Miscellaneous desk
< May 4	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 6 >

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.

May 5

the 5 string fiddle

Who first invented it and where?99.20.93.204 (talk) 05:02, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Does the vielle count? PhGustaf (talk) 05:06, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kilgore Trout

I was just reading about Kurt Vonnegut and his character Kilgore Trout. It says in the article that the name derives from Theodore Sturgeon and the name.... was a transparent reference to the older writer (substituting "Kilgore" for "Theodore" and "Trout" for "Sturgeon").... I understand the fish reference, but what's the Kilgore/Theodore link?91.111.86.2 (talk) 06:59, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Probably just that they sound similar. Not too much rhymes with Theodore... "evermore" ... 218.25.32.210 (talk) 09:06, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A Good Night's Sleep

I have been feeling miserable for the past few days, with a near constant cough and runny nose. However, I seem to be able to sleep soundly at night. I don't remember waking up to cough or blow my nose at all. Given the fact that I am just as sick at night as I am during the day, how is this possible? Hemoroid Agastordoff (talk) 08:02, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We've previously covered this topic, here: Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Science/2009_September_21#Why_don.27t_I_sneeze_when_I.27m_asleep.3F. StuRat (talk) 08:28, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Humanist movement

I was reading the article on Diane de Poitier yesterday where it stated that she was educated in the humanist movement, however when searching for our article on this movement later, i came across the page that I have linked to above. This is obviously not the correct article as the article mentioned as an educational model in the 15th centurey as it states it is a movement started in the 60's. I would be very curious to read the article on the medival education. Please can some one help me find the article and also fix the redirect or create a disambigous page for the two. Further more, the above article is a red link but if you type it into the search box it will take you to the humanist movement article. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.172.58.82 (talk) 09:54, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You want Humanism and specifically for de Poitier Renaissance humanism which isn't so much simply an educational method, more the world view that began to flourish in that era. meltBanana 10:45, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)I'd just changed the link in Diane de Poitiers to Renaissance humanism. The sentence was added in this edit by an IP that had edited no other articles. It's not sourced and still feel unsatisfactory, so another editor with better knowledge might find it preferable to remove it altogether. By the way, Wikipedia links should be identical to the target article's title in terms of spelling, capitals and punctuation. If you capitalise Humanist Movement thus, the link goes blue. Ka renjc 10:50, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Shorefields Holidays

is any part of shorefields holidays site at st leonards nr ringwood a designated s o s i site —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.253.218.10 (talk) 13:59, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What is an s o s i site?91.111.86.2 (talk) 14:38, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think he means S. S. S. I. Site of Special Scientific Interest--Aspro (talk) 14:58, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Usually shortened to SSSI. --TammyMoet (talk) 15:00, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, be that as it may; back to the question. There are SSSI's all over the place. The nearest one to the afore said establishment is just under a mile to the south. Here is some info on it:Highcliffe to Milford It is quite large as you can see on google: [1]. List of Sites of Special Scientific Interest in Hampshire does not yet have an article about it, so do please, think about helping us to write one. Can you obtain some useful information it. Photos would be very welcome too. Is this info what you where after?--Aspro (talk) 15:36, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

MEASUREMENT UNIT - THACHU MUZHAM

Can anybody tell how many feet is equal to one Thachu Muzham (an unit mentioned in old registration documents of land in India)

      1 Thachu Muzham =  2.75 feet -   Chandra Mohan.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by POORNA65 (talk • contribs) 14:58, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

According to Tamil units of measurement 1 muzham= 46.6666 centimetre [= 1.53 ft]. I don't know what Thachu means though.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:06, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

These folks suggest that it may have something to do with the scale used in a drawing. The highly esteemed CBW presents the Talk Page! 16:37, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thachu is carpentry in Tamil and Malayalam. A carpenter is called a thachan. Thachusastram is the "science" of carpentry. A muzham is the length of the part of a hand from elbow upto palm. From the shoulder to palm it is gajam. the length from the tip of the thumb to the tip of the pointing finger when stretched is a chaan. A muzham is two chaans. A chaan is said to be nine inches. By that reckoning a muzham would be 18 inches. But I am not sure if that is a hard and fast idea of a muzham. If you buy jasmine garland in Tamil Nadu you would know that it is measured in muzham. A carpenter's scale was scalled a muzhamkol (kol means a stick or scale). Traditionally muzham is a very loose idea of measurement as the muzham would be different for each person according to his physique. 117.204.86.44 (talk) 19:39, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds a lot like a Cubit, typically also 18 inches and defined the same way. Edison (talk) 19:53, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is no standard length for a cubit - it's changed throughout the world and over time. The guys who built Olympias (a fully functional replica of an ancient greek warship) got 'the wrong cubit' - resulting in a vessel that is about 20% too small - and very difficult to row properly! SteveBaker (talk) 02:37, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, 18 inches o half a yard was the version I learned in school, based on the fingertip to elbow distance, which admittedly differs between people. My "Webster's Collegiate Dictionary" says "usually equal to about 18 inches." Edison (talk) 16:48, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Name of lawsuit

If Wikipedia is going to have an article about this lawsuit, what should the title of the article be? -- Wavelength (talk) 15:19, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Skiping the d/b/a parts in the naming would result in :

Jerry Forte v. Cameron International Corporation

which would seem to be a perfectly acceptable title for such a suit. Should it be notable under standard Wikipedia practice. --Jayron32 15:35, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The name of the lawsuit mentions eight different defendants, of which Cameron International Corporation is mentioned first. Is it appropriate to single out that defendant for the title of a Wikipedia article? Would "Jerry Forte v. Cameron International Corporation, et al." be acceptable?

-- Wavelength (talk) 16:06, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly. Actually, the ONLY way this lawsuit would be worthy of a Wikipedia article is if the lawsuit meets WP:N requirements; by definition that means that the lawsuit is discussed extensively in reliable sources. So, what do OTHER sources call the lawsuit? Per WP:UCN, the title of the article should match the predominant name of the subject. --Jayron32 16:10, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This page calls it "Forte v. Cameron International Corporation et al", but I have not been able to find extensive coverage of the lawsuit. Perhaps I should await ripeness for a Wikipedia article [pun]. -- Wavelength (talk) 16:55, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Road Marker

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:20030614_08_Orpington_High_Street.jpg

In my search for why pelican crossing is named after a bird (it isn't), I found this picture of a road, presumably in the U.K. Why are there white zig-zags on the road?

Thanks, The Reader who Writes (talk) 16:27, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To warn traffic that the crossing is ahead and to show the no parking area. The highly esteemed CBW presents the Talk Page! 16:34, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The zig-zag applies to pedestrian crossings in general. From the Highway code: 191 "You MUST NOT park on a crossing or in the area covered by the zig-zag lines. You MUST NOT overtake the moving vehicle nearest the crossing or the vehicle nearest the crossing which has stopped to give way to pedestrians."[2].--Aspro (talk) 16:40, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The name pelican crossing shares the bird theme with puffin crossing and toucan crossing, and, more generally, the animal theme with panda crossing and Pegasus crossing and zebra crossing; there is also HAWK beacon. -- Wavelength (talk) 17:12, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

From many years ago (when I was at primary school and these things were introduced) I remember the name "Pelican" being derived from PEdestrian LIght CONtrolled crossing. (OK so I know there's an A in Pelican but still...) --TammyMoet (talk) 17:53, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article explains exactly that, Tammy. Dismas|^(talk) 20:41, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nice to know my memory's not gone yet, although my eyesight may be! --TammyMoet (talk) 09:31, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pinky in the air

Here's an odd question. I was browsing through Wikipedia's database on hand gestures and behaviors, hoping to find a reference to a particular behavior where one extends the pinky straight upward from their hand while carrying and drinking a beverage (it was referred to once in a Robin Williams movie which I cannot recall at this time). This is supposedly something that upper-class people do, and it's something that I find myself inexplicably doing from time-to-time. What is this called?--WaltCip (talk) 19:52, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I do this involuntarily as well, and I often see it in sitcoms and such. I remember hearing somewhere that it is the exact opposite of what upper-class people do. Rimush (talk) 20:35, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Was the film possibly Mrs. Doubtfire? Dismas|^(talk) 20:38, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard many possible explanations. The habit of holding items with just three fingers is one. [3]. However, it was the upper-classes that looked down their noses at any member of the lesser classes for mindlessly copying their drinking style. A 'practical' reason for sticking out the little finger can be appreciated in these two images (you will need to click on them and look at the larger version). --Aspro (talk) 23:12, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are indeed many explanations - only one of which can be true! One that I've heard is that prostitutes in France would hold their teacups in that manner in order to leave their pinky finger free to beckon to potential customers. Is this the true reason? I kinda doubt it - it's exactly the kind of story someone might have dreamed up to make rich people look stupid! But who knows? One of these odd ways of holding things IS verifiable. The habit of people to hold white wine and champaign glasses by the stem with just one or two fingers and thumb - while holding red wine and spirit glasses with the bowl cupped in the palm - is for the good reason to avoid heat from the hand warming up the chilled white wine - while deliberately TRYING to warm up the red wine. Extreme wine snobs will hold white wine glasses with a couple of fingers on the extreme outside edge of the foot of the glass to yet further reduce the horrifying risk of a few ergs of heat leaking from the hands into the liquid! SteveBaker (talk) 01:13, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly overthinking this. :) If you've got a cup with a small handle, the little finger has to go someplace. You could curl it the same way as the others, but then it might touch the hot cup. So holding it away is kind of a natural thing to do. If you've got a larger container, like a stein or a tall coffee container, you can grip the handle with all your fingers. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:20, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That could be the case, but I do the pinky finger routine with every beverage, from frappuccinos to soda bottles to lemonade, so I don't think it's temperature-specific. It could probably be a habit I've built related to handling hot beverages, but I'm not that much of a heated coffee fanatic. Also, seeing as how there are so many differing viewpoints about why certain people grip their cups certain ways, I'm not surprised to see that there's no article about it.--WaltCip (talk) 03:37, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It could also just be that it's a more natural position to hold it out straight when you're not using it to grip something. Next time, try consciously to include the little finger in the grip, and see if it feels natural or not. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:49, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No one has mentioned the 'practical' reason for sticking out the little finger. The images above show normal sized cups but they are both wearing gloves. Repeated stains from beverage are difficult to remove. People who thought of themselves as being of a superior class would (out of snobbery) ridicule those who mindlessly did this, as though they too were wearing gloves. It could be that this became a bone of contention due to reverse snobbery. This seems makes more sense than the other etiquette explanations. Another point is: some people find the sensation of having a wet (and sticky) little finger unpleasant. Long after individuals have forgotten why they keep their finger out of the drip and saucer area, they still do it out of habit, just as the non-conscious mind remembers how to ride a bike. Even today, actresses playing period dramas, could well be harangued by continuity to do this (although it would be far safer not to have any liquid in the cup at all). I've also noticed that people in labs often display this habit when holding anything containing liquids (which could often be corrosive). When handling laboratory glassware etc., it appears to give one greater dexterity which is missing if one handles things like a neanderthal. After a time, it would not seem natural not to hold things this way. --Aspro (talk) 09:26, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hyacinth_Bucket does this. Kittybrewster ☎ 14:28, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, no-one with any class at all has a "pinky". We have little fingers. DuncanHill (talk) 14:34, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I do so much agree with you. It is such a common and vulgar word which has no place here on an encyclopædia ;-) Aspro (talk) 15:41, 6 May 2010 (UTC) [reply]

Of course the "pinky hold" is commonly used as a reference to gayness in commedies. Someone above mentioned Mrs. Doubtfire, where cross-dressing is an important component of the story. [4] The source here quotes a song from Hello Dolly!. --Kvasir (talk) 15:20, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The practical reason is if one is being extremely polite, one cushions/guides the bottom of the teacup upon the saucer with the little finger when first setting it down, thus preventing any unpleasant clinking or scraping of porcelain. The extension of the finger during the drink motion leaves that finger at the ready for this, in a rather "Look how polite I'M being!" sort of way. In fiction it's usually a sign that a character is either polite in an annoying and showy way, or a sign of a boorish classless character trying to be on their best behaviour. So there's your answer. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 21:19, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Metric or imperial for Wikipedia?

Which is preferred in Wikipedia? and if both are preferred what should go first in order for conformity? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Si Co15 (talk • contribs) 19:57, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Units of measurement explains, at some length. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 20:00, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Si Co15 (talk • contribs) 20:03, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think the general idea is:

For articles about the United States, use US customary units first, metric units second for articles about commonplace topics. For articles about scientific topics, use metric only.
For articles about the United Kingdom, use Imperial units first, metric units second for articles about commonplace topics that have existed for at least half a century. For newer commonplace topics, use metric units or Imperial units in whichever order you feel best. For scientific topics, use metric only.
For articles about any country whose native language is not English, use metric only.

JIP | Talk 22:04, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Non-US or UK articles should still use US/Imperial units, only after metric. (In other words, not "metric only", as the third point says). AlexiusHoratius 22:08, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Does this mean, that an article whose topic is limited to some continental European or Scandinavian country, which has never used either the US customary or the Imperial system, has to provide conversions for either or both systems, just because this is the English language (not the American or the British) Wikipedia? JIP | Talk 22:10, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Basically, yes. According to the MOS anyway. Although you'll often see non-US articles using only metrics, technically they should use both (but metric first). The only area I know of that is metric-only are space-related articles. AlexiusHoratius 22:19, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some other purely science-related articles are also metric-only, I think. But for things like lakes or cities, one should use conversions, regardless of the location. AlexiusHoratius 22:32, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

While the landmark might be in Europe, it's still somewhat likely the reader will be in the U.S., so it's helpful to provide U.S. measurement equivalents to make the article easier to understand for those readers and save them the hassle of doing conversions. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:07, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. An obvious example that comes to mind is mountains. Informing the American reader that Everest is 8,000+ meters is not overly helpful. We would have to divide the figure by .3048 to come up with feet. Luckily, there are conversion functions in wikipedia. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:15, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For science (and most other) articles, "metric" isn't enough - you shouldn't (for example) talk about volumes in cubic decimeters or distances in decameters (both of which are perfectly acceptable "metric" measurements). We're expected to use the International System of Units - which is (essentially) a more constrained subset of 'metric'. So we use 'liters' for volumes and the preferred nano/micro/milli/kilo/mega/giga prefixes rather than centi/deci/deca/hecto. SteveBaker (talk) 00:55, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Slavish adherence to SI is neither required nor desirable. For example, in articles on fields (such as electrical engineering) where most practitioners say micron rather than micrometre, you should say micron. --Trovatore (talk) 01:36, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One correction: it's not correct that powers-of-1000 prefixes are "preferred" in SI. This is a still more restrictive idea that one sometimes encounters from British sources, and I suspect it reflects a British national standard still more restrictive than SI. --Anonymous, 04:26 UTC, May 6, 2010.

I seem to remember that the UK Metrication Board (which has since passed away) recommended mm rather than cm for use in engineering to avoid confusion with inches. For example, a specification for a part 30 cm long could conceivably be 30 inches, but 300 mm couldn't be confused with 300 inches. I have had a quick Google but haven't found anything yet. Alansplodge (talk) 16:37, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Car muffler

Would a soccer ball stuck under a car damage the muffler? The soccer ball in question is not pumped very full. --Homework2 ^{pass a note}sign! 20:27, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As they say, anything is possible. The air in the ball, however inflated it is, would have to be compressed when it got stuck under the car. If the car were to move and force the ball to compress even more, then it's possible that the strength of the ball outdid the strength of the muffler. It would be even easier for damage to occur if the muffler were rusty or if the ball were stuck in the center of the muffler where the cylindrical curve and thin sheet metal were more easily bent. Dismas|^(talk) 20:37, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some mufflers, exhaust pipes or catalytic converters could be hot enough to ignite the ball. If the muffler/pipes are rusty, a hit by a soccer ball could break something. Edison (talk) 22:46, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's unlikely it would damage the muffler unless it's on its last legs anyway. A lot depends on the car. My modern MINI has everything pretty much buttoned up under there - but on my 1963 Mini, there are brake lines, a brake cable, a fuel line and many wires clipped up to the underside of the car. All sorts of mischief is possible under those circumstances. But I'd expect there to be very little risk with a modern car. SteveBaker (talk) 00:44, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The car is like a '08/'07 four door Infiniti I believe...and the soccer ball is underneath the bar thingy between the two front wheels...Homework2 ^{pass a note}sign! 01:22, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Then I wouldn't worry about it. If you can push it out sideways using a broom handle or something - that would probably be better than driving over it. I suppose if it's really well stuck under there and you're really worried about driving over it - then you could jack up whichever corner of the car is nearest to the ball and it should just roll out...but I honestly wouldn't worry. You have a modern car with a lot of ground-clearance (well, compared to my car anyway!) and the 'bar thingy' is a chunky bit of metal without sensitive stuff around it. SteveBaker (talk) 02:31, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have you ever watched Dad's Army? In one of the earlier episodes they improvised weapons. One was a kitchen knife tied to the end of a broom handle. Make yourself one of these, and use it to puncture the football. Football deflates, stops fouling the underside of your car, and Bob's your uncle. DuncanHill (talk) 13:31, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A harpoon should work. Or if it is accessible, it could be deflated to allow nondestructive removal. Edison (talk) 16:43, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

holistic massage

how could a massage be adapted for a person with sensory/motor disorder?

 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.0.43.16 (talk) 21:43, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We aren't allowed to give medical advice here. If you don't know what you're doing, talk to an expert first. SteveBaker (talk) 00:39, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As an holistic therapist, I'd say this isn't a request for medical advice, but it does sound like a request for help with homework! If you have a client with this disorder or range of disorders, then come back and I'll try and help you. If you are looking for help for homework, first let us know your thoughts on the question, then we'll see where we can help. --TammyMoet (talk) 09:25, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Real "your account has been limited" warnings?

All of you have, of course, received fake "your account has been limited" warnings from eBay, PayPal, and other services you might or might not have ever used, trying to trick you to give them your credit card information to steal.

But has anyone ever received a real warning from such a service? I mean, the service itself honestly sending a warning, to try to protect both its own business and the customer, not to illegally steal money? Do such warnings exist? If so, then do they look anything remotely close to the fake warnings? JIP | Talk 21:54, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Generally not. None of these business would ever send you a request for your credit card number, there is simply no reason to. If your credit card to which your pay-pal account is tied is in good standing, then pay-pal has no reason to limit your account. If there is a problem with the credit card itself, then the credit card company is the one who will contact you, usually through snail-mail or phone call; in fact such notices are usually included in the same envelope as your bill to reduce the likelyhood of fraud. --Jayron32 22:38, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I have received such warnings which were legitimate, such as large purchases on a credit card in a part of the world other than my usual residence. Major credit card companies and banks in the U.S. will on occasion call a person with a computerized message that some security operation within the organization needs to speak to the account holder urgently. On pressing the number indicated, a live person comes on the line and request the account number and possibly other identifying information. I have objected strongly in these cases that such interaction is a gross security breach, since they could be scammers, but the bank/credit card employee on the other end of the line never understands what I am complaining about. I then call the organization's number and get connected to a (different) person who tells me what the concern is. It is not always a scam, just stupidity that they use a contact method similar to that used by scammers. Edison (talk) 22:44, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The trick is to ignore any web sites, links, phone numbers or email addresses in the communication. If you think it might be genuine, find a recent bill and phone the number there - or type in the 'obvious' email address for the company you want to talk to. Both of those approaches mean that you know who you're talking to and the worst thing that can happen is that you wasted 10 minutes only to find out that your account wasn't terminated after all. SteveBaker (talk) 00:38, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is it safe to patch runflat tires?

I heard from someone you shouldn't patch runflat tires, but I am looking for some used runflat tires on ebay and a lot of them are patched. Does anyone know? Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.91.30.156 (talk) 23:07, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If your car already has RFT's then you should look in the maintenance manual for this information. See also:[5]. Personally, I would not bother! --Aspro (talk) 23:24, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The answer is very tricky.

There are places where you can get a puncture - where it can safely, and easily be patched...no problems.
There are other places where (with the right equipment and a careful technical inspection) they can also be patched.
There are yet other places where it is not just impossible - but downright dangerous to patch them.
Runflats are only good for driving about 50 miles after they go flat. Why only 50? Well, the specially reinforced sidewalls are damaged by doing that. Hence, if someone got a flat, drove for 49 miles, then got them correctly patched, then the next time YOU get a flat - you're good to drive about a mile before they crap out on you. The worst part of that is that you don't know how many miles you have left! On a good, new runflat, you can drive on them at 50mph - so long as you keep an eye on the odometer and stop before they die on you. But if you buy one of these tyres you have absolutely no clue!
Even when the tyre could be safely and cheaply patched, many places (like my local car dealership) have decided not to do the work for liability reasons!

So I've gotta say - I wouldn't buy a used runflat unless I could be 100% certain that it either had never had a puncture - or if it had - that you knew the precise circumstances.

Actually, I wouldn't buy a used OR a new runflat. I loathe and detest runflats - they are horrible. The ride is hard, the cornering is crap, your braking distance is worse (especially in the dry) and they wear out faster. Then when you do get a simple nail-in-the-tyre flat, there is about a 50/50 chance that you're going to have to buy a new tyre because the odds are good that it can't be patched. Since runflats cost two or three times more than regular tyres (at least that's true for my MINI Cooper'S) - an unpatchable hole becomes a horribly expensive deal. I don't like to drive on mismatched tyres - so if my tyres are moderately worn and I have to replace one - I usually have to replace two.

I ask myself this: How many times have I had a flat? The answer is three - in my entire life (I'm 54 years old). In two of those cases, the leak was slow and because I carry one of those tiny 12volt air pumps, I was able to drive home at speed without problems - without runflats. So we're down to one time in nearly 40 years when runflats would have done me any good...and guess what? I ACTUALLY HAD RUNFLATS!! The problem was a total blow-out, so patching it was out of the question. So I happily drove (carefully) to the nearest tyre outlet - plonked my wallet on the table and said "Two of your finest runflat tyres please!" and they said..."Sorry - we have no call for those around here - but we can order them for you and they'll be here tomorrow...or our other branch (30 miles away) has them."...so I ended up needing a 30 mile tow ANYWAY!

My MINI doesn't have a spare tyre (not even a 'skinny spare') - so runflats are standard equipment. But you have to ask yourself - what thing kills your car more than anything else on the road? Is a spare tyre really the smart thing to carry? Since I've been driving, I've had three radiator hoses blow and at least three belts. So it's clearly more cost-effective for me to carry a spare radiator hose and a spare belt - and they weigh less than a spare tyre - so I'm getting better gas milage because of it.

So - my advice, buy a can of "fix a flat" and a mini-airpump and buy a set of nice, sticky brand-new regular tyres. They'll last twice as long and cost a third as much - and that (for my car at least) represents a $1600 saving over runflats. You can pay for a lot of AAA membership for $1600!!

Even if you only need one runflat - it's cheaper in the long run to buy four regular tyres because with twice the life and at less than half the cost, they are more than four times cheaper!

So in these days of cell phones and more or less universal phone coverage - and with modern tyres and decent roads - unless you live in a particularly puncture-prone area (next door to a roofing contractor maybe!) you're better off without runflats - and better off not even carrying a spare!

SteveBaker (talk) 00:06, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The only case for run-flats I can think of is if your body guard recommends them: Bodyguard#Driving. The Beast obviously has them. Does all this answer your question?--Aspro (talk) 00:30, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One other issue I just remembered - for some bizarre reason, you can only patch a runflat tyre once. I can't imagine why that would be - but that's what the manufacturers tell you! That's another strong reason not to buy a used runflat. SteveBaker (talk) 02:26, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you to everyone for all the great replies! I didn't think about how many miles the patched tire was driven on while flat, great point. The reason I was looking for used was because I have about 6 months left on my lease and they will charge me $250 each for 4 tires because it will be under the minimum allowed tire thread for a lease return by then and it needs to be returned with run-flats. Its true that they are not as quiet, cheap, and all that, but they are not just safer (I have had a blowout on the freeway with a regular tire), but also, you can just keep driving and don't have to pull over so its so much more convenient if you really need to get someplace. Once again, thank you for the help —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.91.30.156 (talk) 03:05, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]