Linner Strømlinet Vogn (Now with 3D model!)

[Sven7]

Originally Posted by kach22i

Interesting, I bet that sort of thing helped the early VW Beetles too.

I overlaid another sketch I had lying around, plus put your 4" sketch to the template - hope you don't mind. Your recent work looks very promising, and I'd like to know more about how you put that clay model together.

I don't mind as long as you spell my screen name right! Hah. Shoot me few questions about the clay thing and I'm glad to help.

Also, I'd be careful about your package there. There's got to be room for a seat bottom, seat back and headliner!

[botsapper]

This analog has gone through many hours of wind tunnel testing already.

http://deansgarage.com/2009/%E2%80%9980s-gm-image-cars/

http://img237.exs.cx/img237/3629/olds2ck.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_suiHYNm_la...e-aerotech.jpg

[CFECO]

This is a very good looking project you have going! As far as the front-rear engine debate, it depends on many things as to the resulting handling. The design I am using will have the ICE engine mounted in front of the rear axle line, with the batteries set in two rows. One array will go across the car under the rear seat and the second will run forward between the seats, so the weight will be distributed evenly across the car and front to back. Front seat passengers can sit forward, with the foot well between the front wheels, as the original VW Bug was. On your 3d render it shows the tires very exposed, my aerodynamics expert I was working with, said it was much better to have the wheels inside the body, than outside. And the "very narrow" wheel and tire combination works well, only on "Very" light vehicles, as on the Solar Racers, unless you have some type of active camber system, which leans the wheels in while turning.

[kach22i]

Originally Posted by CFECO

Front seat passengers can sit forward, with the foot well between the front wheels, as the original VW Bug was.

The Battle of the Brit's car and motorcycle show was last Saturday. This UK Avenger kit car based on a 1969 Beetle caught my eye. Looks like mostly the pedal movement is beyond the well, with the foot-line in line with the wheel well.

I owned a 1976 Super Beetle once upon a time, it fit my 5-5" body frame just fine. The Super Beetle was bigger than the earlier plain Beetle, several inches in each dimension if I recall correctly.

2011 Battle of the Brits - Auto Show pictures by kach22i - Photobucket

Originally Posted by Sven7

I don't mind as long as you spell my screen name right! Hah. Shoot me few questions about the clay thing and I'm glad to help.

Also, I'd be careful about your package there. There's got to be room for a seat bottom, seat back and headliner!

Oops, I'll fix that screen name error, sorry about that.

The problem with freehand sketching first, then testing it against a template later is that a few fitment issues are bound to occur later on. However, drawing first, to show gesture, intent and artistic flair is so much more natural, even on grid paper. To conform to a template first is too engineering like, sucks the life out of anything. Gotta allow for a back and forth circular design development process.

[autogyro]

Here's another tease from GM: the 1970 Vauxhall SRV. Not to be confused with the SRV-1 (from the GM Lotus tieup like the Corvette Indy) of a decade later.
http://www.motorsnaps.com/v/Concept+...geViewsIndex=1

[kach22i]

1970 Vauxhall SRV - Concepts

The car featured a transversely mid mounted engine

More info and images in the link above.

More info below:
Vauxhall SRV

The SRV itself was built of wood and fibre glass and weighed approximately 2 tons.

[CFECO]

kach22i, are these drawings in #28 and #30 showing the 4.5" ground clearance with the suspension compressed? If not what is the design susp. travel. Also are you trying to make a car that appeals to the "normal" masses ( something the average person would want to buy), or is this just a design study in minimalism for the sake of MPG? I'm not being critical of what your doing, just wondering if this is going to be a possible "Mainstream" car as the Auto X-Prize competition was "supposed to be about". The car which won, was Anything but mainstream, in my opinion, with aluminum sheet metal for seats.
Also with smaller diameter front wheels than the industry standard these days 16-18's, the seating position can be farther forward. This can allow for a closer "filling of the template". The drawings are a good start, but for actually "seeing" the size needed for a body, we set some chairs out and start measuring roof heights, widths, etc, and see what fits what you are looking for. At least thats how we did it before all these new-fangled computer things! Good luck and good day!

[Sven7]

Thanks for all the prototype supercar pics guys?

Originally Posted by CFECO

This is a very good looking project you have going! As far as the front-rear engine debate, it depends on many things as to the resulting handling. The design I am using will have the ICE engine mounted in front of the rear axle line, with the batteries set in two rows. One array will go across the car under the rear seat and the second will run forward between the seats, so the weight will be distributed evenly across the car and front to back. Front seat passengers can sit forward, with the foot well between the front wheels, as the original VW Bug was. On your 3d render it shows the tires very exposed, my aerodynamics expert I was working with, said it was much better to have the wheels inside the body, than outside. And the "very narrow" wheel and tire combination works well, only on "Very" light vehicles, as on the Solar Racers, unless you have some type of active camber system, which leans the wheels in while turning.

Good points. The reason I'm doing front engine is for handling, packaging, noise, parts bin availability etc.

I have been thinking about the wheels, and yes it may have an active camber system. I've yet to do any fairings so that's why they look so exposed.

kachi, I'd start with Lotus package and design your stuff over those general dimensions, wheelbase etc.

[CFECO]

I can agree with the "parts bin" factor, much easier to use what is already designed and built. For the most part rear drive vehicles handle better and have better weight transfer than front drive layouts. Rear engine cars can have great traction due to weight distribution, as can front drive, but due to moments of inertia, mid engine is better overall. Too bad the existing "packages", due not have low profile arrangements to allow them to be installed mid-mounted, below usable spaces.

[Arragonis]

Apparently you have to drive the SRV in your underwear



This website is pretty cool for us old concept car addicts BTW.

Car Design History, Concept cars, Automotive advertising, auto designers and design studios