Roy

very nice mate

what about a different carbon bonnet that doesn't have the uk scoop exactly but some other kind of heat venting properties ie bomex, trd, jun etc etc. if the idea is cooling or heat venting - maybe there are other alternatives ? even ones that cool cyl 5&6 ?

it's not gonna make it any faster mate !!!

pimp mobile !!

you know - i really worry about you sometimes old timer ....

well done honkey and you must be a very happy bunny indeed ! i agree with what tel says about usable power (on the street) and your non-hp quote view as it is a pointless exercise. if you like it adn it goes like a stinking bullet - only you have to be happy with it. i am very happy for you old son !!

... and the chances of that happening are close to zilch !!

huh - yours went crazy everything after the single got put in ...... remember that vette from that night out near hyde park ?

DITTO ...

i paid 700 for a set of 4 when i got the pirelli's .... what kind of moments .... ? the pant-changing type ?

i am sure that will be rectified in the usual CJ (honkey) manner very quickly !! :D

is there anthing you DON'T have on yours honkey ?

hi bobbeh - just to add i had the pirelli's b4 i recently put on the gsd3's and much prefer the pirelli's. maybe it is down to personal preferance ?

congrats mate - she's a beaut ! LOL @ CJ's comments ...

looks sweet mate

hiya mate and welcome. congratulations on the purchase on a truly mint example of a rare-ish car these days. hope you have many days of enjoyment to come ...

smic first ......

very nice honkey !! looks like you lost loads of weight from the pics ?

yes i did. does this however mean that they cannot be re-considered ? i am sure that open and considered discussion cannot be a bad thing or even frowned upon ?

ian - thank you for your reply. i take your point about the perception vs reality issue as far as answering the question if the mods have indeed been 'ham-fisted' in their judgement. if indeed the numbers do bear out your point then all well and good as that is what i was hoping to achieve as well. however, this does not address the more specific issue of when a mod should step in. as esoteric a question like this makes a quantifiable answer difficult i'll grant you but nonetheless, does require consideration. if we accept the premise that we are not children (well, save a few that is ..) then removing threads/posts will be seen by the liberal public as censorship which i am sure you will agree is a dirty word. nobody wants to be told what/when/how to do things and i only question the need for mods to step in (in certain cases) to begin with and then to what extent ? some people have no problems with the actions so far and yet others are just asking questions. i do not doubt that the work the mods do is thankless and time-consuming and have been happy with the majority. i just hope that this question does not affect their commitment to do their best as this is an academic question at best. i sincerely hope that this does not degenerate beyond this discussion stage as that was not my intention. i welcome all your input on this. edited to add that i won't be necessarily adding to this thread anymore as all the necessary questions have been asked and some of them answered. a quick thanks to ian, keith and mawby for being open to discussion.

Ian, just my uneducated wild guess between 3-5 over vs every 1 (maybe!) that is under modded ? how's that for a ball-park figure ? BTW - what great socio/psychological experiment are you hoping to embark upon by keeping mum till people speculate ? just curious as to your view on effifacy (sp.) regarding this ?

Ian - i would not profess to know exact numbers (no access to this kind of info obviously) but it would seem to me that over-moderation has been more of an issue than under-moderation ? IIRC - more people have in the past asked about degrees of moderation needed than to censure mods for not having done their jobs enough ? i assume that you the relevant info available to you - if so, why don't you post it up. i am sure you will be able to correct the detractors that way ? if i am incorrect in this assumption, then pls accept my acknowledgement of a genuine mistake made. this however does not change the fact that the question of moderation is a topic that many people have an opinion on and hence worth discussing. to what extent should mods interfere with the progress of a particular thread i believe is the salient issue ....

faye - while it may possibly be that 'under-moderation exists', i think that the opposite tends to happen more often (unless i am mistaken) and this has caused a few questions to be raised ... hence the interest in this thread it isn't the actual content of the thread that is in question here - i believe it to be more an issue of perceived censorship ... i think the mods on here do fairly well in what must be a difficult situation but maybe a bit less chopping at the initial stage maybe be worth considering ? or maybe lock (not remove) the thread after pruning out the undesirable (offensive) bits ... ?? edited ...