Talk:Series 888

From Terminator Wiki

Page name

I dont think this should be named "Series", because it is only a redesigned and upgraded model of the T-800 series. The same goes by the T-850. What do you think? Ascaaear 04:42, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

We know from the T2 Directors Cut that Arnold in that film was playing a Series 800 Model 101 Version 2.4. We also know from Cameron's commentary that Series 800 refers to the endoskeleton and Model 101 is the biological covering that looks like Arnold. From dialog we know that it is common to use either the series number and/or the model number after a T as shorthnad names. This gives us the following:

Series 70 – from the T2 ride/show. This was specifically designed by James Cameron as a human-designed, pre-Skynet terminator.
Series 600 – "rubber skin" makes them easy to detect according to Reese.
Series 800 (Model and Version unknown) – Attacks a resistance hideout with Reese inside, (the scene where his picture of Sarah burns)
Series 800 Model 101 (Version unknown) – Sent back in The Terminator (aka T-800, T-101)
Series 800 Model 101 Version 2.4 – Sent back in Terminator 2 (aka T-800, T-101)
Series 850 Model 101 (Version unknown) – Sent back in Terminator 3 (aka T-850, T-101)
Series 888 (Models and Version unknown) – Cromartie (and possibly Cameron, Summer Glau said she was the 888 during a fan's on-set visit.)
Series 1000 – the mimetic poly-alloy terminator from Terminator 2 (aka T-1000)
T1 (should be Series 1) & T-X (could be Series X or Series 10,000, who knows, the movie got all of the dates wrong also)

James Cameron never said—to my knowledge—but I would guess that Version is the operation system and related programming.

—MJBurrage^(T•C) 14:21, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Updated Series 888 comment —MJBurrage^(T•C) 23:30, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree about using "Series 800", instead of "Series T-800". The "T" is just a short for "Terminator" which I think is used when referring to a specific model. But my point is that 800 is the series, and T-800, T-850 and T-888 are different models/upgrades. I found a article on internet here. According to one of the designers on Sarah Connor Chronicles, he say in the fourth question, that the T-800, T-850 and T-888 are all part of the 800 Series. This person did previously work together with James Cameron according to the article, so I guess he has some creditability.

So based on this, I think we should rename the "Series T-800" to "800 Series", and the other "Series T-850", "Series T-888" should be renamed to "T-850" and "T-888".

Ascaaear 07:16, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Complete Nomenclature

The Terminator – Called "Terminator" in conversation. Reese specifically describes it as a "Cyberdyne Systems Model 101, ... an infiltration unit", and more advanced than the "600 series". The movie's poster shows "CSM-101" reflected in the "Terminator"'s sunglasses. This film never uses T-# terminology.
Terminator 2 – Arnold's character is called "Terminator" in conversation. It specifically describes itself as a "Cyberdyne Systems Model 101", and less advanced than the "T-1000". Its HUD identifies it even more specifically as a "Cyberdyne Systems Series 800 Model 101 Version 2.4". The script describes "the endoskeleton of a Series 800 Terminator".
- The "T-1000" is only called that in the film, however James Cameron does say the following in the commentary "If the 800 series is a kind of human Panzer tank, then the 1000 series had to be a Porsche. An advanced prototype Terminator".
- No one calls Arnold's character/type a T-800 or a T-101. DVD extras describe the "Terminator" as "Series 800, CSM 101".
T2-3D – In the documentary on the T2 DVD, James Cameron calls Arnold "Terminator", Robert "T-1000", and the Skynet's protector "T-Meg"
Terminator 3 – Arnold's character is called "Terminator" in conversation. It specifically describes itself as a "T-101", and less advanced than the "T-X".
- The "T-X" is called that throughout the film, John calls it a "Terminatrix" once. The "Terminator" describes it as "a T-X" not the T-X (implying there is a series of them).
- The mini-tank design is visibly numbered "T1-#" where # is different for each unit.
- In the DVD commentary Arnold calls his character "T-800". Nick and Arnold call the mini-tank design a "T1".
- The DVD extras identify the T3 "Terminator" as an "Series 850 Model 101", and the older "Terminator" as an "Series 800 Model 101"
Sarah Connor Chronicles – In "Queen's Gambit", Derek Reese calls the Terminator chasing him "T-triple eight". The show has also identified Cromartie as a "T-888"

From all of the above I compiled the list I posted at the top of this page. As far as I can tell, no one was using the term "T-800" until after T2 was released, and the usage probably arose with fans based on "T-1000" and Cameron's quote comparing the "800 series" to the "1000 series". If I had to guess, "Version 2.4" refers to the programming/CPU, but it is just a guess. —MJBurrage^(T•C) 09:40, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

It has always been of my understanding, when people in the movie using the word "terminator" and "800" in any possible way, it is equivalent to T-800, because the "T" stands for "Terminator". If you use the "-" or not, is irrelevant. When they talk about a "series" "800" it is a more general concept of the cyborg, not a specific terminator. I dont mind calling a specific model for "T-800" which is a "Series 800" or "800 Series". Fans have used that for many years, and I actually dont believe James Cameron disagree with that. The point is that, it doesn't matter what we call it as long as we know what we'er dealing with: We have T-make which are a xxx-series. Does anyone actually disagree on that?

Ascaaear 11:22, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

No, but it seems clear to me that the names T-# are shorthand for more detailed names, and in many cases we know the more detailed name. Also no where in any film or commentary does anybody use series and T- together. So for example:

The "Terminator" (Cyberdyne Systems Series 800 Model 101) is also known as a "Cyberdyne Systems Model 101", "Series 800 Model 101", "Series 800", "800 series", "T-800", and "T-101" (but never "Series T-800"). My thought was to clarify and standardize our use of the nomenclature. Furthermore the pages should be at the most correct name possible. (So this page should be at "Series 888" with a redirect from "T-888") —MJBurrage^(T•C) 12:57, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree to us the term "Series 888" if we have prove someone said it is. According to the link to the interview of one of the designers, he said 888 is a 800 series. Maybe it is like this... T-888 is a "Series 888". The "Series 888" is also a "Series 8xx", because it starts with "8". The "Series 8xx" would be about all terminators series and terminators starting with "8". I think we just should start renaming it. We have talked about this for weeks, and nothing do something. Maybe we should have a page describing how we name the terminators?

Ascaaear 13:44, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

The list above includes every version of every name from the live action films (T1, T2, T23d, & T4), and the SCC series. Put another way (note, I have not seen T2-3D, and so can only report what others have posted on T-70 and T-Meg unless otherwise noted.):

Official Designation	Common Name	Other Names (short names, nicknames, etc.)
Cyberdyne Systems Series 800 Model 101 – Its own HUD in T2, and T3 DVD extras. In particular the T2 Terminator was also Version 2.4	Terminator – Used many times throughout the franchise.	Cyberdyne Systems, Model 101 – by Kyle Reese (T1 dialog), by itself (T2 dialog) CSM-101 – T1 film poster, T2 DVD extras (once in a tech-readout) Series 800 – T2 DVD extras (once in a tech-readout) 800 series – Implied by Kyle Reese (T1 dialog), by James Cameron (T2 DVD interview) T-800 – by Arnold Schwarzenegger (T3 DVD commentary) T-101 – by "T-850" (T3 dialog)
Cyberdyne Systems Series 600 – Extrapolation from dialog and above.	unknown	600 series – by Kyle Reese (T1 dialog)
Cyberdyne Systems Series 1000 – Extrapolation from commentary and above.	T-1000 – Used many times throughout the franchise.	1000 series – by James Cameron (T2 DVD interview)
Cyberdyne Systems Series 70 – Extrapolation from reports and above.	???	T-70 – T2-3D (reported by other users)
Cyberdyne Systems ???	???	T-Meg – by James Cameron (Making of T2-3D) T-1000000 – T2-3D (reported by other users) T-one million – T2-3D (reported by other users)
Cyber Research Systems Series 850 Model 101 – T3 DVD extras.	Terminator – Used throughout the film.	T-101 – itself (T3 dialog) T-850 – T3 DVD extras. Model 101 – T3 DVD extras. Series 850 – T3 DVD extras.
Cyber Research Systems ??? –It's never specified what T-X stands for.	T-X – Used throughout the film.	Terminatrix – by John Connor (T3 dialog) Model T-X – T3 DVD extras.
Cyber Research Systems ???	T1 – Shown on them in the film.	T-1 Ground Assault Vehicle – T3 DVD extras.
(company unknown) Series 888 –Model (skin type) numbers have not yet been mentioned.	T- triple eight – Derek Reese (SCC dilog)	T-888 – Official episode summaries Cromartie – One particular T-888
Note that the T3 DVD extras imply that the "T1" is actually the first Hunter Killer, not the first Terminator.

—MJBurrage^(T•C) 11:08, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

This is an amazing chart! What do you think of moving it to its own page? And maybe also expanding it to include the exact quotes and/or screenshots from which each of these terms was derived? I'd love to help in a project like that, if you're up for it... --Kanamekun 18:34, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Cool chart! I like it! I agree about having it on its own page, maybe called "Terminator nomenclature" or something. I actually dont see the difference between "Common name" and "Other names", isn't that basicly the same? Ascaaear 19:21, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Ah or we could work it into this section? Terminators --Kanamekun 21:08, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Backup CPUs

"Among its primary CPU, there are two more additional backup CPUs with the same neural net architecture (although this seems unlikely as Cameron Phillips was able to disable Vick by removing only one CPU)"

First, what's the source? I can't remember anything like that?

Yes, it would be unlikely, but that depends on what are the conditions activating the backup(s). It would be possible that failure / destruction of the primary unit triggers a backup unit, while a (possibly forcible) removal does not, instead being interpreted by self-repair systems as a normal shutdown / dismantle / pre-maintenance / etc condition.

Alternatively, backup CPUs could be inside the same removeable package as the primary one (see [1], [2] for real-world examples). Lilianne Blaze 13:32, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

As far as I have been able to determine they only have one main CPU, others (If there are any) would most likely be Microprocessors used for small tasks such as controlling the streagnth put into a hand shake freeing up the main CPU for more complex tasks such as tracking a target. BTW just because it can walk around with out it's head dose not mean the head isn't controlling it via radio or sothing! ~ Awar 14:49, 13 April 2008 (UTC).
- I agree. I never heard about them having two CPU's. Ascaaear 18:44, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
  - A machine that complex should not need a second CPU chip, from what I understand of computers each cube that makes up a normal terminators CPU chip is a highly complex Micro-CPU connected to other's that together form a single truly powerful CPU chip. An example of this would be that each micro CPU in the chip is equal to around a hundred single core CPU computer systems that when linked together gives the CPU chip human level thinking or even higher thought capacity! ~ Awar 17:08, 14 April 2008 (UTC).
    - We have to stick to what the movies and tv-series show us. Thats whats counts, no matter how the real world is.Ascaaear 17:11, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
We need to add references to this page... anyway I managed to track down the source for T-888's having 3 processors; it's from a tv special of behind-the-scenes for the T:SCC series. I'm at work so I'll post an update tonight or tomorrow. — Jeiara 18:18, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
- Here is the page I made with a video clip and transcript: T-888 (video) — Jeiara 09:09, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Does anyone have pictures of the unconfirmed T-888's endos from the show?

The Pilot terminator endoskeleton
Greenway (after his living tissue has burned off)

We could compare that to the confirmed T-888 endos... that could help us confirm that they're in fact T-888's! --Kanamekun 06:08, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

The endo from the pilot dream sequence shouldn't be an 888 (as Sarah has no knowlege of them yet), but for budget reasons, the producers may have reused their own endo model. Check the thigh assembly for the blades and chestplate for the enhanced armor "beavertail". Greenway should be able to be ID'd by the same features. (hope you like the visual reference library) Fulongamer 06:26, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

The visual reference library is awesome! It will be so great to have a detailed visual guide we can use to definitively ID terminator models! Very excited... --Kanamekun 15:09, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Body types

T-888 clearly come in different body types, while in the movies we see only "Arnie" T-800 and T-850. So, are the different body types something new for T-888? Or where there different T-800 / T-850 too? Is there a canon example of "Joe Average" T-800 / T-850? --Lilianne Blaze 23:58, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

You clearly need to reference over to the Portals:Models page. There is a catalogue of all the used "bodies" for the 800's and all the other endos in print, and film, to date. Most additional "800s" come from the Comics, and are all generally large framed people. Nothing other than the 850 from the movies represents that series, but as Skynet has already demonstrated, anything they made fit in the 800 would also fit the 850.Fulongamer 00:08, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Why are we always assuming that every Terminator that appears on TSCC is a T-888? There was no indication whatsoever as to the series/model of Victoria. For that matter, there was never any indication what series/model Carter was, either. Both of these Terminators should remain "Unknown". As far as Victoria goes, she is the only infiltrator that Cameron was able to dispatch without any outside help. Yes, she was tiny, even tinier than Cameron. But, as any mechanic/engineer can attest, physical size is not an indicator of power.
Victoria=UNK Carter=UNK
sec_1971 13:51, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree completely. One note though: Derek does keep referring to most terminators as a T-888 or a "triple eight". So it's not totally crazy - but it's definitely not confirmed, since sometimes he says it before even seeing the terminator! --Kanamekun 14:25, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Victoria is Cameron-like, her chip layout matches Cameron's and they behave absolutely identically, which also confirms that Victoria is of Cameron's type. We can safely assume that every terminator in the TSCC is a T-888 because T-888 are infiltrators. T-800 are simple plain killers, not infiltrators. --T-890 09:51, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

The T-888s have pretty much been labelled as the generic Terminator for the show, just as the T-800 was for the movies. It is not a stretch to assume that any Terminator in TSCC, unless mentioned otherwise, is a T-888. For all we know, Cameron might actually be a T-888, albeit an upgraded model. Besides, if you're looking for an indicator that Carter was a T-888, how about the glowing eyes or the fact that Cameron never mentioned him as different, just a shorter endo-size. Darth Raivon 15:34, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

The T-800 and T-850 both had red eyes as well. Eye color isn't really a reliable indicator of series.--sec_1971 15:47, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I was referring to the T-888's habit of "showing" its eyes during reboots and mission changes. We haven't seen the T-800/850s do that in the films. Darth Raivon 15:50, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

What do you mean?sec_1971 16:10, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

An example: Carter is in standby mode when that worker guy, Mike, pushes him over. Carter cushions his fall and reactivates, his eyes glowing red upon reactivation. Another example: Cromartie receives a bulletin with Sarah's FBI file, his eyes glow red upon seeing it. A further example: Vick sees Derek's file and his eyes glow red. etc etc T-888s are known to have eye "flashes" at certain moments. It's a minor similarity, but I've yet to see any other model besides Cameron doing this. Darth Raivon 00:35, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

You are forgetting the very first terminator seen operating in the Future War scenes of the first movie. When the "Columbo" terminator assaults the base after Kyle Reese returns from a mission, you see it operating in "combat mode" with actively glowing eyes while backlit and hosing the area with the appropriated plasma cannon.Fulongamer 06:16, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Excellent point. That never occured to me. I think he's referring to the flashing, though. Like I said, it's probably just for dramatic effect and not indicative of series.--sec_1971 13:34, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

F9 - Hit - Battleship Sinking - Glug glug - :) Okay, so you blew that ship out of the water, I totally forgot about that future scene. But logically speaking, when Skynet creates a newer model it doesn't keep building inferior ones. Production stops and the new ones start getting churned out. It wouldn't make sense for Skynet to send an inferior model on a time travel mission and why would it send anything other than the T-888 for a mission to stockpile metal? Just my thoughts. Darth Raivon 16:36, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Speaking of time travel missions being relatively expensive propositions... does it strike anyone as amazing how often Skynet is sending back terminators this season?! --Kanamekun 17:30, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Why would older models be inferior, necessarily? Some models may be better suited for certain jobs. For some it may be easier to obtain the materials needed, or they might be faster to mass-produce. If you need a Terminator to just stupidly follow someone and shoot them, you might pick a different model than if you needed one to eliminate an entire army division. If you already have a certain model at hand in great numbers, you could more readily send it on a last-ditch mission to the past than if you have only one or two that you might still need in the present (i.e. the future). -- Uliwitness 03:05, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Do not forget about alternative time lines! When someone is sent to the past it means automatic creation of a new time line and "current" future does not exist any more as it could if no one was sent. So when the very first terminator was sent, T-888 could be non–existing. Time travel is a complicated thing. --T-890 10:00, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

I get the impression that the war is going badly for both sides, so Skynet may be pulling out all the stocks and resorting to desperate measures. Darth Raivon 17:34, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. IIRC it's even worse than that, as I seem to remember that the movie stated that Skynet was losing, the resistance had won, and that's why Skynet sent the Terminators through time in T1 and T2: To retroactively level the playing field. Of course, by the time the resistance wins, humanity has lost a great deal, so John and Sarah aren't just fighting to ensure they still win, they're trying to prevent the whole doomsday thing in the first place. -- Uliwitness 03:10, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

What's the source on a lot of this?

I'm a little curious what the source for a lot of the specific information in this article is. How do we know that the 888 is 25% faster/stronger/ etc. than the 800. Where does this speed of 60mph come from? It certainly never seems to run like a T-1000 or T-X in the series. The times when a triple eight has caught a vehicle, it was moving much slower than 60mph, and the terminator just seemed to be at a good run. Then there is the bullets used to kill Cromartie. Granted it would make sense that it would take some heavy duty bullets to do any damage, but there is nothing in the episode "Mr. Ferguson is Ill Today" to suggest it. Instead it just comes across as fans trying to justify a scene that previous Terminator Canon said shouldn't have happened. It does seem relatively logical to assume the 888 is tougher than the 800, but on screen evidence doesn't support it. If anything the 888 seems a little fragile. This may come down to a difference between the movie continuity 800 and the TSCC continuity version, but it doesn't change the fact that a lot of this information seems sourceless.AlphaShrike 02:16, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

It's information gathered from behind-the-scenes, episodes, and interviews. The T-888 is stated on many occasions to be tougher, stronger, and more powerful than the T-800. And yes, they can run at an excess of 60mph, because T-800s can run that fast, as stated by earlier evidence excetera. T-1000s and the T-X can run along the lines of 80mph. The shells used by Cameron were specifically explained by the writers of TSCC as being high explosive "tank busters". I wrote all of this, and I did my research beforehand, so trust me (even though I couldn't be bothered to link it all), the information is highly accurate. Darth Raivon 03:33, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

I can confirm that the information is correct. I never read about speed but I came across the rest too. In addition T-800 is a combat unit while T-888 is more an infiltrator (remember Vik), so it may be stronger in some areas but weaker in others. T-890

Speed listed on the T-X page puts it at 80km/h (50mph) not 80mph, and that's a huge difference. If it's actually supposed to be 60km/h (38mph), that would make a bit more sense, but still seems faster than it appears in the show. Are there any other scenes in which the T-888 seems to go that fast, because the evidence listed were instances of chasing slow targets just starting to accelerate. I am interested in the evidence for tank buster rounds. There is no evidence of them in the dialogue or visual effects, which makes their inclusion as cannon dubious, even if the writers notes say it. I'd also be interested in knowing if the writers notes included any information on what kind of shell the shotgun tank busters were. After all, Raufoss Mk-211 is real, and very much as Derek described it, but I've never heard or read about anti-tank shotgun shells. As for the comment about the T-888 being more of an infiltrator, and less of a combat model, that makes sense. The article fairly heavily implies it has superior combat performance too however.AlphaShrike 05:24, 22 May 2009 (UTC)