![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Okay I've reverted the two engine capacity changes. The first one, changing 1.5L to 1.8L seems wrong. Everything I've read about Seras (including the engine plate on my own) lists the 5E motor as 1.5L capacity. Just can't find anything suggesting that it's a 1.8L. Oh and on the second change, if there's one thing the Sera ISN'T, it's a 6.8L beast. :) Ozlucien ( talk) 17:39, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm sure I've heard this style of gullwing described as 'butterfly wing', but a quick google search finds no references like this... If anyone else has come across the term as well, is that evidence enough to put that term into the article proper? :) -- Nemo 01:04, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
yeah ive heard that term, but if you think about it,its inacurrate. as butterfly wings pivot at the bottom and completely meet at the top. not really that appropriate i reckon. if anyone asks about my sera i just call them gullwing, cause they have a similar motion (opening up and out like a delorean for example)
Removed text:
Yes, the boot size is limited, but as a previous editor has stated, the seats fold down to make the boot space very spacious. The high loading lip is a problem though.
The shell is pretty rigid - the sills are very very strong indeed (I've tried cutting through them in the past), and the A and B pillars are very strong as this forms a rollover cage. I suspect the shell is much more rigid than the Starlet the car is based upon.
Pronounced body roll is due to the springing and damping the car comes with. This can be fixed with a set up uprated dampers and springs, but the trade off for handling is a loss of ride comfort.
All added by user 84.45.131.91. Some of it could be incorporated into the article I think, taking care of NPOV and the article format. Andrewa 13:19, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
The comment* towards the end of this article is incorrect..
the 1967 Alfa Romeo Stradale had exactly the same glass design doors as the sera.
Zoo yorker 22:24, 22 April 2006 (UTC) Ammended*- I started an article on the Stradale, and linked to it. Zoo yorker 10:05, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
As a Sera owner I'm trying to avoid making edits or removals that would appear to be POV, but I question the use of the word 'disappointing' to describe the small cargo opening. Disappointing to whom? If this forms part of a critical review of the car (extremely possible) then it should be cited. Otherwise perhaps less emotive phrasing, such as "the rear cargo area has a notably small access opening etc etc" would be preferable? Ozlucien ( talk) 02:55, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Oh and that's so incredibly *not* a comment on the original article itself, but more that it seems to be showing signs of several "it's bad because of this", "but it's good because of this", "but it's bad because of this" type edits that kinda spoil the flow and structure of the info. Ozlucien ( talk) 07:11, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Okay, in the spirit of being bold I've uploaded the refined version of this article that I've been sandboxing over the last couple of weeks (of course if this is too much then feel free to revert). What I tried to do was rearrange the article structure to link common parts of the entry, provide a better order of reading (from original car through factory versions to after-market mods etc), and also factually report on the good and bad aspects of the car in a way that is (hopefully) much less POV than before. Yes I've expanded it a bit but not with anything vastly life-altering. What I haven't done is remove any particular fact outright or put in citations for some of the facts and figures that I really think need it (in particular the production figures, and some of the more detailed bits of aftermarket tuning). It's still not perfect but with any luck now reads a bit more like an encyclopaedic entry. So let the critiquing, flaming and general ripping and re-ordering begin :) Ozlucien ( talk) 04:36, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
Ive got access to a japanese EPC there you can get the date of manufacture from the chassis number. Chassis numbers from the Sera are in range EXY10-0001001 - EXY10-0016942 (so the overall production should be 15942).
But i cant find a way to verify this data to others
here is a list of production per month, perhaps someone can verify it?!
Production | Month | Year |
---|---|---|
1996 | 3 | 90 |
1151 | 4 | 90 |
1205 | 5 | 90 |
1204 | 6 | 90 |
1257 | 7 | 90 |
1025 | 8 | 90 |
1277 | 9 | 90 |
850 | 10 | 90 |
599 | 11 | 90 |
417 | 12 | 90 |
257 | 1 | 91 |
325 | 2 | 91 |
289 | 3 | 91 |
83 | 4 | 91 |
363 | 5 | 91 |
293 | 6 | 91 |
345 | 7 | 91 |
171 | 8 | 91 |
242 | 9 | 91 |
193 | 10 | 91 |
161 | 11 | 91 |
104 | 12 | 91 |
101 | 1 | 92 |
88 | 2 | 92 |
143 | 3 | 92 |
44 | 4 | 92 |
62 | 5 | 92 |
88 | 6 | 92 |
119 | 7 | 92 |
99 | 8 | 92 |
72 | 9 | 92 |
70 | 10 | 92 |
70 | 11 | 92 |
54 | 12 | 92 |
40 | 1 | 93 |
51 | 2 | 93 |
65 | 3 | 93 |
67 | 4 | 93 |
34 | 5 | 93 |
45 | 6 | 93 |
38 | 7 | 93 |
42 | 8 | 93 |
50 | 9 | 93 |
47 | 10 | 93 |
27 | 11 | 93 |
22 | 12 | 93 |
23 | 1 | 94 |
42 | 2 | 94 |
47 | 3 | 94 |
22 | 4 | 94 |
33 | 5 | 94 |
31 | 6 | 94 |
33 | 7 | 94 |
21 | 8 | 94 |
21 | 9 | 94 |
14 | 10 | 94 |
26 | 11 | 94 |
20 | 12 | 94 |
9 | 1 | 95 |
18 | 2 | 95 |
30 | 3 | 95 |
23 | 4 | 95 |
22 | 5 | 95 |
22 | 6 | 95 |
33 | 7 | 95 |
7 | 8 | 95 |
31 | 9 | 95 |
16 | 10 | 95 |
40 | 11 | 95 |
13 | 12 | 95 |
BlackyP8 ( talk) 23:22, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Automobililamborghini ( talk · contribs) and myself have a disagreement over whether the Sera.jpg image (see right) should remain in the article. He is quite right that it is blurry. My argument is that the blurriness is unnoticeable as a thumb view and not too bad in full resolution. The photo demonstrates the special opening feature of the doors better than the other photo with a single door open. The blurriness is only distracting for the number plate and the Toyota emblem on the front - both of which I can tidy up with an image editor. Comments? Stepho talk 00:45, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Something for discussion... the top photo was changed a few months ago by User:Charles01. The reasons for the change are good - it's a cleaner photo without a distracting background. However, it means the article is now without a photo displaying the most notable feature of the Sera - it's doors. I don't see any particularly good photos on [1] which both shows off the doors, and is clean. Does anyone have one they can add to the pool, or have a different view on this? --.../ NemoThorx ( talk • Contributions) 03:11, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
This looks the best one to me on wiki-commons to illustrate the doors opening. As a "portrait" shot I don't think it does the business, but what do I know? As an illustration of the doors it looks good to me. I would normally add it and await reactions, but right now I'm on a laptop by a window which adds up to non-standard aka bad lighting conditions so I'll let someone else judge (or come back and add it when the light is better for this screen). The one you proposed loooks to me very dark indeed, but that might simply be my screen playing billy suggers. Regards Charles01 ( talk) 14:48, 10 January 2019 (UTC)