Comments
| Related page | Author | Message |
|---|---|---|
 |
 Ford78
2014-01-12 22:32 | Rinspeed wrote races? you can do them, drivers? also, co-drivers (is it really intresting?) i dont understand why you said drivers and races. Because we could add the races on racing cars BEFORE THE CHAMPIONSHIP SECTION appeared. We had to put the round, the driver, the co-driver, the team and the result. (If driver was retired, it said "Retirement"). When the championship section appeared, the RACE RESULTS section disappeared. -- Last edit: 2014-01-12 22:32:59 |
|   Rinspeed
2014-01-12 22:23 | explain it to me if you had some ideas. |
| Rinspeed
2014-01-12 22:12 | Ford78 wrote You welcome. I just want you know that I would like to see more things (races, drivers, co-drivers...) on website. races? you can do them, drivers? also, co-drivers (is it really intresting?) i dont understand why you said drivers and races. |
|
Ford78
2014-01-12 22:07 | Desscythe17 wrote Thanks for your support. You welcome. I just want you know that I would like to see more things (races, drivers, co-drivers...) on website. |
|   Desscythe17
2014-01-12 22:07 | Rinspeed wrote yes it's more clear now ;-) but some work for me that i can't do like that. I think it can be done in holiday when i will have more time. Alright, I look forward to it. |
| Rinspeed
2014-01-12 22:06 | yes it's more clear now ;-) but some work for me that i can't do like that. I think it can be done in holiday when i will have more time. |
| Desscythe17
2014-01-12 22:05 | Ford78 wrote I think that it's a great idea. I would like to see this on our site. Thanks for your support. |
|
Ford78
2014-01-12 22:01 | I think that it's a great idea. I would like to see this on our site. |
| Desscythe17
2014-01-12 22:01 | Here, I've tried to make clear what I had in my mind: imageshack.com/i/0uhf1qj and imageshack.com/i/nlmppdj (Especially the second image) -- Last edit: 2014-01-12 22:02:40 |
| Rinspeed
2014-01-12 21:58 | it will take a lot of place. In the right we can't take place because it depends of the configuration of each members. |
| Desscythe17
2014-01-12 21:43 | Rinspeed wrote i dont understand The place where there is now "related with". I think the other version of a car (high performance, bodykit, different front, etc.) can stay there as it will not take up anymore space than it does now. In that case, maybe the other bodystyles (sedan, wagon, etc.) and same cars from different makes (Opel Astra and Vauxhall Astra for example) can go in a different column, like in the image I posted. Because if we put all these things in the "related with", it will be messy and difficult to understand for people. The last thing I said was because you said my idea was too big for this place. I wanted to ask you if the pages as they are now are as big as they can go, or can they become even bigger? If anything is unclear, please tell me. |
| Rinspeed
2014-01-12 20:44 | i dont understand |
| Desscythe17
2014-01-12 20:10 | Rinspeed wrote too big for this place But they fit right now, so why wouldn't they in the future? Or are you talking about the other bodystyles and same cars from other makes? I don't know if the page is at its limit right now. |
| Rinspeed
2014-01-12 20:05 | too big for this place |
| Desscythe17
2014-01-12 19:06 | Rinspeed wrote it will be very long to have all the others versions and i d'ont see where i can put it They can stay where they are? At the related with-section? |
| Rinspeed
2014-01-12 18:18 | it will be very long to have all the others versions and i d'ont see where i can put it |
| Desscythe17
2014-01-12 18:03 | Rinspeed wrote it take a big place the thing you do It can be quite compact. For example, the bodystyles can be listed as "sedan, wagon, hatchback, etc." instead of long names. The cars from different brands are ofcourse full name, and other versions/models can just be short, like "Z24, Berlinetta, Custom Coup". |
| Rinspeed
2014-01-12 17:51 | it take a big place the thing you do |
|
Ford78
2014-01-12 17:50 | Rinspeed wrote i can't put things like that at the right of the pics. And at the beginning, i tought that related with is only for car from others makes (Peuget 107/Citron C1/Toyota Aigo for example) not bodystyle. It will be very long with that. Rinspeed I got one question: How can I create an website like Web Car Story? |
| Desscythe17
2014-01-12 17:44 | Rinspeed wrote i can't put things like that at the right of the pics. And at the beginning, i tought that related with is only for car from others makes (Peuget 107/Citron C1/Toyota Aigo for example) not bodystyle. It will be very long with that. That's what I meant, we could place it above or underneath the pictures and engines. It won't be that long, there are nearly never more than 5 bodystyles for 1 car I think. |
| Rinspeed
2014-01-12 17:14 | Desscythe17 wrote Hi Rinspeed. I had an idea for linking cars better, and I wondered what you thought about it, and if it is actually possible to do. If it is possible, it would mean that I could link enormous groups of cars, which would make it easier to navigate around the site. Here is a (bad) image of my idea: imageshack.com/i/jjan5lj I'm not sure if it is actually possible to add stuff to the side of the pictures, but it could be put above the pictures or underneath the pictures for all I care. If it's not possible to do this, could we maybe discuss a different way to link more cars? Because I think if I link all the cars I want in the "related with" column, it will be really confusing for people. i can't put things like that at the right of the pics. And at the beginning, i tought that related with is only for car from others makes (Peuget 107/Citron C1/Toyota Aigo for example) not bodystyle. It will be very long with that. |
| Desscythe17
2014-01-12 17:02 | Hi Rinspeed. I had an idea for linking cars better, and I wondered what you thought about it, and if it is actually possible to do. If it is possible, it would mean that I could link enormous groups of cars, which would make it easier to navigate around the site. Here is a (bad) image of my idea: imageshack.com/i/jjan5lj I'm not sure if it is actually possible to add stuff to the side of the pictures, but it could be put above the pictures or underneath the pictures for all I care. If it's not possible to do this, could we maybe discuss a different way to link more cars? Because I think if I link all the cars I want in the "related with" column, it will be really confusing for people. |
 | Desscythe17
2014-01-12 11:22 | As this car was produced before 1971, some of the horsepower ratings are in gross hp instead of net hp: 1970 4.1 (gross 155hp, net around 120hp) 1970 5.7 (gross 250hp, net around 170hp) -- Last edit: 2014-04-10 21:07:41 |
 | Desscythe17
2014-01-03 09:23 | Black Bart wrote Why the production years?? If the year models come out the previous year, why not list them from the year range they got significantly changed? @ Ford78: I wasn't referring just to US models. AFAIK the whole world except for North America uses production years, so our notations should be accurate. If this car came out in september '85, in the US they would call an '86, but that kind of thing just wouldn't make sense on European or Japanese cars. We could opt for using both notations, but I think that would make everything confusing. |
|
 Black Bart
2014-01-03 02:14 | Why the production years?? If the year models come out the previous year, why not list them from the year range they got significantly changed? @ Ford78: I wasn't referring just to US models. |
| Desscythe17
2014-01-02 23:33 | Ford78 wrote Yes, you're right. The picture is an 1986 model but it doesn't mean that started in 1986. In WebCarStory we do the prodution years, NOT in US model years. The Celebrity was produced from 1985. For example: I put Fiat Punto. The official sale just began in 1994 but it started the prodution in 1993. So we put 1993. Did you even read my comment? I said the exact same thing. |
|
Ford78
2014-01-02 22:03 | Black Bart wrote First pic is a 1986 model. Yes, you're right. The picture is an 1986 model but it doesn't mean that started in 1986. In WebCarStory we do the prodution years, NOT in US model years. The Celebrity was produced from 1985. For example: I put Fiat Punto. The official sale just began in 1994 but it started the prodution in 1993. So we put 1993. |
| Desscythe17
2014-01-02 21:48 | Black Bart wrote First pic is a 1986 model. I think (if I look at your other comments) you're thinking in US model years, but on webcarstory, we put cars in production years. So if this car went on sale as an '86 MY, but the sales started in 1985, we do 1985-. Okay? Otherwise, you'll find that all the American cars I put on the site are wrong, but that's just because I put them in production years, not US model years. -- Last edit: 2014-01-02 21:49:25 |
 |
Black Bart
2014-01-02 19:25 | There is no '81 model, it came out that year as a 1982 model. |
|
Black Bart
2014-01-02 19:24 | First pic is a 1986 model. |
 | Rinspeed
2013-10-26 09:46 | Desscythe17 wrote Should I make one page from this page and www.webcarstory.com/voiture.php?id=5128 , because I think that they are too similar too have a multiple pages. i dont think, this isn't the same hood. |
| Desscythe17
2013-10-26 09:03 | Should I make one page from this page and www.webcarstory.com/voiture.php?id=5128 , because I think that they are too similar too have a multiple pages. |
 | Rinspeed
2013-10-24 20:19 | Desscythe17 wrote Just a minor detail, but I noticed that when you click on an engine, if you look at the torque, there's only a number and no "nm" Corrected. It's because i actually do the future system of translation. So i verify all the files, one by one and change some things to add the system. In english you can't see nothing or just minor change (like add en engine page, that was not the same presentation). But for example some Admin files are now in french and english(instead of only english before). I had to do that to prepare the site to have others languages. |
| Desscythe17
2013-10-24 19:52 | Just a minor detail, but I noticed that when you click on an engine, if you look at the torque, there's only a number and no "nm" |
 | Desscythe17
2013-09-03 13:24 | The same gross-net horsepower problem occurs here as at www.webcarstory.com/voiture.php?id=533. Refer to the comments on that page for more information. -- Last edit: 2013-09-03 13:24:37 |
 | Desscythe17
2013-09-03 12:35 | Please keep in mind that the horsepower-ratings of 1969-1970 are in gross, and not in net. There is no converter for those ratings, so it may seem that engines of 1970-1971 have lots and lots less power. |
 | Desscythe17
2013-08-23 14:44 | Mieguy wrote the concept car is currently for sale @ www.autobarnclassiccars.com for 35.995 $. direct link here: www.autobarnclassiccars.com/vehicles/2002-chevrolet-avalanche-base-camp-stock-1277/ they have shown this at SEMA 2003 again! and it looks like its absolutely the same car. so add 2000 - 2003 as model year? text also states that it is the "one and only" so total production is 1. If the car is from 2000, and they just showed it again once, that doesn't mean that its production years should be 2000-2003. |
|
 Mieguy
2013-08-23 12:46 | the concept car is currently for sale @ www.autobarnclassiccars.com for 35.995 $. direct link here: www.autobarnclassiccars.com/vehicles/2002-chevrolet-avalanche-base-camp-stock-1277/ they have shown this at SEMA 2003 again! and it looks like its absolutely the same car. so add 2000 - 2003 as model year? text also states that it is the "one and only" so total production is 1. -- Last edit: 2013-08-23 13:04:51 |
 | Desscythe17
2013-07-12 14:25 | I think the rear picture is way too small, and I can't find a decent replacement for it. |
|
Ford78
2013-07-12 14:05 | Desscythe17 wrote Better pictures are much appreciated, if you're able to find any, please post them here! Desscythe17: In my opinion, your pictures are great for me! EDIT: Here's the source for better picture: www.reumatismocarclub.com.br/cgi-bin/reumatismo/reuma_06.asp?IdMateria=6 I think these pictures are great for me, so I don't see why you want the pictures to be replaced. -- Last edit: 2013-07-12 14:12:04 |
| Desscythe17
2013-07-12 13:24 | Better pictures are much appreciated, if you're able to find any, please post them here! |
 | Desscythe17
2013-07-04 21:19 | There was no modelyear 1983 Chevrolet Caprice Coup, so engines from 1982-1983 do not exist. |
 | Desscythe17
2013-06-25 20:29 | Way too small, sorry |
 | Desscythe17
2013-06-25 20:29 | I'll search for something better myself, I just really dislike these interior pictures, because they look to be in a really bad shape. |
|
Gamer
2013-06-25 17:32 | Official shot of the rear: static.ddmcdn.com/gif/chevrolet-monte-carlo-42.jpg |
| Rinspeed
2013-06-25 15:44 | when we will have better picture... |
|
Ford78
2013-06-25 14:21 | Desscythe17 wrote Rinspeed, could you please delete the interiors of cars www.webcarstory.com/voiture.php?id=14759 and www.webcarstory.com/voiture.php?id=14758 ? I want decent interiors on my cars, not disgusting interiors. But you have at least, the interiors images. I don't think that they are disgusting.... -- Last edit: 2013-06-25 14:22:29 |
| Desscythe17
2013-06-25 09:39 | Rinspeed, could you please delete the interiors of cars www.webcarstory.com/voiture.php?id=14759 and www.webcarstory.com/voiture.php?id=14758 ? I want decent interiors on my cars, not disgusting interiors. |
 | Desscythe17
2013-06-23 12:43 | Gamer wrote Is'nt this a better front pic? static.ddmcdn.com/gif/chevrolet-monte-carlo-19.jpg It's very small, which makes it harder to really look at details. |
|
Gamer
2013-06-23 09:10 | Is'nt this a better front pic? static.ddmcdn.com/gif/chevrolet-monte-carlo-19.jpg |
