Electric die grinder.What item have you altered to improve it, and in what way did you modify it ?
Also, have you modified an item so that it can be used for a different purpose to the manufactured intention?
I didn't remove a single thing.If want to maintain the guarantee for use, keep the old parts so you can reassemble it as factory touch up any parts that look used, screw heads etc.
I think he boasted "over 5000" modifications . I can remember saying how wrong was it to start with if it needed that many mods.I wonder how many modifications were made by Dyson after the official prototype vacs. I suppose the modifications would be at most of their release of new models.
I would have fitted an Albrecht style chuck on it.When I ended up with a second identical cordless drill by accident, I fitted the new one with a keyed chuck because I had wondered "what if" for years.
View attachment 475674
Been in use a few months now, and I can say unequivocally that it is an improvement over keyless chucks for metalworking use.
I really like it and would definitely do it again if I update my drills or switch battery system.
I explicitly wanted keyed, as I find they outperform even the best keyless chucks (mine are mostly Röhm) for sheer gripping power.I would have fitted an Albrecht style chuck on it.
Something like a Metabo futuro top wich comes with 1/2" 20 threads
Sorry for being a bit picture heavy but a year or so ago I bought a new rear subframe for Mrs RWD's Mini and tired of trying to get a jack underneath it at the back, I decided to modify the subframe to take a trolley jack centrally.
The pics show fairly clearly what I did but suffice to say, it involved closing in the rear cross beam and adding a strengthener to the middle of it.
View attachment 475575
View attachment 475576
View attachment 475577
View attachment 475578
View attachment 475580
View attachment 475581
I've also now had it fully galvanised and once it fails an MoT (fairly soon I expect!) it'll get fitted.
View attachment 475582
View attachment 475583
View attachment 475584
I doubt any mot tester would bother about the modification to the sub-frame, all their interested in is it rusty or has the strength been compromised enough to make dangerous before the next mot.The irony is that by fitting that subframe you might actually fail an mot! You are not supposed to modify suspension components, though I can understand why after working on a mini.
Not sure a subframe is a suspension component. It carries the suspension but doesn't have any input in it's operation.The irony is that by fitting that subframe you might actually fail an mot! You are not supposed to modify suspension components, though I can understand why after working on a mini.
I know for sure that you are not supposed to weld the front subframe on a pug 205 but if you blend the patch in so it is invisible or make the welds look original, that's another matter....Not sure a subframe is a suspension component. It carries the suspension but doesn't have any input in it's operation.
I get what you're saying, but unlikely.The irony is that by fitting that subframe you might actually fail an mot! You are not supposed to modify suspension components, though I can understand why after working on a mini.
Or you can just keep your opinions to yourselves.I know for sure that you are not supposed to weld the front subframe on a pug 205 but if you blend the patch in so it is invisible or make the welds look original, that's another matter....
That extra bit on the mini subframe is obviously not original and while it strengthens it up it will still be a 'modification'.
Perhaps one of our tame mot testers can comment?
@doubleboost @premmington