Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a22657b2dece48fc

Jump to content

Talk:Lotus Excel

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Mr.choppers in topic 1986 Excel SE horsepower

Why is there a future section? I've tidied it up, but it seems like this belongs under the "Lotus" category and not under specific cars. Suggest removing it. --86.16.190.232 (talk) 22:29, 1 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

Removed. Hotlorp (talk) 14:18, 6 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

I added the exact info "Excel Milestones" as part of an Open University assignment requiring me to do an edit. The "paste operation" I performed has resulted in some unwanted formatting. The dotted box around the '87 yr is unintended. Also, the info in brackets should be under each new model year. If anyone could correct these, I and others would appreciate it. Mickymicky99 (talk) 21:45, 2 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

I think you may want to do another edit and remove what you've added, because this looks like rubbish and you've destroyed the layout of the article. Better learn about Wikipedia editing and standards before going ahead. You even managed to muck up the wiki-code on this talk page, which I've fixed. SeverityOne (talk) 08:49, 25 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

1986 Excel SE horsepower

[edit]

I was browsing through scans of old Motorweek Rivals segments and came across a quick blurb about the 1986 Excel SE stating that it produces 190 bhp, not 180 (Torque is listed as the same 165). I'm wondering if this is an error/misprint on their part, or whether the article is wrong. Most online sources seem to quote the 180hp figure. Here's a link to the picture of the Motorweek section. TKOIII (talk) 20:10, 23 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

I'll see what other period published sources say when I get a minute. Nudge me in a week if there is no response; I may be pinned under a stack of old Auto Katalog.  Mr.choppers |   20:41, 23 April 2024 (UTC)Reply