Stop-start system

[jcochrane]

GJD - I like your reference to rule 239.

Almost everybody now seems to leave headlights on when stopped at the roadside. They deserve to end up with flat batteries(1), except they probably leave the engine running as well.

(1) In the 'good old days' they would have done. They'd have had to do a bit of push starting.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

Push the car. What's the starting handle for?

[TripleS]

GJD - I like your reference to rule 239.

Almost everybody now seems to leave headlights on when stopped at the roadside. They deserve to end up with flat batteries(1), except they probably leave the engine running as well.

(1) In the 'good old days' they would have done. They'd have had to do a bit of push starting.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

Push the car. What's the starting handle for?

Yes, you and I, and that chap over in Shrewsbury will know about such things, but I didn't want to confuse all the young whippersnappers around here.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[Renny]

Yes, you and I, and that chap over in Shrewsbury will know about such things, but I didn't want to confuse all the young whippersnappers around here.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

I'm not of the same viontage as you guys, but the 1958 Series II Land Rover I used to have had a starting handle. I did use it when the battery was flat (though not from leaving the lights on).

[TripleS]

Yes, you and I, and that chap over in Shrewsbury will know about such things, but I didn't want to confuse all the young whippersnappers around here.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

I'm not of the same vintage as you guys, but the 1958 Series II Land Rover I used to have had a starting handle. I did use it when the battery was flat (though not from leaving the lights on).

A starting handle was useful for turning the engine over if you wanted to set valve timing and ignition timing and stuff like that, but most of us no longer get involved with such tasks.

....and I certainly wouldn't want to try using a starting handle to start a modern large capacity high compression engine.

I remember the uproar from some of the older motorists (do you remember the Major Upsett cartoons? ) when starting handles were being phased out, and then somebody asked if they would care to try using one to do a cold start with something like a 3.8 litre Jaguar engine with a 9:1 compression ratio. That's not a task I would relish.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[Renny]

....and I certainly wouldn't want to try using a starting handle to start a modern large capacity high compression engine.

I have also manually started compression ignition (diesel) engines in the past. We used single cylinder Hatz, and later Ruggerini diesels to power auxilluary equipment on some of the trailers we used to haul.

The Hatz engines were mounted with the crankshaft about 2' off the ground and you had to insert a lit "pellet" into the cylinder head as a pre-heat before turning them over and hoping the de-compression reset before you ran out of wind. The Ruggerinis were mounted above the 5th wheel on the front of the trailers and were turned over by a rope wound round the crankshaft pulley, terminated with a 12" piece of bromm handle as a grip. There was no decompressor on those, so the trick was to wind it back against the compression, then pull it over, stepping backwards off the tractor unit fuel tank to give you the required momentum. Probably not a safe system of work

[GJD]

piece of bromm handle

Presumably named after the sound you hoped the engine was about to make?

[TripleS]

....and I certainly wouldn't want to try using a starting handle to start a modern large capacity high compression engine.

I have also manually started compression ignition (diesel) engines in the past. We used single cylinder Hatz, and later Ruggerini diesels to power auxilluary equipment on some of the trailers we used to haul.

The Hatz engines were mounted with the crankshaft about 2' off the ground and you had to insert a lit "pellet" into the cylinder head as a pre-heat before turning them over and hoping the de-compression reset before you ran out of wind. The Ruggerinis were mounted above the 5th wheel on the front of the trailers and were turned over by a rope wound round the crankshaft pulley, terminated with a 12" piece of bromm handle as a grip. There was no decompressor on those, so the trick was to wind it back against the compression, then pull it over, stepping backwards off the tractor unit fuel tank to give you the required momentum. Probably not a safe system of work

I should be pleased to have your assurance that these distinctly dodgy tricks have now ceased, otherwise I'd be obliged if you could let me have a note of your address, and I will arrange for an early visit by the Health and Safety people. Some folk need protecting from themselves. You know it makes sense.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[fungus]

Yes, you and I, and that chap over in Shrewsbury will know about such things, but I didn't want to confuse all the young whippersnappers around here.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

I'm not of the same vintage as you guys, but the 1958 Series II Land Rover I used to have had a starting handle. I did use it when the battery was flat (though not from leaving the lights on).

A starting handle was useful for turning the engine over if you wanted to set valve timing and ignition timing and stuff like that, but most of us no longer get involved with such tasks.

....and I certainly wouldn't want to try using a starting handle to start a modern large capacity high compression engine.

I remember the uproar from some of the older motorists (do you remember the Major Upsett cartoons? ) when starting handles were being phased out, and then somebody asked if they would care to try using one to do a cold start with something like a 3.8 litre Jaguar engine with a 9:1 compression ratio. That's not a task I would relish.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

My old Morris 1000 had a starting handle. Not very nice if the timing was out and the damned thing kicked back, giving you a nasty whack across the wrist.

[TripleS]

I remember the uproar from some of the older motorists (do you remember the Major Upsett cartoons? ) when starting handles were being phased out, and then somebody asked if they would care to try using one to do a cold start with something like a 3.8 litre Jaguar engine with a 9:1 compression ratio. That's not a task I would relish.

My old Morris 1000 had a starting handle. Not very nice if the timing was out and the damned thing kicked back, giving you a nasty whack across the wrist.

Oh, I didn't realise the Morris 1000 had a starting handle: I'd guessed that they had been phased out by then. Certainly the Austin-Healey Sprite (introduced in 1958) didn't have one.

Most of my starting handle experience was gained with a 1953 Lanchester 14 (4 cyl., 1968 cc, about 60 bhp, Wilson pre-selector gearbox and thus not very exciting performance!) as that car was often difficult to start. I had many spells of sore knuckles/hand/wrist thanks to that car.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[IVORTHE DRIVER]

I had a Morris 1000 with a starting handle, had to use it one winters morning, it kicked back and took the damn bumper of with it, via my wrist I might add, its surprising how hard you can kick a car when your in pain

Also imagine the poor sod starting the old Commer engine which could fire up and run backwards, wouldnt fancy the kickback from that one.

[PeterE]

I have to say I was a bit unnerved by the engine cutting out on one night recently when I had the headlights, wipers, aircon and heated rear window all on. In such conditions I've taken to manually turning the stop-start off.

[TripleS]

I have to say I was a bit unnerved by the engine cutting out on one night recently when I had the headlights, wipers, aircon and heated rear window all on. In such conditions I've taken to manually turning the stop-start off.

There, you see, this is quite hopeless. We can't have people thinking about what is appropriate and seeking to over-ride all this clever technology. What we need is even more technology to ensure that this doesn't happen.

Presumably at the time this happened the car was stationary, in which case perhape the headlights were not needed?

Incidentally, a topic on the PH AD forum has been on about the use of foglights, and I think somebody made the suggestion that front foglights should be arranged so that they automatically switched off when a certain speed was reached or exceeded - maybe 30 mph or something like that. I don't like such interference with drivers' decisions but that would get rid of a good deal of misuse. The same principle could also be applied to headlights when a car has been stopped for more than a few seconds.

....just so long as these features are not applied on any car of mine, where they would, of course, be completely unnecessary.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[Renny]

[
I should be pleased to have your assurance that these distinctly dodgy tricks have now ceased, otherwise I'd be obliged if you could let me have a note of your address, and I will arrange for an early visit by the Health and Safety people. Some folk need protecting from themselves. You know it makes sense.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

As far as I know, these practices have now ceased, as has the company

How did I ever get a job in H&S?

[PeterE]

Presumably at the time this happened the car was stationary, in which case perhape the headlights were not needed?

I don't think anyone would reasonably expect drivers to turn their headlights off when stationary at traffic lights, unless they were likely to be stopped for several minutes when at a level crossing or swing bridge.

[TripleS]

Presumably at the time this happened the car was stationary, in which case perhape the headlights were not needed?

I don't think anyone would reasonably expect drivers to turn their headlights off when stationary at traffic lights, unless they were likely to be stopped for several minutes when at a level crossing or swing bridge.

Obviously most people these days work on that basis, Peter, but I don't. It is clear that the vast majority of drivers do now leave their headlights on when stopped at traffic lights or other holdups. This is clearly the modern fashion and I think it is wrong and can be a nuisance.

We didn't used to see this sort of thing: drivers could be relied upon to switch headlights off if they were stopped for an appreciable period. In the days of dynamos that didn't produce a charge at idling speed it is quite likely they did this for fear of running the battery down. Even so, it indicated that drivers were thinking about the car and how it was working, and these days they probably don't: the more robust electrical systems on modern cars means it is unnecessary. In some ways this has allowed sloppy practices to emerge, and Ithink we're all worse off because of that. There is less thinking going on.

Admittedly there is no longer a need to switch headlights off for fear of running out of electricity, but IMHO it would still be better if people were to do it. If you're not moving, you don't need headlights on for your own purpose, but by having them on you are producing excessive glare (and thus reduced vision) for oncoming drivers who are moving and do need good vision.

I would like to see a change of attitude in this respect, but I don't suppose it will happen.

Best wishes all,
Dave.