Jump to content

Talk:List of automotive superlatives/Archive 7

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 8

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)
The Brazilian car Gurgel BR-800 and its derivatives (Supermini and Motomachine) had a watercooled 798 cc 2-cylinder boxer engine [1]. Fiat also announced a 0.9 L inline-2 turbocharged engine for the new 500, but it isn't in production yet.187.59.249.214 (talk) 19:29, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Not to forget the 2 cylinder 2 stroke engine from DKW which was also used in the Saab 92 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.57.0.250 (talk) 22:24, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

If motorcycles are allowed as "automotive" devices (rather than "automobile" which notably ISNT the article title), there must surely be some high production Harley Davidson models and/or similar ones from rival marques with decidedly larger V-twins than 800 or even 900cc, given you can get "big singles" that exceed the half-litre mark. After all, if we're going to have the Aprilia R125's rotax engine... On that note it's a pity that limited-run prototypes aren't permitted, as VW did come up with a high specific-output (47hp/L) 850cc turbodiesel twin in the early 1980s, and actually built some working models but never brought it to market thanks to the oil crisis petering out. That would have hit a good number of categories here I'd wager!
Also ... correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the Saab/DKW 2-stroke engine a small, extremely fizzy V6? (And I think one of theirs might qualify for the contentious "smallest V8" category)... OTOH, we have the old smokey 2-stroke Trabant... what cylinder/cc was that? 77.102.101.220 (talk) 22:25, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
The Saab 92 had a 764cc two-cylinder; subsequent Saab 2-strokes were triples. DKW did build a 1000 (later 1300) cc V6 2-stroke but not many made it into production. Mr Larrington (talk) 02:21, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ http://www2.uol.com.br/bestcars/classicos/gurgel-7.htm

Fastest estate/stationwagon car

I Removed the MG Rover ZT-T 765 Bonneville from the fastest estate car. This was NOT a production car. To the best of my ability, I've found the fastest estate car to be the current model Dodge Magnum SRT8 clicking in at 173 MPH. There may be some obscure European car which is faster so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but the Magnum in it's production is indeed faster than the production MG ZT. Here is a gallery of the ZT-T Bonneville specially modified to make the record breaking run: Click

SSChicken 19:47, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

What, there isn't a single Merc, BMW, Saab, Audi or Volvo that can match up to it? They've certainly made some lunatic estates in their time. Blame it on the 155mph limiter, I suppose, but some of the top end, most fire breathing ones can have it taken off as an option... maybe just not enough people buy them? Would the Porsche Cayennes / Panameras count? Aston Martin shooting brakes? Jags? 77.102.101.220 (talk) 23:03, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
I checked and the Saab 9-5 Aero SportCombi have a top speed of a mere 245 km/h, the 9-3 does a bit better, but not much. // Liftarn (talk)
The VERY unrestricted version of the most recent Audi RS6 will apparently do 305 km/h and may be a more acceptable candidate to those who think Alpinas are naught but souped-up Beemers ;-) Mr Larrington (talk) 02:28, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

The Alpina B5 stationwagon reached 319 km/h in an auto, motor & sport speed test in Nardo and it is a production car. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.70.36.236 (talk) 18:33, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Recent changes by 93.96.133.7

I don't know if these are correct. I'm not an expert on trucks. I fixed the format.

But it concerns me that such changes are being by unregistered editors. Sadowski (talk) 05:32, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Unregistered users have the same rights as registered users (with some small exceptions). Registering is only a convenience so that other editors get to recognise you and so that they can leave you messages. Registration is still highly recommended though.  Stepho  talk  08:01, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

That was me. I forgot to sign in. What was the problem? Meio (talk) 18:34, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

The problem is there is no real way to discuss the changes you made (and you still have no Talk Page). Today I made an effort to fix the formatting of the changes you made. But then changed my mind and I undid them entirely. I think the whole problem centers on the definition of "Commercial" which in the United States depends less on the vehicle than what it is doing.
Legally one can drive any vehicle up to 26,000 GVWR without a Class B license (commercial) which includes all trucks up to Class 6. On the other hand even a Smart Fortwo can be classified as a commercial vehicle if it is used to transport hazerdous materials.
Prior to the late 1990s any vehicle above 8500 GVWR (Class 2b or above) was typically only used for commercial purposes. However things have changed a great deal and trucks of Class 3 (Ford F350 and Dodge Ram 3500) are now common sights on suburban driveways. Thus by convention (not legality) 8500 GVWR might once have been the cutoff, today it is 14,000 GVWR.
Things in Europe are of course quite different and it is uncommon for private individuals to drive such monstrously large trucks just to pick up some groceries. I care less about what standard is settled on than whether the vehicles are treated the same way. For example both the Dodge Ram 3500 and Ford F-350 fall into Class 3. If one is excluded then both should be. But then the category would be more about light light-duty (Class 2a or less), than commercial versus noncommercial. (And similarly, if the list is limited to Class 3 vehicles.) In which case vehicles such as the International CXT (Class 6) should also be excluded.
In the UK, and I imagine for the rest of the EU as well, the cut-off for a normal car licence is 3500kg or about 7700lb. Put five fat bastards and their luggae into something like a Lard-Rover Discovery and you could technically be a Criminal by driving it on a car licence. Mr Larrington (talk) 02:43, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
If the classification is commercial versus noncommercial I recommend including all vehicles that conceivably be be driven for private noncommercial purposes as noncommercial. That would mean counting vehicles up to Class 6 (such as the International CXT) as noncommercial. In such a case the list would need to be corrected as trucks as large as the Ford F-650, Dodge Ram 5500 and the GMC Topkick 6500 technically can be driven without a commercial driver's license. (However, with respect to pickups, evidently only Ford currently has a standard production Class 4: the Ford F-450.) Sadowski (talk) 12:16, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Class 4 Pick ups were only in production 2008-2010. Anything else is a cab chassis with a pick up bed added. I don't see what other function I serve on this page, but I got it on my watchlist. --Dana60Cummins (talk) 19:35, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure you are correct. The Ford webpage lists 2012 F-450 pickup trucks for sale. And when you say chassis cab with a pickup bed added I take it that the pickup bed is aftermarket, right? That seems to be what the Ford webpage implies. Sadowski (talk) 18:45, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
I went to Ford dealership for practical information today and here's what I discovered. For most people deed restrictions are a consideration. In my county (New Castle County, Delaware) oversized vehicles are classified in terms of length, width, height and weight (maximum of 240", 84", 84" and 8000 lbs GVWR) and cannot be stored outside regardless of lot size. Thus vehicles larger than that size typically are only used for commercial purposes. However there are individuals (In my county they call them DuPonts. In California they call him Jay Leno.) who own structures large enough to enclose extremely oversized vehicles. These individuals have been known to buy vehicles as large as Class 6 for personal use. The dealership also claimed that an F-650 can be ordered from the factory as a pickup (a fact I am still trying to confirm). Sadowski (talk) 17:42, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

So this is a list based exclusively on US licencing considerations and other legislation particular to the USA? I based my changes primarily on the stated rules of the page and the Wikipedia pages of the vehicles concerned. Namely: The Ford Super Duty line is described as a commercial line [Ford Super Duty]. The Brabus Mercedes Unimog U500 Black Edition is still listed as avalable in the current Mercedes catalogue. The international CXT is the named commercial variant of the XT line (Commercial Extreme Truck) [International XT]. Meio (talk) 11:04, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

The Ford Super Duty page should not refer to it as a "commercial" truck. The Ford Super Duty is marketed as both a noncommercial and a commercial vehicle. A lot of people drive Ford Super Duties as a personal vehicle and it is the basis for the Ford Tropivan.
I think you have a point concerning the International CXT however. Although it has a history of noncommercial use it was "constructed principally" as a commercial vehicle. And I have verified that the Unimog Brabus U500 Black Edition is still currently manufactured. and I shall make edits to correct for both facts.
This page has an insufficiently clear critera for what should be classified as commercial. Perhaps we should take marketing into consideration, but that should be discussed. And when talking about US vehicles obviously we should take into account US conventions, otherwise what are we talking about? But your repeated massive edits without justification are really not helpful in reaching a consensus. I would prefer it if you made one change at a time and take the time to provide some justification. For example, your point about the Unimog Brabus U500 Black Edition is very well taken.
By the way, how come you have a Talk Page but no User Page? I peronally find it confusing. Sadowski (talk) 17:00, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
Since the US definition of commercial is so fuzzy I am thinking perhaps we should focus on marketing. In which case the CXT should be considered commercial and the Ford Super Duty qualifies as noncommercial. What do you think? And if that's the case perhaps the list of criteria should be clarified to make that more explicit. Sadowski (talk) 18:53, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
In particular I am thinking about criteria #1 which says "are constructed principally for retail sale to consumers, for their personal use, and to transport people on public roads (no commercial or industrial vehicles are eligible)." I think the problem is with the word "constructed principally." In my opinion this is simply too vague and is open to interpretation. For example the Ford Super Duty, the Dodge Ram 3500 and the GMC Sierra/Chevrolet Silverado 3500 are marketed for both purposes, and I honestly don't think it's possible to determine the proportion which are sold for each. Thus I suggest replacing the phrase"constructed principally" with the word "marketed." I think this is a more concrete critera as all manufacturers seem to purposefully market their vehicles.
By the way if we can reach a consensus I would be happy to make the changes myself.(In fact I would prefer to do it myself, as I am concerned about the format.) Sadowski (talk) 19:31, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
Non-commercial and commercial the line is blurred. Don't bother looking for it. Ever since the Super Duty cab/chassis (or commercial IMO). Owners started added beds to them. Later on some dealers actually had a set price what it cost to convert a class 4 or 5 c/c to pick up bed. Then Ford just sold F-450's as pickups with the 2008-2010 models. Now Ford sells to class's of F-450's. Class 3 being a F-350 with larger brakes and axles in only the crew cab, 4x4, dually config. The class 4 being a c/c again. As far what is commercial and what is not, I have yet to find anything wrong with Sadowski's logic. However I did have to revert one of your edits. Manuals are always lighter than automatics. I can give curb weights of all the Dodges if it comes down to that.--Dana60Cummins (talk) 04:23, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
OK, so looking at Ford.com the Super Duty line is only referenced in terms of it's commercial capabilities http://www.ford.com/trucks/superduty/ Also the top navigation places it in 2 places: Trucks (alongside pickup trucks and vans) and Commercial (alongside those same vans and some chassis cabs) which seems to suggest that they are happy for anyone to buy whatever, but they consider Super Duty trucks to be essentially commercial vehicles. If we're going down the marketing route (which is not currently stated in the arbitrary rules of this page), then we need to come to a consensus on if the marketing of Super Duty trucks counts as non commercial. Seems like OR and I really don't get why commercial vehicles aren't allowed on reflection. There are so many sub-categories why don't we just have superlatives for road legal vehicles, broken down into categories? Biggest hatchback; biggest estate/station wagon; biggest pickup; biggest van; biggest goods vehicle... like that? Then we don't have to worry about who feels whether the marketing is commercial or not. Meio (talk) 16:44, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Highest specific engine output

The figure listed for the Ford RS200 is 444hp, but the article for that car says that the street-legal production version produced 250hp, while the 444hp is for the Group B race car. This should be reverted back to the Lancer Evolution FQ400. Crazym108 (talk) 03:03, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Group B rally cars were still road-legal as they had to be driven between special stages on the public road. I've seen figures as high as 650bhp quoted for the RS200 but these were probably in rallycross trim and thus NOT road-legal. Mr Larrington (talk) 02:50, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

SSC Tuatara

The SSC Tuatara is added as most powerful and highest specific power car but: - According to Wikipedia (http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/SSC_Tuatara) "Its engine will be capable of 1,700 hp (1,268 kW) with emission controls removed" and according to the custumer website http://www.sscnorthamerica.com/tuatara.php power is just "1350 bhp @ 6800 rpm" - There is no source confirming that the car is effectly produced and sold — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.21.34.226 (talk) 12:14, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

True, in fact there isn't even a source confirming that a working prototype exists, let alone one that breaks records. Unless someone shows sources that say different I will remove all mention of the SSC Tuatara. 85.127.234.45 (talk) 14:23, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
I've been wondering about this for a while, the tuatara doesn't even exist in a driving form yet, all it is is a theoretical prototype with a bunch of claims at trade shows, does this mean we should include the Vector WX-8 with 1800hp+ despite it being vaporware? The tuatara doesn't even have an actual interior picture yet, the only thing they've shown is a render. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.184.79.91 (talk) 22:10, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Only production cars (Guinness Book of World Records says minimum of 15 cars required) that were actually made - unless the topic is specifically concept cars or race cars. Otherwise I could include my thoughts about a 2000 hp skateboard :)  Stepho  talk  22:58, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
I have come across some problems that make it impossible for me to do the announced deletion. It would be really great if someone else could do it and enter the previous records. 178.165.131.66 (talk) 14:42, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

First trip computer

The article on trip computer gives several examples prior to the 1978 Cadillac Seville. The 1958 Saab GT750 came with a Halda Speedpilot as standard. The 1952 Fiat 1900 had a device that showed average speed. // Liftarn (talk) 09:43, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Highest specific engine output (power/unit displacement)

Under Petrol/Gasoline (naturally-aspirated) piston engine .Why is the Proton Satria Neo S2000 listed? 1 There is no page for this car. 2 From what i can ascertain its also not a production car nor is it street legal. Also the listing of the Ariel Atom 500 in numerous sections is not valid. That vehicle is not sold commercially registerable, nor is it sold with a VIN number. It's considered a kit car in almost all developed markets. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.174.131.242 (talk) 10:14, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Inconsistant list

This list does not follow any of its rules - the list says it is for post WW2 cars but there are numerous pre WW2 cars on it, also there are prototypes, one-off models, and cars with less than 20 made. Either the rules need changing or the list needs some ruthless editing. NealeFamily (talk) 03:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on List of automotive superlatives. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:32, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on List of automotive superlatives. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:09, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Firsts by country

The recently added section for firsts by country (which I deleted) is a can of worms. Entries like "First Japanese automaker to manufacture vehicles in the United States" will wind up being a multitude of entries like "First SomeCountry automaker to manufacture vehicles in SomeOtherCountry". With a couple of hundred countries in the world, this is going to end badly with potentially thousands of combinations of 2 countries. Even the single country entries alone will fill up with long lists for every single country in the world. Better to leave it as world firsts.  Stepho  talk  14:20, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on List of automotive superlatives. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:51, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of automotive superlatives. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:49, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of automotive superlatives. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:39, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

New Most Powerful Naturally Aspirated Car

The new lp640sv is said to have around 670bhp when it comes out —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.228.27.233 (talk) 13:29, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

The McLaren F1 LM's engine is still more powerful at 680hp, and you must realize that the actual measurement for the LP670-4 is 670PS, not bhp. The actual HP rating for it is 661hp. IXetsuei (talk) 02:58, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Why is there no mention of the 2006 Weineck 780 cui Cobra? It's naturally aspirated putting out 1100 bhp and 1299 ft/lbs of torque according to this source[1]. It has a 780 cui (12.8 liter) V8. Wouldn't this be the most powerful naturally aspirated production car? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.55.62.145 (talk) 07:39, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Only 15 built, apparently. Mr Larrington (talk) 02:33, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

The new record-holder should be the Aston-Martin One-77.

the FXX is a race car, highest road car now is Ferrari 812 Superfast — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.175.192.220 (talk) 23:26, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

First Vehicle With Mirror Wipers/First Vehicle With Side Window Wipers

I was thinking of the adding categories for the above two features. I believe side view mirror wipers were first featured on the Nissan Cima Y31/Leopard F30, and side window wipers were first used on the Toyota Mark II but i'm not 100% sure. Can anyone else corroborate that?

Source: https://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/car-design/a15853004/lets-talk-about-these-crazy-jdm-side-window-wipers/

--TKOIII (talk) 22:13, 23 February 2018 (UTC)TKOIII

Largest Piece Of Glass on a Production Car

I think there should be a category for biggest piece of glass on a production car. I'd wager that either the Tesla Model X's windshield or the Plymouth Barracuda's (1964.5-1966) rear glass would be the largest. I'd guess that the Tesla Model X glass is probably bigger but I can't find official numbers. I do have official numbers for the Barracuda though. Anyone else know anything about this?

Sources:
https://www.hemmings.com/magazine/hmn/2006/12/Fish-Under-Glass/1382192.html
https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/windshield-dimension.79100/

--TKOIII (talk) 15:58, 24 February 2018 (UTC)TKOIII

Longest production car section

I'm not sure I'd consider the Mercedes-Maybach Pullman to qualify based on the rules of this page. The article itself states that the list should be "limited to production road cars that are constructed principally for retail sale to consumers, for their personal use, and to transport people on public roads (no commercial or industrial vehicles are eligible)." As far as I can tell, the Pullman doesn't qualify, as it was intended to be chauffeur driven and not owner driven, hence the partition window. The previous longest car produced that was listed, the 1974-76 Cadillac Fleetwood 75 was sold with a partition window, but was also offered as a "9 passenger sedan" without a partition window, and 2,752 were sold during those years. The old Maybach 62 could be ordered without a partition window, and the current Mercedes-Maybach S650, Rolls-Royce Phantom EWB, and Bentley Mulsanne EWB can be ordered without a window. Furthermore, I can't find anything that indicates that the Pullman was intended for retail sale. It's not mentioned anywhere on Mercedes' regional US and German websites with all their other models, only on their international website, which also lists the commercial buses and trucks not listed on the regional websites. The website also mentions that the vehicle was intended to be driven by a chauffeur.[1] The Fleetwood 75 on the other hand was featured in the brochure for the 1976 model year, along side the 60 special, Eldorado, Deville, Calais, and Seville. [2] This indicates to me that the Pullman was not intended for retail sale, whereas the 75 without the partition window was. Information about the Pullman's options seems to only be available "by request," as opposed to the options for the 75 being clearly listed in the brochure. Finally, I can find no information about the production numbers of the car.

I therefore propose that the article revert the title of longest production car back to the 1974-76 Fleetwood 75, and that the title of longest current production car go to the Rolls-Royce Phantom VIII extended wheelbase. — Preceding unsigned comment added by User9870000 (talk • contribs) 16:05, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

The Pullman is for sale to a consumer - the consumer (ie owner) can be a driver or passenger. Commercial/industrial in this definition is trying to filter out trucks, buses, mobile cranes and similar - not chauffeurs. To me, it looks like chauffeur driven luxury vehicles such as the Pullman still count.  Stepho  talk  21:22, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
It still doesn't seem like the Maybach was intended to be principally for retail sale, but we perhaps have different definitions about what that means. I wouldn't consider Royalty and Governments to meet that requirement, and with the Maybach and the Fleetwood Limousine that is certainly the case, but the Fleetwood 9 passenger sedan was not intended for Royalty and Governments, who are the entities listed on Mercedes' website. But again, perhaps I'm the only person interested in editing the page who looks at it that way. I still can't find any sort of confirmation that 25 examples have been built for the Maybach, however.
It does also say at the top of the page that this list is for post WWII vehicles (besides the "firsts" section), and I counted 6 prewar vehicles for the various length/width/height superlatives alone. And there don't seem to be anything stating what a "limited production vehicle" is, despite there being multiple listings for those. Obviously It's less than 25, but is it just 2 or more? I know they only made 3 Probe 16s. — Preceding unsigned comment added by User9870000 (talk • contribs) 02:37, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://www.mercedes-benz.com/en/mercedes-benz/vehicles/passenger-cars/mercedes-maybach/mercedes-maybach-s-600-pullman-guard/
  2. ^ http://www.oldcarbrochures.com/static/NA/Cadillac/1976_Cadillac/1976_Cadillac_Brochure/dirindex.html

Shortest Limited Production Car

The Probe 16 was 34 in tall, not 29 in, meaning it was not the shortest limited production car. Even the Probe 16's Wikipedia article says so. I don't know the accuracy of the current citation, as its to a book, but it seems to be incorrect.
http://www.imps4ever.info/specials/centaur/probe/probe16.html
https://carbuzz.com/news/sexualized-cars-adams-probe-16 --TKOIII (talk) 16:11, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Highest torque - NA gas engine

Since no entry was available, I did some research. Cars such as the Weineck Cobra (1700 Nm) and the VLF Force 1 (865 Nm) have unverifiable production numbers, and the confirmed production of only 3 Zonda HP Barchettas (850 Nm) automatically excludes the Pagani as well, so I added the SRT/Dodge Viper Gen5/VX. Alguemimportante (talk) 15:30, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_automotive_superlatives/Archive_7&oldid=1058354240"