Jump to content

Talk:Chrysler Concorde

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Infobox photo

[edit]

I have made this photo especially with the infobox in mind, trying to abide by every rule and make it the most useful, so I will defend it to the last drop of blood. PrinceGloria 15:46, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Even when your argument makes no sense? It's somehow hard to see the profile in a car that shows it in full? It's not a strange perspective, it's just a car that looks strange in certain angles. Your photo is clearly not 3/4 front, and is clearly washed-out obscuring detail. I don't want to make an edit war out of this, but it doesn't really matter what effort was put into a photo, it matters how well it came out. IFCAR 21:58, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I believe 3/4 refers to 3/4s of side and 1/4th of front end, not the other way around (as most of your best photos are made, e.g. the awesome and exemplary Maxima A33). I can touch-up my photo in due course, but I still believe that even for the time being it is both contentually and aestethically advantageous. PrinceGloria 09:06, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yours is skewed more to the side view by either definition. But I'll let it go for now if you can say "contentually and aesthetically advantageous" fast five times. IFCAR 12:28, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Not only that, I can sing the Sailor Moon song in Japanese ;) PrinceGloria 12:43, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Why is there a picture of an LHS in the Concorde article?

There isn't. As the article notes, the Concorde Limited adopted the LHS bodystyle in 2002. IFCAR (talk) 12:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

concorde problem

[edit]

car runs and idles high and then cuts off and will also cut off when put in gear199.74.8.3 (talk) 19:46, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not a forum... TREKphiler hit me ♠ 06:59, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are you smarter than an ad copywriter?

[edit]

"The cab-forward design was characterized by the long, low-slung windshield and relatively short overhangs. The wheels where effectively pushed to the corners of the car, creating a much larger passenger cabin than the contemporaries of the time." I know, this is the conventional wisdom. Just some comparative numbers: Concorde WB 113", length 202.8", avg F/R overhang 44.9"; '50 Plymouth Special DeLuxe WB 119.5", length 192.6", avg F/R overhang 37". (Figs from Flory, American Cars 1946-1959, p.309.) Which had "wheels effectively pushed to the corners of the car"? TREKphiler hit me ♠ 06:59, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Luxury

[edit]

I think that the sedan which costed 80000$ at 2004, can be called luxurious. I'll write it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.140.219.26 (talk) 18:17, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not change the wording unless there is a reliable source stating it is a luxury vehicle. And I'm not sure what currency you are referring to, but this vehicle cost nowhere close to $80,000 in 2004 in the United States. Bahooka (talk) 18:25, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It has been sold in other countries, but of course in the US it was cheaper, cause its made right there, but the United states is not the whole world (as opposed to Wiki) And generally in comparison with usual average cars (as Hyundai or Ford) it's big, high-powered, comfortable with splendid complectations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.140.219.26 (talk) 19:20, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Add a citation from a reliable source stating it is a luxury vehicle, otherwise it cannot be added. Bahooka (talk) 19:23, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Add a citation from a reliable source stating it is a cheap vehicle, or it can be edited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.140.220.194 (talk) 05:08, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No one stated it was cheap. Please learn a little bit more about Wikipedia before you continue making edits that have been reverted, including WP:BRD and WP:Verifiability. Bahooka (talk) 06:16, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In that case I think it can be called executive car. Cause it's more expensive than other typical full-size cars (like Impala or LTD etc). I think it's fair enough to consider it as a full-size executive car — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.140.220.194 (talk) 12:31, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is an American car, and executive car is a British term. Per WP:ENGVAR, the original term "sedan" is correct and appropriate as a description in this article for this particular vehicle. Also, please sign your posts with four tildes as your signature. Bahooka (talk) 14:14, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chrysler Concorde. 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) 05:36, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chrysler_Concorde&oldid=1200892646"