IMCDb Forum
Naming conventions » Mass change model info thread
Category:  
« Previous topic
Reminder of the previous message
Direct link to this message Edit  Quote  Add this message as quote for multiple quotes  Delete  Top  Bottom
Mass change model info thread
Published 09/10/2024 @ 15:36:24, By dsl
Ooops this might get messier than anticipated. Full list of XJS codes (deep breath ...) from ARonline is:

XJ27 XJ-S Coupe
XJ28 XJ-S Convertible
XJ41 F-type Coupe
XJ42 F-type Cabriolet
XJ57 XJ-S six-cylinder Coupe
XJ58 XJ-S six-cylinder Cabriolet
XJ63 XJ57 with projected Getrag manual gearbox
XJ71 XJ-S mules for XJ41 development programme
XJ77 XJ-S V12 Convertible
XJ78 XJ-S AJ6 Convertible
XJ79 4WD XJ-S
XJ87 facelift V12 XJS Coupe
XJ88 facelift AJ6 XJS Coupe
XJ89 facelift XJS Cabriolet
XJ97 facelift V12 XJS Convertible
XJ98 facelift V12 AJ6 Coupe

.. which has several dead-ends, non-production experiments, and too many things which are visually indistinguishable, so it's unusable for our needs.

XJ77 was the 1988+ V12 full convertible, which we've stretched by usage to include the subsequent AJ6 4.0 version launched with the 91+ facelift - fair enough, it gives us an identifiable collection for non-coupes. Splitting off the 4.0 wouldn't work in practice - the only clue is the bigger bonnet hump for the smaller engine, but Jag started putting the bigger hump on the V12s as part of the 91+ facelift, which means it becomes a dating attribute across all convertibles, not an engine marker. So all full factory convertibles being XJ77 is all we can do. And its mirror for same reasons of all coupes being XJ27 is similarly practical. The American Hess & Eisenhardt convertible conversions of XJ27 coupes predate factory XJ77, so XJ27 works fine for these without change.

XJ28 convertible in the above list was pre-prodction 1970s code for abandoned experimental/prototype only, but may have been revived for 1985+ V12 SC targa (see below).

XJ57/58. These are the two 3.6 six cylinder twins launched Aug 83, but not the 4.0 AJ6 sequels. Hopeless task to try to incorporate XJ57 for the coupe, as the humped bonnet is the only visual clue and it's difficult to use in practice when visible - I've tried, with some results but not enough to fully trust. And then all versions get it .. XJ58 was only used on the 3.6 SC targa convertibles (there were no 4.0 SC/targas), but digging deeper I discovered there were V12 SCs as well (July 85+) so although SCs are distinctly identifiable they're difficult to split (only that bonnet again), and there's no distinct code in that list which securely says V12 SC (unless it was revived for the V12 SC which is unproven and nobody ever uses it).

Summary - stick to what we've got, and abandon XJ58 idea - it's not reliable enough.

On the bright side, we (fingers crossed) seem to have successfully incorporated the stupidly trivial 1991 name change from XJ-S to XJS across everything.


Direct link to this message Edit  Quote  Add this message as quote for multiple quotes  Delete  Top  Bottom
Mass change model info thread
Published 10/10/2024 @ 06:00:49, By Harold B
The manufacturer Vickers-Armstrongs https://www.imcdb.org/vehicles_make-Vickers-Armstrong.html is spelled incorrectly as "Vickers-Armstrong" without the S on the end. That is a common mistake, but "Armstrongs" is the correct spelling.
File: Armstrongs.jpg ( 205.4 KB - 130 )

Latest Edition: 10/10/2024 @ 06:03:05
Direct link to this message Edit  Quote  Add this message as quote for multiple quotes  Delete  Top  Bottom
Mass change model info thread
Published 10/10/2024 @ 13:48:32, By antp
It does not seem so simple, seeing the discussion on the Wikipedia page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Vickers-Armstrongs
At some point the company name changed then, it seems, originally it has no final S then?
Direct link to this message Edit  Quote  Add this message as quote for multiple quotes  Delete  Top  Bottom
Mass change model info thread
Published 13/10/2024 @ 13:45:46, By Harold B
The only argument for no S on the link you posted I see is someone from 2007 quoting "encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com", which was a copy of the old wikipedia page and has since been deleted and changed to Vickers-Armstrongs with S. The other person quoted various documents which show it is Vickers-Armstrongs, as do all of the original equipment data plates.
https://i.etsystatic.com/13649851/r/il/ff2e94/2134003525/il_fullxfull.2134003525- _3anb.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GENikTGWUAANqS6?format=jpg&name=large
https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/CQYAAOSwnipWbitA/s-l1600.jpg
https://shop.unigreenscheme.co.uk/files/ITEM-37040-013.jpg?v=RIvbUlJBWt
A British historian I know, Craig Moore, as said in the past that the company merger documents in the Kew archive say Vickers-Armstrongs. He's hard to get ahold of though so I don't know if I can get a copy of that to prove it.

These two manuals are from 1936 and 1933 respectively
https://i.imgur.com/j0wx7VQ.jpeg
https://i.imgur.com/edUXCiv.jpeg

Latest Edition: 13/10/2024 @ 15:16:44
Direct link to this message Edit  Quote  Add this message as quote for multiple quotes  Delete  Top  Bottom
Mass change model info thread
Published 14/10/2024 @ 11:34:21, By antp
I was a little lost between all there references :smile:
I renamed the vehicles to add the S, and added the old make to the list of automatic fixes so in case the name without S is searched on entered, it is automatically updated.
Direct link to this message Edit  Quote  Add this message as quote for multiple quotes  Delete  Top  Bottom
Mass change model info thread
Published 14/10/2024 @ 22:13:01, By JB007
Direct link to this message Edit  Quote  Add this message as quote for multiple quotes  Delete  Top  Bottom
Mass change model info thread
Published 15/10/2024 @ 03:07:01, By Harold B
I was a little lost between all there references :smile:
I renamed the vehicles to add the S, and added the old make to the list of automatic fixes so in case the name without S is searched on entered, it is automatically updated.


Sorry about that. I'm used to people being stubborn and having to provide a whole bunch of evidence to convince them.

For all "Renault FT", model is "FT17" and year is "1917+".
https://www.imcdb.org/vehicles_make-Renault_model-FT.html

No it isn't. I just asked him to change this on the previous page of this thread. The proper name is Renault FT. Renault didn't use numbers in their model designations (except for two specific exceptions which I mentioned).




This is also wrong. You're confusing the manufacturer's name, Panhard 178, with the French army's name, AMD 35. In the case of the "AMD 178B" specifically you're probably taking it from the "world of tanks" game? I'm guessing, because that's the first google result for that phrase. Don't ever do that. All of the "history" from that game is BS.
The vehicle in those last two images isn't even an AMD 35 B, it's a one-off prototype that didn't receive a name. https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2-france-panhard-178-renault-47mm-gun-turret/ "Panhard 178 47mm" is the best description since you have to call it something.
Direct link to this message Edit  Quote  Add this message as quote for multiple quotes  Delete  Top  Bottom
Mass change model info thread
Published 15/10/2024 @ 06:48:21, By antp
I assume then that the changes other than those you quoted are OK to apply then?
Direct link to this message Edit  Quote  Add this message as quote for multiple quotes  Delete  Top  Bottom
Mass change model info thread
Published 16/10/2024 @ 03:15:32, By Harold B
I assume then that the changes other than those you quoted are OK to apply then?


I don't see anything else wrong, but I don't know the years by heart.
Direct link to this message Edit  Quote  Add this message as quote for multiple quotes  Delete  Top  Bottom
Mass change model info thread
Published 16/10/2024 @ 07:22:50, By antp


There are two as 1936, are these correct? (one was set by Lateef, who usually knows his stuff :D)
Direct link to this message Edit  Quote  Add this message as quote for multiple quotes  Delete  Top  Bottom
Mass change model info thread
Published 16/10/2024 @ 16:36:42, By Lateef
Yes, production ran from 1936-40 so those listed as 1935 should be updated instead.
Direct link to this message Edit  Quote  Add this message as quote for multiple quotes  Delete  Top  Bottom
Mass change model info thread
Published 16/10/2024 @ 18:10:46, By antp
Thanks, updated
Direct link to this message Edit  Quote  Add this message as quote for multiple quotes  Delete  Top  Bottom
Mass change model info thread
Published 24/10/2024 @ 00:43:17, By Harold B
antp asked me to make a post here about the idea of removing the quote marks around the names of American "General" tanks (M3 and M5 Stuart, M3 Lee/M3 Grant, M4 Sherman, M8 Scott, M24 Chaffee, M26 Pershing, M36 Jackson, M41 Walker Bulldog, M46/47/48 Patton, M551 Sheridan, M1 Abrams, M2 Bradley, M8 Buford, M10 Booker) in case anyone had a problem with that.

The names are official and appear on the manuals for some those vehicles, they aren't unofficial nicknames. For the WW2 vehicles the general names are the sole name they were known by to Commonwealth forces (UK, Canada, etc). "M3" didn't fit in the British naming scheme of [name][mark x], so they came up with Lee and the Americans adopted it retroactively.

https://i.imgur.com/LING34V.jpeg
https://i.imgur.com/zoTPOZr.jpeg
https://i.imgur.com/ukWDrDT.jpeg

Other nicknames, like M7 Priest, M36 Slugger, Jumbo (for M4A3E2 Sherman), and M151 Mutt were used at least to some degree by the troops but were not officially adopted. Those ones I would have put in quotes.

M18 Hellcat was an official nickname and unlike the rest came from the manufacturer, Buick.

It's worth noting here the M60 family of tanks did not have any nickname. It was specifically said during development that they were not to be called "Patton".

"Wolverine" for the M10 3in GMC is completely made up and was never used by anyone. It is believed to have come from a toy company probably in the 1990s.

Edit: Correction, Priest was at least going to be adopted officially by the US Army, but I don't know if they followed up on that. It was official to the British.
https://i.imgur.com/QT0PAeL.png

Latest Edition: 24/10/2024 @ 00:49:50
Add Reply - Category:  
Add Reply
Bold [b]Text[/b] Italic [i]Italic[/i] Underline [u]Underline[/u] Strike Out [strike]Strike Out[/strike]
Email [email=nobody@nobody.org]Name[/email] Link [url=http://www.website.com]Text[/url] Anchor [anchor]Name[/anchor] Image [img]http://www.website.com/image.jpg[/img]
Align Left [align=left]Text[/align] Centered [align=center]Text[/align] Align Right [align=right]Text[/align] Text Justify [align=justify]Text[/text]
Color [color=#000000]Text[/color] Highlight [highlight=pascal]Text[/highlight] Widgets Smileys :code: [:code] HTML to BBCode converter Word to BBCode converter
Preview Spell Checker






Ada
CSS
Cobol
CPP
HTML
Fortran
Java
JavaScript
Pascal
Perl
PHP
Python
SQL
VB
XML
Anon URL
DailyMotion
eBay
Flickr
FLV
Google Video
Metacafe
MP3
SeeqPod
Veoh
Yahoo Video
YouTube
Sign In :: Sign Up :: Lost your login or your password?
KelCommunity.be :: © 2004-2024 Akretio SPRL :: Powered by Kelare