Talk:Chrysler Hemi engine - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Cewbot (talk | contribs) at 13:13, 30 January 2024 (Maintain {{WPBS}} and vital articles: 1 WikiProject template. Create {{WPBS}}. Keep majority rating "Start" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 1 same rating as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Automobiles}}.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 13:13, 30 January 2024 by Cewbot (talk | contribs) (Maintain {{WPBS}} and vital articles: 1 WikiProject template. Create {{WPBS}}. Keep majority rating "Start" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 1 same rating as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Automobiles}}.)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

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:

Automobiles Mid‑importance

	Cars portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Automobiles, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of automobiles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AutomobilesWikipedia:WikiProject AutomobilesTemplate:WikiProject AutomobilesAutomobile
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

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.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

] The anchor (#1970–1971) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Archives of past discussion

Archive 1
Archive 2
Archive 3

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)

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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: