First, your quote from me was taken completely out of context, I believe intentionally. The screw up with the 737 MAX was almost completely with the way public relations were handled and a little with the change in the characteristics of the flight control system without proper notification to pilots. The changes with weight, balance, and thrust issues were not of great significance no matter how this was characterized by attorneys hoping to extract funds from Boeing.
Engine changes have been done on multiple aircraft lines over the years on just about every line of aircraft ever conceived from General Aviation to Airliners. They typically do not change the name of name of the plane because of it. oOur statement is so ridiculous that it casts doubt on every other statement that you have made. It seems obvious that if you actually have any aviation background at all... that it included no historical perspective. These days anyone who reads something on Wikipedia or watches a slanted news magazine report believes that they are an expert on just about everything.
Yes it was - and intentionally. I wanted to emphasize only the part I agreed with you on :-)
Engine changes have been done on multiple aircraft lines over the years on just about every line of aircraft ever conceived from General Aviation to Airliners.
That is true. But this wasn't a simple engine change where you swap one model with another. Like the author said these were bigger engines and if they were mounted at the same spot beneath the wings the ground clearance would have been less, making for risky landings. So they were moved forward with respect to the leading edge of the wing -- and that changed the flight characteristics. It's because of this change (aerodynamics) that the model should have been given a different name, not because of the engines. The author clearly said so.