Comments
| Related page | Author | Message |
|---|---|---|
 |   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 Coupé". |
|   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/Citroën 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/Citroën 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/Citroën 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 Coupé, 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 |
 | Desscythe17
2013-05-30 23:17 | Rinspeed wrote it's not more Pininfarina Chevrolet? I changed it around, I'm fairly sure Pininfarina made it after Chevrolet told them to, it wasn't a project started by Pininfarina. |
| Rinspeed
2013-05-30 22:27 | it's not more Pininfarina Chevrolet? |
 | Rinspeed
2013-05-11 10:15 | Desscythe17 wrote The LTZ, Z71, High Country and later to be revealed base models all have different grill designs, do they require a different page, or is this one page enough? High Country is similar to GMC's Denali trim, so it might require a seperate page. like you want, perhaps some of them could be in the future system i will do. |
| Desscythe17
2013-05-11 10:04 | The LTZ, Z71, High Country and later to be revealed base models all have different grill designs, do they require a different page, or is this one page enough? High Country is similar to GMC's Denali trim, so it might require a seperate page. -- Last edit: 2013-05-11 10:12:40 |
 |
 Andra125
2013-04-11 14:11 | Now that's one vehicular beauty. -- Last edit: 2013-04-11 15:57:09 |
| Desscythe17
2013-04-11 07:57 | Mark0 wrote Great car. I am looking forward to buy 1994 version. Anyone can recommend me where i can find one? That's really cool! I found an in-depth video tour of the car that you may be interested in: www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvBorFqRRd0 |
|   Mark0
2013-04-08 15:09 | Great car. I am looking forward to buy 1994 version. Anyone can recommend me where i can find one? |
 | Desscythe17
2013-04-07 22:45 | Ford78 wrote 1983-1990> Chevrolet C4 with black roof 1991-1996> Facellit/ Black roof is gone A black roof doesn't have anything to do with it, the difference is the lights, and the total "boxiness" -- Last edit: 2013-04-07 22:49:45 |
|
Ford78
2013-04-07 22:41 | 1983-1990> Chevrolet C4 with black roof 1991-1996> Facellit/ Black roof is gone |
 | Rinspeed
2013-04-07 21:28 | Desscythe17 wrote I don't know why this car can't be C6 like webcarstory.com/voiture.php?id=527, but automatically turns into "Mk VI".  because it's not corvette but corvette z06 and the program put C6 only with corvette -- Last edit: 2013-04-07 21:37:07 |
 | Desscythe17
2013-04-07 20:08 | Ford78 wrote Desscythe17!!!!! It's 1993, not 1992!  Remember, we do production years, not US model years, so 1992... |
| Desscythe17
2013-04-07 19:40 | I don't know why this car can't be C6 like webcarstory.com/voiture.php?id=527, but automatically turns into "Mk VI". |
|
Ford78
2013-04-07 18:06 | Desscythe17!!!!! It's 1993, not 1992! |
 | Desscythe17
2013-03-28 21:40 | Thank you Rinspeed. -- Last edit: 2013-03-28 22:09:25 |
 | Desscythe17
2013-03-14 20:32 | I don't think so. Classic luxury cars, OK, but modern ones are better off with FWD. It makes them roomier, more fuel efficient and more comfortable, while RWD luxury cars are just plain faster. But that's not what a luxury car is about. Besides, most of the marques you described probably used RWD because they didn't know how to properly make a FWD luxury car. For example Citroën has made luxury cars since almost the beginning, and they make the most comfortable cars that exist -- Last edit: 2013-03-14 20:34:14 |
| Mark0
2013-03-14 16:40 | Desscythe17 wrote For a luxury car that doesn't need high performance, FWD is way better than RWD. I know, but greatest luxurious cars have RWD. Duesenberg, Bentley, Rolls-Royce, old Cadillacs and Lincolns. It's OK for luxury car to have FWD, but when it have over 300hp it's stupid to use FWD. -- Last edit: 2013-03-14 16:41:12 |
