It seems OK right now..
But that is subject to change at any time.

Yes. About $.20 I think.

Well that was my 20¢ worth, anyway. it seems to have returned to blitzing speed again.....

I just purged the cache and resynced a few tables.

I'm pretty sure things should seem a touch faster now.

Much, Much better!!! Was that a main jet or timing change???? Thanks Jon!

As long as the site is faster than my 360, I'm happy.

it was an emulsion tube thing...

Turned & not locked in the grove.

Yup exactly

Sigmaz wrote:I just purged the cache and resynced a few tables.

... you just made all that up didn't you?

I think I helped on my end, I untied a knot in my power supply cord!!

I went shopping and purged my cash. Did I help too?

Maybe..

Its back.... Reeeeeeally Slooowwww..............

not as slow, but not so speedy quick anymore

Now back up to speed????? All other sites were fast,just this one, but like I said, it's back, back to speed......

I'm getting a "awaiting moderation" message when I post to the oil seal discussion - frustrating, as the message vanishes...

I had the same problem, I think its a STICKY thread that has to be OKed before it,s posted?????? That's why I started another thread, jump on it & we can add to it.

Oh OK, that makes sense - I'll try and remember what I was on about then! Thanks!

Yes Jon, what gives? On the one occasion per year when I send a serious message, I get that same "awaiting moderation" message - but as in many instances before, I know I'll never see my reply again!

The only section that requires moderation is the parts crossover section.

General conversation isn't allowed in this area as it obfuscates the thread intentions.

This parts crossover section was originally supposed to be used as a reference section only.
Suppose you have a part number that works or an application for a mod that section is where it can be posted for the public (after approval)

If you have a question pertaining to one of the threads located in the reference section please address it in the appropriate open forums.

OK!!! Anyone beside me having trouble/ very long time logging on?????? Also it takes a really long time to go from one topic to another??? May be my computer???? Been doing it off & on the last few days.

It's not your computer, Wayne. I've been having the same problems - and more - for the last few days.

Thanks Roger. Whew!!! I thought it was time for another new computer!!!!

No trouble at all. Very fast on both desktop PC and Chromebook.

Ok? Maybe it's just that an older person can't log on fast.

It took 2+ minutes to get back to active topics & 9 minutes to get back here after being told the web site is not available any longer twice

Just waited 3+ minutes to post this response .... and this is on my 4th attempt. If it's only Wayne and I who are having this problem, I suspect it's a case of Elder Abuse!

Just waited 3+ minutes to post this response .... and this is on my 4th attempt. If it's only Wayne and I who are having this problem, I suspect it's a case of Elder Abuse!

Just waited 3+ minutes to post this response .... and this is on my 4th attempt. If it's only Wayne and I who are having this problem, I suspect it's a case of Elder Abuse!

Just waited 3+ minutes to post this response .... and this is on my 4th attempt. If it's only Wayne and I who are having this problem, I suspect it's a case of Elder Abuse!

Apparently all of your attempts were successful.

Sigmaz wrote:The only section that requires moderation is the parts crossover section.

General conversation isn't allowed in this area as it obfuscates the thread intentions.

This parts crossover section was originally supposed to be used as a reference section only.
Suppose you have a part number that works or an application for a mod that section is where it can be posted for the public (after approval)

If you have a question pertaining to one of the threads located in the reference section please address it in the appropriate open forums.

But that's exactly what I did! I took the trouble to go through the Japanese parts book to provide the details of other bearings/seals/whatever was being discussed. That has now seemingly been dispersed into the ether.

Doesn't matter...... <sigh> Obviously, I have been earmarked personally as a "general discussion only" person, because it seems blatantly evident that nobody does actually read my post to "authorise" it - as the message misleadingly states. The message needs to be altered to read something to the tune of: "don't bother posting if we have decided that all your posts are unimportant/unhelpful to other members" (this is not the first time it has happened).

Trust me bud, nobody is out to get you Ian.

Maybe it was misread as a comment?
Actually I believe if I remember correctly it read as a question.

To be honest, There was quite a mess in the crank seal thread.

A few posts somehow made it in and set the tone for an open conversation.

I don't think it was intentionally discarded but should have been moved to the appropriate thread.

Please accept my apologies to you kind sir, your post must have been mixed up in the multiple selection for removal.

But hey, Thanks for contributing.....

No problemo - but I do think there should be some indicator somewhere on screen that draws attention to the fact that the thread is one of those type of non-conversational type affairs - I don't always look at the thread "provenance" when reading the active topics, in fact it's very rarely that I take heed of that bit.
Maybe something in red?

Cheers,

Ian

Geez Ian - overreact much? We only had that ONE meeting about you, I swear!

I agree the header in that section could be worded much more strongly to indicate that it is a "Reference Section Only"!

I'll tell you what, if you guys would like to get together and author a new rule heading for that section you are more than welcome to do so.
Once everybody is satisfied and everything has been hashed out I would be more than happy to post it up.

Is this part new? Seems clear enough to me.

NOTE: Conversational posts will not approved.
If you have comments or questions about a thread in this section please use the appropriate open forum section.
Your doing so will prevent this reference section from becoming cluttered with unrelated jibber jabber.

That certainly seems clear to me, Garm - but the whole point of contention is the fact that those "restricted" forum topics look no different whatsoever to any other non-restricted topic item - they all appear in the same "Active topics" listing and there is really no obvious difference once you start reading the content.

It needs to be indicated somewhere with a red flashing heading or similar.... whatever.

No over-reaction - I spent a bit of time getting those part numbers together from two different parts books, setting them out, and finally posting them so they appeared clearly for the reference of all interested members. I don't mind doing that - but to have it just discarded as soon as it's posted seems a dire waste of my time and energy!

Garm, I added that the same day we spoke about it last week.


Actually Ian,
Sometimes it takes a few days before the pending auth queue gets noticed.

So they weren't discarded immediately.


Again, you have my apologies. your post was inadvertently grouped with the other discarded messages.
The moderation tool isn't something I'm 100% versed with yet. I didn't realize it tagged all the unapproved messages until it became an issue and I thought about it.

But, Since I really do care about the info you posted, I downloaded a copy of a backup from the day before your post was accidentally removed from the DB.
I went into the 100+MB database backup and manually scoured it until I was able to locate and extract your post.

Mind you SQL backups are not easy to pick through manually, they aren't just some big ole text file..well, kind of....but they are not easily read top to bottom.

Database Backup File wrote:Re: Crankshaft Seals', 'You chaps have methinks omitted to mention part numbers..... the Japanese parts book (1968) shows \ncrank side seal (8067 25070 [i:1q568i9q]25x45x11[/i:1q568i9q]) as:\n"[b:1q568i9q][i:1q568i9q][NOK. TB-25,45,11][/i:1q568i9q][/b:1q568i9q]" \n\nand fan side (8067 42090 [i:1q568i9q]42x60x9[/i:1q568i9q]) as:\n"[b:1q568i9q][i:1q568i9q][NOK. TB-42·60·9][/i:1q568i9q][/b:1q568i9q]"\n\n(is that the correct ones you are referring to?)', 'b6c3eb41ac1c78e558b33eb261ebd6a9', 0, 'YA==', '1q568i9q', 1, 0, '', 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, '', 0),(45501, 5188, 24, 3399, 0, '106.68.27.164', 1426269843, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, '',>

Cleaned up and re-punctuated it appears to look like this:

Re: Crankshaft Seals',
'You chaps have methinks omitted to mention part numbers.....
the Japanese parts book (1968) shows crank side seal (8067 25070 25x45x11) as:"[NOK. TB-25,45,11]" and fan side (8067 42090 42x60x9) as:"[NOK. TB-42·60·9]"
(is that the correct ones you are referring to?)'


If this is the correct entry, Please feel free to copy and paste it back into the reference section and I'll be sure to approve it.

BTW, The download, search, and extraction of your data probably took longer than you took to look up the part numbers so after it's all said and done, You actually owe me a about 10 mins of your life.

^ haha, where's the "Like" button?

Wot's your address, Jon? I'll post you ten minutes of my life....

(but don't expect it to be very exciting)