[ Login ]

Advertising

Last completed movie pages

Three Into Two Won't Go; Wings to Bermuda; Судьба диверсанта; Irish Wish; Flash(s); Tout le monde ment 2; Le crime lui va si bien; Ripples: 55 to Get Ready; Répercussions; Droit de Regard; Põlev maa; Pollos sin cabeza; The Bad Seed Returns; Yırtık Niyazi; The Bad Seed; (more...)

1973 Mercedes-Benz S-Klasse [W116]

1973 Mercedes-Benz S-Klasse [W116] in Ripoux contre ripoux, Movie, 1990 IMDB

Class: Cars, Sedan — Model origin: DE

1973 Mercedes-Benz S-Klasse [W116]

[*] Background vehicle

Comments about this vehicle

AuthorMessage

sixcyl FR

2007-12-04 07:30

[Image: mercedesbenz450seaaos4.5753.jpg] [Image: mercedesbenz450seacly0.9637.jpg]

rpcm PT

2007-12-04 16:40

Since it's listed as a 450SE, this version was introduced in March 1973.

Ingo DE

2007-12-05 20:16

Why 450? It can be a 280 or 350, too.

sixcyl FR

2007-12-05 20:43

Indeed, but it's better looking than "Mercedes-Benz" alone

antp BE

2007-12-05 21:16

Doesn't 350 look better than 450 ? :p
Seriously, I do not think it is good to take a random number if it is impossible to suppose which one it is.

wrenchhead US

2007-12-05 23:52

antp wrote Seriously, I do not think it is good to take a random number if it is impossible to suppose which one it is.


Agree, if you don't know - just say so and leave it alone.

sixcyl FR

2007-12-05 23:55

I don't agree

G-MANN UK

2007-12-05 23:56

I sometimes wonder if some Mercs on this site are labelled with certain engine-size numbers by default rather than people actually being able to prove what they are, there seem to be a lot of S500s and you can't always see the badge.

CarChasesFanatic ES

2007-12-05 23:59

I agree with G-MANN, i dont see the point either to invent a label :??: just because it is better looking than mercedes alone...

sixcyl FR

2007-12-06 00:11

If we should use this rule at any vehicles , they would be hundreds or thousands more unidentified models, though in fact we know what type it is (but not exactly the exact label)...

some examples...what about DS 19 or 21? , peugeot 302? or 404 Légère? Renault Celtaquatre/Primaquatre...and more pertinent examples are Simca 1300/ 1500 , Fiat 1300/1500 we do choose a label don't we? so I wonder why we couldn't do the same for MB or BMW



DynaMike NL

2007-12-06 00:16

I agree with Sixcyl, but I'd go for the smallest possible engine size, unless it is visible that the car has a bigger engine. So that would make this a 280SE (since these alloy wheels were also available as an option on the smaller versions).

G-MANN UK

2007-12-06 00:18

sixcyl wrote so I wonder why we couldn't do the same for MB or BMW


Because MB and BMW already have "W###" or "E##" to identify the model range.

-- Last edit: 2007-12-06 00:18:58

CarChasesFanatic ES

2007-12-06 00:39

With Citroens we well i mean you invent the model :??: and the same for Peugeots and Renaults? why?

sixcyl FR

2007-12-06 00:46

carchasesfanatic wrote ... we well i mean you invent the model :??: ..


I don't understand that sentence

CarChasesFanatic ES

2007-12-06 00:49

Yes sorry, i meant -"we, well i mean, you invent the model"

Anyway you invent models for those cars?

-- Last edit: 2007-12-06 00:54:32

G-MANN UK

2007-12-06 00:56

I think he's saying that you, sixcyl, are making up the model details (engine sizes) for some of the cars.

G-MANN UK

2007-12-06 00:58

DynaMike wrote I agree with Sixcyl, but I'd go for the smallest possible engine size, unless it is visible that the car has a bigger engine. So that would make this a 280SE (since these alloy wheels were also available as an option on the smaller versions).


I don't agree with this either, not with Mercs.

CarChasesFanatic ES

2007-12-06 00:58

Saying no, asking

antp BE

2007-12-06 00:58

sixcyl wrote
some examples...what about DS 19 or 21?

Just DS then :p

For some makes we take the most common model, or just one out of the two or three possible choices. Because it is very unusual to have those without model name (I think for example to clone US cars, like Dodge Diplomat / Plymouth Gran Fury).
For Cadillac we just do not list a model as it is often impossible to know it. For these it is quite common to just have year + body type, without model.
For Mercedes & BMW, they are usually referred by their W/E-Code, so the model name is not very useful there either. Some are listed with the common part (3/5/7 for BMW, or SE, SEL, S-Klasse, etc. for Mercedes); here it would be just "SE" I guess?
If some still want to list these a random number, I won't fight and debate, but as said above it would be more logical to pick the most common one then or the most probable one depending on the country/year.

-- Last edit: 2007-12-06 01:00:55

CarChasesFanatic ES

2007-12-06 01:00

antp wrote
it would be more logical to pick the most common one then (or the most probable one depending on the country/year).


But why, that's still a guess

G-MANN UK

2007-12-06 01:01

I've started a topic in the naming conventions section of the forum, we could discuss this further there.

CarChasesFanatic ES

2007-12-06 01:02

antp wrote
If some still want to list these a random number, I won't fight and debate.


Why? i think you should state a rule and us all should follow it, we should do what you decide not each of us doing what we want no?

antp BE

2007-12-06 01:05

So even when I say that I do not want to discuss endlessly on a subject I have to discuss about my non-discussion? :cry:

antp BE

2007-12-06 01:09

carchasesfanatic wrote But why, that's still a guess

Many cars were/are identified by guesses. Some are more certain than others. There is still a different between a guess made on popularity/probability of a model and a model name taken randomly.

CarChasesFanatic ES

2007-12-06 01:12

still a guess if yuo dont know the exact model, it doesnt matter how popular the car can be in that specific country

Neptune US

2007-12-06 01:13

antp wrote So even when I say that I do not want to discuss endlessly on a subject I have to discuss about my non-discussion? :cry:


I can see why you get frustrated ... :/

CarChasesFanatic ES

2007-12-06 01:21

Yes we all know why he gets, but if we dont agree things and if we dont talk them everybody will do what they want, but he's right i wont keep with this i imagine that although a rule would be created us all we still do what we want so that is.

G-MANN UK

2007-12-06 01:24

antp wrote If some still want to list these a random number, I won't fight and debate


If some members weren't so resistant to the idea of having rules and guidelines on this site that everyone should follow, antp wouldn't get so tired of this kind of thing.

CarChasesFanatic ES

2007-12-06 01:32

G-MANN says it all

wrenchhead US

2007-12-06 05:31

G-MANN wrote

If some members weren't so resistant to the idea of having rules and guidelines on this site that everyone should follow, antp wouldn't get so tired of this kind of thing.


Yes, the way they carry on you would think they are fighting for life and liberty while in fact all they are being asked to do is show a little restraint and common sense. There is no easy solution if they want to continue to act like assholes.

wrenchhead US

2007-12-06 05:41

sixcyl wrote I don't agree


Now why does that not surprise me?

sixcyl FR

2007-12-06 09:35

wrenchhead wrote Yes, the way they carry on you would think they are fighting for life and liberty while in fact all they are being asked to do is show a little restraint and common sense. There is no easy solution if they want to continue to act like assholes.


Is it you whrenchead talking like that???? ... I've never insult anyone on this site , and I won't accept anybody doing it about me!! [Image: cartonrouge.gif]

When I give a label 280SE or 450SE , I'm not wrong , while I'd be wrong if I wrote MERCEDES 190 S or 500 SE for ex... so what's hell is the problem to introduce a probablity in the choice of the name ?
If we should apply rules of some of people here, there were a hudge amount of models with no names ... :/

This MB is a 280 with a probabilty not quantifiable easily (an approximation should be the product of 1/3 and ratio of number of 350 sold in France or Paris area among the total of W116 present in this area at this time... ) we can suppose there were more 280 SE than 450 SE, then as proposed Dynamike, we could take the highest probability "result" to quote the name of it.

What about this one?
/vehicle_23157-Fiat-1300-1961.html ...sould be enterded as "1965 Fiat"

/vehicle_87341-Fiat-1300-1961.html ... " " "1961 Fiat"

/vehicle_131442-Simca-1301-1967.html... " " "1967 Simca"

/vehicle_64333-Fiat-1200-Cabriolet-118-G-1959.html " as "1959 Fiat cabriolet"

/vehicle_50477-Berliet-GBK.html ... as we can say between GBK/GCK should be "Berliet"

/vehicle_132904-Renault-Primaquatre-Type-ACL2-1937.html ..shall we rename it "1937 Renault" ?

/vehicle_41707-Peugeot-302.html .... just "Peugeot" !!

...hundreds of examples could be taken :D



G-MANN UK

2007-12-06 11:35

Would it be completely incorrect to call this early 70s Merc an S-Class? Some other W116s are labelled as "S-Class".

Now that Sixcyl mentions those examples, I'm starting to see the point of what he's saying, however I'd like to reach a compromise with Mercs (since I care about those cars a lot), see the thread I started in the forum http://forum.imcdb.org/forum_topic-3020-18007-Mercedes_Benz.html#p18007.

I wrote above:

"Because MB and BMW already have "W###" or "E##" to identify the model range."

This would be mean the different models would still be categorized and not mixed up together under the brand name. With all the Fiats and Simcas and whatnot, yes if you took away the default model number you'd have no way to categorize those cars within the brand.

-- Last edit: 2007-12-06 11:59:43

antp BE

2007-12-06 13:32

Yes, BMW & Mercedes already have their E/W code, which makes a difference.
However, as I said above, « it would be more logical to pick the most common one then or the most probable one depending on the country/year », like what we do for makes which do not have these chassis codes to identify models (as Mercedes & BMWs are more identified by that than by model number).

wrenchhead US

2007-12-06 17:01

sixcyl wrote

Is it you whrenchead talking like that???? ... I've never insult anyone on this site , and I won't accept anybody doing it about me!!


Sixcyl, I named no one and directed no insult to you. Its just a fact that from time to time some members act like this site is their personal playground. If anyone had their feelings hurt by what I said, I can only assume that they have reason to believe I was talking to them - so be it. I consider that Antp has the final decision on any issue that arises relative to this site and don't like it any better than he does when when folks continue to argue with him.

Relative to your comment: "I don't agree", my feelings continue to be: if it can't be identified positively then do not put generic numbers. I said that it did not surprise me that you apparently disagreed with that. That is no insult - just a recognition of your past expressions regarding freedom of speech.


-- Last edit: 2007-12-06 17:05:03

G-MANN UK

2007-12-06 17:55

Personally I don't think this site is a place to go on about freedom of speech and all that. This place is a bit like a club and in clubs people need to conform a little bit. Why does this site have to be like a perfect democracy, why is that important? We're dealing with code and files on the internet, not people's lives. Some people harp on about freedom and censorship a bit too much when it's not really relevant. That being said I still think we should leave that Ferrari picture on Supervixens alone, the topless images were what was slightly unnecessary in my opinion (not that nudity offends me at all).

wrenchhead US

2007-12-06 18:00

G-MANN wrote That being said I still think we should leave that Ferrari picture on Supervixens alone, the topless images were what was slightly unnecessary in my opinion (not that nudity offends me at all).


The guidelines are rather clear on that subject: "Under no circumstance post pictures which, in any way , may be considered pornographic or unsuitable for viewing by the general public; including young children." emphasis added.

Ingo DE

2007-12-07 18:28

Oh, what have I done?

It was just a simple, neutral question.

wrenchhead US

2007-12-07 21:59

No worries, that is how these things always start and they seem to never stay on topic.

Add a comment

You must login to post comments...

Advertising

Watch or buy this title - Powered by JustWatch

Advertising