Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > EcoModding Central
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 01-10-2013, 11:10 PM   #41 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: wisconsin
Posts: 36
Thanks: 6
Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
updates




blog at
http://gogebicxp.blogspot.com/

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 01-11-2013, 03:56 AM   #42 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
freebeard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: northwest of normal
Posts: 28,557
Thanks: 8,092
Thanked 8,883 Times in 7,330 Posts
I just found the thread. You promised a surprise. What—the neon underbody lighting?

Quote:
The body will be all aluminum. Laser cut and seam MIG welded. Every part of the car I can make at work except the canopy, but I know where I can get it made. The entire car has been designed around the tools I have available to me.
Castings? Forging? CNC? 3D printer?

If you need to go in snow wouldn't it be better to leave off the pontoon fenders, and run open wheels, like a Lakester? The front pontoon is open on the inside and out. Does it not turn with the wheel? If it doesn't, what holds it up? Why the wide track; do you need >1g cornering forces?

For defrosting you could have a flat on the front of the bubble, like a jet fighter plane and make that out of the glass they used in Ford Taurus windshields. It had lead in it so it would conduct electricity. It would melt caked on ice.

Here are some examples. That wide track look, the Tucker:


One of my favorites, the Mangusta:


Not open wheeled for less interference drag, the Messerschmitt:


Here is a reasonable package. You can get in and out of it. It has bumpers. The thickness of the windshield post shows it has some impact resistance. It isn't built for massive cornering side forces, and the fenders have minimal frontal area; although they could have little individual boattails, There's no need for the massive knife edges in front.

The VW Nils:

  Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 04:42 AM   #43 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
I missed the May '12 proto roll-out. :/
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 05:38 AM   #44 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
freebeard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: northwest of normal
Posts: 28,557
Thanks: 8,092
Thanked 8,883 Times in 7,330 Posts
Well, you see it there on the shop floor last December. It didn't slip much.

GoGogebic -- Wheelbase? Track? Tire size? How tall is that driver figure?

Any details on the drive train?
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 08:15 AM   #45 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
I think he's aiming for a conventional track cuz he's concerned about following ruts.
__________________


  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Frank Lee For This Useful Post:
brucepick (01-11-2013)
Old 01-12-2013, 11:10 AM   #46 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: wisconsin
Posts: 36
Thanks: 6
Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
Quote:
Well, you see it there on the shop floor last December. It didn't slip much.

GoGogebic -- Wheelbase? Track? Tire size? How tall is that driver figure?

Any details on the drive train?
Wheel base is 110in, Track 84 ins-will be narrowed slightly (The track is wide for a couple of reasons. the aero reason is to prevent the wheel fairing from interfering with the airflow around the body)

The driver in the car is a 90% percent male.

The car is 42" tall. all bumper and safety regulations for sale in wisconsin are met. Headlights,bumpers,license plates are at the lower height limits.

The seat will move up 10 ins to help the driver get in. The canopy moves up and forward to let the driver in.

it weights ~845lbs

the engine is a 250cc twin 6speed with a lsd, I'm working a turbo and a automated pulse and glide system.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2013, 12:08 PM   #47 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
HydroJim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Alabama
Posts: 625

Aerofocus (retired) - '00 Ford Focus ZX3
90 day: 44.66 mpg (US)

The Red Baron (sold) - '93 Geo Metro
90 day: 44.1 mpg (US)
Thanks: 40
Thanked 156 Times in 103 Posts
an 84 inch track is wayyy too wide in my opinion. people have enough trouble staying on the road as it is. I'd say a 72 inch track is more reasonable. even then, in the winter it will be hard to stay in the tracks of other cars.
__________________
Aerospace Controls Engineer.
Currently driving a mostly stock 2014 Mitsubishi Mirage DE hatchback.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2013, 02:32 PM   #48 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
NeilBlanchard's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Maynard, MA Eaarth
Posts: 7,907

Mica Blue - '05 Scion xA RS 2.0
Team Toyota
90 day: 42.48 mpg (US)

Forest - '15 Nissan Leaf S
Team Nissan
90 day: 156.46 mpg (US)

Number 7 - '15 VW e-Golf SEL
TEAM VW AUDI Group
90 day: 155.81 mpg (US)
Thanks: 3,475
Thanked 2,950 Times in 1,844 Posts
Eighty four inches is way too wide - driving into an 8' wide garage door would only have 6" per side for clearance.

If you want wide, the make the out-to-out dimension 68"-72".

The leading edges on the wheel fairings don't need to extend as far ahead of the wheels. And the overall vehicle length is probably longer than it needs to be; in the front in particular. The driver's head is right about the halfway point, which means the nose is about 6'-4" in front of the driver's eyes. That's a long way.

Smaller = lighter. You mention a required bumper - front and back?

This earlier revision is much better in all the areas I mentioned:


I like your modeling program - it is SolidWorks or something else?
__________________
Sincerely, Neil

http://neilblanchard.blogspot.com/
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2013, 02:37 PM   #49 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: ellington, ct
Posts: 830
Thanks: 44
Thanked 104 Times in 80 Posts
Nice work. Very VLCish other than the suspension.

Still think a similar vehicle in a trike form has enough benefits to warrant someone building it.

You give up a little stability and foul weather capability, but I think these are a worthwhile trade for the gains in simplicity and weight.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2013, 02:55 PM   #50 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: ellington, ct
Posts: 830
Thanks: 44
Thanked 104 Times in 80 Posts
There is actually a way to deal with the foul weather issues in a trike. Make it a mild hybrid with very lightweight low power, maybe a few horsepower, hub motors up front.

This gives you some regen capabilities, low speed AWD and can be used for reverse which allows you to use a standard MC drivetrain. I would also use a freewheel type rear hub which would allow for EOCing with the motorcycle drivetrain.

I guess I need to get off my butt, buy a welder and get busy!!!!


Last edited by pete c; 01-12-2013 at 03:12 PM..
  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread






Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com