Gerrycan

I give the shop staff my mobile phone as surety so I can run outside the shop. Probably why my family refuse to be associated with me when I shop for shoes

Personally, I would not like like unexpected steering inputs, mid bend while pushing it a bit.

Is @TheWanderer the unluckiest man in the world?? 😞 Joking apart, I agree that the handling issues sound strongly like wheel alignment issues and, a long shot here, I suppose the lane centring facility has been turned off?

Here is a brand new edition from my favourite source of health information and it is about the secrets to longevity. The lowdown on longevity - Health Report - ABC Radio National Much of the information is already presented in other sources in this thread but it is supported with evidence sourced by scientific method (you know the double-blind, peer-reviewed stuff). Basically it touts the widely known benefits of restricted calorie diets and exercise. The main feature, of the excellent content, for me was the importance of a good quality food based on the 'Mediterranean Diet' which is high in nutrition, fibre and minimal refined processed food and high calorie products. What was very interesting was that while Michael Moseley's promotion of the 5/2 diet (just two days of low calorie intake in a week and eat what they wanted on the other days) did achieve weight loss (reduced visceral fat), the biometric markers of improving health were not as good as those achieved by those who just had better diets and similar weight loss. In fact those wholly on the 'Mediterranean Diet' foods could not help but lose weight eating normally and some had to eat wildly excessive amounts to try to maintain weights for the the experiment. The purpose of maintaining the weight was to prove the better biometric markers with the diet were not just due to weight loss. A problem with many scientific studies is that they tend to be very focussed on one particular aspect and in this case I think it ignores the probable link that the diet almost certainly promotes excellent gut health which contributes and may even be the main reason for the biomarker improvement. None-the-less I think this is an interesting and well presented broadcast well worth the near half hour it takes to listen.

VW group advice varies by country. UK Skoda is pushing owners to change belts at 5 years. Australian dealers seem to be recommending 7 years. I might change my low mileage 2014 model's belt this year since I have decided to keep it. Service intervals vary as well. Australian dealers insist on 1 year/15000 km services. UK can be the same or may opt for longer variable depending on use intervals. Spark plugs about 60k km but when mine were changed they showed no wear.

You are on fire today Pete

A similar story here with Australian ethanol producers lobbying politicians on both sides of the fence and donating to both, to at least make ethanol a legal addition to fuel. I won't say 'corruption' but the process was certainly corrupted.

For some time I used a non-gps Garmin fitness watch which required the pace length to be set for distance readings. What became obvious over time and a set course is that my cadence (about 160-163 steps per minute) would never vary but my speed, and therefore reported distance covered, was determined by my stride length. It was pretty much the same when I rode a bike, I could rarely comfortable getting my cadence over 70 per minute and it was just the gearing that determined my speed. The ABC's latest Parkrun promotion has suggested shortening stride and raising running cadence can potentially improve efficiency and times, although they do say it is not easy and you should have a reasonable fitness level before attempting it. Cadence — could it be the key to improving your running performance? - ABC News

I'm trying not to be too much of a conspiracy theorist but I have a few questions about e10. Where all this 'green' ethanol is coming from? Especially now that the Russian invasion has suddenly reduced the world's marketable grain supply by about 30% (that is Russian and Ukrainian exports which I think also fed approx 400 million people). Does it come from destroyed Amazonian rainforest? Where are the factories based that produce the ethanol? It would have to be a pretty massive production capacity. When and where does it get mixed with the petrol? At the producing refinery or at the distribution point where they usually add the added chemicals (for 95 or higher RON)? My guess is the latter as the ethanol content could determine the amount of aromatics, detergents and knock inhibitors added. How are the Euro/UK regulations regarding e10 worded? Is the 10% ethanol content fixed in stone or is it a maximum or minimum amount? I guess I am suggesting that the ethanol content may not be as large as generally thought, which would partly explain why the reported effects so far are minimal.

What car/engine do you currently have to get your current 48mpg, which seems pretty good to me. If economy is important to you then maybe consider a 1.5tsi engine. The overall lighter weight of the vehicle means overall consumption and performance is not far removed from the 150bhp diesel and probably get better consumption on short journeys without having to worry about DPFs.

The combination of the new puppy is starting to settle down, work demands easing a bit, and the Easter holidays has allowed me to string together some runs. A slow 7km run, then 20k steps at work the following day stopping me seizing up meant I felt good enough to run again on the the third day (day off). Tried something different for the 5km run and went all out for the first km and ran my first sub 5 min km, for what seems forever, then recovered from the effort over the next 3 km (very slow) and ran the last km again under 5 minutes. Final recovery was leaning against the pub wall gasping for air but really happy. Surprisingly the overall time was slightly better than I have been achieving lately but suspect that near ideal conditions helped as well. Not quite to Jess Stenson's recommendations but still felt good to mix it up a bit.

Something I read years back suggested that cessation of exercise resulted in the loss of performance at the rate of 1% per day. While it seems a frightening figure there are probably a lot of factors behind it I cannot remember, such as whether the cessation is foregoing all exercise (from injury) or just the activity in question? The other thing to note is the reduction is therefore not linear. After 14 days an expected reduction in speed/endurance of somewhere between 5 and 10% would be noticeable. When I was younger and resumed exercise after a layoff then it seemed to take roughly twice as long to get back to where I was but the curve was reversed insofar as the bigger gains came early and then slowed.

I loved my cycle touring days around France. Especially fond memories of the Loire. In those days I had a full-sized frame fitting cycle pump (actually still have it and it still works at nearly 40 years old) which was especially useful at warding off 'playful' dogs. Only happened twice but both times were in France.

The Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) has really been promoting the benefits of running and walking lately and especially spruiking participation in Parkrun for all levels. This is quite a nice round up of training tips from a locally (Adelaide, South Australia) based elite athlete. Australian marathon runner Jess Stenson shares her top tips to get a parkrun PB - ABC News

A more obvious feature on the sedan than the estate.

Good advice from the NRMA man. Having driven regularly in Sydney I know how heavy the traffic can be and the stop/start can activate many times in a short distance, plus the the battery is drained as the ventilation fans keep running when the engine is stopped. They were rentals so I didn't really care then. None of my old cars have stop/start but I am quite willing to switch off the engine with the key when I know I am going to be still for more than a minute (some of the lights have very long cycles). Saves a bit of petrol and saves the ventilation system sucking in fumes from surrounding idling vehicles. Unlikely to happen more than a couple of times in my trips anyway. I usually get about 5 to 6 years out of standard (Australian made) car batteries. I will willingly admit I am using an environmentalist excuse for being a tight-arse

As mentioned previously I have recently been too busy and tired from work to run regularly and noticed that I have developed some back niggles and knee pains. We managed to catch up at work and I was relieved to get an unexpected couple of days off and managed a 5k run today. Honestly, running is like a magic potion for me, within a kilometre the back was in correct alignment and painless and the knee was trouble free. Things should settle down after Easter and allow better self management and consistent exercise.

The person at the dealer you spoke to was a salesman so believe the manufacturer's recommendations over his . The euro sourced engines are generally optimised to offer best performance and economy on the fuel stipulated for the official consumption and emission tests in Europe, which is 95 RON. In line with our vehicle emission standards (currently Euro 5), Australian fuel standards are considered 3rd world in regard to allowed sulphur content with 150ppm for 91 RON and 50ppm for 95 and 98 RON. European and US standards are 5ppm. The government was giving a billion or so dollars to the local refineries to upgrade so we should meet international low sulphur standards in the next year or so. DO NOT fall into the trap of using our local very cheap10% Ethanol fuel which was once touted as being 94 RON. It is just the high sulphur 91RON with 10% ethanol added to raise the RON. The trouble is that independent testing of the fuel has shown that the quantity of ethanol added varies and sometimes has no Ethanol at all (warning stickers on pumps in SA) so you may inadvertently put in low octane rubbish. Euro/UK standard 95 RON fuel now has 10% ethanol stipulated but I am more confident in their quality control than our producers, also UK 99 RON or higher octane fuels often only have 5% ethanol or less so the higher octane fuel actually has more calories for potentially slightly better power/consumption. Our 95 and 98 fuels with no ethanol would have the same calorific values. A known exception is the Mazda 2.5 turbo engine available on some of their cars here, it was principally designed for the US and can happily run on their equivalent of our 91 Ron fuel through to 98 RON. I remember reading that Mazda claims that the sensors on the engine allow the higher rated fuel to produce an extra 12kw power. Skoda (VW) make no similar claim for their vehicles as far as I know but would not be surprised if there was some power benefits for specialist high revving engines produced by Porsche and other high performance cars. There are also benefits using higher rated fuels for remapped engines tuned for its use. However no harm in trying 98 RON for yourself and see how you go. I tried it in my 1.4tsi when new and could not discern any difference in performance or consumption but some others in this forum swear by it

I agree with you on the max 10% legal requirement and usual (about) 5% speedo overread but as tyres wear then the wheels rotate more for a given distance so the speedo inaccuracy is even worse so why would they build in an initial 5% variation for that? Most of the vehicles I have owned from new over the last thirty years had pretty accurate odometers (1 to 2%) including a mk2 1.9pd and current mk3 1.4tsi but the speedometer accuracy was not good on either at 10% on the mk2 and 5% on the mk3. As an aside the consumption display was a consistent 0.2L/100 optimistic on the mk2 and when new the mk3 was about 0.1L/100 pessimistic but after 7 years the latter is now 0.2L/100 optimistic. I'm sorry but I have not experienced a consistent link between inaccuracy of speedo and odometer or any consequent relationship to consumption accuracy either.

With all the differing factors, it is often difficult to work out whether your car is working as efficiently as it should. Direct comparisons with other reported consumptions are almost impossible to make. I can get 30% better consumption than my wife for the same journey in the same car. I try, she doesn't. For what it is worth this is my approach: 1. Compare at least a couple of refuels actual consumption against reported tank average. It will give you some idea of accuracy and any variation is likely to be reasonably consistent. 2. Check odometer and speedo accuracy against a gps. More likely the former will be more accurate than the latter and the odo is the more important of the two for fuel consumption displays. 3. In my situation (in South Australia) I have access to pretty flat and non-busy roads where I can travel at the national speed limit. The perfect conditions are close to 20 deg C, with little to no wind and a dry road. Think Norfolk/Lincolnshire flats. 4. So with the engine warmed up, no a/c on I then set off with cruise control set at the national speed limit (70 mph true speed not display speed), no one in front and the display set for instant consumption. Even though the display will fluctuate, after a short while you get an idea of what the consumption at that speed is, then use the already calculated variants to work out 'true' consumption. It is my experience in those conditions that I should expect to at least be close or match the official combined consumption figures for the sedans/estates. I would expect it to be slightly worse for SUVs with their poorer aero. I know it is still a real faff around but it is the only way I know to reduce as many variables as possible. This held true for both my mk2 1.9pd and mk3 1.4tsi, which I regard and experienced as having good consumption. Other Korean cars I owned from new were far worse than official figures and this was reflected in generally poor/abysmal general consumption.

Ironically I have only seen an actual snake bite in the UK in Essex about 45 years ago during an interclub competition. A baby adder trapped in a golf hole cup bit my opponent as he retrieved his ball. He had to retire after a few more holes to get medical attention, so was one of my more unusual wins.

In my limited experience of Scotland the beautiful bits usually have elevation changes so Inspect your see walks may offer more aerobic benefits than you are suggesting. The wife and I have done many beautiful walks all around Aus but our UK walks were always more relaxed as we did not have to worry about carrying a snake bite kit

I find that when I extend myself more than usual or run after a layoff (see previous post) then I usually feel surprisingly good the following day but the expected stiffness, soreness (etc) are more apparent on the second day after the exercise. Do others experience this? A good walk usually helps to work out the knots though.

Had my first 5km run for nearly 4 weeks this morning and was happy enough with the time considering the layoff. I'll just say that the addition of a new, noisy and energetically destructive puppy to the household has destroyed whatever free time, energy, or sleep patterns we previously had. NOT my idea, I was outvoted.

I didn't run, or even feel like running, for three weeks after my booster. Lot of variation in how boosters can affect someone.