Talk:Standard wet liner inline-four engine

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Pre-war Standard fours? Postwar Eight/Ten engine?

I find it interesting that this article about the Standard Vanguard / Ferguson tractor engineis titled "Standard inline-four engine" as if it is the definitive Standard inline-four engine. Standard made side valve inline fours before the war, ohv inline fours for Jaguar before and after the war (and a variant for the first postwar Triumphs, the 1800 saloon and roadster), and made a smaller inline four afterward for the postwar Eights and Tens. That this article does not mention the postwar Eights and Tens, and that the Eights and Tens had much smaller displacements than the engine in this article, leads me to assume that those had a different basic design.

The Triumph I6 article claims that the I6 is related to the smaller engines, and, with the evidence (or lack thereof) pointing to those being a different design, not to this one.

Is the scope of this article going to be widened to include earlier and later Standard inline-four engines, or is the article going to be renamed so that the title indicates which Standard inline-four engine is being discussed?

Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 11:26, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a better name for it? This is the "interesting" Standard engine, the pre-war one being anything but. It's commonly called the Vanguard engine, although that obviously excludes the Ferguson use (& v.v.) Andy Dingley (talk) 11:47, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The later Eight/Ten engine is interesting as well, especially with it being the basis for the Spitfire engine and the six.

If use of the term "Vanguard engine" can be verified, then it would probably be good to call it that to disambiguate it from the earlier and later Standard inline-four engines.

Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 13:33, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Standard inline-four engine... am I correct?

This article is titled "Standard inline-four engine".

Most of this article is about one particular design of Standard inline-four engine.

Consequently, a section was added about other inline-four engines by Standard. This section was given the fairly straightforward title of "Other inline-four engines by Standard".

In the section titled "Other inline-four engines by Standard", which is about other inline-four engines by Standard, a thumbnail was added illustrating an example of an inline-four engine by Standard other than the one the rest of the article is about.

The thumbnail has been removed because it is not the engine being discussed in the rest of the article.

Erm... what is the subject of the section the thumbnail is in? Unless I'm mistaken, it's "Other inline-four engines by Standard". The subject of the thumbnail is an inline-four engine by Standard other than the one the rest of the article is about. In exactly what way is the thumbnail not relevant to the section?

Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 14:14, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's questionable as to why a whole section on "Engines that have nothing to do with the subject of this article" is even there. Did these earlier engines influence the wet-liner engine? No. Did the wet-liner engine influence the later Herald engine? No. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:33, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As to why there's "a whole section on 'Engines that have nothing to do with the subject of this article'", look at the title of the article: "Standard inline-four engine". All the engines mentioned in the section are Standard inline-four engines except the Triumph inline-six engine that was developed from a Standard inline-four engine and is mentioned incidentally as such.

The problem we are having is probably due to the scope implied by the title of the article being greater than the scope intended for the article. Unless the title fits the intended scope, there will be an overlap with other subjects that are correctly described by the title.

Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 15:13, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To-do list

Expand the "Standard cars" to include the engines used in the Standard Ensign, neither of which was the "85 mm" version used in the Vanguard. Early Ensigns were sleeved to a capacity of 1.6 L, while later ones, starting about a year after the Vanguard had been given the six-cylinder engine, had a big 2.3 L capacity.
Add a section on Triumph cars that used the engine: the 2000 Town and Country (razor-edge 1800 with the Vanguard drivetrain), the 2000 Roadster (Roadster with Vanguard drivetrain), the Renown (Town and Country bodywork on extended Vanguard chassis, and the TR series from the TR2 to the TR4A.

Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 02:19, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Made up to when?

The article states: Production 1947–1956, but there is picture of a 1961 TR3A with the engine. The articles states the engine was used in the TR3A which was made until 1967. The date of production needs to be nailed down. 90.220.14.66 (talk) 13:47, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]