Advertising Last completed movie pages 1994 Citroën Jumper Série 1Class: Cars, Van / MPV — Model origin: 
— Built in: 
00:24:17 ![[*]](/res/star.png){kind=small}
Background vehicle
Comments about this vehicle| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
◊ 2015-05-12 20:05 |
Taillights of a 1994-2001 Sevel Type 230 (it). As usual, no detail to see if it is a Citroën Jumper, a Fiat Ducato or a Peugeot Boxer, all the more as the lifting platform hides the only location where make and model emblems could appear. For accuracy, better than picking one up randomly, shouldn't we create that category? Or at least give it a chassis code? -- Last edit: 2015-05-12 20:14:33 |
|
◊ 2015-05-13 16:25 |
Did more than one of the three have such wheels? |
|
◊ 2015-05-14 05:05 |
I thought about it too, but I searched for these hubcaps and didn't found them on any model for now... |
|
◊ 2015-05-14 21:57 |
(Some rummages later...) In fact, the three of them can have these hubcaps .gif ":)") ![[Image: 1994citroenjumper.jpg]](http://pics.imcdb.org/18713/1994citroenjumper.jpg) ![[Image: 1994fiatducato.jpg]](http://pics.imcdb.org/18713/1994fiatducato.jpg) ![[Image: 1994peugeotboxer.jpg]](http://pics.imcdb.org/18713/1994peugeotboxer.jpg) (Citroën // Fiat // Peugeot) |
|
◊ 2015-05-14 22:02 |
filmed in France you can narrow it down to Citroen/ Peugeot and by random dice trow this is a Citroen  -- Last edit: 2015-05-14 22:02:18 |
|
◊ 2015-05-14 22:46 |
The Fiat Ducato was (and still is) sold in France, as Type 230 as well as model of the following versions, so it can't be withdrawn from possibilities. I thought we were all here to identify seriously vehicles, but I was wrong: some of us apparently just play dice... Are all your identifications that reliable? -- Last edit: 2015-05-14 22:56:52 |
|
◊ 2015-05-14 23:05 |
I sometimes ask my magic rabbit's foot what it thinks. Or the purple pixie which lives in the cupboard in the kitchen and guards my jars of Marmite. |
|
◊ 2015-05-14 23:13 |
ok genies how you ID such a van which is exactly the same , only the badges differ and you can't see them ? it's not even something like special color or something cos surely all are sold with white... -- Last edit: 2015-05-14 23:15:23 |
|
◊ 2015-05-14 23:23 |
Is there a badge on the fender, like on the Fiat above? -- Last edit: 2015-05-14 23:26:15 |
|
◊ 2015-05-15 01:56 |
I have to admit that I sometime ask to Santa's elite elves, they're doing quite well when it's about exotic cars: ![[Image: prepandlanding-naughtyvsnice-01.jpg]](http://pics.imcdb.org/18713/prepandlanding-naughtyvsnice-01.jpg) ![[Image: prepandlanding-naughtyvsnice-02.jpg]](http://pics.imcdb.org/18713/prepandlanding-naughtyvsnice-02.jpg) -- Last edit: 2015-05-15 02:44:10 |
|
◊ 2015-05-15 02:14 |
What is visible is the square side blinker of a 1994-2001 Sevel 230, nothing more. The lack of badge there can't be a clue for a Citroën or a Peugeot, as it can be missing on some Fiat models too... -- Last edit: 2015-05-15 02:42:37 |
|
◊ 2015-05-15 02:42 |
Well, we could also say what can be seen, i.e that this is a 1994-2001 unknown [Sevel 230]. I know you can't bear the word unknown, but this is just the truth here, and I don't see the point to invent any name that has a 66.66% (two out of three) probability of being wrong. In my world, a guess with such a margin of error just can't seriously be called an identification. The "chassis" is identified, but as nothing in the movie can help us to know more (it's the only moment this van appears and the closest view we can have), there is no possibility to say more. Why not just acknowledge that we don't know? That's something we may also admit, sometime. -- Last edit: 2015-05-15 04:08:27 |
|
◊ 2015-05-15 09:16 |
you know there is unwritten site policy for such cases to simply assign the most common ID cos its frankly retarded to leave something unknown just because you dont see some badges as there are many many clones in the automotive industry -- Last edit: 2015-05-15 09:17:12 |
|
◊ 2015-05-18 16:33 |
Listing the unidentifiable ones as Sevel has not so much interest: it makes a forth category where to search these, and no-one will think of going check these to find such vans. The logo on the van seems to be the Galeries Lafayette... just try to find another photo of such van on internet |
|
◊ 2015-05-18 16:51 |
not same van but Citroen so we can take this as Citroen http://images-01.delcampe-static.net/img_large/auction/000/278/246/199_001.jpg |
|
◊ 2015-05-20 01:47 |
You already know my arguments about the Sevel category or "chassis" code: 1- It could be useful at least as "chassis" code to gather all these vans, all the more as it is their actual code (unless someone can explain me where these codes come from?); 2- it would be more accurate than any random choice, which is all but an identification. If reliability of the IMCDb is part of the objectives, I think that an intended Sevel unknown is better than a fanciful name. About people searching directly vehicles by their make or model name, I watched relatives searching something in the IMCDb: they first search a movie and then look at the vehicles seen in it, which seems to be the good way a database made from and about movie cars should be used .gif ";)") Is it a problem to keep a vehicle as unknown, when it is the case? As far as I know, that doesn't imply any incompetence nor laziness, all the more when the comments show that the IMCDb crew tried to identify the vehicle, but that it was obviously impossible. If it is that disturbing, should we then put impossible to identify instead of unknown? Schon gemacht, but I found nada about it -- Last edit: 2015-05-20 01:52:25 |
|
◊ 2015-05-20 14:12 |
Seeing referral from other sites, there are often links to a whole make or a precise model. Of course that happens more often on Porsche 911 & Subaru Impreza than on Citroën Jmper... For the point 1, it works only if you manually enter it in a search or if you modify the URL to remove the make, so except you there will probably not be many people doing such search We can assume it is a Citroën, a Peugeot or a Fiat, and the comments are there to specify that it could as well be one of the other ones... -- Last edit: 2015-05-20 14:13:06 |
|
◊ 2015-05-20 18:41 |
... or you just have to click on the code link given with the name of a concerned vehicle I don't see the point to give a false information, and you know as well as I do that most people don't read the comments... even when writing one after several others. Basta, call it whatever you like. You know what I think about these pseudo-identifications: I'm not going to change my mind that easily about them, and you won't either, so let's move on to other matters -- Last edit: 2015-05-20 18:44:46 |
|
◊ 2015-05-22 12:12 |
code link? What do you mean? Chassis? It only lists models of the same make What you call a "false information" is just a guess/pick amongst several possible models. In the next version of the site maybe we'll create more "generic" models for unidentifiable cases, as then there will be more linking possibilities between things. |
Add a comment Advertising Advertising
