Jump to content

Talk:Opel Astra

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I added a bit of info...

[edit]

I remember reading in Motor Trend that a design for the next generation Saturn Ion was scrapped and was going to be a rebadged Opel Astra. I added it to the article. 70.57.81.173 23:02, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please, if you could find the source and cite it then this information would be very welcome to the article (a kind of an Astra in USA...)... But we need a reference for that! Could you provide us one? Regards, Loudenvier 03:04, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Astra in the USA

[edit]

I think we should not dismiss the source car may be GM hit as a newspaper gossip that should not be taken. I propose we add this information again since it has a source (in fact, more than one source, because I was able to find a few places citing that the Astra will hit the USA as stated on the above dismissed link). Perhaps adding a temporal template stating that this is about a current or future event is enough. Leting this info out is diminishing the value of this article because it's a great impact to the Astra family: hit the US. If no objections are made I will restore the link and will put the temporal template in place. Regards Loudenvier 17:34, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Objection - even widespread gossip is still gossip. Wikipedia, in general, should not include statements about future, unless they are absolutely certain. I believe in case of automobiles this means a statement from the manufacturer directly, i.e. a link to a media.gm.com press release. Until GM releases one (and I believe they still haven't), this is still high-profile gossip. Remember that WP should be the most factually accurate rather than most up-to-date. Bravada, talk - 18:14, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A widespread gossip could have a place in wikipedia in my opinion, if it was not so then the Template:Current and all of the Temporal templates would be of no use. (Pluto as a planet discussions would have to wait for the final statement to make into wikipedia.) The wording on the article could state clearly that it is a scheduled and/or, to some extent, uncertain event. For the sake of completeness I would include this information on the article, and one of the main reasons for that is that this is a too much important piece of information that the wikipedia article should not let it out. Waiting for a manufacturer statement could be a pointless requirement for adding something to the article. If you read the Fiat Marea article you would see that the Brazilian Fiat stated that the Marea SX with 127hp didn't valve admission control phase variator of the HLX, and that exchanging the SX fuel injection chip for the HLX would be of no use. The manufacturer statement was a big lie. The Marea SX had this device disabled by way of a reprogrammed electronic fuel injection chip, and exchanging this chip for the HLX model would bring back the full 147hp of that model. All that is needed for wikipedia is a reliable source. The cited newspaper seems reliable to me. I'll wait for further discussion on the subject but I'm inclined to bring the info back to the article if no more deeper reasons for ommiting it surfaces. Regards Loudenvier 22:07, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"Current" templates are one of the most abused on WP, and the sole existence of the "current automobile" template in present form is one big abuse, but I don't have the time to go back to fighting that again. It serves as a pretext for outright ignoring the "Wikipedia is not a crystal ball" WP:NOT policy, and this is why you can see so manybad examples of that. Uncertain events should have no place in WP. An encyclopedia is not about speculation, it is about information. In principle, we cannot inform about anything that has not yet happened.
Referring to the Fiat Marea example, it is not referenced, and one would need some really good references for the statement that the described chip change is possible, and first and foremost, to an official Fiat source declaring that it is not. As for now, it is an unreferenced claim on both accounts. Besides, the manufacturer is the one who decides whether they release a model or not - no paper can be more authoritative on that, as they are not the ones who make the decision, so this is an entirely different case.
And, while you may not trust manufacturers entirely (although, again, this is totally irrelevant in that case, as they are the ones who make the decisions, so there is nothing not to trust them about), the press is far less reliable, eager to "create news" out of the little gossip they have. Do I have to refer you to countless examples of press specualtions proving to be wrong, no matter how widespread some gossip was?
The article is currently in a laughable state, failing to convey even a brief roundup of all the factual, 100% verifiable information there are on the past 15 years of the Astra, so I guess we can live without starting a gossip column... Bravada, talk - 23:07, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
About the Marea chip: It's not a claim without substance. Just open the Marea caput and you'll see that the missing valve control is present. I've changed the chip on my Marea and the full 147hp were back (the engine blowed not because of the chip change, but because my mother drove the car and did not paid attention to the low oil warning light!). Many sources for that Fiat lie exists: [1] [2], I could go on, but I think you will not waste your time trying to read all those sources in portuguese :-). If any previous encyclopaedia could be so dynamic as Wikipedia I'm sure they would document current events. All that is need is common sense. For example, those many games that are still in developement sometimes make good articles, even before the games are released. Grigori Perelman prove of Poincaré Conjecture would not be in wikipedia because it's still a litle controversial and current event. But, man, it's encyclopedic, as I think the information that Astra could reach the USA is also. Regards. Loudenvier 13:47, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I clicked the Perelman link but it was revealed to me that he is a mathematician, and therefore I refuse to read the article on principial grounds (not to mention the scary photo ;D ). Coming back to the topic - why don't we just wait a few months until the matter gets cleared out? There is such a vast array of past, and certain, facts that are still not covered by Wikipedia that we do not have to worry that we aren't covering all the latest gossip. Bravada, talk - 13:54, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Astra in USA

[edit]

Please, until GM make a statement it still unofficial info. Wikipedia is not meant to be a newspaper. The compromise we found is a good one: citing the interveiu with Bob Lutz. Adding anything further than that will be in violation of wikipedia guidelines. I will back-up Bravada in any reverts until such a statement is made by GM or Saturn. To avoid a revert war I suggest leaving this part of the article as it reads now: it tells about the high probability of Astra in the USA, letting the reader to figure out if it is or not for certain. Regards. Loudenvier 17:24, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ontopic site

[edit]

I have submitted a site; http://opelastrah.com to the external links, and it has been removed. I believe it is not spam, and it is very ontopic. Roy

Opening Paragraph

[edit]

I find this is wording does not work. At the end of the first paragraph, it states 'It competes mainly against the Ford Focus and Volkswagen Golf.' I find this is rather amibguous now that the car will be sold in North America this year (Under the Saturn Brand). My reasoning for this is that while the Ford Focus may be considered a mid-range car in Europe, it is most certainly NOT in North America. Stating that the car competes mainly with a Ford Focus and the Volkswagen Golf will lead a person from the US or Canada to believe that the price point on an Astra can vary between $12,000 CDN to $28,000 CDN. (As the North American Focus is priced at $12,000 - $15,500 CDN and the Golf is $25,000 - $28,000 CDN) SJM 26 February 2007

Hey, thanks to whomever changed this so promtly. SJM 28 February 2007

Astra F engine spec uploaded

[edit]

engine spec for astra F uploaded, information taken from Haynes service and repair manualScorpio wan1945 21:05, 29 April 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Scorpio wan1945 (talk • contribs) 09:20, 2 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Panoramic windscreen

[edit]

I read

panoramic windscreen (unique for a production car at the time of its launch) which extends into the roof area. This type of window is not a panoramic windscreen.

A car with a real panoramic windscreen haves A-pillars with a vertical angle like opel Kapitän P1 This way the A-pillars block Les visibility.

regards

Stef —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.92.132.118 (talk) 10:57, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Saturn Astra into Opel Astra

[edit]

Hi people, there's an on going discussion about this on the Saturn Astra article talk page. It would be interesting if we participate so that we can really reach a better understanding of the issue. Please, visit the talk page of Saturn Astra to participate. Loudenvier (talk) 19:21, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You could post also to http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Automobiles

--— Typ932T | C  19:32, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK - the conclusion of that debate was a clear consensus to merge - so Saturn Astra is now a redirect to this page. The original Saturn Astra page is stored at the bottom of the talk page for that article. SteveBaker (talk) 01:14, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Error in dimensions

[edit]

There's something wrong with the width of the hatchback - it can't be 2032 mm (80 in) vs 1753 mm (69 in) / 1759 mm (69.3 in) for the other models. PMJzz (talk) 02:32, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Easytronic

[edit]

One, or more of the generations had the Easytronic transmission. I am fairly sure it was the Astra-G and Astra-F - can someone clarify/confirm, and add it to the article, thanks. 78.32.143.113 (talk) 10:27, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Interior panorama

[edit]

Do you think that is useful to add an external link to this panorama: Interior of an Opel Astra . I only propose it.--RobCatalà (talk) 08:07, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bad production dates

[edit]

Astras F were produced and sold in Poland until late 2001 and sold as Astra Classic, as opposed to Astra G marketed in Poland as Atra II. I own this model produced in august 2001, bought in november 2001 from dealer in Poznań.

Production dates should be expanded at least to 2001 or even early 2002.

Yanc —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.253.149.39 (talk) 10:11, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Engine

[edit]

The engine table really needs to clarfify which engine code corresponds with which model. It is also missing the 1.2 Corsa engine used in some (underpowered) Astras82.141.196.178 (talk) 16:27, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I believe putting 5.7 V8 or 4.0 V8 on the list is wrong and foolish, for these are either concepts or race cars. Its same as saying a big block 455 Chevy is a VW Beetle engine, as people swap for drag racing.85.110.172.75 (talk) 23:16, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Opel logo 2009 .png Nominated for Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:Opel logo 2009 .png, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests September 2011
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 09:03, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Astra J OPC PR photo.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:Astra J OPC PR photo.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:09, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Vauxhall in Opel

[edit]

I think we should merge Vauxhall in Opel — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.212.27.97 (talk) 08:08, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You don't mention any reasons why. It could be a bit confusing for UK readers as the Astra nameplate has been used on both Vauxhall versions of Kadetts and Astras for thirty years and is rather notable - particularly as several versions are built in Britain. However, from an international point of view it might make more sense. The Vauxhall Astra page has been rationalised in places to better reflect the Opel host car, and maybe this can be improved so that the Vauxhall Astra page is more specific about UK derivatives. Warren (talk) 08:21, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
neutral: Well it certainly would make things easyer by merging the pages for me when giving information that is relevant to both Vauxhall and Opel brands, instead of having to go back and forth putting all the information on both pages but I understand that it might create certain problems so ill leave it for whoevers in charge to sort it out. yesilikecars (talk) 01:00, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Others such as Corsa and Vectra were redirected to Opel as that was where the names were originally used, or where the Vauxhall version (e.g. Nova) would only be part of the Opel model article. Astra was originally a Vauxhall name so the situation would be reversed (and Vauxhall Astra shouldn't be a disambiguation page, as it isn't about unrelated uses of a name). Peter James (talk) 13:16, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose - Didn't the Vauxhall Astra exist before the Opel Astra according to the articles or am I misremembering another attempted merge that was similar? Thanks ツ Jenova20 (email) 08:47, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Oppose - The Vauxhall Astra has existed for 12 years before the Opel Astra. If anything the Opel Astra should be merged into the Vauxhall Astra. Thanks ツ Jenova20 (email) 08:54, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I did some digging and here is a link to how this went the last time it was proposed for anyone interested. Thanks ツ Jenova20 (email) 13:04, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Astra J 1.7 Circle L engine torque figures

[edit]

I'm not completely sure about this but I believe the 1.7 L diesel unit (Circle L engine) produced 221 lbs/ft (300 N.m) of torque as of 2012 as well as the previous 207 lbs/ft (280 N.m) and 192 lbs/ft (260 N.m) stated. I would put forward this information myself only I can't verify it. yesilikecars (talk) 22.28, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Conversion chart for other Astra

[edit]

Hey, I was wondering if it might be a good idea to add a chart that shows the various models of Astra across the world and their equivalents.

So, showing that a Opal Astra G is the equivalent of a Holden Astra TS.

Just a thought.

KhevaKins (talk) 06:52, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, it sounds like it would just be a basic presentation of facts. Converting known facts into table form wouldn't be OR, would it?  Mr.choppers | ✎  21:47, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Astra Coupe

[edit]

According to Vauxhall's literature, the Astra GTC at least is a coupé: [3] and Parker's Car Guides have a section for the 2000-2004 coupé as well: [4] Possibly more, but I stopped with the first two results. Chaheel Riens (talk) 11:37, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Chaheel Riens thanks for this, as a result of which, I won't make (a third set of) changes. I guess automotive descriptors have no role or boundaries anymore. I've also given up noting how the similar Renault Megane gets described. CtrlXctrlV (talk) 11:05, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Can't comment on the Renault Megane, but with regard to the Astra, even if we discount that a manufacturer may be generous with the term "coupe" to try to attract sales, when somebody like Parkers agrees with the term, we have to accept it. The Coupe section kind of agrees with your opinion of blurred lines, but certainly in the case of the Astra, there is a very different body shape when the "coupe" model is compared to the 5-door:
(And I'll tell you something else - if you want to buy a 5-door 2003 era Astra, according to Google image search, the world's your oyster!)
It's not like the VW Golf, for example, where a 5-door and 3-door are very definitely the same body shell. Chaheel Riens (talk) 11:49, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Opel Astra. 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:

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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:47, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Astra H Platform?

[edit]

All, it appears that the Astra H (Mk 5) is not based on the Delta platform, but based on the T-platform. I am currently trying to find more references to this before I make any changes, so if you have any to share that would be great. VX1NG (talk) 16:13, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Production Plant for Astra F and G

[edit]

The Opel/Vauxhall Astra F and G were also produced in 3-door & 5-door liftback Version in Opel Eisenach Plant in Germany. EA-Henning (talk) 23:14, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Opel Astra. 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.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:18, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

adpost and eBay as a source

[edit]

@BushelCandle: This piece of text got to go, This was also a feature of the first generation Holden Astra in New Zealand, although this was later changed to an Opel-style grille, bringing it into line with Australia, as well as the Opel Astra in India.

New Zealand portion is only supported by ebay and Australia and India part was supported by adpost. These are both not reliable sources. Adding the information back with citation needed tag does not cut it. Every information which is not supported by a reliable source is doubted and your summary and reason in the tag is misleading. I request that you remove this information until you can support it with a reliable source. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 02:44, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The source link links only a nice message saying that "they" can't find the page [7]. I have taken the liberty of concealing the contentious bit. Please feel free to restore it when you have found a reliable verifiable source for it. If you do not do that, then presumably it will make sense simply to remove the thing. Regards Charles01 (talk) 07:33, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This is how useful our article would be if I took that fundamentalist advice about "Every information which is not supported by a reliable source is doubted" seriously and to it's logical conclusion.
Pretty sparse, enigmatic and unhelpful, eh?
If you seriously doubt the information about the grille, by all means remove it until it is cited. (I shan't be doing that, because I know from personal knowledge that it's accurate.)
Otherwise, and if you only have mild doubts as to it's veracity, it's probably best to just tag it as needing reliable sources - after all the grille information has been in there for a long time and I'm sure a Kiwi would have challenged this before now if it was false - this is quite a frequently edited article!
Apologies for my original reversion, User:SheriffIsInTown - I thought that URL spamming was happening until I realised that you were using a semi automated tool to place citation templates on a number of unrelated articles, and had probably not checked to see if the source was reliable and the web page title appropriate. It was only after I saw the changes that you were making to other citations on other unrelated articles that same day that I realised you were an entirely kosher editor and not a link spammer and self-reverted (I was NOT the original author of either the "facts" or the dodgy citations...)
Thanks, User:Charles01 for your wise and pragmatic edit.--BushelCandle (talk) 12:30, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Opel and Vauxhall Astra H

[edit]

The saloon was offered as an Opel but the hatchback and estate was offered by Opel and Vauxhall. GroppeBoucher (talk) 09:43, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Opel Astra-e

[edit]

The Opel Astra-e will be launched in Europe on 2023 (rebadged as a Vauxhall in the United Kingdom). Derwydd74 (talk) 03:53, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Potentially incomplete edit (needs clean up)

[edit]

The second paragraph of the section headed "OPC" under "Astra H (A04; 2004)" (see here: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Opel_Astra#OPC ) has issues with readability which suggests it has been poorly edited and needs cleanup.

It says "This vehicle was sold until late 2009 in Australia and New Zealand by Holden Special Vehicles as the HSV VXR. HSV VXRs but it never offered a sedan in the UK and Australia are sold as standard with full leather trim, climate control, 6 disc CD and 19-inch alloy wheels."

The second sentence seems to be missing something, and the paragraph then goes on to say "The sedan was discontinued in Australia and United Kingdom in 2003" which goes against the earlier mention of the sedan never being offered in UK and Australia. KumoAcademic (talk) 03:57, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Opel_Astra&oldid=1257844490"