Chins

thats what i thought, but he is saying it doesnt come back until he has switched the engine off and on

I'll ask him. Its a dodgy Avant 2.0T Quattro, you know how bad they can be!

One of the guys at work got a brand new A4 MY10 with all the toys. He is having issues with the TMC dropping out/stoping. When he stops the car and the restarts it he gets it back. Any thoughts?

ome interesting views. One of my recent cars was the 2.0T. The TTS is in a different league. Sure you can remap the 2.0T and it wont be far short of the TTS, but as anyone knows that has driven the std car in the wet it struggles and fast getaways are a no no. Whilst lighter the handling on the 2.0T can match the TTS and with its Sports ESP and uprated mag ride it understeers way less. It also sounds a hell of a lot nicer. Not sure the TTS is really struggling to sell, although as people in the city lose their jobs there will of course be cancellations. I usually own 2-3 different cars each year and have enjoyed time in an R32, M3 and RS4 amongst others. My TTS has drawn more attention than any other cars Ive owned. Had more people compliment me on my choice to a point were its embarrasing. Is it a mini R8?. Never driven one, but the TTS is a damn good car. [IMG]http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c49/Chins1/TTS5.jpg[/img]

ot sure how you can compare the TTS to a Boxster S and claim they are close on price. The TTS Roadster is £35385 and it comes with Leather as std, xenon's, leather around instrument cluster, magnetic ride, short shift, heated seats. To spec the Boxster S to this level you would end up with a £8,000 difference. Even as std there is a £5k difference The boxster isnt an option for me as I need 4 seats. Even if it was, its too expensive, looks dated (even though it still looks better than its ugly sister the Cayman). The TTS costs less to run, service etc and comes with the benefit of less chance of vandalism.

You bought the Fluke from my company

[ QUOTE ] Yep. Well I'm meant to be but, it's been a while since I've seen any decent speeds. Seems to be getting worse by the week. I used to consistently get 17Mbits+ download and around 700kbits upload but not for a while now [/ QUOTE ] Are you suprised?

[ QUOTE ] Paul- are the posts at odds?? I think your taking about Because F- connectors are only available in crimp or screw / self bite shells As for CT100 being poorly screened, well the stuff I use has a decent foil and screen that seems to work well. The screen isn't as good as RG6 cables, but for home use is fine. Simple practices such as keeping to the MBR, avoiding kinks, twists and muscle bound pulls help, the big one is to keep the distance between 240v and the cable over 50mm. So avoid using the same joist holes as the 240v cabling And Paul I solder my aerial plugs as well [/ QUOTE ] Without being a pain in the a*** You also have compression connectors to add to the mix. These were developed as installers who lost their tools used plyers to crimp connectors. This leads to poor termination and in the event of deployment by a cable tv company major RF ingress and exgress issues. Today, the majority of major organisations are moving to compression and away from crimp. twist on F's luckily in the professional arena are dying off - however they will always have a place in MFI where the public want to make their own lead without spending lots of pounds on tools. For compression connectors, you look at the biggest F connector manufacturers in the world Thomas and Betts and their Snap and Seal and Gilbert/Cabelcon with their CX3 range and Ultaease range. Cabelcon Compression You can use the same technolgy for BNC, RCA and IEC. Jonathan

[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Interesting thing is that CT100 isnt really good on screening. Solder is I'm afraid something from the 80's with connectors. [/ QUOTE ] Who said anything about soldering? We certainly don't solder any bnc's or f connectors. And to my knowledge, CT100 is a code, not a final grade afaik. Maybe I got our codes wrong. Bearing in mind we mainly install into £10m+ houses in London & we've never had any issues, so maybe I have?? [/ QUOTE ] You didnt mention solder, Paul did You are spot on with your writing re cables and quality. My point is that CT100 is not the worlds greatest for screening, but its great for its job of RF distribution in a property. We have a trend of people wanting quad sheild cable for headend work and this makes CT100 look pretty poor. CT100 is to an extent a Webro cable and other have to use WF100 etc as a code. Its nice to see you use the words CT125 as I wonder how many people dont think of the losses in cables. We sell pallet loads of the stuff, so I like it I know you work for a good company as your company has a nice Fluke CIQ for testing, and not many companies have invested in test equipment for their installs

Hi Rob Sent you a PM

[ QUOTE ] Sky HD is run via shotgun / twin cable or two single runs Guess where you can buy it here Your need F-connectors for the cable termination TLC order code MX SATP [/ QUOTE ] Please dont post pictures of twist on F connectors. These cost 3p max from China and are not worth even that. Quality costs, aim to pay around .30-40p MAX (which is what TLC is charging for a 3p connector) for a good connector.

Rob Ive got loads instock of the HDMI cables in stock - sell to the trade installers. Dont get many calls for DVI to HDMI though. I'll have a look in the morning when I'm on the 3m DVI to HDMI. Might be able to make you up a nice 5m component cable as well. Jonathan

Interesting thing is that CT100 isnt really good on screening. Solder is I'm afraid something from the 80's with connectors. We now sell to SKY corporate proper connectors for their commercial installs. I'd love to be able to sell CT100 at TLC prices. Guess its ok for members of the public. If trade people are buying from them, they need to check their costs. Jonathan

£26,200 with the extras - £500 discount

Mine