--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 246 AUTOMOTIVE Ref: F3E00007 Date: 03/05/98 From: BILL MITCHELL Time: 07:29pm \/To: RONNIE THOMPSON (Read 0 times) Subj: Insurance Rates Go Up? RT> How about HONESTY??? If you pull out your insurance policy, RT> you will more than likely find out that you are required to RT> report ALL accidents, no matter who is at fault. Your in most places if your insurance company does not have to pay a claim your rates will not go up because you were involved in an accident. RT> insurance company is insuring your vehicle, and if that RT> vehicle is someone unsafe, they should know about it, to RT> protect YOU. If you aren't in a "no fault" state, your RT> company won't raise your rates as a result of an accident, RT> unless you were at fault. NC must not be a "no-fault" state because it sounds like you are misinformed about what no fault means. No fault means _your_ insurance company pays _your_ medical claims in an accident involving a vehicle which is covered by the no fault rules without litigation no matter who is at fault. In addition, there is a threshold which your medical bills must exceed before you can sue for pain and suffering. If the limits of your policy are exceeded, then if another member of your household has an auto policy under no fault THAT POLICY takes over the claim. No fault does not apply to physical damage, nor does it mean that fault is no longer determined to establish cupability under liability coverage. An example. You are walking on the sidewalk and a car which is legally required to be covered by no fault insurance hits you. Your medical bills are paid, without having to litigate, by your auto insurance, not by the guy who hit you. If you don't have any auto insurance, then you are covered by a policy of a member of your household. If nobody in your household has auto insurance, then the owner of the car, their policy covers it without litigation. If your bills are over whatever threshold is set, only then you can sue for pain and suffering because of their neglegence. The fence the car damaged when it hit you is paid by the car owner's liability insurance, as property damage it is not covered under no fault. And, payment for a no fault claim does not raise rates. Physical damage claim would raise rates. --- * Origin: FREQ DVFILES from 1:2604/539 (1:2604/539.11) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 246 AUTOMOTIVE Ref: F3E00008 Date: 03/05/98 From: MARK LOGSDON Time: 07:33pm \/To: TOM WALKER (Read 0 times) Subj: OHM'S LAW TW> As long as the Resistance Ratios are right it DOES work and your TW> example of the Blown fuse indicator is a perfect example. TW> Of course when I suggested something similar as what you did I got TW> Laughed off the Echo. Hope you have better luck. There are some HARD TW> HEADS here. I think the hard heads are the ones who are too lazy to analyze the circuit and see that it simply will not work. It doesn't take any analysis tools other than Ohm's Law. --- QScan/PCB v1.19b / 01-0232 * Origin: IBMNet Connection - Indpls, IN - 317-882-5575 28.8 USR (1:231/1) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 246 AUTOMOTIVE Ref: F3E00009 Date: 03/05/98 From: GARY HALL Time: 10:07pm \/To: DUANE WONG (Read 0 times) Subj: EGR Valve->Gas Mileage On (02 Mar 98) Duane Wong wrote to All... DW> I thought I got 70MPG on a 2.5L 4-TECH Engine. DW> I changed the EGR Valve on the Cutlass Calais from DW> a Borg Warner (Pep Boys Style-Lifetime Warranty) to DW> a General Motors EGR Valve for about $83.00 or so. Hi I have been a engine performance Technician for 25 plus years and when it comes to emission and electronic parts I will use only OEM parts. All of the auto makers in the world today are getting more than a quarter million miles from their vehicles even with poor maint. so why use any other parts. You do get what you pay for. DW> Rumor has it that Clinton policies helped to rejuvenate DW> the American Automotive Industry. Yea that is why the women in Arkansas are so slow they all have a Governor on them. Gary Generic Hall The Generic Redneck Terlton Oklahoma USA Earth Milkyway --- PPoint 2.02 * Origin: Terlton the Oklahoma Jungle 74081 (1:170/302.16) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 246 AUTOMOTIVE Ref: F3E00010 Date: 03/05/98 From: GARY HALL Time: 10:19pm \/To: ROY J. TELLASON (Read 0 times) Subj: Vehicle Confiscation RJ> This still isn't going to do anything constructive... Well Roy I just got two questions. Why the Hell are we even talking about this dumb thing anyway? What good is it? Gary Generic Hall The Generic Redneck Terlton Oklahoma USA Earth Milkyway --- PPoint 2.02 * Origin: Terlton the Oklahoma Jungle 74081 (1:170/302.16) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 246 AUTOMOTIVE Ref: F3E00011 Date: 03/05/98 From: GARY HALL Time: 10:29pm \/To: DON DELLMANN (Read 0 times) Subj: Vehicle Confiscation On (03 Mar 98) Don Dellmann wrote to gary hall... DD> While tripping merrily through the mail, gary hall was overheard RW> )--(Headlight Switch)-+ Low RW> | beam RW> +-(Headlamp)-+---------------------!-(Ground) RW> ! ! RW> ! 220 ohm ! RW> ! 1/4 watt ! RW> !---------------(resistor)-!+ ! RW> ! ! RW> !+-(LED)! ML> RW> DD> No, as long as the resistance of the LED circuit is high enough, the DD> LED should stay off unless the lamp burns out, then the LED would DD> light. DD> The headlight bulb is of sufficiently low resistance that as long as DD> it is working it is effectively "shorting out" the LED. You got your people mixed up but what you said is exactly what I was saying. A headlamp has a Res of about 1.2 Ohms with the 220 or higher I dont think 220 will do it the current flow through the led will not be enough to illuminate it. if the headlamp fails then all current will flow through the resistor and LED. The math whiz that put the Ohms law theory to it forgot about Multi source schematics which must be done with a Loop equasion, or Thelvinized. --- PPoint 2.02 * Origin: Terlton the Oklahoma Jungle 74081 (1:170/302.16) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 246 AUTOMOTIVE Ref: F3E00012 Date: 02/24/98 From: KEVIN RELKOFF Time: 07:51pm \/To: KENNY HENDERSON (Read 0 times) Subj: Formula is hurting KH> To make a long story short, I was lucky. The car is not that bad, Least that's the most important part, you didn't get hurt, I'm just waiting for it too happen to me.. I knwo it'll happen, but when.. that's the part i hate.. I've already been in on accident where i went into a ditch.. But that was in my Bobcat.. heh also Took out a `No parking' sign KH> about $1500 in damage and its still in the body shop. My front end was KH> it was sort of like I got caught in his wake. Anyways I did not go KH> through insurance because my premiums would be so increased KH> dramatically, so I have to pay out of my own pocket. Because of this I Heh I have a 40% discount on my insurances.. and I paid $1400 with THat for a year.. if i lost that 40%.. I'll have to take out a LOAN =] also even the insurance company here has a Monthly payment plan of all things =] I myself would of done the same.. also One reason i try to keep a Few extra grand in the bank account.. Well I hope You get your car back soon.. and That it's still up to par afterwards.. and luckly it wasn't worst.. --- Blue Wave/386 v2.30 [NR] * Origin: Value Link BBS 930-0715 (1:153/959) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 246 AUTOMOTIVE Ref: F3E00013 Date: 03/06/98 From: MARK LOGSDON Time: 07:35pm \/To: GARY HALL (Read 0 times) Subj: OHM'S LAW GH> You got your people mixed up but what you said is exactly what I GH> was saying. A headlamp has a Res of about 1.2 Ohms with the 220 GH> or higher I dont think 220 will do it the current flow through GH> the led will not be enough to illuminate it. if the headlamp fails GH> then all current will flow through the resistor and LED. The math GH> whiz that put the Ohms law theory to it forgot about Multi source GH> schematics which must be done with a Loop equasion, or GH> Thelvinized. Gary, I didn't forget about Thevinin's Theorem, and for what it's worth, I'm not a math whiz. I'm merely a licensed professional engineer (PE) with a degree in electrical engineering. Here's the bottom line. The circuit won't work as drawn. I've explained it already. If you find some fault with my analysis, then please show me explicitly. I want details. If I'm wrong, then I'll admit it. Show me, but don't try to insult me by calling me a "math whiz." For what it's worth, the math I used (and will use again below) is something most of us learned by the second or third grade. Once again, here it is. Read closely, and please ask if you don't understand. I'll try to keep it simple. Recall that Ohm's Law says the current is I=V/R, where I is the current in amps, V is the voltage across some branch, and R is the resistance through that branch. Below we have two branches. The first branch consists only of the headlamp, which is between 12 volts and ground (zero volts). The second branch is the resistor and LED combination in series. This branch is also between 12 volts and ground. GH> RW> )--(Headlight Switch)-+ Low GH> RW> | beam GH> RW> +-(Headlamp)-+---------------------!-(Ground GH> RW> ! ! GH> RW> ! 220 ohm ! GH> RW> ! 1/4 watt !