbs in the glove in case a particularly parnicity pissed off traffic copper ever decides to try and enforce this. Only way they can tell i guess is to check the headlight casing for an E marker with the number reference in the original post.

Aye, they can't be seen to say no aftermarket because it is seen as a safety upgrade. So instead they set about making it impossible to legally have aftermarket HIDs without getting Hella or someone to stamp your headlight unit to say it passes their tests.

I know we've had a few threads about HIDs and MOTs since the latest testing manual came out and I think we're all in agreement that it states, IF the unit has self levelling suspension and washers then they must work to pass...interpretation is that this means aftermarket ones are OK since they dont have those functions and cannot be tested and failed, plus they admit themselves that testing the self levelling function isn't really practical. However we've also had other discussions about MOT pass for other things (number of mirrors and placement for instance) which can still lead to you being pulled by the rozzers and given a ticket despite your fresh MOT in hand. This seems to be the same situation for HIDs given this information from the Department for Transport (unless I am reading this wrong then please let me know) : http://www2.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roadsafety/drs/hidheadlamps.html bit of interest is: ====== However new vehicles have HID headlamps. This is because they comply to European type approval Regulations. The UK cannot refuse to register a vehicle with a European type approval. These are to ECE Regulation 98 (for the HID headlamps which are tested on a rig in a laboratory) and ECE Regulation 48 (Lighting Installation on the vehicle). For the after market, a used vehicle cannot obtain type approval because it is only applicable for new vehicles. However we feel that saying "HID is banned in the after market" would not be reasonable. Instead we should make analogies with new vehicles. It would be reasonable to require HID in the after market to meet the same safety standards as on new vehicles. The same level of safety should apply. Therefore a HID headlamp unit sold in the after market should: 1. be type approved to ECE Regulation 98 as a component. 2. when fitted to the vehicle should enable ECE Regulation 48 to be complied with (although no government inspection will take place). 3. Comply with RVLR as far as "use" is concerned. In practice this means: 1. The headlamp unit (outer lens, reflector, bulb) shall be type approved to ECE 98 and be "e-marked" to demonstrate this. That can only be done by the headlamp supplier - Hella, Valeo etc. who must test the headlamp in an independent laboratory. 2. Once fitted to the vehicle it must have headlamp cleaning and self-levelling (which can be for the headlamp or can be in the vehicle suspension - some expensive estate cars have "self-levelling suspension" and that is adequate). Also the dipped beam must stay on with the main beam. 3. The headlamp must be maintained in good working order, kept clean, and aligned/adjusted correctly like any other headlamp. Under the Road Traffic Act 1988 it is an offence to supply, fit or use vehicle parts which are not legal. In summary it is not permitted to convert an existing halogen headlamp unit for use with HID bulbs. The entire headlamp unit must be replaced with one designed and approved for use with HID bulbs and it must be installed in accordance with the rules stated above. If you require any further information regarding the regulations covered by this fact sheet, please contact the DfT at the address below: Transport Technology and Standards 6 Department for Transport Zone 2/04 Great Minster House 76 Marsham Street London SW1P 4DR Telephone: 020 7944 2078 Fax: 020 7944 2196 Email: TTS.enquiries@dft.gsi.gov.uk

I think its 'consultz' you are after mate. I'#m sure someone in your area with it will poswt up soon

Z31 I've had longer so it already had the name 'zed' so when the z32 tt came along it became known as Big Red

These are the cheapest ones I found - http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/310213954935?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1438.l2649 I'm sure a former trader of hids (not these exact ones) posted this week to say that he's seen wiring loom problems caused by higher wattage sets and just to stick to 35w. The higher wattage gives more light but doesn't 'throw' it any further to light up more road.

Phone the bodyshop on the window sticker and tell that you've just purchased it...if he wants his sticker to stay on then he can tidy up that spoiler/rear panel for free! Otherwise get the stanley out and remove his sticker :laugh: It doesn't look bad mate, hope the rust isn't too bad. I quite like those wheels.