Comments about this vehicle

Author	Message
sixcyl ◊ 2006-12-16 09:19	E Type Roadster 1961+
Bebert ◊ 2006-12-16 09:34	C'est quoi la différence entre un cabriolet classique, comme tous ceux déjà référencés, et un "roadster" ?
sixcyl ◊ 2006-12-16 10:21	Aucune différence, c'est juste une erreur des autres référencées : le terme commercial exact est Roadster
Bebert ◊ 2006-12-17 11:49	Apparemment, quelqu'un ne doit pas être d'accord et a modifié la fiche...
antp ◊ 2006-12-17 12:01	Je l'avais mis en extra-info comme pour les autres, mais je sais pas pourquoi l'info a disparu. Ou alors j'ai raté mon coup en collant le texte coupé de l'autre champ.
Bebert ◊ 2006-12-17 12:08	Pour les autres, ça ne figure même pas en extra-infos...
antp ◊ 2006-12-17 12:28	Bizarre Je ne sais pas qui a viré ça
wickey ◊ 2006-12-17 14:48	The Roadster is not a part of the name and I believe it is unnecessary here
antp ◊ 2006-12-17 14:52	Well, it is still part of its denomination, it could be put as extra info like the "Four-Door Sedan" etc. of US cars, no?
wickey ◊ 2006-12-17 15:02	I am not sure.. Same should be with XK8 - we have Coupe and Convertible, but not in the extra field
antp ◊ 2006-12-17 15:08	This info could go in extra info, I think: http://www.jaguar.co.uk/uk/en/xk/models_pricing/models.htm
sixcyl ◊ 2006-12-17 17:07	Roadster is in the name denomination of this Jag, as Coupé is too... what is the problem? ... putting it in this "extra info field" is not logical... as many "convertible" "coupé" "familiale" "estate" "station wagon" entered in model name, why shouldn't we make a difference with this One another point is that all the Jag E Type coupe and roadster are mixed togother, and it's not very convenient for a good classification
antp ◊ 2006-12-17 17:19	Isn't it is better to sort them by year & series than by body type? For me they can also be listed with Roadster in the name, I only want that the same name style is used for all E-Type (i.e. for all E-Type "Roadster" in model name or for all "Roadster" as extra info, but not a mix of the two). -- Last edit: 2006-12-17 17:21:54
sixcyl ◊ 2006-12-17 17:28	antp wrote Isn't it is better to sort them by year & series than by body type? In my opinion, it's better to have a classification by body type first, then years and series...it's much easier if you need research on a model.... many cars are listed in that way and it's nice antp wrote For me they can also be listed with Roadster in the name, I only want that the same name style is used for all E-Type (i.e. for all E-Type "Roadster" in model name or for all "Roadster" as extra info, but not a mix of the two). I agree with you -- Last edit: 2006-12-17 17:28:51
antp ◊ 2006-12-17 17:33	sixcyl wrote In my opinion, it's better to have a classification by body type first, then years and series...it's much easier if you need research on a model.... many cars are listed in that way and it's nice Yes. Except some cars where no body type is included in commercial names (I think for example to some Wagon versions of US cars, like the Ford Taurus, as it was mentionned before).
wickey ◊ 2006-12-17 17:44	sixcyl wrote Roadster is in the name denomination of this Jag, as Coupé is too... Where on the vehicle is that written?
sixcyl ◊ 2006-12-17 17:47	antp wrote Yes. Except some cars where no body type is included in commercial names (I think for example to some Wagon versions of US cars, like the Ford Taurus, as it was mentionned before). Agreed. The master word is "commercial names"! ... for instance, in such a way: Simca Aronde P60 Châtelaine will not be grouped wit Simca Aronde P60 Ranch, though there are both estate version of the P60...it's not so much matter and the list remains coherent (... all the Ranch and the Châtelaine are togother )
sixcyl ◊ 2006-12-17 17:52	wickey wrote Where on the vehicle is that written? there are many vehicle part of names not written on the vehicle, however there are offical commercial names ...
antp ◊ 2006-12-17 17:55	wickey wrote Where on the vehicle is that written? Where is it written "E-Type"? Link to "www.autowallpaper.de" (well, maybe on some it is written, I do not know)
Bebert ◊ 2006-12-17 18:41	Ça me rappelle un débat avec une Simca 9... Comme la majorité des Type-E n'a pas "roaster" dans la dénomination, plions-nous, momentanément à cette majorité. En attendant que sixcyl apporte la preuve de ce qu'il avance... Sur le fond, personnellement, je m'en contrefiche.
antp ◊ 2006-12-17 18:42	Bebert wrote Comme la majorité des Type-E n'a pas "roaster" dans la dénomination, plions-nous, momentanément à cette majorité. Tu veux dire sur le site ? Aucune ne l'avait, mais je ne sais pas qui a viré l'info. De toute façon en deux lignes de code j'ai remis les Roadstar & Coupe pour toutes les Type E, et je peux les virer ou les mettre en extra info aussi facilement s'il le faut
Bebert ◊ 2006-12-17 18:45	antp wrote Tu veux dire sur le site ? Oui bien sur!
wickey ◊ 2006-12-17 22:51	antp wrote Where is it written "E-Type"? Link to "www.autowallpaper.de" (well, maybe on some it is written, I do not know)
wickey ◊ 2006-12-17 22:55	Well if we look at this... http://www.jaguar-e-type.net/etype_875676_JDHT.jpg It stated the model name quite clearly.. Anyway we should add OTS (Open Two Seater), FHC (Fixed Head Coupe) and 2+2 to the extra info field, but not to the model name.
antp ◊ 2006-12-17 23:00	So what, I remove "Roadster" and "Coupe"?
Bebert ◊ 2006-12-17 23:11	J'en ai bien peur...
wickey ◊ 2006-12-17 23:14	My vision - stay as it was, without anything. If something, then OTS, FHC and 2+2 to Extra info (but I am affraid it will be a bit difficult to say whether FHC or 2+2 by most of the coupes )
sixcyl ◊ 2006-12-18 01:28	wickey wrote Well if we look at this... http://www.jaguar-e-type.net/etype_875676_JDHT.jpg It stated the model name quite clearly.. Anyway we should add OTS (Open Two Seater), FHC (Fixed Head Coupe) and 2+2 to the extra info field, but not to the model name. Sorry Wickey, but your document is not the commercial document (catalogue) but a purchase certificate / Registration card ... Roadster is the commercial designation of the cabriolet ,eventhough its coded OTS on this certificate... here an example of catalogue were it is clearly mentionned "Roadster" there are many litterature were these terms of Roadster and Coupé are used
wickey ◊ 2006-12-18 11:03	the question then is, which opinion is more reliable to us - the sales documents, brochures, or certificate.. Anyway I do not wanna argue about that - I will try to find some E-Type related forum and ask people there
sixcyl ◊ 2006-12-18 12:58	wickey wrote the question then is, which opinion is more reliable to us - the sales documents, brochures, or certificate.. Anyway I do not wanna argue about that - I will try to find some E-Type related forum and ask people there thank's... according to what is done here , sales documents, brochures are the vector for this database...not the registration cards or certificates! for instance, my MG ZT-T is described as: Marque MG Type MMG1804FA158 MG ZT-T N°Serie SARRJXTFT3D279102 Carrosserie: BREAK Energie: ES Puissance 13CV Places Assises 005 and as you know the name of this car is MG ZT-T, and not MG ZT-T Break
wickey ◊ 2006-12-18 13:40	sixcyl wrote Marque MG Type MMG1804FA158 MG ZT-T N°Serie SARRJXTFT3D279102 Carrosserie: BREAK Energie: ES Puissance 13CV Places Assises 005 and as you know the name of this car is MG ZT-T, and not MG ZT-T Break exactly, then model name is quite clear - MG ZT-T
wickey ◊ 2006-12-18 18:06	well I have some answers: Link to "forums.jag-lovers.org" I think, we should make it according to the 3rd message.
sixcyl ◊ 2006-12-18 19:58	wickey wrote exactly, then model name is quite clear - MG ZT-T Well, my example is maybe not so good, what I ment is that datas in those registrations documents or certificates are notwhat are used for commercial names ... (here the type is MG1804FA158 MGZ-T )
sixcyl ◊ 2006-12-18 20:02	wickey wrote well I have some answers: Link to "forums.jag-lovers.org" I think, we should make it according to the 3rd message. Could you make copy/past of the messages with IMCDB please?...
antp ◊ 2006-12-18 20:18	sixcyl wrote Well, my example is maybe not so good, what I ment is that datas in those registrations documents or certificates are notwhat are used for commercial names ... (here the type is MG1804FA158 MGZ-T ) On the other hand, the commercial name is not always the best choice either. Sometimes these name vary from one year to another, and are not easy for classification. For example for Mercedes & BMW the "internal" name is more useful than the commercial one for some uses (searches, classification, etc.)
sixcyl ◊ 2006-12-18 20:43	antp wrote On the other hand, the commercial name is not always the best choice either. Sometimes these name vary from one year to another, and are not easy for classification. For example for Mercedes & BMW the "internal" name is more useful than the commercial one for some uses (searches, classification, etc.) ... in that case, you find better to have all the E-type Coupé and Roadster mixed togother ... antp wrote On the other hand, the commercial name is not always the best choice either. Sometimes these name vary from one year to another, and are not easy for classification. So what? if there are grouped in the same classes?... for ex. all the Citroen ID19, ID20,..are togother, and all the DS are togother in another group... what's the matter? and in the DS group, it's better to have all the "DS21"(berline)togother, and all the "DS21 Cabriolet" togother to respect name designation and order in lists antp wrote For example for Mercedes & BMW the "internal" name is more useful than the commercial one for some uses (searches, classification, etc.) I agree , that is an exception which can help, because you give a link with chassis/internal code
wickey ◊ 2006-12-18 20:46	wickey: "Hello fellow Jag enthusiasts. I am one of the admins at Internet Movie Cars Database (www.imcdb.org) and we are solving one little problem with denomination of E-Types, XK-Es. On our site, we are trying to identify and correctly name all visible cars in the movies and E-Type is very common there too smiling smiley Anyway to the point. We have E-Types and XK-Es arranged by years and series but we are trying to solve whether the body type denomination (Coupe, Roadster, 2+2) is the part of its model name, or not. We also have a field called Extra Info, where we usually add infos about engine; body style by 30s, 40s US cars; coachbuilders by RR and Bentley etc. What do you think? Should be the model name as this: ''E-Type Roadster'' or just ''E-Type'' and Roadster in extra info field? Or should we use just E-Type without anything, as all the cars are divided to categories by body style generally (Sedan, coupe etc..) here is the recent example with discussion to it: /vehicle.php?id=74257 Please if you have time, take a look and help us out winking smiley For whole IMCDB staff " Robert Moore: "In reply to a message from wickey sent Mon 18 Dec 2006: E-Type or XKE (the name Jaguar chose to market the car in the USA) is correct. Era factory literature did not define the styles as separate models per se, but simply referred to the cars according to their body types; Coupe, 2+2 and OTS. Note that the correct factory nomenclature for the open car is OTS, or open two seater, not roadster. Bob" George Cohn: "The Coupe was usually called a FHC for "Fixed head coupe". So the 3 styles are FHC for the Coupe, 2+2 for the 4 seater model, and OTS (Open Two Seater) for the open model with the cloth or vinyl top. The cars from 1961 to 1964 had a 3.8 litre 6 cylinder engine. The '65 to '71 cars had a 4.2 litre 6 cylinder engine, and the '71 - 74 cars had the 5.3 litre V-12 engine. Most Americans called them XK-E's although the official name was just e-type. The literature in the US often carried the XK-E name although the factory still called them the e-type as well. George Cohn '70 OTS" paul spurlock: "Wickey, This could spin out of control as even Jaguar themselves were not 100% committed to the names and US marketing put their spin on it. Earlier XK open cars were called DHCs (Drop Head Coupes) and that name will be found in some early E-type documentation. In North America marketing had a firm grip on nomenclature for the car so it was called the XKE, tho that name was never adopted by Coventry it is pervasive here and was used in publications and factory ads. Indeed S3 cars are not XKEs by definition as they don't have the XK motor. Roadster would have been used as well, tho I don't think by the factory, but there's even argument as to what a real roadster is. Some say if it doesn't have side curtains its not a roadster. And of course modern mfgs want to call some 4dr sedans "sports cars". In '90 Nissan added a decal in the rear door window "4DSC" which stood for 4dr Sports Car. Short story there's going to be arguments but I don't believe the body style is part of the name. IMHO (only) the priority and probably most correct naming convention would be: 1) E-type, it stands alone, loose XKE if you can, they're all E-types first and foremost but not all XKEs. The following two items being descriptors of 1) could be combined in a separate field but they're independently important. 2) Series; S1, S2 or S3 3) OTS (open two seater), FHC (fixed head coupe) and 2+2. There's little argument in the last two body style names that I know of. E.g.; E-type, S2 FHC or E-type, S3 2+2 etc. pauls 67ots"
sixcyl ◊ 2006-12-18 21:09	Thank's Wickey... the Roadster name for body seems to have been used though official name should be Open Two Seater?... Ok. let it be You suggest not to indicate the body type in name field, but rather in extra-info field... I would be 100% ok for this if "extra-info" field could help to put order in the lists... what it doesn't at the moment, due to the fact this field can be entered by many infos from different kind
antp ◊ 2006-12-18 22:50	sixcyl wrote ... in that case, you find better to have all the E-type Coupé and Roadster mixed togother ... As I said, I see the ordering by year maybe more useful than the ordering by body type. Though that the fist one can be changed in the drop-down box at the top right corner of the list. Maybe I could simply add a similar option to sort by body type? (when I will have some time I will make an option so everybody can chose what sorting style he prefers by default)
antp ◊ 2006-12-18 22:53	sixcyl wrote So what? if there are grouped in the same classes?... for ex. all the Citroen ID19, ID20,..are togother, and all the DS are togother in another group... what's the matter? and in the DS group, it's better to have all the "DS21"(berline)togother, and all the "DS21 Cabriolet" togother to respect name designation and order in lists DS is not a problem, as they are grouped. I was thinking to some special cases like the Break 20 for example But even if I find these names annoying (for the users that would like to find all DS and similar, for example), I use them, as they are the real name of the car...
DidierF ◊ 2013-11-03 06:46	Time: 000910 (C'est quoi,le coupé ou sedan 2 portes, derrière ? J'ai failli lui ouvrir sa page.)

Advertising

Last completed movie pages

1961 Jaguar E-Type Open Two Seater Series I

1961 Jaguar E-Type in Les aventuriers, Movie, 1967

Comments about this vehicle

Add a comment

Advertising

Watch or buy this title - Powered by JustWatch

Advertising