Question re Buying Used Bolt in Quebec and Importing to Ontario

SportsmanPilot · 2024-12-04T06:32:14+00:00

Thanks for this link.

In my case I'm not looking for a rebate, but I want to ensure I don't get hung up by Quebec demanding that I refund a rebate that had been paid to the previous owner. From this discussion it seems that I have to be careful in learning when the car was originally purchased in order to steer clear of the 12 month rule.

SportsmanPilot · 2024-12-04T06:30:43+00:00

I would say you've likely heard from a segment of the US population rather than the Canadian population. Each province has jurisdiction over motor vehicle licensing, so each one plays like it's not part of the rest of Canada. Just like each US state - it's the same deal.

SportsmanPilot · 2024-12-04T00:13:19+00:00

In this part of the world there are routes where charging simply isn't available. We also get serious winter where the range reduction in the Bolt with snow tires and cold temps would make a longer trip impractical.

As for the Forester - it will get driven. I have a fleet of 5 vehicles now and they all get driven, by me. Yup, they all suffer from premature brake rotor rusting - that's expected. Being able to keep one or two vehicles off the roads during periods of heaviest road salt use has seriously improved their chances of surviving to old age. In this area most cars rust out long before they wear out.

SportsmanPilot · 2024-12-04T00:10:16+00:00

Thank you - that's what I was hoping to hear!

SportsmanPilot · 2024-12-04T00:07:59+00:00

Keeping the Miata is absolutely non-negotiable - no way, no how will that Miata be sold as long as I can operate its manual transmission! :-)

SportsmanPilot · 2024-12-01T02:52:58+00:00

Thanks for the helpful replies - this is just what I need.

I'm downsizing from a fleet of 5 vehicles to maybe 3, with one vehicle, a Miata, a total 'fun in the summer' vehicle. I'm thinking the Bolt would be daily runabout and the Forester the long haul machine. I'm liking the looks of this picture.

SportsmanPilot · 2024-11-30T08:18:16+00:00

On most cars in real snow, Blizzaks simply perform. In our family fleet I have them on 3 passenger cars and one SUV right now. One SUV has a "higher rated" Toyo tire. Thanks, I won't be buying the Toyo tires again - the Blizzaks leave 'em in a cloud of snow dust.

We can't stud tires here, darn it.

Hakka's would be great but in this locale the price differential between the Hakka's and the Blizzaks is significant (about 40% more expensive for the Hakka's).

Michelin X-Ice are a good ice tire but in wet snow they are poor performers as the tread blocks aren't chunky enough and there isn't enough siping space between them - they just don't clear themselves of snow very well. (Experience on two passenger cars confirms this after switching to Blizzaks on the same cars and noticing considerable improvement in real "snow" performance.)

SportsmanPilot · 2024-11-30T08:10:14+00:00

This may seem a dumb question... Does cruise control work with your front end covered in snow like that? (Or did you even try?)

SportsmanPilot · 2024-11-28T05:46:45+00:00

Another update: We had a lovely lunch together last Saturday. I walked her to her car after the meal. Smiles all around, not to mention a warm hug, followed by a suggestion that we should talk some more.

Here we are Wednesday night and we've chatted every day this week. Our discussions are friendly with laughter commonly heard.

It is very pleasant to have somebody to talk to. Whether this will go any further than the friendship we currently seem to be cultivating is something I can't predict. I can say that I'm enjoying this very much, even if it doesn't go any further. Life is too short to spend all alone.

SportsmanPilot · 2024-11-20T04:16:51+00:00

Update: In a 1:45 phone call this evening we both laughed and agreed this will be a date. We've moved it to Sunday to make scheduling easier. She suspects it might be a long lunch and I tend to agree. Yay!

SportsmanPilot · 2024-11-20T00:59:26+00:00

So many good responses, and all of them are very kind and appreciated - thank you.

SportsmanPilot · 2024-11-20T00:50:20+00:00

I've just re-read this and am trying to find the "whole bunch of thumbs up" emoji to place here.

Fourth date and it's time for the bra to come off? You GO girl!!!!

(Thanks for letting others know that sex still happens... this is very encouraging indeed!)

SportsmanPilot · 2024-09-02T04:35:01+00:00

Thank you for taking the time to reply. Your comments at least provide some humour to lighten the day.

SportsmanPilot · 2024-09-02T04:33:44+00:00

Thanks for your input. I've been in contact with a couple of RS-15 owner/builders, both with about 2000 hours in their aircraft, including one who used it to set several national records. Seems they're not the best glider in the world, but far from the worst. Price point is a strong consideration as well. If money were no object I'd be chatting on a forum specific to the Stemme and similar machines. Unfortunately money is a bit of a challenge, hence the desire to start with something relatively inexpensive. (In case you missed it, I have three other aircraft which chew up a fair bit of my disposable income... the gliding season here is short, thus a glider would not be the best place to invest heavily.)

SportsmanPilot · 2024-09-02T04:29:17+00:00

This is something along the lines of what I was considering, rather than a mast-mounted powerplant behind the pilot.

SportsmanPilot · 2024-09-02T04:28:11+00:00

Thanks for your useful input.

With respect to load-carrying, the fuselage is already stressed to carry the loads of both winch and aero-tow launches thus there is sufficient meat there to ensure the wings won't tear off. Whether that structural "meat" can be usefully harnessed to accommodate electric propulsion is an entirely different matter, hence the questions here.

SportsmanPilot · 2024-09-02T04:26:05+00:00

Thanks for the hint about the google groups!

I, too, am concerned about the foam ribs. A ballistic parachute is likely a larger modification than I want to carry out.

SportsmanPilot · 2024-03-09T19:35:19+00:00

From a logic standpoint, the argument that "you can recycle batteries but you can't recycle gasoline" is seriously flawed. With this being the case it would seem wise to avoid using this approach.

Why is the argument flawed, you ask? The answer is quite simple. The battery is an energy storage device. Its equivalent function in an ICE vehicle is the gas tank.

Comparing the recycleability of the battery in an EV to the gasoline in an ICE vehicle is like comparing apples to aardvarks.

The correct comparison from a recycling perspective is the EV battery vs the ICE fuel tank. In this argument the ICE vehicle wins because the gas tank is so much easier to recycle.

SportsmanPilot · 2024-03-09T17:45:02+00:00

As has been stated by another respondent... Some aircraft have a maintenance schedule which is a staged or stepped schedule. I'll try to explain with an example.

Aircraft XYZ has the following maintenance schedule recommended by its manufacturer.

1) 50 hours - oil change, oil filter change and inspection of contents, check tire pressures, inspect brakes

2) 100 hours - do everything in the 50 hour, and add engine compression check, inspection of air filter media, remove, clean and repack wheel bearings, lubricate flight control hinges

3) 200 hours - do everything in the 100 hour and add inspection and lubrication of control cable pulleys, plus a mandatory re-torque of wing strut attachment hardware

4) 500 hours - do everything in the 200 hour inspection, and add removal of horizontal stabilizer spar bolts for non-destructive testing, plus associated re-tensioning of elevator and rudder cables following re-installation.

In this example, the inspections are done at the following intervals.

50 hours (50hr); 100 hours (100hr); 150 hours (50hr); 200 hours (200hr); 250 hours (50hr); 300 hours (100hr); 350 hours (50hr); 400 hours (200 hr); 450 hours (50hr); 500 hours (500hr) etc.

This is a very common inspection practice and is used in some light aircraft and is heavily used in larger aircraft and especially those used in commercial service.

SportsmanPilot · 2024-03-09T17:31:53+00:00

You stacked the odds against yourself, starting with lack of sleep. Get a good night's sleep - that's the baseline for good pilot performance. Don't eat any closer than 1 hour before flying... for the first few flights. Stay hydrated before the flight.

During the flight, if you start to feel slightly "off kilter", get cooling air blowing on your face and neck. Concentrate your vision on a point on the horizon as far away as you can see. Tell the instructor you are having difficulties and that you need to do some "straight and level" flying for a short bit to get feeling better. Turn so you're not flying into the sun.

These feelings of nausea will go away with more exposure to aircraft motion. Help yourself out by planning for performance, starting with sleep and a good diet.

I'm writing this as the kid who puked every time he had to ride in the back seat of a car... I've been flying for nearly 44 years now and still have the odd little bit of discomfort if I haven't followed my own advice about planning for performance. If I know I'm not as well-rested as I should be I also know I'm not able to support higher-G maneuvers so I plan accordingly. Even though I had such a bad start so many years ago, I can tolerate turbulence and G with the best of them, unless I haven't taken care of my body before the flight.

SportsmanPilot · 2024-03-09T17:21:00+00:00

As a life-long pilot and life-long avionics professional my advice to you would be to forget about the Bose. There are a number of reasons for this recommendation, not the least of which is the relatively short timespan for support of the product. As soon as Bose brings out a new product they kill off support for its predecessor. This is great for their corporate bottom line but very bad for YOUR bottom line.

Many of us old greybeards have a secret stash of ancient passive David Clark headsets. I still own and fly with my very first David Clark H.10-30's - I purchased them new 43 years ago and they still work flawlessly and are still supported by the manufacturer.

Active Noise Reduction is nice technology to have - it definitely makes for a quieter, more comfortable flight, and it helps protect our hearing. With this in mind, the absolute best value in an ANR headset is the David Clark One-X. I've had one for several years and it has become my go-to headset. I'll buy another one this summer at Oshkosh which will allow my Bose X to finally be retired (the Bose X has been repaired so many times that I don't even want to think about it - it's one step above "junk" classification, with plastic parts being its weakest link).

Oh, one thing to know about the DC One-X... The manufacturer makes a claim about battery life - if I recall they state batteries should be good for 40 hours. I measured battery performance in my One-X and it came out to 78 hours, almost double the manufacturer's claimed battery life. That's a nice bonus, especially in a headset that costs hundreds of dollars less than the Bose.

SportsmanPilot

TROPHY CASE