I want to build a 100-mpg car (and I want it to look vintage) - Page 6 - Fuel Economy, Hypermiling, EcoModding News and Forum

sgtlethargic · 10-03-2020, 12:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by freebeard

It may be your least worst option at 1750lb. A 2nd-hand chassis is a place to start.

I plan on driving to work, to run errands, etc, not off-road nor 200 mph on a racetrack. I'm not going to wear a helmet, racing harness, etc.

Did you see the custom Metropolitan? That Elmer Fudd car is 1750 pounds. I'd want to sit in the (lateral) center for a little more safety. Modify the body, floor, etc to resemble the aerodynamics of the BOcruiser. I think it'd look cool and get good fuel mileage. It might be too small for safety.

I could do the same to my 2400 pound '61 Ranchero and feel safer, but that would probably come with a fuel mileage decrease. It might be hard to see, but I see modified Ranchero in this Mercedes prototype (the Mercedes rear would be the Ranchero front).

Or I could build a frame around Falcon doors and front fenders and a '37 Ford beam axle I have (with wide five and/or artillery wheels). That should be lightweight.

Or mimic the AST with a Volvo PV444 rear body portion as the front. Or a '38-'48 Ford sedan.

sgtlethargic · 10-03-2020, 12:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JulianEdgar

I thought safety was important?

What's unsafe about that shape?

sgtlethargic · 10-03-2020, 12:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by M_a_t_t

https://ecomodder.com/forum/showthre...cle-19863.html

The point of a project is to have fun and learn something.

I remember that one from when I was on here previously.

The rest of your reply has good points.

JulianEdgar · 10-03-2020, 01:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sgtlethargic

What's unsafe about that shape?

Well, I was thinking in terms of side impact and frontal crash testing - cars like that don't have safety requirements of that sort, do they?

sgtlethargic · 10-03-2020, 01:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JulianEdgar

Well, I was thinking in terms of side impact and frontal crash testing - cars like that don't have safety requirements of that sort, do they?

I imagine the solar car doesn't. I would do my best to build in protection.

freebeard · 10-03-2020, 01:42 AM

Quote:

...'61 Ranchero...

[swoon]

It'd be a shame to do more than a Watson panel paint job and Appleton spotlights.

That's a unit construction body. Lighter, but modify at your own peril.

The big tension nowadays is the grounded half-Zeppelin and modern [electric] sedans and CUVs. The Metro is neither. Better to start with a Porsche 356. Or an old SAAB.

Quote:

I plan on driving to work, to run errands, etc, not off-road nor 200 mph on a racetrack. I'm not going to wear a helmet, racing harness, etc.

Ah, a use case. That's helpful. Ingress/egress is important. Cargo space?

Pretend this isn't a VW. It is a four-passenger vehicle with a Cd of 0.21 or better. It would do 90mph with a 25hp engine. That's down to the shape of the body, but it was nothing special underneath. Modern car like the Aston-Martin Valkryie or BAC Mono look like a full fendered car from above, but they're hollowed out underneath.

https://www.car-revs-daily.com/wp-co...1-1200x520.jpg

If you put the pictures side-by-side and cross your eyes....

sgtlethargic · 10-03-2020, 02:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by freebeard

That's a unit construction body. Lighter, but modify at your own peril.

Why? You have to brace pretty much any car you chop.

Quote:

The big tension nowadays is the grounded half-Zeppelin and modern [electric] sedans and CUVs. The Metro is neither. Better to start with a Porsche 356. Or an old SAAB.

Why?

Quote:

Pretend this isn't a VW. It is a four-passenger vehicle with a Cd of 0.21 or better. It would do 90mph with a 25hp engine. That's down to the shape of the body, but it was nothing special underneath.

I like that. A VW would be a good starting point. But they're on par with the Metropolitan as for construction. Either could be modified for a bit more protection.