Originally Posted by kach22i
With my own design exercises I find that adding those little details an advantage that helps mature it.
The more details you address such as; engine access, wiper blades, air intakes/exhaust ventilation, interior design, chassis structure, buildability, headlights, turn signals, side view mirrors, door handles, gas cap, gas tank location...................the more detail addressed, the more thought out and realistic it is, and perhaps the more appreciated by the viewer.
Imagine some perspective client or employer looking at your drawing for five minutes without saying a word and then suddenly they say how do you get in the trunk? Without the little seams and joints providing clues the question could come up.
And yes; that rear hatch opening just as the door opening size and shape is going to affect crash safety. You don't have to do crash safety simulations as the general designer or stylist but you don't want to raise any read flags and look impractical.
Now if you were in a design competition sponsored by some Tier-1 supplier that just invented some super material which would allow you to do things never before possible, that is a different opportunity and a different expression of design to solve or exploit and something different would emerge.
you're absolutely right, designing a car can require quite an advanced research and development since the sheer number of production if nothing else. but it still feels like they don't pay enough attention to aerodynamics, they could be more efficient and better looking at the same time with no more effort than now made by the companies. by the way I'd think this concept as a rwd electric and batteries in the floor tesla style. trunk -frunk- space would be the most important impracticality I guess. and there's the thing with three wheel handling which I don't even know what to think about.