So what dose everyone think ? Could be my next project ?
For more info check out http://www.mevltd.co.uk/atomicgallery.html
MEV has anounced a new offering the 'Atomic' a single seat, Motorcycle powered, super light (targeted 450 BHP/ton)
So what dose everyone think ? Could be my next project ?
For more info check out http://www.mevltd.co.uk/atomicgallery.html
wow! thats rather nice! would like to have a go in one
I think its somehow ugly but damn cool - i want one (i think!!!) 
I like it a lot - the bare simplicity of it and selfishness of single seat.
What's the specs?
Think thats going on my xmas list.
I really like MEV stuff, it's innovative and a damn good price for what it is. If I was looking to buy a kit it would be one of theirs, probably
the Sonic
John
Not keen on a front mounted fuel tank
Love the look and ethos behind it! Would be interested in making one for sure - I do have some concern that the passenger compartment is the
derforming structure if struck from behind as you can see!
quote:That'll be why the fuel tank is in the front then. It's so you protect it in a rear end shunt.
Originally posted by cloudy
Love the look and ethos behind it! Would be interested in making one for sure - I do have some concern that the passenger compartment is the derforming structure if struck from behind as you can see!
I like that a lot 
I dont like the exhaust tho'
I'm not sure that the roll hoop would satisfy scrutineers if you wanted to compete in it!
If the seat is offset to one side, why is the roll hoop central?
I like the principle and applaud them for giving it ago but ....
The rear roll hoop is just for show & that chassis doesn't look to my very untrained eye as being very strong.
It looks like a F750 racer chassis...
That mev is ugly as sin, that f750racer on the other hand......nice!
I think the atom has got it right for the minimalist bodywork but still good looking - ditto the warner r4/motoleira, that mev though, not to my
taste.....
450bhp per tonnes sounds like a lively beast, I'd end up killing myself too quickly!
quote:
that f750racer on the other hand......nice
That mev looks horrible, I wonder if it's based off a lego model.
The F750 jobber on the other hand. WANT.
Glad i wasn't the only that wasn't to keen on the mevs looks!
I like the MEV. I think I'd ask them to redesign the roll bar though. A side impact bar on the drivers side, a petty strut from the engine side
down to near the engine and offset it to behind the drivers seat.
Wonder how much the kits will be?
Mike
I applaud a company trying something different especially now during this uncertain ecconomic climate but the looks just don't float my boat.
I'd much prefer James's Warner design
Had another look at it over dinner and it's strangely starting to grow on me.
Wonder what the kit price is?
While I confess to not being a structural engineer. I would like to remind everyone that the world renowned road going ‘Aerial Atom’ has a similar
centre roll hoop and it has no back stays at all! and is generally accepted as the benchmark that all other exo skeleton cars are judged by.
As a MEV Sonic 7 builder and owner I am somewhat bias towards MEV products. What I can advise from personal experience is that MEV are extremely
fastidious with regard to there design and development process, as it was last year when visiting there factory in Mansfield that I had the
opportunity to thumb through of a detailed 15 page Structural Engineering Analysis Report by a Reputable Structural Engineer of the Sonics rear
suspension that when a long way to convincing me to part with my hard earned money and embark on a Sonic 7 build. Not that many Kit car manufactures
are prepared to fork out there profits on what some people would consider luxuries. (I view as necessities, if its my life on the line)
As for the looks that is very much a personal choice, but I certainly would be interested in a test drive, as I feel this may be a true road going
track day tool of the future.
spoke to mev this morning and they are saying the somprehensive kit will cost 4500 and if ordered now would be ready for august if all goes to plan
with the final developement.
time to sell mine and move on i think
quote:
Originally posted by Sonic7
...a detailed 15 page Structural Engineering Analysis Report by a Reputable Structural Engineer.
<devils advocate> I wonder if it's the same reputable structural engineer that signed off the rocket harness mounts?
[Edited on 1/4/09 by cloudy]
I do not divulge info re my consulting engineers. That would be very useful to my competitors. Around 40 Rockets have passed SVA though so dont worry
I think my guys know what they are doing. They design roller coaters and fair ground rides too. The documents relating to my products have phrasing
like "plastic redistribution of moments".
The other approach is to look at it, use logic and add a bit in if your not sure if its strong enough. Add weight though. Make it too stiff, watch the
welds crack after it's been in service for a while and then get an expert in. How many manufacturers produce 60 odd pages of calcs to show
potential customers? No I,m not posting them on here! Lots of builders turn in to experts when they have had a little experience and no formal
training and small experience. Problem is if you build yourself a one off it can cost more than the car costs to have it designed by pro's.
Maybe a problem but it does mean cars can be heavier than they need to be. Use a cad system such as Robot and it will only produce info based on your
input. That can mean garbage in garbage out.
The Rocket forinstance has seat belt mounts made from 6x50mm plate welded to a 50x3 CDS tube. Not exactly inadequate. Your internal organs cannot
stand anywhere near the loads that the Rocket seat belt mounts can!
Regards Stiggy
An average human in a 30mph crash with a relatively immobile object such as a tree or wall produces about 2.4 tons of force on the seatbelt mounts.
Perhaps an oversimplification but divide that by 2 for a 4 point harness with the top mounts together - 1.2 tons
If that 6x50mm plate is just welded to one side of the tube then I can guarantee that force will arc it down to crush the tube and then tear off
around the HAZ. SVA requires the seat mounts to go right through the tube and weld both sides in this situation, so if this is the case it has a
fighting chance however the undercut weld at the front side suggests otherwise...
James
[Edited on 1/4/09 by cloudy]
The SVA inspectors have all passed the top seat belt mounts on many occasions. This just goes to prove that experts and self acclaimed experts opinions differ. No one who has commented on this point has examined the vehicle, an expert would not voice an opinion without carrying out a full investigation.
quote:
Originally posted by stig mills
The SVA inspectors have all passed the top seat belt mounts on many occasions. This just goes to prove that experts and self acclaimed experts opinions differ. No one who has commented on this point has examined the vehicle, an expert would not voice an opinion without carrying out a full investigation.
I sense more than a hint of annoyance in your tone, I've never proclaimed myself as an expert! I think your products are great and of a very
similar mindset to my project - I notice your chassis has had a previous incarnation on your website - presumably this arrangment was changed as a
result of the investigation?
As a mev customer ill just quickly add my 2 pence to this fairly heated thread...
when i read some of the threads on here i start to panic about my build, the last one to cause panic was a thread about pop rivets and if or not they
come loose over time (which means my floor will fall off )
when i read this thread i started to panic again but then a asked my self this question...
would stuart at MEV design and sell a car with seat belt mounts that could possably fail in a crash and kill the driver (i.e me), my girl friend or
any of the other 50 odd rocket owners out there????
i think the answer is obvious isn't it!
The intention was not to cause panic, more to highlight something that just visibly looks to be insufficient (especially on the chassis
pictures on the website)
As potential customers are noticing, it might be worth MEV posting up the test results to put everyones mind at rest?
I understand what your saying mate, but if stuart say's its safe then thats good enough for me!
I don't think any kit car company would sell a car that is sub standard in the way of safety.
just like you, i would be happy to weld my own chassis and drive a car that i had welded but i wouldn't feel happy with welding a chassis for
someone else just incase something happened or i hadn't done it right, im quite sure kit car companys like MEV go to great lenths to make sure
all aspects of there car's are safe before they sell to customers.
Just think it would be more beneficial to us (and MEV!) to quote an estimated positional deflection against a factor of G and a maximum loading rather
than:
"The documents relating to my products have phrasing like "plastic redistribution of moments" Which frankly tells us nothing!
quote:
Originally posted by pocket rocket
I don't think any kit car company would sell a car that is sub standard in the way of safety.
quote:
Originally posted by Paul TigerB6
Best not mention the particular Robin Hood model that some SVA testers were refusing to test due to their dodgy design a few years back!!
What about the dutton amphicar that was according to a judge last year - a death trap. Seem to recall their was a jail sentence being threatened for
that one.
As I said before - I'm no expert and have learnt most of what little i know via reading on here.
Would a kit car manufacturer knowingly do something that put a customer at risk - not likely unless they where morally bankrupt. MEV don't sound
like that at all - the fact they've gone to the effort to pay someone to analyse the chassis is a very positive act.
At the same time - mounting your harness via a lump of steel that is going to try and twist / lever its mounting in an accident .... with no
engineering experience, doesn't seem right to me.
I don't think people are asking for the complete analysis (ok, i'm sure we'd all love the complete analysis as we're all a bunch
of car geeks) but something covering the seat belt mount would be welcomed by the engineers and non engineers alike.
As for the comment about floors and rivets - loads of people have the floor rivet on, probably (complete guess) 70% of people on here. They do fret
and over time it is a possibility the floor will drop out, just like with a welded floor where there is the risk of water getting in and rotting the
floor out. You make your choice and you take your chances lots of years time.
That seat belt mount looks OK to me. I think all this stuff needs to have a context, and the context here is a small lightweight car. The light weight
is particularly important.
I assume that the seat belt mount in question has been designed in that way because the mounting point needs to be where it is, and the bar it is
attached to needs to be where it is, and if the bar was moved to make the mount 'look better' that would seroiusly compromise the overall
design and add weight to the structure.
What we need to know is whether or not the solution that MEV have adopted is adequate. It certainly appears so to me, and I'm sure that, were I
about to purchase one, and went to the factory, that Stuart would show me the relevant part of the report were I really concerned about it.
Another point worth considering is that, were the worst to happen and I be in the car during a serious collision, whatever force went into deforming
the seat belt mount would be force that would not be going into me
John
Mr Henderson, I'm confused. Are you saying you should think about the aesthetics & weight over safety?
In an accident the forces transfered to that mounting will be at some sort of angle to the centre line of the car. That plate will bend and the welds
will probably tear
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Dave
Mr Henderson, I'm confused. Are you saying you should think about the aesthetics & weight over safety?
In an accident the forces transfered to that mounting will be at some sort of angle to the centre line of the car. That plate will bend and the welds will probably tear
I pulled out some calcs I had done for a roll bar. I used a 33mm CDS tube as a horizontal member with 4 top harness mounts on it. My engineers report
showed it as being inadequate and so I changed the design b4 selling any. I have attached a small part of that report as proof that we do it properly
and that none of you should have any concerns. I pay £1000's for this kind of report and do not wish to assist competitors with it by posting it.
I do not take the "lets weld another bit in to make it look stronger approach" That just adds weight.
Interestingly if you look at the Haynes Roadster it uses a 33mm top roll bar tube that has 4 harness mounts on it. Exactly the same as the one I dont
make.
[Edited on 2/4/09 by stig mills]
[img]<a href="http://s666.photobucket.com/albums/vv25/stiggymills/?action=view¤t=img040.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i666.photobucket.com/albums/vv25/stiggymills/img040.jpg" border="0" alt="bar calcs"></a>[/img]
Those calcs are interesting. That section relates to the moment applied to the diagonal rollbar brace and shows that max force is approximately equal
to a 100Kg man decelerating at 7g.
I hope that further down there are calcs to show that the plate welded to the diagonal is adequate enough. I still think this will be a plastic
hinge
John, my 'probably' is based on results from Ansys. I trust Ansys rather than Stuart
[Edited on 2/4/09 by Mad Dave]
Stewart this is not coming across well - I suspect most will now think you are avoiding the issue, posting a report of a design you haven't used
is completely pointless.
Why not just post the small section of report that states the calcs for the actual setup? The statement "do not wish to assist competitors with
it by posting it" is frankly bull, and we both know it.
I posted the calcs ref a bar I dont use as they are of no use to me. Happy for anyone to see those. They are not for a current MEV chassis and do not
relate to a diagonal tube. The calcs show the Haynes Roadster tube as inadequate as a case in point that everyone does not get it right.
Over 40 succesful SVA tests and documentary evidence of structural integrity gives me complete confidence in my products. That said if a potential
customer wanted me to supply a car with alterations to say a single hoop or 4 point mounts or a different engine option then I would always look at
it.
One off bespoke cars are always considered. We do all our own pattern making, GRP laminating and most of the fabrication. We also guarantee structural
integrity and produce documentary evidence for customers who request it.
Thank you for the exposure. Stiggy
Not the stance I would have taken, but that's your call to make, my opinion of MEV has definitely changed somewhat
quote:
Originally posted by cloudy
my opinion of MEV has definitely changed somewhat
quote:
Originally posted by mr henderson
quote:
Originally posted by cloudy
my opinion of MEV has definitely changed somewhat
Mine hasn't. I'd buy one tomorrow given the appropriate amount of dosh (and a quick check to make sure I could get in it)
John
quote:
Originally posted by Paul TigerB6
I thought from one of your previous threads you thought things "had gone wrong" now that kit cars arent at a really low price??
taking this sideways a little..... I'll be fitting a roll bar soon and was going to do something similar to the haynes roaster. My plan was to
use 2.5 inch RHS of a random thickness and weld on the harness mounts at the rear of the box section (like on the floor).
Thoughts on this approach / thickness of steel to use? I was guestimating 2mm should be fine so would probably go for 2 to 2.5mm. The roll bar will be
2.5" and 3mm (or it may be 3" and 2.5mm I can never remember).
I started this thread on the ‘Atomic’ a new car from MEV and it ends up being a somewhat heated discussion on the Structural integrity of the Rockets
top seat belt mounts.
I do wonder ‘cloudy’ if there is some ulterior motive, to your hostility towards MEV. Could it be a degree of jealousy of Stiggy’s chassis design
ability ? or are you after Stiggy’s source in order to check out your own chassis design ? Or is it that you just enjoy a good old fashioned
confrontation. Who knows and I for one really don’t care.
If its Stiggy’s wish to keep the information confidential, then I will respect his wishes. Personally I am not worried in the slightest at driving one
of his designs, as a customer I have seen and thumbed through my cars ‘the Sonic 7’ roll bar structural integrity report. No I am not a qualified
structural/stress engineer and neither do I feeling confident enough to challenge the engineers results, but I do hold a general engineering degree
gained in the aeronautical industry and like to think, that I would have picked up any bad vibrations during the cars selection, purchase and current
build to know if I was being sold a pup.
I for one have faith in Stiggy’s design.
Anyway do we like the ’Atomic’ ? or are we going to continue to bitch about the Rockets top seatbelt mounts. X
Hostility? I've stated at several times I love the products! Hell if I didn't build my own, the rocket would be my weapon of choice,
I've even passed business their way with people looking for a similar car to R4.
I was only pointing out something that looked wrong to me! (and it turns out I wasn't the only one!) We're all on this forum to improve,
and I was hoping for a "yeah we realise it doesn't look right, but here's the report that shows otherwise"
Next time I shant bother.
quote:
Originally posted by cloudy
I was only pointing out something that looked wrong to me! (and it turns out I wasn't the only one!)
Please dont take the hump chaps. We all have fun with our cars. I love designing them and looking after my customers. I also enjoy the normal spirit
of helpfulness on the many forums.
For the record the mount in question has a fully welded seam all the way around. Not just one side as assumed below. The total length of the welds per
mount are actually 550mm.
I continue to develop new products for the kit car scene. I do it because I enjoy it. I have my work checked by professionals. Frankly the money is
c..p
but thats partly because I spend it on secret engineers! And of course because I continue to reinvest in product development at a phenomenal rate.
Like I said previously if a customer would like mods to our standard products then we always try to accommodate them.
The summer is just around the corner, enjoy this wonderful varied car game.
quote:
Originally posted by cloudy
An average human in a 30mph crash with a relatively immobile object such as a tree or wall produces about 2.4 tons of force on the seatbelt mounts.
Perhaps an oversimplification but divide that by 2 for a 4 point harness with the top mounts together - 1.2 tons
If that 6x50mm plate is just welded to one side of the tube then I can guarantee that force will arc it down to crush the tube and then tear off around the HAZ. SVA requires the seat mounts to go right through the tube and weld both sides in this situation, so if this is the case it has a fighting chance however the undercut weld at the front side suggests otherwise...
James
[Edited on 1/4/09 by cloudy]
Hear Hear, lets put this to bed and get on with the DVLA bashing
quote:
Originally posted by cloudy
Hear Hear, lets put this to bed and get on with the DVLA bashing
quote:
Originally posted by Sonic7
I do wonder ‘cloudy’ if there is some ulterior motive, to your hostility towards MEV. Could it be a degree of jealousy of Stiggy’s chassis design ability ? or are you after Stiggy’s source in order to check out your own chassis design ? Or is it that you just enjoy a good old fashioned confrontation. Who knows and I for one really don’t care.
Thanx for your comments chaps.
If we look at tin top belt mounts by removing the plastic caps then you start to wonder how the tin can stand the required 25 kN
If you take a 33mm tube with a 3mm wall and weld it across the car then bolt 4 top harnesses to it then the calcs I posted earlier in this thread show
it to be inadequte. "Maximum feasible anchorage load = 6.79kN" BUT it looks fine and thousands of kits are made like this. Mills Extreme
Vehicles Ltd do not use this system. Ours are calculated to withstand the maximum force even if the driver may not.
Clearly however on investigation that system does not comply with IVA regulations or to directive 76/115 EEC.
The conclusion I have come to is the same as in 1976 when my company was Milsteam Ltd. I designed an industial vauum table that was very futuristic
with its single pedastool leg. It didnt sell because it didnt look strong enough so I put 4 legs on it, put the price up and sold 1000's. Paul
Smith had 1, he only had the Nottingham shop then.
So in order to gain more customer confidence I could have things checked by consulting engineers then add a few extra tubes.
They of course have all the facts and figures in front of them and carry out a full structural assessment b4 making a judement but a potential
customer may just say
"it dont look strong enough to me pal" and walk.
My advise to anyone thinking of buying a kit is to ask the manufacturer to show that he has carried out structural calcs. Dont reley on your own
judgement or anyone else's opinion unless they are qualified and have all the facts and figures b4 them.
Thanx again for everyones input, I will now decide where to put the extra bits.
Deposits are now being taken. The full kit price inc almost everything is £4500.
We will start production in Aug after our prototype has been fully developed and tested.
quote:
from cheapracer
Now for my opinion -
Consider the Atom-ic, it's a deadly weapon and I mean it in a bad way, the rear protection is zero, nil, zilch. Imagine on the road someone running into the back of you (and I mean that literally) or on a track day spinning backwards into the fence/tyre wall - you would be assured of being crippled for life if you survived. If this really happened it would reflect badly on our whole scene.
Now for pocket rockets opinion -
the way i see its... its not a car with poor rear end protection... ist a motor bike that you can't fall off!!!!!
also by the look of it an 80kg driver on one side of the car will balance the bike engine that is on the other side.
For the record if i had finished the rocket by now as planned i would have placed an order for the new atomic last monday when i saw the pictures
[Edited on 6/4/09 by pocket rocket]
cheapracer - 11/4/09 at 03:59 PMquote:
Originally posted by pocket rocket
Now for pocket rockets opinion -
the way i see its... its not a car with poor rear end protection... its a motor bike that you can't fall off!!!!!
also by the look of it an 80kg driver on one side of the car will balance the bike engine that is on the other side.
[Edited on 6/4/09 by pocket rocket]
I suggest you hang around motorcycle shops on Saturday mornings and see the amount who come in for a chat on crutches and wearing slings ;-) (thats the ones who aren't laid up or worse of course).
It's a fun setup but don't think for a second that hanging all that weight out to the sides, balanced or not, isn't a drawback compared to keeping it all along the centerline.
By the way, I like MEV vehicles (and can assure you I promote the Sonic often) except for this one and IMO they should endeavour to make a single seater Sonic, what a stunner that would be as well as a great trackday car base.
Anyway, good luck to them.
pocket rocket - 11/4/09 at 04:55 PMa single seat sonic 7 would look ace
iv seen the injurys from bikes, 3 of my mates ride, all have had off's in the last 12 months, one races for susuki and had a high side at mallory park end of last season... broke his arm and collar bone... he is not racing this year!
I see what your saying about a shunt from behind but i would still have one over a bike for some sunday afternoon fun (mostly because i don't have my bike licence
GRRR - 14/4/09 at 01:03 PMSaw it at Detling yesterday and I think the Atomic looks fantastic; imagine if someone gave you some metal, a bike engine and a bucket seat and said 'build something cool' (for a sensible budgt), the Atomic is exactly what I'd want to end up with. I really want one!!
cheapracer - 15/4/09 at 12:05 PMquote:
Originally posted by GRRR
Saw it at Detling yesterday and I think the Atomic looks fantastic; imagine if someone gave you some metal, a bike engine and a bucket seat and said 'build something cool' (for a sensible budgt), the Atomic is exactly what I'd want to end up with. I really want one!!
C'mon Stig, your not fooling us
(Do I have to explain thats humour?)
GRRR - 15/4/09 at 08:31 PMquote:
Originally posted by cheapracer
C'mon Stig, your not fooling us
(Do I have to explain thats humour?)
haha it does look that way doesn't it! but no I'm not on the payroll... although my gf works in PR if MEV fancy donating an Atomic for marketing purposes :-)
Sonic7 - 9/5/09 at 11:55 AMNew MEV Atomic Video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhdfiDZj9jU
cloudy - 9/5/09 at 12:06 PMLooks a lot of fun
Not to be a killjoy, but those look like public roads in some parts of the video, Donuting and slides on showplates shouldn't be posted on youtube! Especially as it's manufacturer linked..
James
goodguydrew - 25/5/09 at 08:20 PMWow. If I was starting over, that's exacly what I would build. Excellent. Where can I get plans?
eddie99 - 5/6/09 at 05:19 PMWhat i dont understand is, if you think there is a potential issue/problem, instead of making a fuss, do something about it. Contact MEV directly, ring them or visit them, im sure directly they will talk to you and show you the stats....
It is the worst possible thing, to go on a forum and start complaining and heating a thread.
About the car, i think its excellent and love it and would have one if i had the money... I would also feel perfectly safe with anything MEV have designed.
Ed
cheapracer - 7/6/09 at 10:51 AMquote:
Originally posted by eddie99
What i dont understand is, if you think there is a potential issue/problem, instead of making a fuss, do something about it. Contact MEV directly, ring them or visit them, im sure directly they will talk to you and show you the stats....
It is the worst possible thing, to go on a forum and start complaining and heating a thread.
About the car, i think its excellent and love it and would have one if i had the money... I would also feel perfectly safe with anything MEV have designed.
Ed
This is a forum Buddy, a place for discussion and debate.
Goods are displayed, comments are given both positive and negative, whats hard to understand?
I don't care who designed it, MEV or Ferrari, I don't have to be shown a piece of paper written by a rocket scientist to know that one tube and a piece of thin fibreglass between my back and other cars, guardrails, trees etc. isnt good enough for me and I'm quite entitled to express my opinion in a public arena. If you feel that setup is ok for you great - you have the right to express that sentiment as well.
You will find here and other forums that I highly support and recommend the Sonic showing it has nothing to do with the brand, just the model.