Talk:List of automotive superlatives

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Archive
Archives
  1. August 2004 to April 2005
  2. April 2005 to May 2005
  3. May 2005 to September 2005
  4. September 2005 to July 2006

Rules

The following questions have been resolved by a public vote and discussion.

Honorable mentions for disputed entries - A consensus is required before a dispute about an entry bumps it down to honorable mention status.
Production numbers - The "20 produced" rule refers to the superlative version, not just the named model in general.

Contents

[edit] Smallest V8 Engine

I would like to dispute your entry for the Ferrari. The Mazda MX3 had a 1.8 litre V8 engine in it, in Europe at least. I'm not an authority on them but I would suspect this applies to most of the regions they were sold in. Thanks.

I don't think that that's correct (the MX-3 did have a 1.8 L V6, though), but if you can provide a source, feel free to make the change. TomTheHand 00:23, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
The Mazda MX3 had a 1845 cc V6 engine, not V8. Bore and stroke were 75 mm and 69.6 mm. I have an Automobile Revue yearbook that mentions the TVR S3 was once available with a 1948 cc V8 engine (smaller than the Ferrari), but I can't find any proof that engine was actually used in a production vehicle. --Pc13 12:57, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] First transverse

We now has the first transverse engine as the 1949 SAAB 92, but in Transverse engine it says the 1931 DKW Front. I haven't manage to find any source to back it up, but it's not unlikley as the SAAB 92 was designed to be "a modern DKW". // Liftarn

[edit] Hybrid vehicles

On http://www.aircaraccess.com/pics01.htm there is a mention of a hybrid car. It gives very little details, but it seems to be from sometimes in the early 20th century/late 19th century thus beating Toyota Prius with about 100 years. Does anyone know more? // Liftarn

I think there were a handful of gas-electric hybrids made in that time frame, such as the Woods Dual Power (http://www.petersen.org/default.cfm?docid=1043). The main section of this article is for post-WWII cars, though there is a pre-war section where it could be mentioned. DoktorRocket 04:50, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
It says "except for the Firsts section" so it should go in there. // Liftarn
Belgian Auto-Mixte (there is a book in the French language about this brand) was the first "modern" hybrid car, as it used the same kind of techniques; regenerating energy from braking, petrol engine kicking in when extra power was needed etc. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 159.134.94.21 (talk • contribs) 15:31, November 8, 2006.
According to this page, the Lohner-Porsche beat the Auto-Mixte (and the Woods Dual Power) to the punch using an almost identical system. --DeLarge 16:58, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
The Lohner-Porsche sounds like it may have had electric transmisson rather than a hybrid drive. // Liftarn

[edit] Some possible corrections...

  1. "Best-selling American Sedan - Ford Taurus (more than 7,000,000 sold in 4.5 generations sold between 1986 and 2006)". Do we really need market-specific superlatives? For example, with a bestselling American sedan present, could be disallow an editor adding in what the bestselling sedan in The Philippines was, or the bestselling pick-up in South Africa? There's also the small matter of the Chevrolet Impala possibly outselling it, if I could find sales figures for the sedan body style of the Chevy...
  2. Honorable mentions for "Lowest selling vehiles". I don't see any reason for inclusion for these:
  • "Sports car - avg. 79 per month, Bricklin SV-1 (2,857 sold in 3 years)"
  • "SUV - avg. 200 per month, Suzuki X-90 (7,205 sold in 3 years)"

I'm going to be bold and delete every one of these entries, unless there's an objection. --DeLarge 16:55, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Done. --DeLarge 19:56, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

A new reference is needed for the Veyron's 0-100-0 time, the current external link is dead. Meio 18:38, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Power Ratings?

Are all these power ratings to the wheels or to the crankshaft? --Russoc4 19:44, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

To the crankshaft. Manufacturers generally do not rate power to the wheels. TomTheHand 19:45, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Good point. Thanks. --Russoc4 00:04, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] First directional headlamps

For the heading "First directional headlamps" we have an mention of the 1948 Tucker Torpedo, but it wasn't first (Tatra had it in the 1930s) and it didn't have directional headlamps on the production models. So why mention it? // Liftarn

[edit] common rail

where is the first common rail car? metin emre

[edit] First fiberglass monocoque

Currently it's listed as being the 1959 Lotus Elite, but I wonder if it may be the 1956 Berkeley T60. It depends if they were actual monocoque (it may be body-on-frame with a fibreglass frame). They were made in fibreglass with aluminium bulkheads and steel sections for the engine support. According to http://www.microcarmuseum.com/tour/berkeley-t60.html they had a "box-shaped substructure and suspension and engine compartment reinforced with aluminum, forming a fiberglass monocoque structure". // Liftarn

No objections? Alright then. Lotus Elite gets bumped. // Liftarn

Well... according to this link [1], the Elite used fiberglass "for the entire load-bearing structure of the car". According to this link [2], the Elite "featured an all-fiberglass, monocoque chassis". According to the wikipedia article, it did use a steel subframe for the engine and front suspension. I realise this is subjective, but it sounds to me like the Elite was a little farther along in this area than the Berkeley. Perhaps you would reconsider the bump. Maybe a good compromise would be to switch the cars and give the Berkeley an honorable mention? --SpinyNorman 08:10, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Your first source is just an older version of the Wikipedia article (compare [3] and Lotus Elite). The Berk did have fibreglass chassis so it's first. I found some pictures at http://www.coldplugs.com/berkstoday01.htm that shows how it looks. The Elite chassis is more advanced and it's also a larger car, but the Berk was first. // Liftarn
In that case I'll change it from Berkeley T60 (1959 3-wheeler) to the Berkeley SA322 (1956 4 wheels)Meio 18:26, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] First all-aluminum body

It is now listed as the 1961 Lagonda Rapide, but what about the Land Rover? Ok, they use an aluminium-magnesium alloy rather then pure aluminium, but still... // Liftarn

[edit] Most powerful Diesel

Looks like the 2007 Audi Q7 will demolish the most powerful Diesel record... They're saying 500 hp, which is probably 500 PS, but that's still WAY more powerful than any other Diesel! --SFoskett 15:23, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

And the torquiest as well, at 1000 Nm. However, it won't go on sale just yet. Sales will begin early 2008 only. --Pc13 07:45, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Drag coefficient

What's the lowest drag coefficient for a production car? General Motors EV1 has a low value (0.195), but they weren't sold to the public so is it Tatra T77 (0.212)? It seems odd nobody have made a more streamlined car since 1935. // Liftarn

Just out of curiosity, what's the source of the Tatra T77's drag factor? And I mean who measured it, not where was it published. The reason I'm asking is that 0.212 seems extraordinarily low. The old Audi 100 made a big fuss in the early 80s when they got to 0.30 using flush windows and so forth (they even had a sticker on the rear side windows), and the even slippier Opel Calibra was only about 0.28 or thereabouts. The Tatra, while streamlined, doesn't seem like it would be such an order of magnitude better than today's cars, and I'm wondering if they had a different way of calculating drag factor back then. --DeLarge 17:56, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
I've googled a bit and added a few sources. It is etraordinary low, but the T77 was from the start designed to be aerodynamic and they did extensive wind tunnel testing. T77 had thing like a flat underside and door handles inset in the body rather than hanging out. Allt o make it as streamlined as possible. Also keep in mind that it's easier to get a low drag with a smaller surface area. It may also help that the T77 was air cooled so it didn't have to force the air trough a radiator. So I think the value is reasonable. The Audi 100 has a quite reasonable drag coefficient. It's for instcane significantly lower than the Ferrari F40. The GM Calibra is at 0.26, so it's quite aerodynamic. // Liftarn
Just a note: though low surface area reduces drag, I don't think it has anything to do with drag coefficient, which is determined by shape. I am equally skeptical about the T77's drag coefficient. It just doesn't look far more aerodynamic than more modern cars designed for minimum drag coefficient. It may not have to push air through a radiator, but it's still got to push it through the engine's cooling fins. I agree with DeLarge; I would very much like to know who measured a drag coefficient of 0.212, not just a list of places that repeat the figure. TomTheHand 15:25, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
Drag coefficient is the ratio of the drag of the object in question compared to the drag of a flat plate of notionally zero thickness, with the same frontal area. King Hildebrand 11:23, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
It's probably in the details. For instance notice the inset door handles. It also has a flat underside (most modern cars don't). Also most modern cars also has at least some focus on creating downforce and thus increases the drag. The T77 was designed to be aerodynamic and they also used a wind tunnel to design it so it's not impossible. Other old cars have acheived impressive figures such as the Saab 92 (0.30 in 1947 despite the flat windscreen) and Rumpler Tropfenwagen (0.28 in 1921). It did have to get the air over the cooling fins, but the engine was in the rear so that may be easier. // Liftarn
Don't underestimate how much the skinny tyres of the day effected the cd. There would be a large saving right there compared to any modern car. --LiamE 13:27, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
All good points. I'm not as skeptical any more. Thanks, guys! TomTheHand 13:42, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Ok, but under what heading should it be placed? // Liftarn

[edit] Holden Maloo fastest pickup?

I'm a little iffy on the Holden Maloo being listed as the fastest pickup truck. It's not a truck; it's a "ute", or a car with a pickup bed, similar to the El Camino. Does anyone else have a similar issue? Does an open trunk area make a car into a pickup truck? TomTheHand 15:52, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Heh, I see your dispute, and kind of agree with it; you're maybe thinking that it should be limited to crude old things with a separate chassis? Unfortunately... "The Chevrolet El Camino [is] a car-based small pickup truck..." , and "A pickup truck or pick-up is a light motor vehicle with an open-top rear cargo area", both of which suggest that the Maloo qualifies.
Personally, I'd call it a pickup, but not a pickup truck, but that's just me... --DeLarge 17:56, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
Well, those are good points. Would anyone be opposed to an honorable mention to the Dodge for fastest body-on-frame pickup? I'm not a Dodge fan by any means, but to me an open-top cargo area does not turn a car into a truck. TomTheHand 15:15, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
I think the usual usage in the UK is that a pickup is pretty much based around a car design with a conversion to an open cargo deck, usually with intrusive wheel arches. The vehicle with a separate chassis and a load deck above the wheels is a dropside. The sides are usually removable to turn it into a flatbed. --King Hildebrand 11:17, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] First electric park brake

Wasn't there a Saab from the 1960s with an electric park brake? I'm a bit dubious about the first one being on a Lincoln in 2003. - Richardcavell 05:04, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] # First aerodynamic design - 1921 Rumpler Tropfenwagen

I'd like to suggest something earlier, what about the 1914 Alfa Romeo Castagna?

http://shl.stanford.edu/Bucky/dymaxion/cars.htm

Thanks for your consideration,

bs

That was justa prototype. The Rumpler Tropfenwagen was a production vehicle. // Liftarn

[edit] Cleanup help on Fast cars

Hey guys,

I was hoping to recruit some of you to come have a look at the article Fast cars. I was thinking we could possibly turn it into a list showing the cars that have held the "fastest production car" title through the years. I figured it might be a topic of interest to all of you, so if anyone is interested, could you come give your opinions on Talk:Fast cars on the direction we'd like the article to take? TomTheHand 19:55, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Two-cylinder engines

Citroen used horizontally opposed two-cylinder engines in its 2CV and derivatives. I believe they started at 435 cc in the 2CV, appeared in a very popular 602 cc version in the later 2CV, Dyane and Ami, and there may have been a late model with about 800 cc before the whole lot disappeared in the 80's. I think these are worth a mention!--King Hildebrand 11:11, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I've just checked the 2CV article here, which gives detail of the initial 375 cc engine, and the final 652 cc one. Just for the record, and to start the ball rolling, I'll enter these as smallest and largest two-cylinder engines in the main article. Please feel free to supersede these with better info! King Hildebrand 12:52, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Horizontally-opposed engines

There's apparently no mention of the horizontally-opposed configuration in this article. Are they considered as a 180° V-layout, and therefore not entitled to their own section? VW beetles and Citroen 2CVs (see above) ran on HO engines, and I doubt if they were alone. I'm not arguing particularly for their inclusion separately but it might be worth mentioning them as a subset of Vs. King Hildebrand 11:32, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Trucks

I understand that this article is about road cars, with goods and industrial vehicles excluded. Yet there is an honourable mention for a Mercedes truck under four-wheel steering. If this one is allowed, then the power and torque of truck engines deserve honourable mentions throughout. I think, for consistency, the Merc should be ruled out. --King Hildebrand 11:48, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Electric cars

IMO this article should list most powerful & fastest electric cars also. - G3, 13:08, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Biggest I4...

Actually, I know that 3.6 liter can't be the biggest straigth four ever because my cousin owns a Hino truck equipped with a 4.6 liter straight four diesel and Hino also produced 4.0 liter I4. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.82.198.101 (talk) 00:28, 14 January 2007 (UTC).

That's true, truck engines typically are large, but this article is pretty much intended for passenger cars only. The 3rd criteria says that commercial or industrial vehicles are ineligible. VectorD 01:34, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

The Toyota Mega Cruiser (similar to an H1 Hummer has an I4 slightly larger than 4.0 liters, and I believe it as sold to the public http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Mega_Cruiser —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 141.215.68.59 (talk • contribs) 04:28, 25 February 2007 (UTC).

That looks like a good contender. However, the wiki article says it was only sold to the police and firefighters. I haven't been able to find much from external sources other than to say a few were sold to Australian mining companies it seems. If it could be confirmed as actually being sold to the general public for personal use, then it looks pretty good. VectorD 10:30, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Production periods

Any room for a superlative for models that have been in continuous production for the longest (and the shortest)?Meio 18:48, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GT40 is not a production car.

why is it included in the lowest height. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.21.2.5 (talk) 23:30, 10 March 2007 (UTC).

Wasn't the Mk III a production road car? // Liftarn

[edit] Redlines

Anyone want to include a section on highest redlines for each engine configuration? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.21.2.5 (talk) 23:44, 10 March 2007 (UTC).

I think creating such a section would be difficult. If by redline you mean the bit of red marked on the tachometer, then I think a comparison wouldn't be all that helpful. Manufacturers these days seem to arbitrarily mark the redline anywhere they like, and it could be above or below the actual point the engine stops revving (some cars don't even have a redline!).
But I'm assuming you're referring to the engine cut-out point, which may be a better indication of an engine's capabilities. However, this also poses problems. Old style engines don't necessarily have a set cut-out as such so they can theoretically rev forever until they run out of air or just self-destruct.
I suppose it's possible to make a section using a hybrid of both redlines and cut-outs but I'm not sure how successful that'll be. Perhaps it might be workable. VectorD 08:51, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Smallest V10 honorable mention.

I added Connaught Type-D GT with a 2.0L V10 in the smallest engines category as a honorable mention since the vehicle is awaiting production currently. It was deleted. Any reason for it?

Here are the specs http://www.connaughtmotorco.com/performance_gt.html —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.44.168.185 (talk) 23:42, 1 April 2007 (UTC).


[edit] The list

Is this list for car models, brands or part suppliers?. lots of missing model information, so its impossible or very hard to verify those details, some reference or source should be mentioned..--Typ932 13:04, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Country specifics

Now we have both "First American V6" and "First Japanese V6 engine" and soon we will have "Fist Swedish V6", "First French V6", "First Egyptian V6" and so on for every engine type. It will soon get silly. Can't we just nip in the bud? // Liftarn

These should be removed..., the whole page needs overhauling, lots of errors, when ever possible should exact car model and year be mentioned, if its whole model range that should be mentioned (makes verifying lot easier), maybe 1-3 honorable mentions per case. And the intoruduction should tell if this page is for Car models, Car Brands or part suppliers otherwise there is all kind of stuff, ... ...--Typ932 15:46, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
No. Honorable mentions are not for second places, they're for one-offs, low volume cars, prototypes, unused projects and special editions. We use them only when warranted. --Pc13 18:50, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
I didnt mean that there should be second places, but there should be clear rules, 20 or more examples produced BRAND and MODEL , not Hella or Goodyear ;) Honorable mention - 1985 Lancia Delta S4 (Homologation special, only 200 road cars produced for Group B regulations) this is clearly over 20 produced road legal model, why its honorable ? or what about Straight-8 Honorable mention - 1920 Duesenberg? where is the model? or First overhead cam engine - 1898 Wilkinson, no info no source link nothing....just some thoughs to make this article better... --Typ932 21:12, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Hey, you're right, I hadn't noticed some of these (the list is very long nowadays)! There's no point in having the Group B homologation specials as honorable only. As for the 1920 Duesenberg with 8 cylinders... I imagine it was available on both the Model A and the Model J. I don't know, pre-WWII cars are not my forte. And these cars are the ones that need proper sourcing, that's for sure. As for technologies, agreed, of course, it's the use in a car that makes them important. --Pc13 21:09, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../l/i/s/Talk%7EList_of_automotive_superlatives_ffa3.html"