Talk:Trunk (car)

Automobiles Start‑class Low‑importance

	Cars portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Automobiles, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of automobiles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AutomobilesWikipedia:WikiProject AutomobilesTemplate:WikiProject AutomobilesAutomobile articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Trunk in the back safer?

I heard that the trunk positioned in the back, while the engine in the front is a safer configuration than the opposite. Is this true? If so, why? Malamockq 04:21, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When a front boot is empty or filled with rather soft things (a bag for example), which is the most usual condition seeing that front boots are usually quite small when compared to rear boots and that front-booted (or middle/rear-engined for that matter) vehicles aren't usually used as cargo-carriers (with the exception of mid-engined vans), there is less stuff in the front to absorb the frontal impact of a crash, meaning that the dashboard and the cabin accomoditions are more likely to be reached by the other vehicle or being pushed to the driver without direct contact, the likelihood of serious injuries or death goes up. --DifiCa 18:00, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

all true. Additionally the mass of the rear mounted engine will tend to crush the passenger compartment between it and anything the vehicle collides with.Zebulin (talk) 10:14, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology

Where did the words come from and how did it go from boot to trunk? A history of the words would be good Sweetie candykim (talk) 09:39, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It looks from the wiki information that the two terms developed independently and fairly straightforwardly: "boot" coming from an area of a carriage (for boot storage? a place where you stepped to get up?), and "trunk" referring quite literally to a trunk attached to the car (such as shown in the pictures). One could muse about the tradition-mindedness of Brits vs. the practical literal-mindedness of us Yanks, but I doubt there will ever be a solid explanation of why one is used in some places and the other elsewhere. Fool4jesus (talk) 16:44, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The usual explanation for 'boot' is that it derives from French 'boite' (box). However, I don't know of an authoratitive source for this. Dayvey (talk) 14:06, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

'Diggy'

I've removed what appears to be a bit of folk-etymology in the first paragraph: the explanation for 'diggy' being 'because people dig the tire out of it'. 'Diggy' looks much more like a corruption of 'dickie', which is probably the older word (cars were a common sight in Britain while they were still rare in South Asia). Dayvey (talk) 14:19, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Moved

So, RGloucester moved this from Trunk(Automobile) to Trunk(car) without any semblance of debate. Surely this should be moved back. If the problem is with "automobile", this article is to be written in American English, not british english,(see the talk page box with the 13 striped flag...) ~ipuser 90.198.209.24 (talk) 23:38, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Are you trying to argue that "car" isn't American English? That's the most absurd thing I've ever heard. RGloucester — ☎ 01:05, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm arguing that we shouldn't move articles without a discussion first. Ok, that's not an argument, it's a statement. An emphatic statement. We shouldn't move articles without discussion first! If anyone is wondering what I mean by that, I shall spell it out...if we have an article, and you (as a user) dislike it's current title, then you should do a request move, and have it discussed, reach a consensus and, upon reaching consensus, move the article. Without these steps, one should not move an article. Under this logic, this article should be moved back! ~~ipuser 90.198.209.24 (talk) 08:17, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]