Revision as of 22:24, 27 December 2007 edit64.107.58.130 (talk) →Unencyclopædic text removal← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 00:07, 9 July 2024 edit undoSable232 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers30,774 editsm broken anchor resolved | ||
(153 intermediate revisions by 56 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Not a forum|Chrysler Hemi engines and related matters}} | |||
== Real history of the hemi == | |||
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start| | |||
{{WikiProject Automobiles|importance=Mid}} | |||
}} | |||
{{merged from|Dodge hemi small block}} | |||
==Archives of past discussion== | |||
While Crysler did real things with the hemi over the last seventy years, they did NOT in fact design it. That kudo has to go to a french design engineer @1929. Henry Talbot, in cooperation with a coach designer named Largo, First designed and built the Hemi head for a custom built straight Six to be built in their race oriented two seat coupe. This car was built for wealty european's after the much sought after road racing titles of the day. The Talbot-Largo coupes were hand built with much advanced technology including a 6 speed, semi automatic transmission with no clutch. This transmission was operated by engaging seperate bands on individual levers to advance through the gears. Down shifting was accomplished by disengaging the levers one at a time till all were again off. Reverse used 1st and a reverser. This transmission pioneered the use of planetary gear technology used today in almost all auto transmissions.The suspension types under the car were also way ahead of latent technology. The most recent appearence of these hand built coupes, suprisingly, was a Disney film. Cruella Deville's Long nose coupe, In the movie 101 Dalmations was in fact, a very close artists rendition of the Talbot-Largo. Extremely rare now, there are none the less, restored versions still around. When the company went under in the 30"s Walter P. Chrysler had the funds available, and the good sense to purchase the patent rights to the design and put it away. Other companies have modified and used the style head but Chrysler owns the terminology HEMI and so is the only company who can use it. | |||
''']'''<br/> | |||
''']'''<br/> | |||
''']''' | |||
==Image== | |||
:Early 1900s peugeot racers had dohc hemi 4 valve per cylinder, monobloc (head and cylinders one piece) etc. which enabled them to compete with a small engine versus the 20 liter flatheads the competition were running. not much new in engine technology since those. they were the ancestor of the Offy. ] 18:25, 26 November 2006 (UTC) | |||
This article is about the Chrysler Hemi engine. Granted, the image in question shows the word "HEMI" on the side of a Chrysler-built car, but…how does that further a reader's understanding of the subject matter of this article, please? —<span style="font:bold 11px Arial;display:inline;border:#151B8D 1px solid;background-color:#FFFF00;padding:0 4px 0 4px;">]</span> <sup>]</sup>·<sub>]</sub><small>03:49, 17 July 2011 (UTC)</small> | |||
: I don't see how a picture of a Chrysler Hemi Engine logo is inappropriate in an article about Crysler Hemi Engines. There are picture of Chrysler Hemi engines in the article. To play the devil's advocate, how do the pictures of the engines further a reader's understanding of the subject? ] <sup>]</sup> 00:21, 18 July 2011 (UTC) | |||
== Unencyclopædic text removal == | |||
==Where are the forgotten Hemi???== | |||
How come you don't talk about the crate 426, 472 and 528 Hemi?? These are "real" Hemi with hemispherical heads... Why nobody gives informtion about those?? | |||
] (]) 03:55, 13 August 2011 (UTC)Francois Cote | |||
== modern hemi engines == | |||
Are the modern hemi engines cast iron or aluminum? --] (]) 16:34, 28 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
:It is important to specifiy what metal the block is made from. This is a page about an engine. The material the block is made from is important to list. Almost as important as configuration and horsepower. --] (]) 17:45, 28 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
I have — for the ''second'' time — removed a dump of unencyclopædic text copied wholesale from other websites. The bulk of the text I've removed was copied from and from other web boards, without any attempt whatsoever to disguise its web board origin ("And some opinions posted in response to Mr. Tedder's post:" headed a dump of web board me-too comments). In the first place, this type of text dump is not permitted. Mind the advisory present on every Misplaced Pages editing page: '''Do not copy text from other websites without a GFDL-compatible license. It will be deleted.''' In the second place, the text was wholly unencyclopædic. Misplaced Pages is an encyclopædia. It is not the place for transcripts of television shows, reprints of magazine articles, lengthy soundbites from tv-show engine builders, or web board chatter. --] 15:10, 16 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
::Once again. I don't care anything about a Hemi. But the engine block material should be added when it can be either cast iron or aluminum. '''This is important.''' ''Not something the gets discussed in a Hemi forum either.'' It needs added to the page. Any engine page for that matter.--] (]) 02:14, 29 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
'''Update:''' I have now removed the same text dump for the ''third'' time. --] 04:48, 19 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
:::'''''Thank''''' you, at last. ''This'' is an appropriate comment for the talk page. Yes, the block material needs to be mentioned in this article. Absolutely. Please ], go do a Google search and see what comes up, and you'll probably find not only the answer, but corroboration for it in a couple of ] sources, and then you can and should add it to this article…all in just a couple of minutes! —<span style="font:bold 11px Arial;display:inline;border:#151B8D 1px solid;background-color:#FFFF00;padding:0 4px 0 4px;">]</span> <sup>]</sup>·<sub>]</sub><small>05:13, 29 October 2011 (UTC)</small> | |||
== Hemi V6? == | |||
'''Update:''' and a ''fourth'' time. This time, I am being accused of "perpetuating false tests" or somesuch. I am perpetuating nothing, merely removing unencyclopædic content dumped wholesale from another website in violation of Misplaced Pages rules. --] 14:38, 19 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
Chrysler designed a 3.6L Hemi V6 in 1951, but it was not produced. | |||
'''Update:''' ...and a ''fifth'' time. The PP should help; if the perpetrator wishes to engage in discussion regarding this text, he can do so as a registered editor. --] 20:23, 19 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
== Cross-flow contradiction == | |||
There is a concerted effort by Hemi loyalists and apologists to rewrite and censor the history of the actual performance levels and records of the classic hemi engine. This effort consists of removing unpopular statements of fact, which are duly annotated and clearly true statements, and not just "dumps" of text. You may call the source of the statements up, and verify their veracity for yourself if you doubt them. But until you provide proof that they are incorrect, stop editing away the holocaust. The holocaust happened. A lot of so-called history and facts regarding the mythology of the hemi engine also happened. Acknowledge it and accept it. The source of these comments references an actual Hemi builder, in business, for profit, who has been involved with the engine, it's builders, racers, users and documentors for much of his life. If real world facts and experience are unencyclopeadic, then some people have a poor idea of just what an encyclopedia is. | |||
As it stands the article contradicts itself. I personally agree with the bracketed statements, but the article should be one way or the other. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 17:14, 4 March 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:FYI, ] did an extensive comparison between a 2-valve crossflow head and 2-valve ] head in 1964 when they designed Cosworth SCA series, which had a SOHC counterflow non-hemi design similar to ] FWE engine. 1498cc SCB was built for this purpose to compare against ]-based 1498cc Cosworth Mk.XVI, which had a DOHC crossflow hemi-head on the same Ford block and the same forged crank and rods.<br> | |||
:Mk.XVI made up to 150hp, and SCB made 175hp on the bench, so Cosworth released the 1L SCA with the same SOHC head as the SCB for Formula Two racing where SCA dominated. So the notion of crossflow being superior to counterflow in terms of volumetric efficiency is proven wrong at least in these two designs. Cosworth used this result in successfully moving on to 4-valve crossflow designs later.<br> | |||
:I am not familiar with American V8s and have no intention of editing this article, but thought this would be of interest to you. ] (]) 16:22, 15 November 2013 (UTC) | |||
::"proven wrong at least in these two designs"? according to what you've written, it was proven wrong in the one design they tested, and then released in the other design, and successfully used, but not A/B tested. ] (]) 03:20, 20 July 2023 (UTC) | |||
== Incorrect displacement figures == | |||
The displacement figures for the DeSoto Fire Dome hemi engine are wrong. I checked on this website () and it lists 276 ci, 291 ci, 330 ci, 341 ci, and 345 ci. On the Misplaced Pages article it is 287 ci, 306 ci, 312 ci, 324 ci and 345 ci (the 345 is correct). The Misplaced Pages article is clearly incorrect not only on the displacement but also on the year the engines were introduced. For example, the FirePower engine was introduced in 1951 and the section states that the Fire Dome engine was introduced in 1946. The Fire Dome was introduced in 1952, not 1946. ] (]) 00:59, 16 January 2014 (UTC) | |||
:The source you presented seems to be legit and is used not only on this article but on others as well. I think it's acceptable to edit them to the '''correct''' values. As I posted on your talk page, there's been a rash of number-changing vandalism on this article in recent months and it's made myself and others fairly paranoid when people start changing numbers. For future reference, you need to have a source when you change numerical values - don't just do it because you think it's right. Also, I'd suggest you use that webpage you just posted as a reference in the article when you edit it to correct the values. See ] to learn how to do that if you don't know how already. <b><span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #A200FF, -4px -4px 15px #00CCFF;">]</span> <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF0000, -4px -4px 15px #FFF600;">] ]</span></b> 01:09, 16 January 2014 (UTC) | |||
== Split article == | |||
I, VX1NG propose that this this information in this article be split into 3 different articles, because there are three different engine families covered by this article. I also suggest that this page be a disambiguation page for those articles. Regards, ] (]) 13:57, 4 April 2014 (UTC) | |||
{{not done}} | |||
==Rename proposal== | |||
I think the title of the article should be changed as there are currently no Chrysler vehicles available with any of these engines. Perhaps FCA Hemi would be a more accurate title, which would also allow for bringing in some of the other brand names' hemi- headed engines from the European brands that have been rolled up into FCA. <small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 23:32, 9 March 2016 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:'''Oppose:''' This smacks of recentism. The firepower, RedRam, etc. engines are definitely not FCA. ] <small>(])</small> 00:18, 10 March 2016 (UTC) | |||
:::I think FCA lawyers would strongly disagree with you, they now own all the trademarks. And what is wrong with that? <small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 13:02, 10 March 2016 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:'''Oppose:''' Clearly the article is about the lineage of the original Hemi and not about the disparate hemispherical engines of various Chrysler owners. Those other engines have no meaningful relation and we don't want to rewrite the article every time Chrysler corporate structure changes. ] (]) 19:58, 9 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
:'''Strong Oppose''' I have a better idea: ], where you can detail all the various types, including the ], the Simca 136ci (based on the Ford flatty), all the FCA variants, all the '50s & '60s Mopars, the Donovans, the Arduns, & anything else under the sun that might apply. You can then leave ''this'' page for its subject: the Mopars, up to the elephant. ] ] 05:26, 11 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
== External links modified == | |||
Hello fellow Wikipedians, | |||
I have just added archive links to {{plural:1|one external link|1 external links}} on ]. Please take a moment to review . If necessary, add {{tlx|cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{tlx|nobots|deny{{=}}InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes: | |||
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110707191357/http://www.automobile.com/daimlerchrysler-announces-winner-of-zany-what-can-you-hemi-contest.html to http://www.automobile.com/daimlerchrysler-announces-winner-of-zany-what-can-you-hemi-contest.html | |||
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' to let others know. | |||
{{sourcecheck|checked=false}} | |||
Cheers.—]<small><sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS">]:Online</sub></small> 11:05, 13 February 2016 (UTC) | |||
==Auto news== | |||
<span style="text-shadow:#396 0.2em 0.2em 0.5em; class=texhtml">] (])</span> 18:44, 1 April 2016 (UTC) ''Happy 16th day after the Ides of March'' | |||
:Not that this isn't funny, but are April fools day articles really worthy of mention? ] (]) 02:39, 2 April 2016 (UTC) | |||
== Holy replacement engine, Batman == | |||
Is mention of the ], planned as a replacement for the low-volume 426, warranted? (I'd have put it in a "see also" section, if there had ''been'' one...) ] ] 11:16, 30 July 2017 (UTC) | |||
== External links modified == | |||
Hello fellow Wikipedians, | |||
I have just modified 2 external links on ]. Please take a moment to review . If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit ] for additional information. I made the following changes: | |||
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.kolossochryslerjeepdodgeramwi.com/2009-mopar-performance-catalog.htm | |||
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120916011533/http://www.media.chrysler.com/dcxms/assets/specs/2011_Challenger392_Specifications.pdf to http://www.media.chrysler.com/dcxms/assets/specs/2011_Challenger392_Specifications.pdf | |||
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. | |||
{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}} | |||
Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 01:28, 7 August 2017 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 00:07, 9 July 2024
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Chrysler Hemi engines and related matters. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Chrysler Hemi engines and related matters at the Reference desk. |
This article is rated Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
The contents of the Dodge hemi small block page were merged into Chrysler Hemi engine. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Archives of past discussion
Image
This article is about the Chrysler Hemi engine. Granted, the image in question shows the word "HEMI" on the side of a Chrysler-built car, but…how does that further a reader's understanding of the subject matter of this article, please? —Scheinwerfermann ·C03:49, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
- I don't see how a picture of a Chrysler Hemi Engine logo is inappropriate in an article about Crysler Hemi Engines. There are picture of Chrysler Hemi engines in the article. To play the devil's advocate, how do the pictures of the engines further a reader's understanding of the subject? Bubba73 00:21, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
Where are the forgotten Hemi???
How come you don't talk about the crate 426, 472 and 528 Hemi?? These are "real" Hemi with hemispherical heads... Why nobody gives informtion about those?? 24.201.225.92 (talk) 03:55, 13 August 2011 (UTC)Francois Cote
modern hemi engines
Are the modern hemi engines cast iron or aluminum? --Dana60Cummins (talk) 16:34, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
- It is important to specifiy what metal the block is made from. This is a page about an engine. The material the block is made from is important to list. Almost as important as configuration and horsepower. --Dana60Cummins (talk) 17:45, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
- Once again. I don't care anything about a Hemi. But the engine block material should be added when it can be either cast iron or aluminum. This is important. Not something the gets discussed in a Hemi forum either. It needs added to the page. Any engine page for that matter.--Dana60Cummins (talk) 02:14, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you, at last. This is an appropriate comment for the talk page. Yes, the block material needs to be mentioned in this article. Absolutely. Please be bold, go do a Google search and see what comes up, and you'll probably find not only the answer, but corroboration for it in a couple of reliable sources, and then you can and should add it to this article…all in just a couple of minutes! —Scheinwerfermann ·C05:13, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
- Once again. I don't care anything about a Hemi. But the engine block material should be added when it can be either cast iron or aluminum. This is important. Not something the gets discussed in a Hemi forum either. It needs added to the page. Any engine page for that matter.--Dana60Cummins (talk) 02:14, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
Hemi V6?
Chrysler designed a 3.6L Hemi V6 in 1951, but it was not produced.
Cross-flow contradiction
As it stands the article contradicts itself. I personally agree with the bracketed statements, but the article should be one way or the other. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.102.164.130 (talk) 17:14, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
- FYI, Cosworth did an extensive comparison between a 2-valve crossflow head and 2-valve counterflow head in 1964 when they designed Cosworth SCA series, which had a SOHC counterflow non-hemi design similar to Coventry Climax FWE engine. 1498cc SCB was built for this purpose to compare against Lotus-Ford Twin Cam-based 1498cc Cosworth Mk.XVI, which had a DOHC crossflow hemi-head on the same Ford block and the same forged crank and rods.
- Mk.XVI made up to 150hp, and SCB made 175hp on the bench, so Cosworth released the 1L SCA with the same SOHC head as the SCB for Formula Two racing where SCA dominated. So the notion of crossflow being superior to counterflow in terms of volumetric efficiency is proven wrong at least in these two designs. Cosworth used this result in successfully moving on to 4-valve crossflow designs later.
- I am not familiar with American V8s and have no intention of editing this article, but thought this would be of interest to you. Yiba (talk) 16:22, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
- "proven wrong at least in these two designs"? according to what you've written, it was proven wrong in the one design they tested, and then released in the other design, and successfully used, but not A/B tested. 76.33.171.135 (talk) 03:20, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
Incorrect displacement figures
The displacement figures for the DeSoto Fire Dome hemi engine are wrong. I checked on this website () and it lists 276 ci, 291 ci, 330 ci, 341 ci, and 345 ci. On the Misplaced Pages article it is 287 ci, 306 ci, 312 ci, 324 ci and 345 ci (the 345 is correct). The Misplaced Pages article is clearly incorrect not only on the displacement but also on the year the engines were introduced. For example, the FirePower engine was introduced in 1951 and the section states that the Fire Dome engine was introduced in 1946. The Fire Dome was introduced in 1952, not 1946. Meltdown627 (talk) 00:59, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
- The source you presented seems to be legit and is used not only on this article but on others as well. I think it's acceptable to edit them to the correct values. As I posted on your talk page, there's been a rash of number-changing vandalism on this article in recent months and it's made myself and others fairly paranoid when people start changing numbers. For future reference, you need to have a source when you change numerical values - don't just do it because you think it's right. Also, I'd suggest you use that webpage you just posted as a reference in the article when you edit it to correct the values. See WP:IC to learn how to do that if you don't know how already. Antoshi ☏ ★ 01:09, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
Split article
I, VX1NG propose that this this information in this article be split into 3 different articles, because there are three different engine families covered by this article. I also suggest that this page be a disambiguation page for those articles. Regards, VX1NG (talk) 13:57, 4 April 2014 (UTC) Not done
Rename proposal
I think the title of the article should be changed as there are currently no Chrysler vehicles available with any of these engines. Perhaps FCA Hemi would be a more accurate title, which would also allow for bringing in some of the other brand names' hemi- headed engines from the European brands that have been rolled up into FCA. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.176.249.163 (talk) 23:32, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose: This smacks of recentism. The firepower, RedRam, etc. engines are definitely not FCA. Toddst1 (talk) 00:18, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
- I think FCA lawyers would strongly disagree with you, they now own all the trademarks. And what is wrong with that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.176.249.163 (talk) 13:02, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose: Clearly the article is about the lineage of the original Hemi and not about the disparate hemispherical engines of various Chrysler owners. Those other engines have no meaningful relation and we don't want to rewrite the article every time Chrysler corporate structure changes. unixxx (talk) 19:58, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose I have a better idea: Hemi engine, where you can detail all the various types, including the Chrysler IV-2220, the Simca 136ci (based on the Ford flatty), all the FCA variants, all the '50s & '60s Mopars, the Donovans, the Arduns, & anything else under the sun that might apply. You can then leave this page for its subject: the Mopars, up to the elephant. TREKphiler 05:26, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on Chrysler Hemi engine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110707191357/http://www.automobile.com/daimlerchrysler-announces-winner-of-zany-what-can-you-hemi-contest.html to http://www.automobile.com/daimlerchrysler-announces-winner-of-zany-what-can-you-hemi-contest.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—Talk to my owner:Online 11:05, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
Auto news
Ferrari to Begin Using Hellcat Engines 7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:44, 1 April 2016 (UTC) Happy 16th day after the Ides of March
- Not that this isn't funny, but are April fools day articles really worthy of mention? Carguy1701 (talk) 02:39, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
Holy replacement engine, Batman
Is mention of the Chrysler ball-stud hemi, planned as a replacement for the low-volume 426, warranted? (I'd have put it in a "see also" section, if there had been one...) TREKphiler 11:16, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Chrysler Hemi engine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.kolossochryslerjeepdodgeramwi.com/2009-mopar-performance-catalog.htm
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120916011533/http://www.media.chrysler.com/dcxms/assets/specs/2011_Challenger392_Specifications.pdf to http://www.media.chrysler.com/dcxms/assets/specs/2011_Challenger392_Specifications.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:28, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
Categories: