What car would you CREATE?

[sidecar]

Originally Posted by freebeard

I like the fender. I was trying for that with my Very Light Volkswagen (I'll spare you the drawing).

I would just add a [filleted] canard moustache to the inside of the lower front edge.

That's an interesting periscope/ventilator setup on the bubble top. Not sure about the door cut-line.

Integrated roll bar is a plus, but I forget how you enter, I seem to think it was fighter aircraft style. The model was displayed with the canopy off too giving a good look at the interior. It was quite large, highly detailed and well finished

The canopy looks like a 1 piece affair with no other opening parts, so vents would only work on the move. That wont go well without aircon in warmer climes. It also makes egress problematic if you roll it.

[JRMichler]

I would build a pickup truck about the size of an extended cab Ford Ranger. Bench seat in front, sideways seating in the back. The back seats should be reasonably comfortable for two adults to sit in for a couple of hours.

Engine would be the latest and greatest four cylinder gas engine with 120 to 150 hp. Two wheel drive. Six speed manual transmission with gear ratios similar to the new Chevrolet Colorado. Lots of attention to low friction in the driveline and wheel bearings.

Ground clearance at least seven inches. Front like the Airflow Bullet Truck. Rear view cameras instead of outside rear view mirrors. Belly pan, possibly integrated into some form of unit body frame/belly pan design. Enough room in the rear wheel wells to use tire chains. Turning circle less than 36 feet. Trailer hitch with 2" receiver.

All LED lights. Kill switch. Large AGM battery. Alternator disable switch. Integrated solar panels to assist in topping off the battery. The AC would NOT be wired to the defroster. Electric PS with capability to disable. Electric power brakes, or better yet, brakes that do not need power assist.

Aero topper with hinged lid similar to mine, except better. Car top carrier to fit the cab. Topper lid strong enough to support a car top carrier.

I would expect to average (close to) 50 MPG in summer with a rig like that.

[freebeard]

Would this be a Ranger with an engine swap and snowplow airdam, or a vacuum-bagged carbon fiber monocoque?

[JRMichler]

Vacuum bagged if course. Got to get that swoopy styling.

And one more: The air dam area must be designed to bust through snowdrifts and plow piles.

[oldtamiyaphile]

Seriously thinking of selling my Jeep and building a long arm Miata:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8c8xlJZalu4

Should roughly double my MPG and be more fun.

[19bonestock88]

Originally Posted by JRMichler

I would build a pickup truck about the size of an extended cab Ford Ranger. Bench seat in front, sideways seating in the back. The back seats should be reasonably comfortable for two adults to sit in for a couple of hours.

Engine would be the latest and greatest four cylinder gas engine with 120 to 150 hp. Two wheel drive. Six speed manual transmission with gear ratios similar to the new Chevrolet Colorado. Lots of attention to low friction in the driveline and wheel bearings.

Ground clearance at least seven inches. Front like the Airflow Bullet Truck. Rear view cameras instead of outside rear view mirrors. Belly pan, possibly integrated into some form of unit body frame/belly pan design. Enough room in the rear wheel wells to use tire chains. Turning circle less than 36 feet. Trailer hitch with 2" receiver.

All LED lights. Kill switch. Large AGM battery. Alternator disable switch. Integrated solar panels to assist in topping off the battery. The AC would NOT be wired to the defroster. Electric PS with capability to disable. Electric power brakes, or better yet, brakes that do not need power assist.

Aero topper with hinged lid similar to mine, except better. Car top carrier to fit the cab. Topper lid strong enough to support a car top carrier.

I would expect to average (close to) 50 MPG in summer with a rig like that.

My plan to build a truck was to start with an old Ranger(likely a 93) and build a lightweight alloy frame and front suspension, swap to an independent rear (Ford 8.8" center section)... Engine would be a 2.4L ecotec (the LE5), tuned for lean burn at cruise, trans would be from the Colorado, and the differential would have a limited slip and 3.08 gears... With body panels replaced with hand-made carbon fiber ones, weight would be around 2500#, and with around 180bhp acceleration would be sprightly, and with aero as clean as possible (aero cap, belly pan, grille blocking, etc) 35-40mpg should be possible under the right conditions...

[freebeard]

Other Rangers

[sidecar]

my flying car doesnt seem so off the wall now eh ...

[freebeard]

I'd settle for an amphibian:



Electrically insulative basalt fiber hull with electric AWD and hydrojets.

[sidecar]

Originally Posted by freebeard

I'd settle for an amphibian:

Electrically insulative basalt fiber hull with electric AWD and hydrojets.

When you get down to it its actually a very difficult thing to do, so while they seem a simple solution, for other than the Type 166 production they are rare. Yes you do need AWD and also a takeoff for a prop, because as the Germans discovered depending on wheels as paddles doesnt cut it.

So they built quite a complex two ended transmission necessary for 4WD, and had another problem accommodating the folding prop drive, probably off the end of the engine.

In that way it shares the same power issues as car/airplane, as it also needs the additional power takeoff. The thing that always troubled me though was that all the suspension and shaft seals, as all that stuff is underwater. Where the flying car is just the adaption of a body that can transform into a workable wing, but has half the transmission issues.

Even if you made it water tight for the body, which seems broadly achievable, I dont know about all the moving sliding shafts and axles, brake parts etc. In the end they are going to be a maintenance nightmare.

Beginning with a 166 layout using electrics as you describe, or hydraulics (I think I'd prefer the latter) are probably the best ways to go though.