encyclopedia of car info

[thedriver]

Does anyone know of a website where I can find specifications of vehicles of the past? How can I find the wheelbase of a 57 chevy? Or the width and length of a 69 thunderbird?

wikipedia doesn't have it, google hasn't been helpful, any suggestions?

[Cory Wolfe]

Hmm... I can't say my Encyclopedia of American Cars would even have such specific info. *checks* Yeah, it has wheelbases, but not lengths and widths. Also has weight, prices, production, engines, c.i., horsepower, bore x stroke, and models in the data, while it has writing about each make and model.

[Drew Dowdell]

We at C&G should make one. I own autowikipedia.com but haven't done anything with it. Would some of you be game to building a wiki?

[Flybrian]

Wikipedia's current presentation is a good template, but is flawed in so many ways, mostly unknowledable people posting 15,000 lines about some one-off aftermarket performance model they care about and 2 lines about the other twelve years of that certain car.

I'm all for spearheading an AutoWikipedia (Autopedia?) under the C&G banner. Between us all, we have a bottomless vat of knowledge on all things automotive. Plus, we have enough knowledgable members to cross-reference if we don't agree on something.

I'm in!

[Hudson]

Books.

Start with the "Standard Catalog of American Cars: 1946-1975"

I have the whole series:

Standard Catalog of American Cars: 1805-1942

Standard Catalog of American Cars: 1946-1975

Standard Catalog of American Cars: 1976-1999

Standard Catalog of American Light-Duty Trucks

Standard Catalog of Imported Cars

They come in handy.

[NOS2006]

So, how thick would that entire catalog be, Hudson?

[thedriver]

I've got the standard catalog of imported cars, but none of the others. Good information, but is a little brief in places, if a model is around for several years, they assume sometimes it doesn't change much if at all.

A good resource to be sure, but the internet needs a version too I think. .

[Hudson]

So, how thick would that entire catalog be, Hudson?

The five books are about 8 inches wide on my book shelf. Almost as wide as the TWO books of the Beaulieu encyclopedia.

[balthazar]

Standard Catalogs are much better than wikipedia of course, tho the SCs are also not without erroneous information. Still: the best general hard data source out there, IMO.

As far as making an 'autopedia'.... do you guys know how much information we're talking about??? And if it's all posted from other sources, how do we go about fact-checking it? If it's not more correct that the already-available sources, I don't know if it's worth the mountain of time. Unless we have experts on certain vehicles or multiple sources to cross-reference.

[Drew Dowdell]

Standard Catalogs are much better than wikipedia of course, tho the SCs are also not without erroneous information. Still: the best general hard data source out there, IMO.

As far as making an 'autopedia'.... do you guys know how much information we're talking about??? And if it's all posted from other sources, how do we go about fact-checking it? If it's not more correct that the already-available sources, I don't know if it's worth the mountain of time. Unless we have experts on certain vehicles or multiple sources to cross-reference.

191610[/snapback]

Well, the hope is that as knowlage of the autowiki grows, more people will contribute and fact check. It's not going to be just us doing the work.

It's only 3 days old so far...

[balthazar]

Haven't seen it yet (will check...). Is it just a segregation of the auto entries into another domain, ala ebaymotors?

Post-check: Is this it??: www.autowikipedia.com

Cadillac entry: >>"Founded by Henry Leland? in 1903 {It was 1902}. Aquired by General Motors in 1908 {1909}for $4.5 million. {$5.6 million}

I'm confused now (sees 'Flybrian' tagline): Is this connected with wikipedia or no? Is this the post regarding this undertaking, or did I miss explaination elsewhere?

Edited September 10, 2006 by balthazar

[Drew Dowdell]

Haven't seen it yet (will check...). Is it just a segregation of the auto entries into another domain, ala ebaymotors?

Post-check: Is this it??: www.autowikipedia.com

Cadillac entry:  >>"Founded by Henry Leland? in 1903 {It was 1902}. Aquired by General Motors in 1908 {1909}for $4.5 million. {$5.6 million}

I'm confused now (sees 'Flybrian' tagline): Is this connected with wikipedia or no? Is this the post regarding this undertaking, or did I miss explaination elsewhere?

191696[/snapback]

it is not connected with the wikipedia

the post regarding it's undertaking is here.

And those facts<?> I typed in that entry came from "Cadillac: Standard of Excellence" Copyright 1980.

But that's the beauty of it Balthy, go ahead and change them if I'm wrong.

[balthazar]

Missed that thread.

Your source was incorrect, shame on Cadillac there.

I've registered, will add as time allows. Hope it takes off!

[Sixty8panther]

I need to get the Standard Catalog collection.

You can never have too many books on cars.

[thegriffon]

www.carfolio.com

Far from exhaustive but a useful compendium of specs for vehicles from a wide period and provenance.

[Hudson]

Standard Catalogs are much better than wikipedia of course, tho the SCs are also not without erroneous information. Still: the best general hard data source out there, IMO.

As far as making an 'autopedia'.... do you guys know how much information we're talking about??? And if it's all posted from other sources, how do we go about fact-checking it? If it's not more correct that the already-available sources, I don't know if it's worth the mountain of time. Unless we have experts on certain vehicles or multiple sources to cross-reference.

You're absolutely right on the content of the "Standard Catalog" series, they're far from perfect. They're a good starting point and you can use that information to do further information searches. I actually wore out my first imported cars book (the binding cracked and entire sections started to fall out) before getting a second copy and a copy of the second edition.

The American books are much better than the import book. The sections on GM brands, for example, are written by experts in the individual fields. The major import brands (Toyota, Nissan, etc), however, are not as well covered.

If you're looking for a good general source of brand/car company information (not specs of individual models), look into the Beaulieu encyclopedia. The 1,792 page, 2-volume set covers just about every brand of production car in the world.

[balthazar]

I've not owned the import Catalog, tho I've also busted up my first edition American '46-75 book due to extensive usage. It's in the American Catalog I've found numerous errors- to the point I've taken to writing correct data in it in pen. One of the individual marque catalogs I've checked out was, by itself; awful.... tho I am trying to recify that.

I have a few of the 'encyclopedia' type books- they're great for number of entries but of course they never get into any deep info or specs. Actually, they give such general info that they're probably quite reliable, accuracy-wise.