EcoModder.com

EcoModder.com (https://ecomodder.com/forum/)
-   Fossil Fuel Free (https://ecomodder.com/forum/fossil-fuel-free.html)
-   -   Gordon Murray's T27 EV (https://ecomodder.com/forum/showthread.php/gordon-murrays-t27-ev-13301.html)

NeilBlanchard 05-20-2010 01:07 PM

Gordon Murray's T.27 EV
 
They keep a a fairly tight lid on this car (and the petrol powered T25):

Murray T27 nears production - Autocar.co.uk

http://cdn.images.autocar.co.uk/612x...01600x1060.jpg

http://cdn.images.autocar.co.uk/612x...111612x408.jpg

The second picture just sank in -- the entire upper front of the car opens up...

Peter7307 05-20-2010 08:59 PM

Neil,
An interesting concept.
I wonder how closely the production vehicle will follow the one pictured?
A lift up front might have problems with legislation and may even face some "consumer resistance" as they say in the marketing blurb.
In the middle of a downpour who is going to want to open the entire vehicle to a torrent of water?
Still with Gordon Murray doing the design work the pedigree of the credibility is unquestioned for sure.

Peter.

RobertSmalls 05-20-2010 09:55 PM

I clicked on this thread hoping to find an electric T77:
http://www.volny.cz/tatra.oldtimer/t77d.jpg

Hmm, the front door on the T27 reminds me of an Isetta. And what's with those un-aero three lug wheels?

NeilBlanchard 05-29-2010 09:56 AM

Here's another picture:

T.27 | Image | Auto Express

And more details are now available:
Gordon Murray's forthcoming electric T.27 city car in detail — Autoblog Green

NeilBlanchard 01-20-2011 11:11 AM

An update on the T.27 -- it does very well in crash testing:

http://www.blogcdn.com/green.autoblo...27-crash-1.jpg
(click on image for link)

http://www.blogcdn.com/green.autoblo...27-crash-2.jpg

Having the driver in the center helps -- in an offset crash, the driver is better protected. In a full on crash, it is the same as in a conventionally located driving position. That is one of the reasons I put the driver in the center of my open source design, called CarBEN EV:

http://neilblanchard.blogspot.com/20...ct-part-3.html

Also, in a 1 car crash, having lower weight is better; all else being equal. So, the crumple zone is proportional to the weight.

botsapper 01-20-2011 11:50 AM

I really appreciate Murray's engineering insights, our Colin Chapman. He brings 'lightness' back to our contemporary awareness. The T.27 is a masterful project in packaging, fitting engine, drivetrain & passengers in the the smallest envelope.
My first impression though with the egress/ingress choice automatically brings up the BMW Isetta. It also has a front-hinged cabin 'door. I'm sure the T.27 crash photos proves the safety cage/structure could withstand expected collisions. But like the Iso, a front hinge cabin 'door' in any collision will deform and will make it difficult to open and rescue occupants. Knowing his prowess, maybe he has engineered that eventuality too.

Rokeby 01-20-2011 08:01 PM

Interesting car. Kind of a width-wise "fat boy" version of the Tango

Anybody seen any pictures of the interior, especially behind the driver's seat?
I'd be interested in seeing how passenger ingress/egress is handled.

Does the rear half of the car open clamshell fashion too?
If the two squarish openings in the doors in the first crash photo are for
two sets of door handles/mechanism, it would suggest so.

All I can find is these terse words, from a T25 review:

... The interior of the car also has the feasibility of providing better rear
passenger leg room in case we opt for the single seater option with retrofit
bolt-in rear seats.

The car has a unique door opening mechanism and traverse path. This
permits for passengers of the car to alight even with the car parked at close
proximity to other objects. Access to the car therefore is very easy for
passengers and driver even if the car is car is parked two at a time in the
garage...
From: Gordon Murray

NeilBlanchard 01-20-2011 09:30 PM

My guess is that only the front part opens?

http://photos.autoexpress.co.uk/imag..._374092_25.jpg

BHarvey 01-20-2011 09:57 PM

Can you believe that that monstrosity comes from the same man who brought you the McLaren F1????

NeilBlanchard 01-21-2011 10:44 AM

I admit, it's got some clunky details, but any design this tight and compact has to be appreciated. The headlights in particular are quite awkward, but the overall design is quite elegant, I think.

Cd 01-21-2011 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobertSmalls (Post 175483)
I clicked on this thread hoping to find an electric T77:
http://www.volny.cz/tatra.oldtimer/t77d.jpg

Hmm, the front door on the T27 reminds me of an Isetta. And what's with those un-aero three lug wheels?

( Same here. :) )

botsapper 01-21-2011 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard (Post 216123)
I admit, it's got some clunky details, but any design this tight and compact has to be appreciated. The headlights in particular are quite awkward, but the overall design is quite elegant, I think.

I agree, Murray is a top automotive engineer. Now if car design studios, Pininfarina, Italdesign or Bertone put their 'stile', it would probably have more passion & soul.
Touches of designers, Gandini, Donckerwolke, and even Bangle could be more compelling.

NeilBlanchard 11-08-2011 10:21 PM

Well, the T27 has leapt to the top of the efficiency list!

Gordon Murray's T27 Is the Most Efficient Car in the World | PluginCars.com

NeilBlanchard 06-02-2012 08:20 AM

McLaren F1 Developer Designs New Auto Driving 100 MPH on 96 MPG - Bloomberg

NeilBlanchard 06-11-2012 01:03 PM

Murray T27 Review | Autocar

Murray T25 Review | Autocar

http://images.cdn.autocar.co.uk/site...-t25-t27-2.jpg

niky 06-12-2012 09:54 PM

I so dearly want to drive this car...

NeilBlanchard 06-13-2012 09:27 AM

I would drive a T27 in a second, and a T25 would be pretty great, too. The T27 is close to 100Wh/mile which is in excess of 300MPGe, and the T25 is rated at 96MPG. They each seat 3 adults, so they would be perfect for my driving most of the time.

tortoise 06-13-2012 01:45 PM

Great, but for me, I'd accept the trade of less enclosed volume for lower aero drag that a small sports car like package would give. Aesthetics would be more to my liking, too. Probably a minority view.

rmay635703 06-13-2012 09:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tortoise (Post 312184)
Great, but for me, I'd accept the trade of less enclosed volume for lower aero drag that a small sports car like package would give. Aesthetics would be more to my liking, too. Probably a minority view.

Actually you would gain room, the car should be lower and stretched out, then again his car is what the C-car should have been. The c-car had too wide of a front and the squared back made it worse.

I have often considered a kammback on the c-car, since the top speed is roughly 50mph any aero gain should be visible on the speedo.

niky 06-13-2012 09:56 PM

It's tall, but the narrow body should give it very good aerodynamics.

Low isn't the only way to keep frontal area down...

NeilBlanchard 06-14-2012 08:14 AM

Another point is that the same frontal area can be configured in many ways (tall & narrow ranging to low & wide) but the interior *volume* is not the same for these. A square (or round) frontal area of a given size will, by definition provide more interior volume than a narrow rectangle.

If you consider the passenger space above the floor on the Murray cars, they are nearly square, which means they have more interior space than a low and wide design with the same frontal area.

tortoise 06-14-2012 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard (Post 312320)
Another point is that the same frontal area can be configured in many ways (tall & narrow ranging to low & wide).

Low and narrow beats both. I like a 2 seater with the passenger seat beside, but slightly rear of the front, for shoulder room, like many '20s race cars. Guess I'll have to build it.

NeilBlanchard 06-14-2012 11:22 PM

Low and narrow has less frontal area, sure, but the volume also varies with the proportions of the width and height; and the length too, of course.

The newest VW XL-1 has a staggered tandem seating arrangement; as did the tandem version of the Edison2 VLC. The passenger seat can be moved closer to the driver's seat, because the legs are narrower than the hips...

niky 06-16-2012 09:25 AM

Tall and narrow is how they fit three people within a smaller footprint than a SMART ForTwo. Granted, they could get more aerodynamic with a longer design with a proper tail, but the whole point is to give it the smallest footprint both in terms of wind resistance and road usage, while giving it usable interior space.

Granted, it's possible to design something more fuel efficient and more aerodynamic, but difficult while meeting the same safety and space targets.

NeilBlanchard 08-16-2013 01:15 PM

Gordon Murray's T.25 and T.27 microcars headed for production - Autoblog

cRiPpLe_rOoStEr 08-16-2013 08:38 PM

Apart from the not-so-practical canopy, its concept seems to be overall better than the Smart, not just due to its design being more efficient but also more sporty-looking which seems to attract people who see the current eco-cars as not manly enought.

sheepdog 44 08-16-2013 09:16 PM

The Smart fortwo has the same horrible drag coeficient as the VW Beetle, 0.38. Which is why the 1 litre Smarts have lower highway mpg then a 4 person sedan. The T-25 has a smaller frontal area, but i doubt it's CD isn't far off. All that engineering, and little thought to aerodynamics. Thats the only bad thing i have to say about it.

I'm sure it's a fantastic city car.

cRiPpLe_rOoStEr 08-16-2013 09:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sheepdog 44 (Post 385701)
The Smart fortwo has the same horrible drag coeficient as the VW Beetle, 0.38. Which is why the 1 litre Smarts have lower highway mpg then a 4 person sedan. The T-25 has a smaller frontal area, but i doubt it's CD isn't far off. All that engineering, and little thought to aerodynamics.

Aerodynamics in a shorter vehicle are a higher challenge than it might appear initially, but the T25/T27 seems to be actually better than the Smart regarding this matter.


Quote:

I'm sure it's a fantastic city car.
Eventually it might still be also not bad in short-to-medium road trips.

niky 08-16-2013 11:31 PM

The Twizy's cd is worse than a Jeep's.

This one might be at around 0.40 or 0.45... they're remarkably coy about it...

cRiPpLe_rOoStEr 08-17-2013 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by niky (Post 385739)
The Twizy's cd is worse than a Jeep's.

Wasn't its hamster exercise ball shape supposed to improve the aerodynamics? :D


Quote:

This one might be at around 0.40 or 0.45... they're remarkably coy about it...
At least in the pictures its cd seems to be lower than the Smart.

niky 08-17-2013 11:18 PM

The Twizy is supposed to be around 0.68 or thereabouts. It's not a smooth shape... too much stuff sticking out here and there.

The T-car is not as bad, but it's not smooth, either. I'd still like to see what it will do.

I'm betting the production version will look more than a little different. We'll have to say goodbye to the clamshell, for one, and the front bodywork will probably change to make the shape more streamlined.

cRiPpLe_rOoStEr 08-18-2013 09:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by niky (Post 385842)
I'm betting the production version will look more than a little different. We'll have to say goodbye to the clamshell, for one, and the front bodywork will probably change to make the shape more streamlined.

It would make sense to get a different arrangement for the access instead of that canopy, but I actually wouldn't bet the final version to look dramatically different from this one.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:03 PM.

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