Talk:Isuzu Trooper

Untitled

Isuzu's lawsuit against Consumers Union was LOST. Numerous news outlets have reported this and so has Consumers Union: http://www.consumersunion.org/products/verdict.htm--Bryanmenard 20:58, 21 July 2005 (UTC) The Isuzu Trooper is not a large SUV, its a mid-size. Davez621 10:47, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

there is an err

i have no idea how to fix it or if im posting this in the right spot.

it says there are no troopers with a C223-T sold in the usa, i have a origanal usa spec C223-T trooper.

it is true that no non turbo diesel trooper was sold in the usa.

i do not know of any usa trooper with a 2.0L engine only the 1.9 - 2.2diesel - 2.3 - 2.6 EFI and 2.8 V-6 EFI

a very good web page for isuzu diesel info is, isuzupup.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.164.182.251 (talk) 02:34, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

References

Sad

The isuzu Trooper is a Great SUV its really sad isuzu replaced it. -.- No Isuzu Trooper had a V8 engine offered from factory... Bryan

I concur, the Isuzu Trooper at no time and in no country was offered with a V8 from the factory... Eric

DUDE THE ISUZU ALTERRA/ASCENDER STINKS, CANT BELIEVE THEY REPLACED THE TROOPER WITH IT!

Isuzu probably intended to offer a V8 Trooper at some point. I have two reasons to believe this:

1. The 3.5 V6 in the last generation Trooper is a 75-degree V6. There is no reason to make a clean-sheet 75-degree V6, because a 60-degree V would be even firing and therefore smoother. A 90-degree V8 would be even-firing, so a 75-degree V only makes sense if the engine family was intended to accomodate a V8 at some point.

2. Isuzu held some trademarks that implied 8-cylinder power, including "AWD/V8" and "ultim8." A V8 would make sense for Isuzu's commercial trucks, but not the AWD. Logically, this powertrain would have been in the Trooper. The only other possibility would have been for a V8 in a larger SUV that slotted above Trooper.

[1] [2] [3]Meersman 04:48, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

2009 Trooper in Europe

This is referenced in the article. Is there a source for this? Will it be a version of the Mu-7? I'll delete if this remains unreferenced for a while.Meersman 02:40, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

A little confused about engines

This page seems to suggest that the pre-1992 troopers only offered a I4 engine. But I owned a 1990 Trooper with a V6. Am I reading something wrong? 75.75.110.235 16:03, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Requested move, 2007

Isuzu Trooper → Isuzu Bighorn — Nominating as naming convention favors domestic name. The Bighorn according to the Japanese wikipage and the vehicle's official domestic site is the domestic name, wheras the Trooper is its export name —Willirennen (talk) 19:01, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

• Comment what is the name used in English language markets? WP:COMMONNAME would seem to suggest keeping it at Trooper. 132.205.99.122 (talk) 19:12, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

• The current naming convention is to title the article based on one objective criterion: the name the vehicle was first released under in its domestic market. This is because some vehicles are released under conflicting names in foreign countries. For example, the car released as "Isuzu Trooper" in the United States might be released as something else in Europe, and an unrelated car might be called the "Isuzu Trooper" in Europe. I don't suppose that it's the case here, but that is the idea, anyway. Dekimasuよ! 13:05, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

The first version turned up in UK branded as the Isuzu Trooper (though they never progressed beyond the staus of 'rarity' under this name). I do not know if the Isuzu Trooper - eg Greece (to take a country on the other side of capitalist Europe to which Japanese cars are sometimes imported and where this type of vehicle might be deemd suitable - if expensive - for the country districts) name applied elsewhere in Europe. Once General Motors started importing 'Troopers' branded as Vauxhalls (UK) or Opel (rest of Europe as far as I know) the ones with Isuzu Trooper labels seem to have faded out of the market. I do not know whether (or even when) the ones with Isuzu Trooper labels on them were formally withdrawn from sale, however, and even after they had been there's always the possibility of the odd grey import turning up imported with a Japanese (or other non European) brand name say three years old, courtesy of the relatively low prices of (relatively new) second hand vehicles in Japan. I do not know what it was called in Japan because I do not understand Japanese, but as far as I can make out from the wiki aricle in Japanese, it MIGHT have been Bighorn. Which is unlikely to mean much to most readers of the anglophone wikiCharles01 (talk) 14:00, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I can confirm that the Japanese name was Bighorn. Dekimasuよ! 11:02, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Quoting Which is unlikely to mean much to most readers of the anglophone wiki, Like the Mazda Bongo, the Bighorn name is in fact notable to anglophone wiki as a source of ridicule known as Engrish and this is not an excuse to use as a oppose reason. There is a large number of website to prove this, these are the few examples...

• Auto Trader UK: The name's Stupid, Really Stupid
• 4car: Silly Car Names
• Dumb Names for Cars
• Telegraph Motoring: Motormouth

Willirennen (talk) 00:09, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

It's not Engrish. There's nothing inherently wrong with the name, which probably comes from the Big Horn Mountains. Even if they come out with the Isuzu Grand Tetons next, we'll just have to make more fun of Wyoming. For that matter, how many native English speakers can pronounce Mazda correctly? Anyway, I'm sure everyone agrees that the request should be judged on its merits. Dekimasuよ! 10:53, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

This page was moved uncontroversially from "Isuzu Trooper" to "Isuzu Bighorn" in accordance with the discussion above and the listing at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Dekimasuよ! 01:22, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Rear Door View

A photo needs to be added for the distinctive asymmetric rear-door combination. While a bit of a gas hog, still one of my favorite vehicles (driven to 13K ft.). It would also show to reinforce the High rating on the article. 198.123.51.6 (talk) 18:14, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was not moved. Aervanath (talk) 18:18, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

---

Isuzu Trooper → Isuzu Bighorn — this move was already done in 2007 per Wikipedia:WikiProject_Automobiles/Conventions#Titles. However, User:Nwwebber moved it back to "Isuzu Trooper" without discussion. OSX (talk • contributions) 05:47, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

• Support: no explanation on why it was moved back to the Trooper nameplate —Preceding unsigned comment added by Donnie Park (talk • contribs) 11:29, 3 July 2009
• Oppose: common name is clear here. Leave it at Isuzu Trooper. Jonathunder (talk) 22:26, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

• The current naming convention is to title the article based on one objective criterion: the name the vehicle was first released under in its domestic market (per Wikipedia:WikiProject_Automobiles/Conventions#Titles). This is because some vehicles are released under conflicting names in foreign countries. For example, the car released as "Isuzu Trooper" in the United States was released in Europe as both an Opel and a Vauxhall. It is almost universally used policy (except for Lexus), and the 200 WP:CARS members have argued long and hard on several occasions, but this policy has remained with overall support each time. WP:Common name does not apply here because it would almost always lead to an unfair U.S. bias. OSX (talk • contributions) 02:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

• Support: If it was moved to Trooper without consultation then move it back to Bighorn, then have the discussion as to whether it should be moved to Trooper per COMMONNAME. --Falcadore (talk) 04:15, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

• Falcadore, Common name does not apply here—there are far too many issues with using it. Intead we go by original market name (i.e. Bighorn)—see Wikipedia:WikiProject_Automobiles/Conventions#Titles. OSX (talk • contributions) 10:55, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

• OSX, what are the issues that actually apply in this case? --Born2cycle (talk) 21:34, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose move to Isuzu Bighorn per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:GOOGLE (see below). As to supporting arguments based on Wikipedia:WikiProject_Automobiles/Conventions#Titles, see WP:COMMON and WP:IGNORE. That is, while there might be a problem in general with automobile names, in which case that's a good rule, here it simply does not apply. In the entire English speaking world, the most common name is clearly Trooper. --Born2cycle (talk) 21:34, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose. Project-specific guidelines should only be used if they don't conflict with policy. This one advises to use the common name of the subject of the article. It seems the common name here is the current title. Jafeluv (talk) 09:47, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose. Already at most common name. Hippo (talk) 02:42, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Discussion

Google results are interesting.

• Results 1 - 10 of about 620,000 English pages for "Isuzu Trooper"
• Results 1 - 10 of about 48,500 English pages for "Isuzu Bighorn".

So Trooper is used over 12 times as often as Bighorn on English pages. Seems pretty clear to me. --Born2cycle (talk) 21:39, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject_Automobiles/Conventions#Titles still applies. Even if we went by the new proposed changes here, original market name would still qualify because it is known by more than one name in English-speaking countries. OSX (talk • contributions) 04:40, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm afraid a WikiProject-specific guideline agreed to by 200 people can't override a community-wide agreement that we use the common names of persons and things as article titles. I understand your concern that the same car can be known under several totally different names in different parts of the world, but when an overwhelmingly more common name exists, we should definitely go with policy and use it. Maybe the WP:AUTOS guideline should be changed to reflect this? Jafeluv (talk) 22:40, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

There's an extended discussion on this subject presently running here. IFCAR (talk) 23:05, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I left an outside opinion on that page, I hope it's ok. Jafeluv (talk) 00:27, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

I just lost an awesome 2000 model isuzu trooper. Unlike the rest of you guys I was driving a stick shift. The other person ran a red light, that I couldn't avoid and flipped my truck. I wish Isuzu made troopers, because I would buy another model. The only complaint I had was that I need to add oil between oil changes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.33.85.24 (talk) 06:28, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

1st generation Trooper/Jackaroo gearbox (Australia)

In the wikipedia article it says that the Trooper/Jackaroo only came with a 5-speed gearbox, mine only has a 4-speed manual. Ii's a 1981 3 door LWB wagon, with 4cyl Isuzu petrol engine. Model #:UBS13FK — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.10.86.99 (talk) 03:51, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

After consulting my bible (Terry Bebbington's 60 Years of Holden), the first generation Holden Jackaroo offered the following transmissions:

• 4-speed Isuzu MSG manual (model years 1981 to 1985 — released November 1981)
• 5-speed Isuzu MSG manual (model years 1986 to 1987 — released August 1985)
• 5-speed Isuzu MAU5C manual (model years 1988 to 1991 — released July 1988)
• 4-speed Aisin Warner automatic

Obviously these only apply to the Australian market, but I can't imagine other countries being much different. OSX (talk • contributions) 11:03, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Picture

Hi guys! I uploaded a picture of a Jackaroo on commons :

Holden Jackaroo off-road

I think it would look good on this article, since it currently only has "urban" pictures. But when I tried to put it in the article, my ignorance hit me like a 5-ton angry ram : which version is it ? What kind of detail should I add? No ideaaa… I can only tell you that it's a Holden Jackaroo with a 3.5l V6 engine.
Cheers, Thouny (talk) 13:32, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi, great image! I agree it would work well with the article. I have identified this car as a 2000 Holden Jackaroo (UBS) SE 5-door wagon. Also, it would be great if you could get the project an interior photo, that would be great, as it is difficult to obtain interior photos of older cars like this. OSX (talk • contributions) 14:52, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi! Glad that you like it :) Unfortunately, that was a car I used when I was in Tassie, but I'm back in France right now :/ Sorry!
Cheers, Thouny (talk) 07:34, 2 May 2014 (UTC)