Advertising Last completed movie pages
1961 Land-Rover 88'' Series IIa Station Wagon Comments about this vehicle| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
◊ 2019-06-12 20:51 |
![[Image: 1958land-rover88seriesiistationwagon2ndpic.jpg]](http://pics.imcdb.org/26849/1958land-rover88seriesiistationwagon2ndpic.jpg) |
|
◊ 2019-06-12 22:29 |
Deep sills mean S2a likely. |
|
◊ 2019-06-13 20:54 |
Stop adding unnecessary 'Made for' tags I'm not  |
|
◊ 2019-06-13 20:55 |
I think dsl is the one adding the tags and Exiv96 is the one removing them and putting this stuff up in place. |
|
◊ 2019-06-13 21:04 |
Yeah, we had this discussion on this page, to which I agreed not to tag everything as "Made for IS" unless there are visible changes etc /vehicle_1270483-Peugeot-505-551A-1984.html I guess I'm being monitored now  |
|
◊ 2019-06-13 21:13 |
https://youtu.be/7YvAYIJSSZY?t=53  |
|
◊ 2019-06-13 21:21 |
However, I notice that many of the cars in this film are fitted with mudflaps and it begs the question whether these were mandatory or not. In Norway and Sweden mudflaps were mandatory for several years and we list entries with said features visible as Made for N and S respectively. I know Iceland had very bad roads back during the time of the film's setting and it would certainly make a lot of sense if they had mudflaps as mandatory equipment. |
|
◊ 2019-06-13 21:23 |
Unironically I've always liked that song |
|
◊ 2019-06-13 21:23 |
A Land-Rover with mudflaps is nothing remarkable though... |
|
◊ 2019-06-13 22:49 |
Correct. And to emphasise that screw13article is entirely blameless. I'm not going to die in a ditch to keep this Landie as made for IS, but some of the others definitely deserve it. And the point about consistency with how we recognise N and S mudflap regimes seems to have legs. These exchanges go round in circles. Someone objects to a made-for being inserted, usually quoting "the rule". If it's a case where I feel it's worth adding it I'll often put an explanation or defence - brief example. And then ... nothing. No-one actually engages in the discussion about whether we should allow more flexible made-for use for interesting examples. I've raised in the forum in the past as well, but again no real response. So am I really alone in seeing the possibilities for more creative use of made-fors?? |
|
◊ 2019-06-14 10:06 |
Thanks, dsl. And I'm sorry for bringing you in all of this. The thing is, I would have tagged it "Made for" as well, simply because of one reason: it's a LHD Landie (not a RHD Landie sold in a domestic market) in a LHD off-road/SUV country where Landies have always been a popular choice for icelanders since they were introduced there in the 1950s (very rarely privately imported from the UK). And if the mudflaps is one good reason to make other Landies "Made for S" or "made for N", then what makes Iceland so different? So is this rule now redundant? ![[Image: mmtwfod.jpg]](http://pics.imcdb.org/26849/mmtwfod.jpg) -- Last edit: 2019-06-14 10:26:16 |
|
◊ 2019-06-14 15:45 |
Curiously, I read these remarks as if they were challenging the rules... |
|
◊ 2019-06-14 16:40 |
I have looked at some pictures of Iceland from the 1960s, and it seems that there's no consistency about the mudflaps. Some cars have them, others don't - so I doubt an actual law existed after all. Therefore I support the omission of the "made for IS" tag for now. |
Add a comment Advertising Advertising
![[*]](/res/star.png){kind=small}
