Miscellaneous desk
< August 22	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 24 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

August 23[edit]

what was this 3 wheeled vehicle?[edit]

I just saw a three-wheeled vehicle go past me in cambridge massachusetts. It had two wheels in the front and one in the back, was electric and it had an almond shaped wind screen in front. Does anyone know what it might have been? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.125.207.188 (talk) 12:45, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A Myers Motors NmG (formerly called a Corbin Sparrow), perhaps? If not, try looking through Category:Three-wheeled motor vehicles. -- Finlay McWalter ☻ Talk 12:49, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Very likely an experimental vehicle built by someone at MIT. Marco polo (talk) 12:51, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Don't you need NHTSA certification to drive any vehicle on a public road in any US state? Experimental vehicles driving down a regular highway lane sounds illegal and unwise. Experimental vehicles normally run on racetracks or other private roads. Comet Tuttle (talk) 21:29, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the article Tricycle, it refers to 2 wheels in front as a "recumbent tadpole" design. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:52, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well, I couldn't find it in the category, so maybe it was an MIT design, although it looked like a professionally manufactured vehicle. Either way, looking through Category:Three-wheeled motor vehicles was one of the most enjoyable twenty minutes of my week so far. Damn there are some silly-looking cars out there.

The Can Am Spyder is popular these days- could have been that. I'm aware of no production electric version, though. Friday (talk) 18:56, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gilford Michigan Tuscola County[edit]

It states in Wikipedia that the above mentioned town was named after the Gilford Family. Can you tell me where this information was obtained. I am trying to research Giford and would appreciate that information. As early as 1849 there are land entries for the town of Gilford. Thank you. Ref: History of Tuscola County —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bettyboop8001 (talk • contribs) 14:53, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The reference for the information was given in the Gilford Township, Michigan article as ^ Romig, Walter (1986) [1973]. Michigan Place Names. Detroit, Michigan: Wayne State University Press. ISBN 0-8143-1838-X. --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:23, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And here is a link from Google Books. — jwillbur 20:32, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wooden Spoons in Pubs?[edit]

According to the BBC, one of the top ten jokes at the Edinburgh Fringe Fest was: "Wooden spoons are great. You can either use them to prepare food. Or, if you can't be bothered with that, just write a number on one and walk into a pub..." I'm from the US and don't know much about pub culture, so I assume the humor here lies in some special significance of wooden spoons with numbers on them -- could someone enlighten me? 96.246.59.38 (talk) 15:40, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They are often used to indicate the number for food orders taken at the bar - so, if your food order is no. 8, you take the no.8 spoon and hand it back when the food is delivered to the table. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:43, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's exactly what it is. Chevy monte carlo - alt 16:46, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wondered about that joke as well and I'm from the UK. I've never been in a bar and had to take a spoon for my food order. Is it restricted to particular areas of the UK or have I just not had enough bar meals? Mike 87.113.180.73 (talk) 21:01, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The latter. They're also used in some pubs as ornamental table numbers, and hence stay on the table rather than being issued as a token by the bar staff. Despite all of that, the joke's still rather weak. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:10, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This search brings up a lot of examples. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:39, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Including this image. ---Sluzzelin talk 21:41, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Remarkably, the woman wearing black seems to be holding a rare example of an invisible wooden spoon. --Dweller (talk) 10:15, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Confutation of Tyndale's Answer[edit]

I am looking for this work by Thomas More- is it available online anywhere? 149.169.162.134 (talk) 17:25, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is an excerpt of it on Google books HERE - but I can't find a complete version online. The most obvious place to look (Project Gutenberg - http://www.gutenberg.org) has a bunch of works by More - but not this one. SteveBaker (talk) 22:53, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, the Internet Archive - http://www.archive.org - is generally the most obvious place to look for downloadable books. They have all of PG's stuff as well as most/all of the PD google books, plus some other stuff. --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:37, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maximum depth of Lake Havasu[edit]

Can anyone find a reliable source as to the maximum depth of Lake Havasu? The current number on the article (over 3,000 feet) is unsourced and seems way too deep; I haven't been able to find anything else about it on other sites. AlexiusHoratius 18:49, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since it's the product of a dam on the Colorado River, it can't be any greater than the maximum pool impounded by the dam. That maximum height is 450 ft ASL, and the dam itself is mentioned as about 85 feet high (much of the dam is below the riverbed). I haven't found a place where it all comes together, but here's the Bureau of Reclamation site: [1]. Acroterion _(talk) 19:10, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, I found an 1883 (in other words, pre-Parker Dam) map of Arizona on Commons, and it mentions no lake of any kind at that location (since the dam is only a few hundred feet high, there would have had to have been a really deep natural lake there before). I think I'll just remove the figure for now, and let someone add a new one back in if a source can be found. AlexiusHoratius 19:32, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's the right action. In support, I note that Crater Lake is not that deep and its article says it's the deepest lake wholly within the US. --Anonymous, 19:40 UTC, August 23, 2010.

That bogus figure was posted by an IP last September 10th.[2] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:05, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah - I agree. The original text (pre-vandalism) said that the average depth is 35 feet - which is much more believable. SteveBaker (talk) 22:58, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Something wrong with my car brakes?[edit]

I just bought a new Toyota Yaris (50 miles) and I noticed that the brakes don't work as I expect them to. The brakes work as if there is reduced friction between the brake pads and the wheels. I have to press really hard to stop on red lights and I can't stop the car immediately (it keeps rolling for some distance). Also when the car is stopped I get tired from having to press down on the brakes to keep the car from moving. What type brake problems can a new car have that cause this problem. 76.84.122.32 (talk)UberYarisHaxor —Preceding undated comment added 23:50, 23 August 2010 (UTC).[reply]

The brakes may just need bedding in - see the end of this, for example, although your description sounds a little more extreme than this. There's much more discussion on the subject of bedding in brakes such as this--Tagishsimon (talk) 23:56, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well if you don't have enough fluid I imagine it could cause this. But don't ask random strangers on the internet- get that car back to the dealer and have them look at it. What you're describing sounds unsafe to me. Friday (talk) 23:57, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Take it to the mechanic. That said, every car "feels" different. Aaronite (talk) 01:33, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When you first start depressing the brake pedal does it seem soft and spongy? Then, do you find you have to press it further towards the floor than you have been previously used to in other cars? If so, then you have 'air' in the hydraulic system. The dealership will just have to bleed the bleedin' brakes for you. In a new car this is probably due to sloppy filling of the brake system with hydraulic fluid. Air is a lot more compressible than oil, so you loose hydraulic advantage.--Aspro (talk) 15:34, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I had the same problem with my new Suzuki SX4SZ4 and after allowing time for it to bed in I just had to take it back to the dealership who checked it out and reported no problems - until I challenged them to get it to hold fast on a steep incline on the parking brake only - when it persistently slipped backwards. Seems the problem emanates from this being the first edition of that model with front and rear disc brakes on which the rear parking brakes are less effective than the earlier drum brakes. That said, the dealership were very good and did eventually "roughen up" the discs on the rear since when I have had no problems until last week when the footbrake became very stiff and the parking brake became very loose and sloppy. Needless to say I took it back again only to learn that a "return spring" on one rear disc system had broken off and disappeared. The problem was solved to my satisfaction so as others above have advised, get the car back to the dealers and don't be fobbed off until you are happy. It is you after all who is held responsible in law for the safe operation of your car. And if you subsequently learn as I did that your car was manufactured in Bulgaria you have to ask yourself what importance the Bulgarians place on effective car brakes.92.30.160.37 (talk) 20:19, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously, for a car this new, a trip straight back to the dealership is the only sane answer. If you want to go armed with the facts, you can try "pumping" the brakes - pressing and releasing the pedal repeatedly - if that gets the brakes to work (albeit only for a while) - then it's certain that you have air in the brake lines - which is really dangerous and needs to be fixed. They should be able to do it while you wait. If bleeding them helps - but then they get worse again - then you probably have a fluid leak someplace. On an older car, I'd be telling you to replace the master cylinder - but this is a new car, so probably not. If pumping the brakes doesn't help - then there might be some kind of adjustment problem - however, it's hard to imagine how that would affect all four wheels and the usual symptom of this would be of the car pulling violently to one side when you applied the brakes as one wheel locked and the others didn't. Some cars to take a while for their brakes to "bed in" (on my MINI Cooper'S, they tell you in the owner's manual that it could take 100 miles for that to happen and that you should be careful to leave plenty of stopping distance and anticipate braking until that's done) - but the effect you're describing sounds much more dramatic than that. I suppose there are other possibilities, like maybe the wheel speed sensors are screwed up in some particularly creative manner and the ABS is kicking in inappropriately - but again, that's unlikely to affect all four wheels at once. I would bet on air in the brake lines...which should be a very quick fix. SteveBaker (talk) 05:44, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Low levels of 1) brake fluid or 2) engine oil must be corrected before driving further because of their serious consequences for 1) safety and 2) engine damage. Even a non mechanically inclined car owner needs to check these regularly. See the owner's manual. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 14:37, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]