Talk:Sport compact
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Morwan,
I see you've added a statement to the sport compact article that says Front Wheel Drive cars are prefered for autocross. Can you reference that? I only ask because I autocross a FWD car, and I consider it to be a considerable disadvantage. In fact, Adam Breaky, the founder of autocrossforum.com, calls FF cars "wrong wheel drive": http://www.autocrossforum.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=1940&st=0 If you look further down in that same thread, you will notice that Ian Steward (2005 National ProSolo Champion for STU)lists his requirements for a prosolo/autocross car, and the very first requirement is RWD. Evenprime 18:11, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
- If you look at the results of Solo II nationals, it looks like there's a somewhat even mix of FWD/RWD/AWD, or at least it's clear that no single layout completely dominates, and no single layout is completely missing from the standings. So perhaps the article shouldn't state any preferences, or shouldn't state them so unequivocally. --Interiot 18:29, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
-
- That seems reasonable to me. I'd say that part of the article should be removed. Let's see what Morwan has to say Evenprime 18:44, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
-
- I'll go ahead and change it to 'fairly popular'. I was just looking at the national rankings for stock classes, the Celica, Integra, and Mini Cooper S seem to dominate their respective classes, but that may be due to the classifications themselves.Morwan 14:55, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Merging Sport Compact
I've cleared up most of the NPOV-related talk because it's more or less been settled.
I've marked Sport Compact to be merged into Sport compact. I think this article is just missing a short section on hot hatches, but beyond that, I think that Sport compact contains all of the important information in the Sport Compact article and a little bit more. -- Morwan 18:47, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Merge from Compact performance car
The Compact performance car article talks about the same car type as this article. Besides, the sport compact term is more commonly used (only 154 results in Google). -- NaBUru38 00:17, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Domestic?
In "Classification and debate" the article refers to domestic cars, and the fact that it is refering to American cars is not mentioned until the end of the paragraph. I would think refering to American cars as domestic is very US-centric and should be changed. Apologies if I am missing something. Robogymnast 17:49, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
- Is the term Sport Compact used outside the US or North America at all? I don't think I have ever seen the term used in the UK (or Australia or New Zealand) motoring press, or heard it used on BBC Top Gear program (for example).
- I think the whole page is only relavent to the US/North American market, so maybe page needs to be tagged as such? Is there some tag/template that warns readers that the page does not represent a global view? Perhaps the best way would be if page simply stated, that "A sport compact is a term used in the US (North America?) to describe a high-performance version..." so readers from other countries would not misled --Xagent86 (talk | contribs) 00:35, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Merge with Hot hatch
These seem close enough that it's sensible to merge. Thoughts? Friday (talk) 03:57, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
DEFINATLY NOT...
- I thought I would try to be a little more articulate than the last user. I agree that the terms are different enough to warrant separate pages. Hot hatch is used almost exclusively in Europe while Sport compact is used almost exclusively in the US. These words have different history and to some extent refer to different types of cars. Some overlap exists but I think that the difference in use and history make separate pages the best choice. --Daniel J. Leivick 23:04, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
- Also, from a purely practical standpoint, they are each rather long articles. Thefirstdude02 06:31, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
