Talk:NUMMI

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

First Corolla[edit]

The article states that the first Corolla produced at NUMMI was in December 1986 - https://web.archive.org/web/20100402121111/http://www.nummi.com/timeline.php . The E90 series started in Japan in May 1987 - https://www.toyota-global.com/company/history_of_toyota/75years/vehicle_lineage/car/id60003780/index.html (click on "Description"). Which implies that either NUMMI made a short run of the E80 Corolla (easy because it was almost identical to the Nova) or started the E90 before Japan did.  Stepho  talk  23:14, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

According to the first source, it was the Corolla FX16 that started, but in September 1986 - and Toyota Corolla (E90) states, with a source, that NUMMI had been building the E80 FX hatchback but switched to building sedans for the E90 due to slow sales of the former.

In any case, the LTA vandal changing it to 1985 is clearly disruptive. --Sable232 (talk) 03:59, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake, September 1986 was the start of NUMMI production for the Corolla.
And yes, the vandal changing it to 1985 is wrong.
Are we agreed that NUMMI started producing the E80 Corolla in September 1986 and can therefore add the line back in for Corolla E80 (1986) ? Although the table seems to use a mix of US style model years and calendar years.  Stepho  talk  04:54, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that should be in there. I didn't look as closely into it as I should have at the time on account of just how much disruption I was working through from that LTA.
Since NUMMI built cars exclusively (right?) for the U.S. and Canadian markets, model years would be preferable in my opinion, but maybe with the years in front of the model so it's clearer (i.e. that it was the "1987 Corolla (E80)" built there, more so than E80 Corollas in 1987). --Sable232 (talk) 13:47, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I got a bit distracted by other things but finally adjusted the table to consistently use model years instead of mixing model years and calendar years. I choose model years mostly because this is an American article, primarily of interest to American readers and American readers vastly prefer model years (for reasons that totally escape me). I also attached the above timeline URL as a supporting reference.  Stepho  talk  11:24, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]