Talk:Yugo/Archive 1

Image:1990yugo2.jpg Proof of the Porsche connection - eat dust now !!! Nestore
The engine was off course an old stock 1300ccm Fiat engine as seen in Fiat 128 e.g., the fuel-injection off course from BOSCH but as for SEAT  Porsche did the design for the engine - that means the fuel injection etc.-  using for that the fiat and bosch components.

the nestore version seems to bee the most informative and extended one-though in poor english
someone should correct the grammar, but it contains a lot of beautiful pics and very amusing facts about the simpsons e.g., good links, and also the truth of the nato-bombing. the car assembling-line of zastava got indeed very badly damaged - check cnn-history sites - and of course it was the Pentagon spokesman Ken Bacon who declared it as collateral-damage.read the following pages before reverting stupidly

 pics of the destroyed car assembling-line, especially for you ignorants   observe the factory mentioned in kragujevac is of course zastava      

i don't know who is posting that the fuel injected car has porsche engine, but that is not true. it was just a 1300cc fiat based engine with bosch fuel injection. i am the USA fiat parts distributor, i have owned fuel injected yugos, and it is just not true. if you want to discuss this please contact me a yugo@yugoparts.com and quit entering falsehoods into the page. oh, and the thousands of people who are still driving them say they are good cars. unless you own one, i don't think you have the right to keep posting other wise. thank you

What is up with it being a good car?
I'm the person who added the note about it probably being flawed in production, not design, after reading a few review online about people actually liking their Yugos. However, it was voted "The Worst Car of the Millennium" on the Car Talk website, and I don't think that--at least in the beginning--it was the target of a smear campaign. As far as I can tell, it was trying to be the VW Bug and not doing very well. -Litefantastic 17:31, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * The car was designed after Fiat 127, produced in the early seventies. Yugo started production in the early eighties, since then it did not have any significant improvement. The car still ships with carburetor. For a car not to be redisigned in 20 years is a design flaw (of course, there is poor quality control as well).


 * The meaning of the phrase design flaw in the context of the sentence we were modifying was different, it meant that the cars didn't have systematic errors that affected all produced models. It didn't attempt to make any reference to what one might call mis-features or lacks of features. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93;   22:07, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Sorry about responding late. I think that even suggesting that Yugo did not have design flaws is incorrect and biased. There is no reason for us to make such a statement. Everything from interior plastic to engine parts is failing on regular basis. Most of Yugo owners, especially ones in Former Yugoslavia, don't have access to Internet so you can't find representative expiriences on-line. There are no grounds for such a statement, so I suggest removing it and not getting into dispute of why the car is of such a poor quality. We don't have enough information to claim anything, and we only know the fact is that Yugos are failing. I can probably dig out Bozidar Djelic's (ex Serbian finance minister) making a statement that his Yugo is too unreliable to be driven out of city. Reliable Yugos are rare. They are cheap to fix in former Yugoslavia, so many people still opt to buy them. --Dejan Cabrilo 05:36, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Everything is failing on other old cars, too, and reliable 20 year old cars are rare in general. I just don't see why we need to pick on Yugo so much, as you say, without actual clear information. Though it does seem that we still make a bit of judgement, I'll fix that. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93;   11:04, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * The ones that worked fine were exported to the USA, and were hand picked.


 * I find that statement about as hard to believe as the claim that you could puncture the hull with a pencil... --Joy &#91;shallot&#93;


 * Cars exported to America did pass quality control, that's what I meant by "hand picked". Cars for Yugoslavian market did not. I can elaborate on this if you would like me to. --Dejan Cabrilo 05:36, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * However, majority of Yugos ended up in Yugoslavia, or was exported to third world countries (Yugo not as much as Zastava 101). I don't see why should this article defend Yugo. Especially with stories about wrong motor oil, etc. --Dejan Cabrilo 21:41, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * It shouldn't defend it, but it also shouldn't attack it, either. If we state that it has a bad reputation, we can't just leave it at that, we need to explain it. If that explanation includes evidence to the contrary -- and I see many >15 year old Yugos still being driven in hr (they have to be that old because we never imported any new ones after the wars) as well as refitted with household natural gas and whatnot -- then we wouldn't be doing justice to the truth if we didn't include that, too. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93;   22:07, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Yes, you do see them, but you should probably ask the owners how many times a month they need to take it to the mechanic. FYI it's not houshold natural gas, but LPG (propane and butane mixture). --Dejan Cabrilo 05:36, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * I knew several owners and one of them told me quite clearly that maintenance after two years cost him more than the a new (or "new") Yugo purchase. But that still isn't much reason to bash the car, we can state all this without showing bias. Thanks for the correction about the gas, I knew that but I initially remembered just that it was in the characteristic orange tanks :) --Joy &#91;shallot&#93;

Also, I just checked, Yugo is modeled after Fiat 127. Zastava 101 was modeled after 128. You can check it by googleing for images.--Dejan Cabrilo 21:41, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * In retrospect, I think my statement in regard to quality control should probably be referenced or something...just to make sure I'm being correct about all this or whatever. -Litefantastic 03:06, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * This has nothing to do with anything, but I just love how the guy who designed one model of the Yugo is the same guy who designed the DeLorean. -Litefantastic 03:06, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

That claims about wrong oil and the negative marketing campaign were added anonymously and are unverified, but they don't seem too implausible. We need a rationale to keep or remove that. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93;   11:04, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * I've never heard anything about either, except for this page. The story about the gas certainly seems possible, but I wonder about the smear campaign. So far as I know, the car was it's own smear campaign in the United States. -Litefantastic 12:19, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The later Yugo models, like the Sana, which are NOT on the front page ( although the typified bashing is going on ) are based I think on the FIAT Tipo.

Sana The Yugo Sana

http://zastava.c2000.pl/www_htm/tech/yugo/yugo_florida_sana.htm

Yugo vs. Model T
It says Yugos are about as complicated as Model T Fords. I suppose it's a bit much to ask, but is there anyone reading this who has worked on both, and can confirm or decry that? -Litefantastic 23:51, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I didn't work on Model T, but read about it. It's as similar as any other pre 1980 car really, since it still uses (actually, that may have changed in last couple of years) carburetor vs. fuel injection, there are no onboard computers, etc. I would argue that less computerization means lot more work hours nowdays, at least in more developed countries, so I will alter the paragraph to reflect that. --Dejan &#268;abrilo 00:04, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Err, not my view of maintenance cost, but the fact that any pre 1980 car can be considered similar to Model T :) --Dejan &#268;abrilo 00:13, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, my father and I have worked on my Yugo and his Ford Model T. Both are about as equally complicated. As far as the level of complication, it's not that high. My father has built two Model T's from the ground up, however, so he knows them well. I, on the other hand, haven't met a problem on my Yugo that I haven't been able to fix myself, and likewise on the Model T. --Brandon Simonson 06:51, 05 January 2006 (UTC)

If Yugos are failures then why are there still thousands on the roads? i sell parts for yugo's, and unless you have the data to back it up, you shouldn't be attacking something you know nothing about. Jay Pierce

"Put it in 'H'!"
In the TV section, under the Simpsons, there was a not about how there was a Yugo with an automatic transmission. This part of the article has since been removed. Is there a Yugo with an automatic transmission? -Litefantastic 15:45, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, there is a Yugos came with automatic transmission, but an automatic Yugo in the USA is as rare as a Cabrio. - Karrmann
 * Stranger things have happened on The Simpsons. I say lets keep it. -Litefantastic 01:18, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

As I said, there were 300 units sold in US named GV Plus with automatic-transmission gear-box as well with AC equiped.Nestore

I have streamlined the TV section and corrected the references to the Simpson's television show. Here are list of things corrected.
 * Homer's pink sedan has been on the show since season 1. The scene originally referenced occured in season 4.
 * There is no evidence that the family station wagon is a Yugo. The image of the pink Simpson's toy car in not good enough to be used as evidence because the family station wagon in a red/orange colour.
 * I could not understand the reference to Murder on the Orient Express or why it was under the Simpsons area so I removed it.
 * I removed the second image of the 128, as it seemed redundant.
 * I corrected the Mr. Plow reference and added the Great Louse Detective reference. Movementarian 11:50, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

The Yugo is a Zastava
It was called as i have written in the article in the beginning Zastava Jugo 45. But further on for export reasons the brand-name was changed, also in the article. So all models or versions are the same car in different periods:whether Zastava Jugo 45 or Yugo GV etc or Zastava Koral IN etc. So all stages should be in the article. And all version have one common reason: the history of Zastava.without the history-part there still would be Yugos imported to US, but because of the mentioned reasons (war etc.) the success-story suddenly ended in US. This should be in the article - otherwise readers would think that the Yugo was withdrawn of the US-market only of its bad reputation and poor quality-myths. all pictures are Yugo models or for the domestic-market Zastava.the florida was the attempt of a evolution of the yugo 45 or gv etc. it was also named YUGO. and the new zastava 10 is now the third evolutory stage of the yugo also cooperated with fiat like all stages of evolution.so previous versions are not non-sense. but certain persons should read more before claiming knowledge.Good links are mentioned above by Nato-Observer, also i recommend, the official yugo information site (zastava- its the same - yugo was just the name for americans who would have problems to pronounce it) with all the truths and facts. who of you would claim that they - the producers- would say non-sense? You bad informed ignorants and fascistic-US-chauvinists.... Persons like You allowed your government to bomb this unguilty persons for imperialistic reasons with the effect that the cheapest car ever imported to the us-market was withdrawn- with sanctions first attempted and then with bombings. yes they also manufactored weapons, so what? if this is the reason to allow the us to bomb this plant, so how many reasons would all other countries in the world have to bomb all facilities and plants in us which produce not only small guns like zastava but also weapons of mass-destruction?how would you like this? ah ok. only the us has the right to produce weapons a to claim for itself to bee the good ones. but for how long? all countries in the world even old allies like germany and france hate the us for its wars spreading mentality.the whole world... except israel. but a country without friends and allies will not survive long... the history of the yugo is a parade-example for americas unjustice and bad-fortune in the future.people can apologize but people will never forget...Some links for fascistic-us-chauvististic ignorants:     observe the factory mentioned in kragujevac is of course zastava      

Nestore 20:47, 17 November 2005 (UTC)


 * First of all, please don't call names. Second of all, Yugo was never a success in the USA. Can you back that up? It was always seen, in Yugoslavia as well as in the USA, as a bad car. The difference is that due to protectionism it was still sold relatively well in Yugoslavia, but it could've never compete with Korean and Japanese cars on the US market. If the fact that the car is ridiculed and was often proclaimed the worst car ever is not enough for you, than look at the sales number. --Dejan &amp;#268;abrilo 23:42, 17 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes which was 160.000 sold units in just 4 years, with customers-orders without end... which could not be fullfilled due of known and above mentioned reasons,...Nestore 20:00, 18 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Well, you're right about the company being called Zastava, although your reasoning for the Yugo name was incorrect. The brand was called Yugo in Western Europe as well, and the Zastava Jugo was sold as Yugo 45/55/65 (according to power level) or, in Italy, Innocenti Koral. And the Yugo suffered from the same reliability as the Fiat 127, even in Europe. People only bought it because it was cheaper than any European supermini. The Zastava Florida is not a modernized version of the Yugo, it was a rejected design for the Fiat Tipo and used the Fiat T3 platform. Now, instead of a cliché rant against the evil imperialistic war-mongering americans, you would be more productive by actually adding and correcting information about the company and cars. --Pc13 12:00, 19 November 2005 (UTC)


 * "The Beaulieu Encyclopeadia of the Automobile by Nick Georgano - (Forward by Lord Montagu of Beaulieu) has the car listed under Zastava, with a picture on 1781 vol 3 as the Zastava Yugo Tempo. In Britain I remember the early days when the 101/311 range was imported into the UK and the brand was Zastava back then...which became Zastava Yugo..then Yugo for short...

will have to look where the Datsun Cedric is!!!!

Copyvio
I removed a big chunk of article as it seems to be a copyvio. The source is in the edit summary. Do not put it back in until the status is clarified. --Dejan &amp;#268;abrilo 03:11, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Engineering Equivelent of a 1940s Tractor
I'd desperately like to find a source that the Yugo is in fact the engineering equievelent of a 1940s tractor. I'm a mechanical engineer, and I happen to know for a fact that it is. Seriously, if you've convinced one to run for more then 10 years you've got a miracle on your hands (or a complete engine-block rebuild, one of the two). However, until we can source it I'd say this has to go: "This failure of the vehicle has nothing at all to do with the fact that is the engineering equivalent of a 1940s tractor. Seriously."

Because we all know how many 1940's tractors were front wheel drive and have SOHC engines... :D User:K-111

There is one saying in Serbia, I will try to translate it: "You get as much music, as much you paid for it". Tell me what do you expect from a car which is 3990$ cost. That at least has four wheels and motor and that it can drive you from point A to point B. Yugo can do that. Hey it was not built to compite with Audi, or Mercedes. It was built to be cheap and that you can drive it. Yugo achieved even much more. To be loved and to be fetish car for many people around. Why do you offend it then? Yugo achieved everything what was it's mission and I do hope that it will run long and well for all their owners.

Cleaned Up
I have tried to clean up the article and streamline the information. I have also tried to remove as much of the Zastava information as possible. Hopefully I have made some headway. I also removed the clean-up tag. Movementarian 16:06, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Recent Edits
Please talk about things before reverting a massive section. The Simpsons references are correct as is. There is not a Simpsons Episode called Murder on the Orient Express. See The Simpsons Episode Guide and therefore the reference does not belong in that area. There is also no concrete proof that Homer's car is a Yugo. There is just a reference.

I think the Pop Culture references to the Yugo are a little out of hand. The amount of photos in that section makes the article look untidy. I have removed a few them more than one time, but they keep getting readded. Under movies Moonlighting is mentioned with a comment that it stars Bruce Willis and Cybill Shepherd. That was a television show not a movie. Whilst it is apparent that there are some Yugo entusiasts that would like every single appearance listed, I believe that the point can be made just listing the more prominent ones. Perhaps limiting movies to Drowning Mona and Dragnet, where they were part of the story as opposed to just a car in the movie. Television references could be limited to the Simpsons, Whose Line, and the Midas commercial. Again, because they were part of the story.

I removed the point about Inspector Gadget driving a Yugo in the movie Inspector Gadget - because he was driving a Chevette, not a Yugo - and even reffered to the car as a Chevette verbally in the film. User:K-111

I touched up the TV section and removed the R. Kelly bullet. I looked through that entire website and could not find a single refernce to Yugo or Zastava. Either way, unless the vehicle is going to be marketed as a Yugo it does not belong here. It would belong on the Zastava page. Movementarian 04:22, 4 December 2005 (UTC)


 * It is part of the marketing strategy not to put a connection between yugo and zoragy. but the zoragy is manufactored in serbia and montenegro in particular in lazarevac. this groups works for the zastava-yugo group in kragujevac. this link should exist, because it shows the capacities of yugo, and if the sanctions and bombings would never happen, imagine what cars would come from yugo... the name zoragy comes from the designer zoran radivojevic and his partners and was in the beginning a concept-car introduced at the chicago-motor show, where r.kelly felt in love with it and took it for his video. it is built on a toyota-mr2 plattform which also provides the engine and the middle-motor-concept. as i know only 3 cars were made, and only one was registered in e.u. in luxemburg particularly. the registry templates seen in the video exist only in luxemburg. nevertheless it is possible to order a zoragy with individual design etc. price is unknown.Nestore 06:55, 6 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I understand what you are saying, but I disagree that it belongs here. It would be like listing the Audi A3 as a Volkswagen.  They are the same parent company and share some of the same parts, however they are different entities.  I think that the company needs it own article and not a mention on the Yugo page. Movementarian 03:50, 7 December 2005 (UTC)


 * the zoragy is not a own company like audi, its more a own model of the yugo designers, maybe some people did not understand here that tha yugo is as well a model of a car as well as a brand name. whether zastava or yugo (written with a Y) it is a name.for domestic sales the yugo was called zastava koral or zastava jugo. for export after 86 always in europe yugo 45 etc. and usa yugo gv etc. i think it is worth mentioning it because it shows what yugo the manufactor is producing, and the article is about yugo.Nestore 17:48, 9 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Different badge, different company. The Opel Speedster and Vauxhall VX220 are essentially the same car, but you would not list the Vauxhall under Opel.  The Zoragy deserves it's own article and not a mention here.  Movementarian 04:09, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

the point of view" "''In 1999, US military aircraft bombed the Zastava factory as part of the NATO peacekeeping operation in Kosovo. The attack targeted the military production site of the Zastava plant and as a result of it's close proximity, major damage was caused to the civil production site as well. 'it is a fact in history that the yugo factory was directly targeted, and not collateral damage. the is a provable fact, and it needs it be corrected.'''

NPOV thing
Dunno what's been going on here, but the Yugo section is a tincy wincy bit off the NPOV standard... It's fine to say the factory was bombed, it's fine to say that only the civilan part of the plant was dammaged while the weapon manifacturing portion survived and such, but let's stick to facts and not start speculating on pentagon's motives and what not. --Sherool (talk) 16:49, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Somebody keeps pushing a version which is full of factual inaccuracies, copyvios, POV, etc. We worked hard to clean up the article and I'd say that such behavior is vandalism at this point. --dcabrilo 17:29, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

saying the truth is considered to you as vandalism? or do you have the right to censor this page? remember wikipedia is a free encyclopedia for everbody and also can should be edited freely for everybody!--Nestore 17:48, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia also has a NPOV policy. It's not free for all, and many of us certainly don't agree with what you call "the truth". The article needs to be factual, but also balanced, well written, and on topic. --dcabrilo 11:49, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I exmplained all that already. Nestore simply erased my comments from his/her Talk: page. -Litefantastic 22:53, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I am going to disagree with you for an entirely different reason. This in an article about a car not a war.  The issues you are trying to post belong in Legitimacy of NATO bombing of Yugoslavia.  Movementarian 02:28, 11 December 2005 (UTC)


 * All written things are facts also proved with external links. do you really dispute the fact that the car-plant got hit etc. ? Do You really think that the destroying of the factory and the uprise of the yugoslavian war which lead to the disappearance of the yugo car from the market and from the streets should not be in the article? If this is not part of the Yugocar history - what else then? Maybe you want do hide this shameful part of recent us-history- i think that is your only motivation from constantly deleting these very important facts of the car-history. Nestore 02:05, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Facts are fine as long as they are presented in a neutral way and are backed by verifiable sources. Mentioning that the factory was bombed, and what kind of dammage was done scertainly seems relevant. However turning it into a raving rant about the evil terrorist NATO bombing and whatnot violates WP:NPOV, simple as that. --Sherool (talk) 05:22, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

aha this is progression, confessing the facts is allready the first step to the truth, but destroying and bombing of a souvereign state is undisputable an evil terroristic barbaric act and should be described like that. facts are not npov, whith this explanation then hitler's actions during second world war or saddam hussein regime also cannot be described as barbaric, which certainly was, so what? do people have the right to choose what is npov when it seems shameful for their own? all verifiable sources are listed at external links at my versions. Nestore 16:38, 26 December 2005


 * I've just edited out the most painfully political rants in the article. Seriously, though, if you can't see that what you wrote was a long way away from anything resembling a neutral, objective point of view, you have been spending too much time near the propaganda machine of a totalitarian regime. Discussing the merits of the NATO campaign is fair enough. But in the appropriate areas of Wikipedia (hint: A talk page, maybe?). And an article about cars is not a good place to do it. Believe me. What's next? Using an article about sauerkraut to condemn German militarism? Whatever one may think of the subject, the facts/"facts" or the validity of the conflict is completely and utterly irrelevant. It may be the most vile international crime of all time for all I care, IT STILL DOES NOT BELONG IN THIS ARTICLE. Comprende, Nestore? [Arild] 01:36, 05 Feb 2006 (CET)

Scope Of Clean Up.
I think we should move all of the general Zastava information off of this page, and just focus on the Yugo brand name vehicles. Zastava already has it's own page, so it's not necessary for us to have further discussion of the company here. All we really need to mention about Zastava is that Yugo is a brandname of theirs. We should only be detailing the Fiat 127 and 128 vehicles that were solds as Yugos on this page in my opinion. I think we can cut back, condense, and omit a large portion of what is presented on this page currently, as well as add a good deal of more useful information. - User:K-111

Exactly, We should change the history section to give information about the Yugo, not Zastiva --Karrmann

if you want to leave the article a bunch of lies, controlled by a child. okay. you better be able to prove what you say. it is not vandalising when i correct lies. you better contact someone who knows the truth before printing lies. there was never a porsche motor in a yugo, etc. i guess this 13 year old knows more about cars than i do.

This looks more like..
Maybe this article should just be about the Yugo 45/55/Koral models with all the other infomation about the company moved to the main Zastava page.

Lock her up boys
Ok, this is getting old. Orphan1 is continually vandalising this article wiht POV, and removing any info about the Yugo generally being considered a crappy car by the general public. a peatial lock should be used to let the heat drop and then we can open her up. Orphin just joined, so wyhy don't we just do the anon and new lock. --Karrmann ''if you want to leave the article a bunch of lies, controlled by a child. okay. you better be able to prove what you say. it is not vandalising when i correct lies. you better contact someone who knows the truth before printing lies. there was never a porsche motor in a yugo, etc. i guess this 13 year old knows more about cars than i do.'' '''oh, i am new to this, so your objection is "point of view". what i changed was not point of view, like illegally bombing a country. it was facts, which i can prove. there was no porsche motor. parts are available where i said they were. that certain models were added to the line up is true. and the yugo jokes are slander, you can not prove that it was a bad car, you never owned one, so you have no right to insult yugo owners, yes human beings who own these cars, and you are ruining the value of their property. show me what i changed is point of view, and we will discuss it. what if i made jokes about your toys, and the other children laughed at you? would you like it?'''


 * Excuse me, but we don't tolerate personal attacks or any form of age discrimination here.--MONGO 06:54, 14 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Wow, you are asking to be blocked Orphan1, I wonder what Jimbo has to say....... --Karrmann

WP:NPOV
I believe the jokes must go as they are not encyclopedic and violate neutral point of view. Also, someone find out if indeed Porsche ever had anything to do with the engines found in Yugo's. If you find it, cite it.--MONGO 12:45, 14 February 2006 (UTC) Image:1990yugo2.jpg proofs the porsche connection - look in the article  .--Nestore
 * Neutral point of view means we don't take sides. If popular opinion - and press reviews - have it that the car is crap, it can be reported here. What NPOV means is that you or I can't enforce our opinion, or try to make the article unbalanced. In other words, what you or I as individuals think shouldn't influence the article at all. Neutral point of view does not mean neutered. Whether jokes are encyclopedic or not is a different matter of course - probably not, although it wouldn't do any harm to mention that the car was the butt of many jokes (assuming it was, it would seem it had a higher profile in the US than here in the UK. Our jokes were mostly about Lada and Skoda). --kingboyk 18:35, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Protection
Now that the user who caused the page protection has been blocked for legal threats, is there any reason to leave the page blocked? Understanding that if he backs off his threats and manages to get himself unblocked, it could all easily start up again. But as long as he's indef blocked, I don't see any reason for the page to remain blocked. Just IMHO. - TexasAndroid 21:41, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Got one to run for 10 years
Yes, really. I bought a new 1988 GV for $3990, added my own cassette deck and a set of new Michelins (the Yugoslavian Tigar tires were horrible and truly unsafe) but I loved that car. Even with the smog equipment, its Italian roots shone through and it was a joy to drive. Yes, the plastic was cheesy, and the defroster wasn't up to snuff. What do you want for $3990? It would rev to 6,000 rpm through a 1-1/2 inch exhaust pipe, and when that rotted away, a two-inch pipe made it a lot happier. How many 1988 models could you actually diagnose and fix yourself without special tools? The Yugo's included tool kit would get you out of almost any jam short of a blown head gasket.

Keep clean oil in a Yugo, like you should do with any car, and it will live forever. My first Yugo went over 120,000 miles on the original engine, the same engine that took that car 200 miles in two hours, and covered 850 miles in one day. It finally died when the water pump started to leak, and my brother in law let it run out of coolant.

The timing belts only last 30,000 miles, so you have to keep on top of those, too. Oil changes and timing belts are cheap, and they're not hard to change. Nothing's hard to change on a Yugo, except the water pump. You can even do a clutch in four hours with only hand tools.

I owned 25 of these cars over a span of 10 years, most of them with two-digit purchase prices, or free. Few of them had anything seriously wrong. Most were merely misunderstood and/or neglected.

An automobile is a machine. Machines require care and maintenance if they are to last, whether that machine is made by Zastava for $3990 or Rolls-Royce for $349,000. Run either one on the same oil for 20,000 miles and you've got junk.

Yugo could have worked in America, but subsidized competition from Korea made it untenable, and the 1992 UN embargo made it impossible. Now the time is past, unless Zastava can build an SUV with 24 inch rims.

Go ahead, laugh at my Yugo. It's still out there giving reliable transportation to somebody, and it's almost old enough to vote now. How many cars have that kind of lifespan? Now, let me ask that question again: how many $3990 cars have that kind of lifespan?

Stu from Cleveland Proud Yugo owner for 10 years

I won't get into the issues of whether or not the car was good, bad or the worst car of the millenium, obviously each person has their own view and in general, encyclopedias are supposed to be content and viewpoint neutral. I'm not sure why those comments are in there at all as it's widely acknowledged that Yugos continued to sell until the importer went out of business due to UN sanctions in 1991/2. The numbers may not have been high, but the product clearly was available.

From a facts perspective, this article has flaws. The "engine designed by Porsche" is clearly incorrect. The motor, like all of Fiat's powertrains until its recent joint venture with GM, was designed in-house without assistance from anyone. Fiat, and other members of the Fiat group including Alfa Romeo and Lancia, have a historic tradition of engineering and innovation in the powertrain space, including several breakthroughs with the packaging of the 128-series cars. Ing. Carlo Lampredi was the designer of the particular series of motor that DMB was licenced to produce in Yugoslavia and that ultimately showed up in the Yugo we saw in the US. Please see http://www.mirafiori.com/~courtney/128/history/MOUSE_THAT_ROARED.html) for more information.

Perhaps the person who posted this was referring to the Lada Samara-Sputnik (VAZ 2108), a car built in the USSR (later Russian Federation) that debuted in 1986 and was designed with assistance from Porsche, including the motor. It is _not_ Fiat 12x-series based at all, though it does share with many modern cars a front engine, front wheel drive layout. VAZ Lada does continue to build the Fiat 124 sedan based Lada 2104/5 series cars, perhaps this is where there is confusion. Please see www.vaz.ru for more information and model series.

Yugos, and Zastavas are in existence at all because of Fiat's 1950-60's policy of licensing car designs to Communist-bloc countries. Fiat and its component suppliers became the defacto car industries for most of the countries in the Soviet sphere of influence, with the notable exception of Romania, which licensed Citroen and Renault designs. Besides Russia, Poland, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia, Fiat also licensed designs to other countries for the same purpose of establishing national auto manufacturers. SEAT in Spain and TOFAS in Turkey both built Fiats under license, just as Zastava/Yugo did in Yugoslavia. None of this is mentioned in the article, or only briefly so.

Also in the article -- or perhaps it was another person who posted comments -- is something to the effect that automatic Yugos were imported under the name "GVPlus". That's not correct. The GVPlus model was simply an improved version of the GV with fuel injection, significant interior enhancements and an optional automatic. Yugo GVPluses were just that, a model like anything else, with optional equipment.


 * -APD

'''This article is extremely biased in, shockingly, a pro-Yugo light. I suggest a POV dispute flag'''

Yugo in the Movies: Inspector Gadget
Someone continues to add that a Yugo was in the 1999 Inspector Gadget movie. The car which was in that movie was a Chevette, not a Yugo. I deleted the misinformation. Thank you. yugobrandon 04:18, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry; my mistake -Litefantastic 01:08, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

>>>The actual quote from the movie DRAGNET, described the car as "The cutting edge of Serbo-Croation technology"....or something like that. Spoken by Dan Akroyd.

Removed deleted image(s)
Just a note to say that I have removed some [or an] image[s] from the page beacuse they were speediable under either:


 * Category:Images with no fair use rationale
 * Category:Images with no copyright tag
 * Category:Images with no source

Or similar category. Iola  k  ana |(talk) 15:51, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Innocenti Mini 120
For more details on my last revert, see pictures of the Innocenti Mini 120 at and you will understand. --Asterion 22:00, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

 * I have compiled a body of evidence suggesting that User:NestorYugo is actually User:Nestore, who has vandalized this page in the past. Please be aware. -Litefantastic 01:08, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * User:Nestore was blocked for a week a few days ago, which has not yet expired. This could be reported to WP:AN/I for block evasion.&#160;—  The KMan  talk  01:18, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I've blocked him and his sock puppet indefinitely for serial violations of copyright, per WP:COPY. Please see my comments on User_talk:NestorYugo/Evidence. If he reappears, I'd be grateful if you could let me know. -- ChrisO 01:42, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Drowning Mona Note
In the movies section, there is a note about Drowning Mona: "As with Dragnet, the Yugos were provided by Zastava." This is not accurate. All of the Yugos used in Drowning Mona were between the 1986 and 1988 model years, and this movie was filmed in 1999. The director's commentary also states that Yugos were purchased from all over the United States and not "provided by Zastava". In fact, when the director tried to contact Zastava concerning the movie, it had just been bombed. I am going to go ahead and delete this part of the note now, and if later proof is posted we can put it back in. Also, I will give my contact in Kragujevic (who worked for Zastava when the Yugo was exported to America) a call and check the part about "Verplanck, New York, the town where the Yugo was test marketed in the U.S." Again, from the directors commentary, it was implied that this bit was made up just for the movie. Best wishes. yugobrandon 05:43, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Found out today that Verplank was not a "test market" for the Yugo, rather it was a bit made up for the movie. Also, the Yugos in drowning Mona were provided by Apple Motors (www.applemotors.com) in Denver Colorado, and other donors from around the US. yugobrandon 17:37, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Please see if all international names are correct for this car..
...and if anybody know the dates when the model went by those names in all the different countries. That would be a help.

Thank you.

Jesus.


 * I would advise to rename the article "Yugo" and add the list of models referred further down in the | current article, then create individual redirects for each one of these models, pointing at Yugo: Yugo 45, Yugo 55, Yugo 65, Yugo Koral, Yugo Tempo, Yugo Ciao, etc as these are basically variations of the same car. Also add "For the rest of Zastava models, visit main article Zastava"

In the same way, I will then try to start brand new articles for (hopefully!):


 * Zastava 128 (redirects from Zastava 101);
 * Zastava Skala (redirects from Zastava ZLM,Zastava ZLC, Zastava ZLX, Zastava 311, Zastava 411, Zastava 413, Zastava 511, Zastava 513, Zastava GTL, Zastava Comfort, Zastava Mediterran, Zastava Stojadin)
 * Zastava 750 (redirects from Zastava 850, Fico, Fićo, Ficho and Zastava Fićo)
 * Zastava 1300 (redirects from Zastava Milletrecento) (first Zastava made under Fiat license)

Regards, Asterion 12:24, 12 March 2006 (UTC) (Proud UK Zastava 311 owner)

List of Countries
In all honesty, I believe the best option is to follow the United Nations and stick to Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. This whole issue is collateral to the nature of the article and I would not like to see it hijacked by anyone. Regards, Asterion 23:39, 14 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi, thats ridiculous. Wikipedia has a Naming convention. Unlike the UN etc. we don't have to bend over backwards for Greek nationalists. I can go into more detail if you like but essentially /no-one/ says FYROM in real life, people either say Macedonia, or, if they are Greek nationalists they probably say Skopje or Skopjan (for the language), or sometimes they say Slavo-bulgar or something. Whatever, the important thing is that Wikipedia doesn't have to kow-tow to nationalists. :) - FrancisTyers 23:46, 14 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Not that I want to get into an argument, but I hope common sense prevails :) - FrancisTyers 23:48, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry but I cannot see the point of starting an edit war. I stick to the internationally accepted view (UN, European Union and even NATO). Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is a NPOV term, while Macedonia or Rep. of Macedonia is not. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not an "anti-nationalist platform". The article is about cars, nothing else. There is no need to add wood to the fire. I respect your opinion but cannot agree with it. Regards, Asterion 00:11, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, FYRM is a POV term. We generally call that country Republic of Macedonia on Wikipedia, so that's the most logical way to go and will cause least reverts. --dcabrilo 00:36, 15 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I did not say FYROM but the full official name, as recorded in their UN membership, that is Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. If you check the page history, I was the first one to revert FYROM. This way, we also cater for anyone searching for the word Macedonia in articles. To be honest, as long as we reach consensus, I would be happy. I just don't want a bloody edit war for a matter totally unrelated to the article subject. Regards, Asterion 02:17, 15 March 2006 (UTC)


 * The convention on Wikipedia if for either "Macedonia" or "Republic of Macedonia". I could do a count of pages that mention either in a similar context if you like, but the outcome is clear... Hell, even the countries Wikipedia page is at Republic of Macedonia. :) - FrancisTyers 11:37, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi Francis, the name Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia was used by the country itself in its applications to join the UN and for the EU admission talks. It is not Greek namecalling (before you ask, I am neither Greek nor Macedonian). Besides, I am simply interested in writing about the car. I just would not like to see the article turned into an edit battlefield by third parties, with no real interest in the subject of the article. I will stay aside any further discussions on the country name. It is up to you all to agree on the terminology. Regards, Asterion 22:47, 15 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I see you've removed the reference... that works fine for me too :) - FrancisTyers 22:52, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Break it up
Okay. The edit wars are over; the unlicensed pictures have been weeded out. I think this article should be broken up into different articles, one for each of the vehicles in its new - and, forgive me for saying this, poor title. Then we can have the 'Yugo' page back. -Litefantastic 00:48, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I just changed the title to "Zastava vehicles" from the previous one, but I am totally supporting what you just said. --dcabrilo 01:04, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
 * If anyone wants to take up my suggestion for separate pages, I would be really happy then :o) In the meantime, please redirect Yugo to the new title, so we do not miss any searches. Asterion 02:12, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
 * No it shouldnt be Zastava Vehicles as there is a separate Zastava page - most of this is just about the model range that featured the Zastava Yugo 45 / Koral / American range rather than the Florida, 600, 1900, 1400, 1100, 1300, 101, 10 etc etc etc etc!!
 * If it was Zastava vehicles it would have to be from 1954 to date (ref: THE COMPLETE ENCYCLOPEADIA OF MOTORCARS 1885 TO THE PRESENT by G.N.GEORGANO)...will change it back again. - JESUS


 * My choice would be to keep it as Yugo for all Yugo 45 derived cars and create separate pages for the rest as I already outlined. Thanks, Asterion 02:47, 16 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Every day, I keep finding this page with a different name, so perhaps we should go ahead and decide on one that we can all be happy with.&#160;—  The KMan  talk  01:23, 16 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I say we take the Yugo information, put that in the "Yugo" page and take the rest of it and lump it in another article, for the time being. List of Zastava vehicles, for instance, would be a good starter page. -Litefantastic 03:12, 16 March 2006 (UTC)


 * But in this instant its not about a range of Zastava vehicles its about one model range...the name it is called now is the one theat globalautoindex goes with...


 * I've never heard of the "globalautoindex", and I think it's time to let common sense take the wheel. Not that I'm accusing anyone here of stupidity, but if we think too hard about this we'll go nuts. If it's all about Yugo models, let's call it Yugo because that's the name Americans, who comprise the largest percentage of native English speakers, are familiar with. If its about something else, let's break it up. -Litefantastic 00:58, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


 * That is misleading. The Zastava 311/511 was sold in the UK under the name Zastava Yugo 311/511, even if not based on the Yugo 45, which was the model base for the US Yugo. We must accept that at one point Yugo became synonim with Zastava outside Yugoslavia and reflect this somehow and somewhere. It is not as simple as deleting any non-US Yugo info from this page. Asterion 01:38, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Alright, how about we just take that and make it a redirect to 'Yugo.' Or, we could have a different page for each model of Yugo, which is what most of the automaker pages do. I'm still not sure whether or not Yugo is a brand name or a nameplate. -Litefantastic 13:26, 17 March 2006 (UTC) badge, sorry. It's the difference between Oldsmobile and the Oldsmobile Cutlass, for instance. -Litefantastic 13:27, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Zastava 101 movie?
Has anyone seen this? Is it a feature film or a documentary?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0353028/

As the Zastava 101 came out in 1971 I say it is a promotional film (motor industry propaganda)

FYI - Zastava 101 aka Zastava Skala

Datsun 260C Cedric is listed as the...
Nissan Cedric From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Nissan Cedric is a large luxurious automobile produced by Nissan since 1960. It was developed to provide upscale transportation, competing with the Prince Skyline and Gloria which were later merged into the Nissan family. In later years, the Nissan Skyline was positioned as a sports sedan/coupe, whereas the Nissan Gloria was turned into a sporty version of the Cedric (with identical styling but using a different radiator grille and front & rear light clusters). In Japan, the Cedric/Gloria series was affectionately called Cedglo, and this long running series finally came to an end in October 2004, being replaced by the Nissan Fuga.


 * which is, if you notice, the modern company brand name and not the name that the car is refered to in this month's Classic Car magazine!!! So I think it's best to keep to the same standard and at least the word yugo does appear

Page name
A well intentioned but new user has been unilaterally renaming a few well-established pages today, without consensus and without fixing double redirects, including this one. I've moved it back to Zastava vehicles. Please note that this was just an admin action and I have no opinion on what the name should be. All I will say is, please discuss any moves first - or at the very least fix double redirects when a page has been moved. --kingboyk 18:28, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

SynLube?
Can anyone confirm this? Asterion 16:19, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

1984 YUGO 45

yugo2.jpg (28709 bytes)

The first three YUGO's were introduced in the USA in May 1984 at the Los Angeles AUTO EXPO 84.

The vehicles were imported and modified for the US market by YugoCars, Inc of Sun Valley, California.

More interesting than the low Retail price of $4,500, was a 10 year or 100,000 mile warranty that included all scheduled maintenance FREE. This was possible due to SynLube™. Essentially only topping of the engine motor oil with ADD OIL to compensate for normal oil consumption was needed. There were no oil changes scheduled over the 10 year 100,000 mile interval. This was possible because SynLube™ Lubricants were used in the engine and in the 4-speed transaxle.

What was amazing is, that after accumulation of 92,000 miles, one test car that was equipped with SynLube™ had exhaust emissions 20% lower than a new car with only 1,500 miles on Conventional Petroleum Motor Oil (CASTROL GTX 20W-50). Two other test cars that were equipped with Conventional Petroleum Motor Oil (one with ZASTAVA OEM oil, the other with CASTROL GTX 20W-50) and with 5,000 mile oil changes, have both failed the California Exhaust emission test at 32,000 miles and 36,000 miles respectively. The increased emissions were attributed to excessive engine wear due to use of low quality metals in the engine production. This was a proof that SynLube™ can make even a poor quality materials last at least three times longer than normal.

Emission testing was done by Olson Laboratories in Orange County, California.

Engine disassembly and inspection was done by M.I.K. Automotive, Inc. in North Hollywood, CA.

In August of 1984 the marketing rights for the YUGO were sold to IAI (International Automobile Importers) of New Jersey operated by Malcolm Bricklin. He later formed Yugo of America, Inc. a company which marketed the YUGO in the USA until 1992.

The Bricklin organization decided that to market a car in the USA with "unconventional oil" in the engine was not a good idea, and that Fuel Injection was too luxurious for an economy car. They reduced the retail base price to $3,995 and reduced the warranty to the 3 year or 36,000 miles, a durability that was expected from the YUGO if it was operated on conventional petroleum motor oil as was documented by Olson Labs.

The YUGO 45 as introduced by YugoCars had 850cc 4 -cylinder engine with BOSCH L EFI and BOSCH electronic Ignition with BOSCH Platinum Spark Plugs and ZEUNA Three-way Catalytic Converter so that Unleaded Gasoline could be utilized for low exhaust emissions. The same system was utilized by FIAT and later BERTONE from 1980 to 1989 and was able to meet stringent California emissions through 1992 model year. A 4-speed manual transaxle was used. This allowed a top speed of over 75 MPH and delivered fuel economy of 45 Miles per Gallon and engine delivered 45 HP, hence the marketing name of YUGO 45.

The vehicles that were eventually sold by Yugo of America had 1.1 and 1.3 Liter engines with 4 or 5 speed transaxle, but only retained the BOSCH electronic ignition. The very complex emission system ( which was cheaper than EFI) used a carburetor, a two way Catalyst that required an Air Pump and EGR; it was one of major problems that caused the vehicles to get a poor reputation due to poor driveability, inability to meet emission standards when used, etc.

Making the initial "indestructible" maintenance free car $505 cheaper, effectively killed all prospects of YUGO to become another VW Bug or FORD Model T as the initial promotional advertising claimed.

Yugo America realized its "fatal" mistake by 1990 when, EFI version of the YUGO GVX was introduced, but it was too late to save YUGO in the USA. The prospects of recalling over 126,000 vehicles that were sold in the USA by EPA, due to failure to meet exhaust emissions effectively caused Yugo America to close its doors for good in 1992.

Moved back to Yugo
I moved this page back to Yugo, because it is it's best known name, and the only reason it got to the Zastava name is because someone thinks making it a global view is making it a hundred diffrent names. for eexample, the Ford Mondeo is also known as the Ford Contour/Mercury Mystique, but it's not named "Ford Mondeo/Ford Contour/Mercury Mystique", now is it? --Karrmann

You got this wrong. This page is about all the cars made by Zastava and not all are known as Yugo. Therefore, it should be moved back to Zastava vehicles and new articles created for each family, as discussed. In the meantime, Yugo should redirect here. Asterion 09:22, 15 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Yugo was also used as a brandname in amongst others the Netherlands. Cars as the Yugo Sana (Yugo Florida), Yugo 45 etc. were not sold as Zastava at all.

Page name argument continued
The Nissan Cedric page is entitled "Nissan Cedric" because that was the name the car was originally sold as, and the Datsun brand was not used on that particular car in Japan. The Ford Mondeo article is named "Ford Mondeo" because it was the name the car was first sold as. It is general concensus of WikiProject Automobiles that articles for cars that were sold under many different names or slight variants should be named after their original domestic name, so the same should apply for this, i.e. the page should be titled after the original name the car was sold under in Yugoslavia, be it Zastava Koral or whatever (the article isn't very clear on what name was actually used there). All other names specific to this car should redirect to this page, and there should be a disambiguation page on Yugo saying what the name was used for, as (certainly in the UK anyway) it was used on several different models and was regarded as the brand (i.e. it was a more apparent name than Zastava). --Zilog Jones 19:07, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm asking you, in the name of peace over logic, just to let this argument die here. You can argue back and forth (as they do over the alternate spelling of aluminium), but at the end of the day, most people in the English speaking world will (I think) know this car much better as Yugo than as anything else. -Litefantastic 00:14, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Change the article name to Yugo
The article's name should be Yugo, not Zastava vehicles. Why, because Yugo and Zastava are to two diffrent brand names under one company. And Zastava vehicles should be in the Zastava article. Also, the article mentions Yugo, many, many times. So there is my reason to change the article's name to Yugo. CrnaGora (Talk | Contribs | E-mail) 02:44, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, this would make sense as long as American wikipedians stop insisting on using it only for the Yugo 45 derivatives sold in the States (they never got the 128-like models over there). I own a 1989 Zastava 311 (in the UK) and it is also branded under the "marque" Yugo in the bonnet (though Zastava is on the front grill). As long as people understand this, I am happy with moving it to Yugo. Regards, --Asterion talk to me 19:40, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Move it to Yugo, it is this article's proper name, and the car's most common name. --Karrmann

It is not "the car" but "a brand"--Asterion talk to me 01:31, 1 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I moved the article back to Yugo. Karrmann 19:57, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, in that case let's start adding info on other Yugo cars (i.e. Skala) to this page as Yugo is a marque not a single car. Regards, --Asterion talk to me 06:49, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like a winner. Karrmann 12:00, 11 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for moving this article back to Yugo. I agree, start mentioning names of Yugo models and lets start articles about those cars. [[Image:Flag of Montenegro.svg|25px]] [[Image:Flag of Albania.svg|25px]] CrnaGora (Talk/Contribs/E-mail/Edit Count) 23:22, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I will take some pictures of my Yugo 311 tomorrow, depending on weather. I also have many UK sales brochures from the eighties, depicting the whole range available in Britain. Considering Yugo Cars (GB) stopped trading around 1991, would it be OK to scan and use some pics (i.e. "Fair Use")? In any case, it is about time for me to move my lazy arse and start the Skala/101/121/301/311/313/etc page, I reckon :o) Asterion talk to me 13:39, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

POV edits
I've waded through this article and tidied up grammar where necessary. As for the 'evil NATO' issue, I've simply reduced the existing reference down to a mention of UN sanctions on Yugoslavia. For whatever reason, the sanctions were the cause of the company's problems. If anyone thinks the sanctions were unjust, they can create an article about them and argue their case there.

I've also made an effort to remedy the imbalance in the "Response to Criticism" section by retitling it, reorganising the material, and removing blatantly POV or irrelevant claims such as


 * using the same gauge of steel as Volvo - could be said about a number of vehicles
 * 'very easy to repair with mechanical skills' - also relevant to a large number of vehicles.

The cars were inarguably more basic than contemporary Japanese and European vehicles, and buyers attracted by the low sticker price most likely expected to encounter a vehicle that could be abused and neglected with the same impunity as a Toyota (although under prolonged abuse, Japanese cars will pack up just as catastrophically as any Yugo). The Yugo can be a reliable car with the correct maintenance, as enthusiasts and proponents have shown, but modern buyers generally aren't prepared to get involved with cars to that degree - to their cost. I hope this helps to make some common ground between the various camps arguing over this article.

One final comment - a lot of people aren't displaying much of a sense of humour here. So I don't quite know why I find the volume of debate so immensely funny. And here I am becoming a part of it... it's a funny old world.

Anyway, please let me know here what you think of my edits. --Samf-nz 07:51, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Was NATO attack on factories US-led?
I have heard that the attacks on Kragujevac were really US-led, but were labeled as "NATO." Is it true and is "NATO-led" just hiding the fact that a specific country actually did this? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.16.196.129 (talk) 01:10, 9 January 2007 (UTC).

More internationalisation please
Why is there a huge section specifically dealing with the US, but hardly anything about Western Europe, where the Yugo was also (albeit briefly) quite popular? The Bricklin stuff is notable, sure, but does it really need to be covered in quite such extreme detail, down to the precise trim levels? Stuff like "This event earned Yugo's already-tarnished reputation in the Motor City another devestating [sic - typo fixed now] black eye" doesn't help the impression of a US-centric article either. Hopefully some European editors with knowledge of Yugos can improve the non-US coverage; at the moment it's teetering on the edge of a globalize/USA tag. 86.132.138.205 13:10, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Removed some subtle POV.
I was reading the article and I removed two subtly POV sentences. First off, saying that that local media outlets in Detroit are instruments of the big three automakers is completely ridiculous. Its unreferenced, making it WP:OR. This also falls under WP:Avoid Weasal words as well. If someone died because her car blew off a bridge when that had never happened before in the bridge's history, I'd say that's pretty significant and doesn't deserve being explained away by a supposed media bias. Second, in the trivia section, I removed the sentence about that incident. Its mentioned above. Also, there is nothing in the source that says the accident was due to high speed and not the car. Again, at least WP:OR and at most a POV push. Although this article presents both sides, there is little fairness of tone. Whether or not editors believe the criticism was fair, the criticism needs be given a fair shake and not be explained away immediately after its presented. I'm going to come back and give it a thorough reading to see if I can balance the points of view. --Jdcaust (talk) 12:36, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the woman being blown off the bridge, I don't think it's possible to "deny the car of needed downforce provided by forward motion" by stopping. This is because the majority of cars don't produce downforce with forward motion. They produce lift, because the top of all but a race car is longer than the bottom. I would think it got blown off because it was right there at that spot at that second, as just the right gust came to that spot, and would have been blown off while still or moving. Or maybe forward motion would have helped avoid the worst of the gust by virtue of not loitering in it for more than a second, but it would not have been downforce. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.69.39.213 (talk) 00:06, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

bias
"United Kingdom has around 100 Yugos still in existence and an owners club has been created, unlike in the USA Yugo was never considered to be one of the worst cars ever imported, partly because there were other much worse imports from eastern Europe, and partly because the expectations were not so high as in the USA." This seems to be quite biased....pro-Serbian if you ask me. Norum 21:40, 10 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Can you explain why this sounds biased? I see no problem with it.

Poor editing
I significant number of edits of this article are being done by a series of anonymous IPs all starting 92.60.225, using quite poor language ("With communism's collapse, however, Yugoslavia began to unravel." was the federation knitted? "Also in Canada the Dodge sold Yugos through his dealerships." etc.) and inserting a huge number of images mainly of the GV variant. Most auto mobile articles contain one or two photos of each model, not this many. I am thinking this article may need long-term anon blocking so that random IP users can be encouraged to do things the Wikipedia way and discuss their edits rather than reverting everyone else and re-booting their connection to jump to a new IP. Djapa Owen (talk) 14:11, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Requested move 25 October 2018

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: moved (page mover nac) Flooded  with them hundreds  11:01, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

– "Yugo" is by and large the WP:COMMONNAME for this (in)famous model, both in English and in former Yugoslavia. "Zastava Koral" was a market name from late production years, but it's largely unknown to the general public and it never caught up. OTOH, it is true that Zastava Automobiles marketed all their cars under the "Yugo" brand from 1990s on (Yugo Florida, Yugo Skala) following this model's success (compare AvtoVAZ vs. Lada), but still there's only one car model universally known as simply "Yugo", and this is the one. I also claim that this car is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for "Yugo"; a quick glance on pageviews should suffice. It is also evident that pageviews for the dab page are unusually high (near 20% of those of "Zastava Koral"), indicating that a large number of users do not land on the page they expected. No such user (talk) 07:44, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Zastava Koral → Yugo
 * Yugo → Yugo (disambiguation)
 * Link to pageviews for dab page items: |Zastava_Koral|Yugo_(given_name)|Yugo_(manga)|Yugo,_Baltistan No such user (talk) 07:47, 25 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Support per nom; both the COMMONNAME and PRIMARYTOPIC claims seem supported. power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 20:38, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. Well over 90% of readers are looking for the car. The COMMONNAME argument is also telling. Narky Blert (talk) 18:22, 30 October 2018 (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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Service Manual Now Online
I don't know were to best add this to the wiki page (if at all), but for decades it was debated whether or not service manual even existed. I managed to snag a copy of it and scanned it to help all the yugo owners out there struggling to keep their cars running properly. Can someone find where this best would fit on the wiki page? Thanks :)

https://archive.org/details/yugo-gv-service-manual/

Hate speech?
If you intend to reinstate your edits, please provide a rationale before hand - especially as to why you believe that the "[w]hole segment is hear say and provoce hate. I can find artical from some newspaper that clame - for example- USA is evil nest, is it ok to put it here. No. More, information in this segment have nothing ti do with subject, car,rather politics.... If you put back text I clean, I will regarded as hate speech toward people of this article geografy"

Based on IP geolocation I'm assuming that English isn't your first language, so there may be some loss in translation, but you really need to clarify your thinking here. Chaheel Riens (talk) 14:41, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

top gear
topgear tank shooting yugo is dodgy, should really say "simulates shooting a yugo" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.7.221.47 (talk) 07:57, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

"enormously successful market introduction"?
By what standard? 38.140.226.82 (talk) 18:14, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Split and turn Yugo into redirect
Yugo was the brand used by Zastava in most export markets. This car was the Zastava Yugo, later the Yugo Koral, with a wide variety of names used in different markets. I agree with the recent IP attempt to change the current, incorrect setup. Yugo should be a redirect to Zastava Automobiles and this title renamed Zastava Yugo as per WP:CARNAMES. Any opinions?  Mr.choppers &#124;  ✎  17:25, 11 October 2023 (UTC)


 * No. The common name of the automobile described here was "Yugo", and this nitpicking about 'correctness' is meaningless. The average English reader doesn't generally recognize the difference between the versions of the car called Zastava Yugo and Yugo Koral and we shouldn't expect them to, this is a topic that has continuity and the split would be arbitrary and astonishing for the average reader. The guideline of the automobiles project can't be used as a blanket rationale to override the article title policy, you have to provide a coherent rationale instead, referencing the specifics of that guideline that would support this kind of a change. Also, to invite more people to discuss any such changes, use WP:RM. --Joy (talk) 11:20, 12 October 2023 (UTC)