Talk:KITT

Kitt
I would like to comment on the fact that Kitt is not just the name of a car from a TV show but a surname also. In fact it is my surname. I am sure this problem has arisen with other surnames. I am in the process of compiling information in order to create an entry for the surname "Kitt". I will also request the article in the hope of finding more contributers. I am not complaining but merely informing others with the same surname who may have sought the history or geneology of their name that i intend to create a page and that their input would be helpful.

Thank You, Shane Kitt aka skitt —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skitt (talk • contribs)


 * Looks like your surname project is in hiatus since you posted this last year. I'd say if you want to start an article about the name then either choose the article title as Kitt (surname) or move this article to KITT (Knight Rider) and make a disambiguation page. If you need help with this just ask me and I can assist you. Just don't delete this article for your own article. Cyberia23 02:17, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Stroker and Hoop
C.A.R.R. is a parody of KITT. Added to the trivia section. Wasn't sure if you can have parodies there, but, you have a Totally Spies refrence so... —Preceding unsigned comment added by EAB (talk • contribs)

Citation
ABC News said that the KITT up for sale at Dublin, California, is the exact KITT that David himself rode on and that's why is being up for sale for $149,995. They made four KITTs where three are stunt cars. The others are only replicas and weren't used in the TV series.

Most Informative page Ive read so far
And perhaps the coolestJoebsullivan 08:02, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

William Daniels
Anyone have any idea why he requested that he not be credited for his work? How and why did this happen? -Mike Payne 14:03, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

KITT's Seiyu
Just out of curiosity, does anybody know who KITT's seiyu was in the Japanese dub? Sarujo 15:59, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind, I found it. the seiyu was Akio Nojima. Sarujo (talk) 19:38, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Why was KITT a Trans Am?
Anyone know what the reason was that a Trans Am was the basis for KITT? Ie, why did the producers use that particular car (as opposed to, say, a Corvette or a Datsun/Nissan Z, or something more exotic), and was there ever any reason given in the show about this car (wanting to blend in/not be too conspicuous, etc)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Georgiablue (talk • contribs)


 * The Trans Am has always had quite good numbers in terms of power, times, etc. In the last years of the Trans Am, numbers were actually advertised lower than they were so as not to stall sales of the Corvette for the much-less expensive Trans Am. I can't tell you exactly why it was chosen, but why was a new Mustang chosen for the remake as opposed to a concept Trans Am (based on the Firebird)?  Zchris87v  21:10, 31 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I believe Glen Larson explained why he chose the Trans Am in the Season 1 DVD commentary. He simply wanted a sporty, American, muscle car to represent KITT and the Trans Am fit the bill. I'd imagine the TA's were probably cheaper than Corvettes, so trashing one every week in stunts would have probably kept it within the show's budget. Cyberia23 (talk) 22:35, 31 December 2007 (UTC)


 * In the Season 1 DVD, Larson comments that Pontiac came to the party with budget and cars, expecting the TV show to promote sales of the new Firebird (it was a 1984 TA model and the show first aired in 1983...) This would seem to have worked out well for Pontiac! I expect there's similar budget and marketting reasons behind NBC's decision to go with Ford/Shelby. An alternate explanation (From the point of view of the story's plot [pilot episode]), the original KITT was converted from Michael Long's own TA. Also a very exotic looking car would attract undue attention, whereas the Foundation's mission I think calls for a more clandestine approach. At least, that is my take. Sinewalker (talk) 03:32, 1 April 2008 (UTC)


 * OK - in 1981, GM were shipping autos to a car show, amongst them were 2 of the new F-Body Trans-Am. The train they were on was involved in a wreck (cars apparently thrown from the train). As GM were sponsoring various shows at Universal, they simply had all the wrecked vehicles shipped there. Amazingly, the T/A's has sustained very little damage - the story is that when Glen Larson heard this fact, and saw the car's design, that this shaped the show. GM were only too pleased to supply another 2 cars (and replacement panels!) for filming to start.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.15.39.195 (talk) 21:52, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Will someone add the new KITT?
The new KITT was just revealed by NBC for the TV movie. It's now a Ford Mustang. Is someone going to add it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Antenox (talk • contribs) 08:37, 13 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Here are some specs here, some of them obviously fake (laser weapons, etc.)  Zchris87v  21:10, 31 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Whoever added the new 2008 KITT info last time, pretty much took the entire Popular Mechanics article and copied it word-for-word here - which of course is a violation of copyright law. I had removed all offending data and summarized it down to a basic mention that the new 2008 KITT was revealed online. In the end, I think the new 2008 KITT should probably have it's own article and a link to it included on this page. I wouldn't double up on info here. If you wanted a 2008 KITT section they you need to add the Knight Rider 2000 KITT as well - which is already discussed on the Knight Rider 2000 article. Cyberia23 (talk) 22:40, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup tags
I added the cleanup tags to this article as there appear to be several issues with the article. With the broadcast of the backdoor pilot tonight, it will likely get some extra traffic, so it might be a good time to look at serious cleanup. Here is why I added each tag.
 * Original Research: There seem to be a lot of statements in the article which are uncited. We need to clean those up, but I don't own any of the DVDs to use for reference. I am talking about the parts that need more than just the episode reference.
 * Laundry List: this list looks like it is trying to add every feature in the vehicle. Instead of enumerating every sensor on the car, couldn't we just note that KITT contained sensors and list the items it could sense?
 * In-universe: Though this article cites several of the episodes, outside of the episode reference, it is written in places as if KITT were a real car. The article needs to be given appropriate revision per writing about fiction. Slavlin (talk) 04:26, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

A lot of the Original Research has been removed since I tagged it as such, so I left that alone. I fixed and moved the laundry list tag to the section I meant it for. I will need to think about the in-universe tag. I am not sure if I agree that just stating at the start of the features section that KITT is fictional qualifies as not writing as in-universe. Slavlin (talk) 02:58, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Change of wording
I changed "pee" to "urinate" as a matter of taste (morally). If there is any specific reason "pee" should be used, please revert it. Just another guy trying to be a Chemical Engineer, Nanobiotechnologist, and Mathematician (talk) 07:08, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Chappelle's Show Reference
Shouldn't there be a line in the trivia which lists KITT's "appearence" on Chappelle's Show? --Promus Kaa (talk) 03:47, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Dollars
I find this: ''KITT's total production cost was estimated at $11,400,000 in 1982. (This was KITT's total construction cost as he was first built in 1982. This equals $24,382,861 in 2006 dollars. However, due to inflation and material costs $53,299,730 would be needed in 2006 to purchase the material used in 1982).''

My understanding is that the conversion to 2006 dollars is supposed to allow for inflation and material costs, so this is double-counting. And yes I know I'm asking a complex economic question about a talking car, but hey, I've nothing better to do. DJ Clayworth (talk) 22:40, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Gender
I know KITT always talks to Michael with an effeminate male voice, but the name 'KITT' itself is a woman's name -does anyone know which gender KITT really was? I think this is important information for the article which is not listed, and I'm very curious. -- Teetotaler 23 May, 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.68.22.207 (talk) 06:25, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Being a machine, KITT technically has no gender to speak of, but it's fairly obvious that it has masculine programming. Plus, I believe he was referred to as a "he" by characters on the show. 216.236.163.39 (talk) 10:45, 4 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, if KITT really is more masculine in 'his' programming and he is a 'he', does that mean that KITT, is supposed to be bisexual, to match David Hasselhoff's character? This might explain KARR's dislike for KITT: Homophobia.  Besides such speculations, I wonder if KITT was offended by movies like The Terminator, or how KITT feels about The Matrix, both of which would put an immoral edge on their fellow machines, and which is rabid Speciesism and Anthropocentrism, or the denial of AI, which is after-all, a form of Racism.  Any thoughts?  --Teetotaler 26 September, 2008  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.67.81.197 (talk) 07:25, 26 September 2008 (UTC)


 * How did you come to the conclusion that Michael Knight was bisexual? 165.214.4.23 (talk) 10:22, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Features
In the Chariot of Gold episode new features have been introduced. Kitt has a blood analyzer (analysys is done by a wire attached arm band) (kitt can tell blood presure and can recognize over 5000 drugs) (button "~blood analysis" is on the same panel as turbo boost). Other probably new introduced feature is the ability to tell the age of a relic (a vase) which is done in the interior by the daisy-on-the-screen-scan :) Other thing that might not be new is ability to open the 'turn right-left-right locks' --Beavel (talk) 07:53, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

History of K.I.T.T.
The new 2008 Series Ret-Con's Dr Graiman as the original inventor of K.I.T.T. from the original series. This should be noted in the history entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.3.152.70 (talk) 00:02, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

True, however in the original series (season 3 episode 14 - Junk Yard Dog) K.I.T.T. falls into a pool of acid and needs to be rebuilt from the ground up by the original team Wilton Knight put together. That team consists of Dr. Von Vorman, Dr. Breeland (or Greeland) and Dr. Numada (not sure on the exact spelling, as I just noted the names like Bonnie said, without subtitles). Dr. Charles Graiman is not mentioned.

Xsaenen (talk) 20:32, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

KI2T vs KI3T
Just a thought, but as the original KITT (KI2T) was in 4 seasons (90 episodes or so), and the KI3T has only been in 1 season so far, it would make more sense for the first infobox in the article to be for KI2T rather than KI3T. Possibly the article should be split into 2 and 3? -mattbuck (Talk) 22:39, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

ARTICLE REVISION 03-05/10/09
Have clarified the history of the two KITTs and their relation to each other. Also clarified the history of KARR, and the distinction between the old and new KARR. Also clarified the role of the Knight 4000 body, and the chronological history of the two KITTs. Have made minor improvements on the ordering and layout of the article to make it easier to follow and flow better.

I am unaware of how to perform this task, but I feel it would be appropriate to remove the notes at the top of the page which state (in brief) that the article has an excessive amount of intricate detail/is written 'in-universe'/and is not encyclopaedic. The information provided is relevant, comprehensive, and in the appropriate level of detail for the subject in question. It is also provided in a clear enough manner to be followed by and inform the fanatic and non-fanatic alike. While the information appears to be largely accurate it will benefit ultimately from more references to qualify it, but it is generally an authoritative piece presented in a logical manner.

Regards, Yardsmyth7 (talk) 10:11, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Followup: I have removed the cleanup tags, but references are still required for this article so I have attached a citation and references tag. Yardsmyth7 (talk) 10:38, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

KITT is a Cylon
As PvP noted, KITT's scanner bar really is quite like that of a Cylon - is there any connection, given that Larson created both series? The Cylon (1978) page clams so but there's no citation. -mattbuck (Talk) 04:50, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Split
The article is over 51 kilobytes long, with by far the most of it consisting of the two cars' features. The parts containing the feature lists should be moved into their own articles. J I P &#124; Talk 09:46, 5 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I would agree. Definetely split them into seperate articles. TBird100636 (talk) 06:40, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

KARR
Is the KARR section needed? KITT is KITT, KARR is KARR, KARR already has a seperate page. RJX74 (talk) 05:28, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Knight Rider 2010
There should be a section of Knight Rider 2010 movie and information about the 2010 kitt — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.234.107.168 (talk) 16:22, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Original Tv series KITT vehicle information (real life)
Some year ago i found a fansite which had information about the Trans Ams used, how they were modified and driven when on 'autopilot' etc. As of now i cant find that fansite anymore but i think that kinda information would be great addition to article. Now it's only about fictional content and speculation of whereabouts of surviving vehicles. It indeed seems that Hasselhoff owns one or replica atleast, used to promote his Tv-show in Finland. --85.76.108.181 (talk) 22:54, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on KITT. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100504210010/http://www.hitari.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=product.details&objectId=1C569A95-AB0A-B3CF-7C71DED33D9FABFF to http://www.hitari.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=product.details&objectId=1C569A95-AB0A-B3CF-7C71DED33D9FABFF
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100214193638/http://www.hitari.com/filestore/product/1C569A95-AB0A-B3CF-7C71DED33D9FABFF/KnightRiderK.pdf to http://www.hitari.com/filestore/product/1C569A95-AB0A-B3CF-7C71DED33D9FABFF/KnightRiderK.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 14:39, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on KITT. 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:
 * Added tag to http://www.diamondselecttoys.com/store.asp?p=item.asp%3FItemNo%3D118596%26CategoryID%3D595
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080113193046/http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4237588.html to http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4237588.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:31, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on KITT. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110204071902/http://www.carsofthestars.com/cott3_6.html to http://www.carsofthestars.com/cott3_6.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070602021453/http://www.myhotcars.com/used-cars.php?id=7c44e23b5881c433255586352de178d1 to http://www.myhotcars.com/used-cars.php?id=7c44e23b5881c433255586352de178d1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:42, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Styling Garage
I found a reference in an Indonesian car magazine from 1992, stating that the KITTs were built by German tuning company Styling Garage (SGS). Is this true or not? Normally I would just enter it as fact, but I cannot find any other mention in the online universe.  Mr.choppers &#124;  ✎  14:50, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

External Links for Cylons
I added a cite web tag for the "nod to the cylons", it's the only reference I could find, on line, however, the History Channel just aired a "Battle of the 80s Supercars with David Hasselhoff", which the designer of the car layout, said that the light was a nod (not so many words) to the Cylons. Not sure how we can get it referenced here though. The link is listed below

https://screenrant.com/battlestar-galactica-tv-show-movie-trivia-facts/

Pirhounix 00:50, 12 July 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pirhounix (talk • contribs)

Trim the features list
This article is 12 pages long, of which almost 9 pages consist of a list of KITT's features. This list should be trimmed. J I P &#124; Talk 10:34, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Uncertain about preposition usage
Before I edited it, the following sentence from the opening section went as thus:

"KARR was voiced by both Peter Cullen and Paul Frees in season one and season three of the NBC original TV series respectively in Knight Rider."

Could anyone please tell me if the preposition "in" should be "of"?

I also added commas around "respectively" and italics to "Knight Rider" in that sentence, but that's a different matter. Sorry to be boastful about that (my OCD wouldn't let that act of editing go unmentioned and without an apology).

(Edit: OCD also made me ask this whole post; sorry about that, too. Also, I already changed "in" to "of", so sorry to ask for forgiveness instead of permission. The previous apology was also OCD-motivated, as was this whole edit; really sorry about all of this.)

(Further edit: Sorry that I buried the lead in the previous edit; confessing that I already edited what I'm asking about should have been first. This apology was also OCD-motivated.)

(One last edit note: It was accidental that I didn't explicitly mention my edit of preposition change in the original post. I did write "[b]efore I edited it", but forgot to explicitly note that I had made the change of "in" to "of". Actually, it's just my subconscious trying to make me feel less guilty, and trying to make myself come off as less of a bad editor to anybody who reads this.)

(Another edit note: The previous edit was OCD-motivated, and the last sentence another reason why I wrote it. Sorry also that I lied about it being the last edit note. This whole edit note, including the last apology, was also OCD-motivated.)--Thylacine24 (talk) 17:59, 25 April 2020 (UTC)