sgraber
|
| posted on 24/10/05 at 08:00 PM |
|
|
Anyone seen the 'Blast' before?
http://www.blastautomotive.com/index.html
Let me know what you think about this. Be sure to follow the link to see more about it. I think it is interesting that it is a California based
project.
Steve Graber
http://www.grabercars.com/
"Quickness through lightness"
|
|
|
|
|
Hellfire
|
| posted on 24/10/05 at 08:07 PM |
|
|
Different but looks a bit "boxy" to me. Lines are too square in my opinion and there aren't enough curves.
I reckon it'll shift though.
[Edited on 24-10-05 by Hellfire]
|
|
|
CommanderAce
|
| posted on 24/10/05 at 08:18 PM |
|
|
Great Scott! Someone enjoyed using their ruler!
Roads? Where we're going we don't need roads!
|
|
|
Winston Todge
|
| posted on 24/10/05 at 08:21 PM |
|
|
Does look like a great bit of design. Not entirely sure about the looks, but it's definitely different...
Also that gearbox seems to stick right out at the back. Would not want to get rear ended and have to buy neew engine... Still, most rear/mid engined
setups are like that I guess.
Chris.
|
|
|
_Aero_
|
| posted on 24/10/05 at 09:55 PM |
|
|
The Blast seems to have a hidden appeal. It's certainly a quirky style for sure. Not a keen fan myself and that engine/gearbox protrusion truly
wrecks any idea that you though it was a thing of beauty.
He needs to return to the drawing board with the rear end.
|
|
|
mangogrooveworkshop
|
| posted on 24/10/05 at 11:00 PM |
|
|
A Caddy nose with Stealth fighters angular shape with a plucked chickens tail sticking out the rear........
|
|
|
mangogrooveworkshop
|
| posted on 24/10/05 at 11:04 PM |
|
|
He maybe has found a cheap engine to stick in TADLTD `s car.....Steve what ya think
|
|
|
Rorty
|
| posted on 25/10/05 at 05:26 AM |
|
|
Quite an interesting car, but the bodywork is absolutely appalling! It has some nice elements, but generally looks like its back is broken and
it's sagging in the middle.
The body looks like a light weight skin as used on drag cars; there are no returns on any of the openings which make it look fragile and flimsy (which
in reality, it probably is).
The technical quality of the 'glass is, as he acknowledges, not the best either.
Graber's and Alan B's efforts really put it to shame.
Now there's a name for a car company - Graber & Bertwhistle.
Cheers, Rorty.
"Faster than a speeding Pullet".
PLEASE DON'T U2U ME IF YOU WANT A QUICK RESPONSE. TRY EMAILING ME INSTEAD!
|
|
|
RallyHarry
|
| posted on 25/10/05 at 06:58 AM |
|
|
Classic kitcar styling = butt ugly
There must be thousands of design students that need some lowprofile experience to cut their teeth. Why not use them ?
Guess the welder/mechanic guy is afraid of meeting a academic artsy type of guy ...
Cheers.
[Edited on 25/10/05 by RallyHarry]
|
|
|
James
|
| posted on 25/10/05 at 08:08 AM |
|
|
I like it aesthetically- it's growing on me the more I look at it.
What a shame about the rear/gearbox business though! 
Cheers,
James
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The fight is won or lost far away from witnesses, behind the lines, in the gym and out there on the road, long before I dance under those lights."
- Muhammad Ali
|
|
|
Fred W B
|
| posted on 25/10/05 at 08:40 AM |
|
|
Quote from the website:
"After 4 years of full-time work , I finally drove BLAST for the first time."
Unquote
So us part-timers don't need to feel bad about how long our projects are taking
Cheers
Fred WB
|
|
|
Tudor (Ted) Miron
|
| posted on 25/10/05 at 11:41 AM |
|
|
Now this is VERY INTERESTING!
I never knew that subaru had a 2WD transaxle! Nice to have some kind of alternative to Audi.
Does any one have more information about this box? What subaru models it was used on, gear ratios, weight/dimensions, Diff/LSD etc. etc?
Thank You
Ted
|
|
|
akumabito
|
| posted on 25/10/05 at 12:35 PM |
|
|
The front:
Needs a lot more attention to detail. It's too plain right now, even bordering on the ugly. Looks like a flat sheet of plastic with some holes
cut it. Hmm, guess what.. it IS a flat piece of plastic with holes cut in! The windshield looks too tall. I guess any lower than that and it
woldn't be functional, but it's not pretty..
The back:
I like it! It's kindof a buggy-look I guess. I can't really complain about it.. the engine/gearbox cold use some detailing to make it look
prettier, but that's about it.
The sides:
Kindof ugly, but ugly can be pretty sometimes.. (hey, buggies are hardly a thing of beauty either, and everyone loves 'm) The sides just look
weir though.. skinny at the top and all fat down below... the doors are just plain ghetto. I don't like those at all! Would be way cooler if
they could sink into the bodywork, like that onze BMW (Z1 I believe?) maybe using the mechanism from electric windows? (wow, that's actually a
pretty cool idea! Note to self: remember that one...)
|
|
|
ditchlewis
|
| posted on 25/10/05 at 12:42 PM |
|
|
Different 
not something i would want, but an easy fibre glass buck to make, very few curves to make symetrical.
ditch
|
|
|
Peteff
|
| posted on 25/10/05 at 01:13 PM |
|
|
Why not just make another box and stick it over the gearbox at the rear to finish it off. It looks like a home made car, which is what it is really.
yours, Pete
I went into the RSPCA office the other day. It was so small you could hardly swing a cat in there.
|
|
|
sgraber
|
| posted on 25/10/05 at 02:04 PM |
|
|
Some months ago we attacked the 'Attack' for lack of front suspension travel. Anyone notice here how there seems to be more or less 5cm of
front wheel travel? Surely it's sitting in a lowered position for it's beauty shots?
Aside from that, I for one can say from personal experience how difficult it is to pull off a complete car. (Hell I'm not even finished!) I have
to give massive props to the builder of this car. I really like almost all of it, the concept is sound, the interior is spartan, just as I like it.
Excellent choice in poweplant. Overall a good effort. The bodywork is probably the main area that will generate comments. It's polarizing.
Either love it or hate it type of styling. Don't think I could live with it... But that's why I'm building my own.
Steve Graber
http://www.grabercars.com/
"Quickness through lightness"
|
|
|
kb58
|
| posted on 25/10/05 at 02:14 PM |
|
|
They don't as far as I know. I believe they just don't use the driveshaft that would have gone to the rear axle. It's easy to find
out more info on the engines, just Google it.
The use of the Subaru isn't new, there's a car out of Australia that using the same setup.
quote:
Originally posted by Tudor (Ted) Miron
Now this is VERY INTERESTING!
I never knew that subaru had a 2WD transaxle! Nice to have some kind of alternative to Audi.
Does any one have more information about this box? What subaru models it was used on, gear ratios, weight/dimensions, Diff/LSD etc. etc?
Thank You
Ted
[Edited on 10/25/05 by kb58]
Mid-engine Locost - http://www.midlana.com
And the book - http://www.lulu.com/shop/kurt-bilinski/midlana/paperback/product-21330662.html
Kimini - a tube-frame, carbon shell, Honda Prelude VTEC mid-engine Mini: http://www.kimini.com
And its book -
http://www.lulu.com/shop/kurt-bilinski/kimini-how-to-design-and-build-a-mid-engine-sports-car-from-scratch/paperback/product-4858803.html
|
|
|
Tudor (Ted) Miron
|
| posted on 25/10/05 at 02:30 PM |
|
|
Thanks mate,
I'm aware of saker car that is using subaru power. How ever this is not my piece of cake - for same reason that they stoped using it in F1 in
70's - it's too wide and hampering underbody aerodynamics. Simple simulation will show you that performance gains from lower CG (by very
little actually) are much less than could be gained from decent aero.
As for gearbox - it's clearly stated on specification page that this is from 2WD subaru. Hmmm....
Thanks
Ted
[Edited on 25/10/05 by Tudor (Ted) Miron]
|
|
|
macspeedy
|
 posted on 25/10/05 at 03:58 PM |
|
|
just asked him, which subaru he got the box from, seemed like a good idea awating a response, will keep you posted
|
|
|
gutball
|
| posted on 25/10/05 at 05:06 PM |
|
|
Definately growing on me. Thought it was a bit of a fugly beast at first, quite liking it now! Be interesting to see it in the flesh. Cool doors! How
simple could doors be!?!
On the specs page he says the donor is a Subaru Wagon which I believe is one of these...
You've got to admit its an improvement on that! Although maybe not quite so practical 
|
|
|
Spyderman
|
| posted on 25/10/05 at 05:42 PM |
|
|
I like the simplicity of the design.
It wouldn't take much fabrication to make a cover for the gearbox without altering it's looks too much.
The only thing I am uncomfortable with is the change in design from side to front. There is a nice flowing line from rear to front that stops at the
windscreen. The same angle should therefore be used from screen forward. It is the front wing/fender area that is wrong.
The front clip looks like it is from a different vehicle.
Otherwise a nice car!
Terry
Spyderman
|
|
|
Sven
|
| posted on 25/10/05 at 05:55 PM |
|
|
Love the idea ... wondered about using a Subaru motor in the rear myself. I understand the transaxle for the 4WD Subaru can have the RWD driveshaft
removed, place the whole gubbins in the back and it becomes mid engined.
In terms of aesthetics, though, I have to put myself on the side of the nay's. I like the lightweight and spartan look, but the roll bars look
they'd take a chunk out of ones head and the windshield is just ugly. I don't really mind angular shapes on cars but this one just
isn't working for me.
-Steve
[Edited on 10/25/2005 by Sven]
|
|
|
RazMan
|
| posted on 25/10/05 at 09:54 PM |
|
|
I'm afraid I must give it the thumbs down too. It is certainly a brave design but a little too quirky for my taste. The windscreen looks like it
doesn't belong and neither do the headlights ..... and even the gearbox.
I'd like to see the Mk2 though
Cheers,
Raz
When thinking outside the box doesn't work any more, it's time to build a new box
|
|
|
andygtt
|
| posted on 26/10/05 at 04:49 AM |
|
|
To me it looks to me as if each aspect has been developed individually and not as a whole......
Saying that a lot of cars that look awquard and a little visually challenged IMO selll extremelly well as they are priced effectivelly and perform
well.
Andy
please redefine your limits.
|
|
|
RallyHarry
|
| posted on 26/10/05 at 10:19 AM |
|
|
windscreen:
He did write that he didn't want to be buffed around by the wind at high speeds ... but using a windscreen from a SUV
Will act like a mousetrap if roll over, reaching all the way back to the rollbar.
Subaru engine:
Yes, there are 2wd subarus, mostly older ones ...
Cheers
|
|
|
