I've always liked WiReD, but I really take exception to their characterization: Ultra-aerodynamic—but totally impractical.
Quote:
So why didn’t this wind-breaking wonder become the new template for cars everywhere? Schlör’s focus on aerodynamics came at the cost of other considerations. For example, the car is remarkably sleek head-on and moves through the wind almost effortlessly, but the car is so tall that a stiff crosswind could send it careening to the side.
...
While a fascinating historical relic, the Schlörwagen doesn’t have much to teach us about automotive design, Livingstone says. It was simply too singular in purpose, with little concession to the other things we want from our cars. “Clearly, modern cars must essentially embrace a form inherently less aerodynamic to afford a decent ‘package’ for the cabin space, and also deliver good visibility, crash performance and engine cooling.”
|
The problem is people will conflate 'was' and 'is'. All I see is the lack of chance for proper development. A lot of things never made it out of the turmoil that enveloped that time and place.
Visibility —external video monitors
Crash performance —wut?
Engine cooling —magnetic drive
Cross-wind performance. So what is it? Does it yaw into the wind like a Dymaxion, roll downwind, lift? What?
They didn't even mention changing the front tire (TPMS), or those 30s style door cut-lines. I say bring it on.
____________
What's really weird though is that plan drawing. The lightening holes in the floor-pan are very specifically sized and spaced to offer an evenly supported rim around that central hole. It's like it was designed to load onto a turret, not support a floor and seats. What the what?
____________
Every one of their objections is answered by the Volkhart-Sagitta. At least for small people.
