Search
List of Categories
Who has read this topic?
Add Reply
Printable version
Activate notificationNaming conventions » Incorrect spelling/listing
Reminder of the previous message
Plus, there are years and year ranges to Ford C-Series trucks that are being overlooked.
These were from yesterday, not yet to be considered as missed comments
And also, the "non-unidentified" thread suits more to this kind of info than this one which is for mass-changes requests.
If I knew... 
Hello!
(I didn't find any related topic, at least in the "Naming convention" category. Sorry if this is a double topic)
The 2011+ Chryler 300 is build on the Chrysler LX platform, so as its predecessor was.
So why is there only 5 out of 50 "new" 300 within the IMCDb dedicated page? Is it a choice of the IMCDb crew to make a difference with the former model?
If so, the 5 mentioned above should not have this code... Otherwise, shouldn't the 45 others join their pals?
(I didn't find any related topic, at least in the "Naming convention" category. Sorry if this is a double topic)
The 2011+ Chryler 300 is build on the Chrysler LX platform, so as its predecessor was.
So why is there only 5 out of 50 "new" 300 within the IMCDb dedicated page? Is it a choice of the IMCDb crew to make a difference with the former model?
If so, the 5 mentioned above should not have this code... Otherwise, shouldn't the 45 others join their pals?
The "new" 300 is more or less a new body built on the same platform as the 2004-2011 model. A kind of huge facelift. And as the LX code is put on almost each "1st" generation in IMCDb, why not doing the same with the second?
In fact, it could be useful to tell the difference with the 1993-2004 LH platform, which was the one of the previous Chrysler Concorde / 300M... if the LH code had been set on more than 7 cars (on 232 cars that should be identified that way) in IMCDb
So, more generic question: should the IMCDb use the LH/LX codes, or not? Is it worth a "mass change model"? Right now, I think having these codes just for a few random cars is not helping in anyway.
In fact, it could be useful to tell the difference with the 1993-2004 LH platform, which was the one of the previous Chrysler Concorde / 300M... if the LH code had been set on more than 7 cars (on 232 cars that should be identified that way) in IMCDb
So, more generic question: should the IMCDb use the LH/LX codes, or not? Is it worth a "mass change model"? Right now, I think having these codes just for a few random cars is not helping in anyway.
I think you already know my answer, if I'm the one you ask that question 
For me, the LH and LX codes should be set, so:
1 - your future work for the IMCDb 2.0 (3.0, if the current one is already the 2nd generation?) will be eased;
2 - if people check a little existing cars before filling the form, some of them may add the code for the car they identify (and then back to point 1 for your future work...).
If the code solution is chosen:
- LX plateform (+ LD, LC and LY derivatives) cars(1);
- LH platform cars.
_______________
(1) The Maserati Ghibli III is made on a Chrysler 300 plateform. The rise and fall of luxury car makers...
For me, the LH and LX codes should be set, so:
1 - your future work for the IMCDb 2.0 (3.0, if the current one is already the 2nd generation?) will be eased;
2 - if people check a little existing cars before filling the form, some of them may add the code for the car they identify (and then back to point 1 for your future work...).
If the code solution is chosen:
- LX plateform (+ LD, LC and LY derivatives) cars(1);
- LH platform cars.
_______________
(1) The Maserati Ghibli III is made on a Chrysler 300 plateform. The rise and fall of luxury car makers...