Mave
|
| posted on 28/5/03 at 09:58 AM |
|
|
Why so few mid-engined self-builds?
I was wondering why there are so few people making mid-engined cars. Especially considering the huge amount of front-engined FWD donors out there.
What would be the reason? The lack of available plans? Or the amount of bodywork? (unless you're looking for something like the original OX7,
you're looking at the kind of work Alan has been working on for the last year?!?!)
I'm still in the planning/thinking/designing stage, with an IRS design "Seven" already in 3D in my computer. But I would also be
interested in making a slightly more modern car, by taking the mid-engined route.
Would the bodywork of the AS One be easy to make (http://www.automotivesolutions.de/), using flat GRP sandwich panels? There are only single
curvatures in the body, so maybe it is not needed to go through al the pattern/mold-making.
Or am I talking complete nonsense?
|
|
|
|
|
sgraber
|
| posted on 28/5/03 at 01:32 PM |
|
|
I'd say wihout a doubt that it's the bodywork that puts off most people.
Alan's well documented effort would be enough to put-off most normal people with 'semi-normal lives'.  No disrespect to Alan, he
is my hero and my mentor.
I think that most GRP fabricators would say that the flats are the most difficult areas to get right... Alan?
The cars themselves are probably easier to fabricate, but except for the almost unfindable "Terrapin" there is no real "book"
so you're on your own there too.
Steve G
------------
HOWEVER - I think it's a great idea!!! Please go for it!
[Edited on 5/28/03 by sgraber]
Steve Graber
http://www.grabercars.com/
"Quickness through lightness"
|
|
|
Schrodinger
|
| posted on 28/5/03 at 07:08 PM |
|
|
I have been toying with the idea of building a mid engined car for a while having built a Tiger Cat. ATM I am in the thinking stage with a couple of
ideas around using a YKC Pace or a MOJO chassis as a starting point and then making my own body to fit
Any thoughts?
Keith
|
|
|
kb58
|
| posted on 28/5/03 at 11:55 PM |
|
|
I think it would be much faster to start with an *existing* body and work from there rather then the other way around. I agree with ^, there's
probably the same amount of time if not more spend on the bodywork...
|
|
|
Rorty
|
| posted on 25/6/03 at 06:22 AM |
|
|
Like most people on this list, I have a number of mid-engined cars in my mind, all with novel/swoopy bodywork. Realistically though, KB58 is spot on.
Unless you have a load of time on your hands, or, like Alan, you plan to market the final product, you'd be far better off stuffing all your
mid-engined gear into an existing car, as kb58 suggests.
I picked the ubiquitous Beetle as a victim on 5 occasions, simply because the body falls off after a handful of small bolts are removed.
I've also midded (new word?) a Peugeot 205 and a Honda Civic. Hatchbacks make the best middies.
The surgery becomes routine after a while. I spend the times halted at traffic lights to eye up the distance from the B post to the rear wheel centre
of the cars along side me as potential middy converts.
I also look at the rear window sections of pickups/utes as potential bulkheads/firewalls in midded conversions.
The trick is to strip the rear interior of the chosen car, and tack weld a double cross brace into the car, just in front of the B post. That way,
when you start cutting out the rear floor etc, the shell won't twist.
Once the cut out is finished, the new rear subframe is in, and the bulkhead tacked in, the cross braces can be removed.
Those are the best days; turning mundane shoppers into respectable cars.
Cheers, Rorty.
"Faster than a speeding Pullet".
PLEASE DON'T U2U ME IF YOU WANT A QUICK RESPONSE. TRY EMAILING ME INSTEAD!
|
|
|
kb58
|
| posted on 28/6/03 at 04:35 AM |
|
|
Maybe a compromise for those who really want to do it all themselves, and save a Ton of work and time, is to use a body shell from an existing kit
car. Use that "envelope" and design in whatever they desire inside.
[Edited on 28/6/03 by kb58]
|
|
|
chrisg
|
| posted on 28/6/03 at 08:48 PM |
|
|
Well lads,
when you've worked it out I'll have something like this:-
Cheers
Chris
Note to all: I really don't know when to leave well alone. I tried to get clever with the mods, then when they gave me a lifeline to see the
error of my ways, I tried to incite more trouble via u2u. So now I'm banned, never to return again. They should have done it years ago!
|
|
|
kb58
|
| posted on 1/7/03 at 02:55 AM |
|
|
Exactly. Buy the above shell from the maker, then "fill it" with whatever you want. Like I said, it saves a ton of time since the body
is already done. As long as the wheels line up with the wheel wells, and you have provisions for body mounts, it puts you (seriously) a good year
ahead in the project.
|
|
|
Alez
|
 posted on 26/11/03 at 09:08 PM |
|
|
Why??
Greetings!
May I ask a very very newbie question?
Steve said:
> I'd say wihout a doubt that it's the bodywork that puts off most people
My question is: Why does it need to be any more complicated than a Locost?? I'm sure there's a good reason why you cannot follow the same
cheap panel route but I'd like to know it..
Many thanks.
Alex
|
|
|
Alan B
|
| posted on 26/11/03 at 09:20 PM |
|
|
Alex (or Alez?),
Basically it doesn't have to be complicated...It's just about getting some decent looks with minimum work...that's the hard
part....
I find the "minimum body/exo skeleton"* type cars appealing....I think some kind of sports car/buggy type car will be my next
project.......whenever that might be..
*Ariel Atom, BMW concept thingy..etc.
[Edited on 26/11/03 by Alan B]
|
|
|
MikeR
|
| posted on 27/11/03 at 12:16 AM |
|
|
for simple (ish) body work look at the early lotus (loti?) the 23 springs to mind. Not too complicated.
Oh the terrapin books been reprinted - how do i know, i've got one 
|
|
|
Alan B
|
| posted on 27/11/03 at 12:38 AM |
|
|
Mike, am I thinking of the right Lotus?...I thought the 23 had really curvy bodywork...unless I'm thing of something else....maybe the 11?
|
|
|
MikeR
|
| posted on 27/11/03 at 08:39 AM |
|
|
Well its not really curvey compared to your car (the benchmark ). Its got curves around the wheel arches and big flat bits inbetween.
|
|
|
Alez
|
| posted on 27/11/03 at 09:18 AM |
|
|
Hi chaps,
Thanks for your posts. Alan you are right, I kind of keep thinking about a low cost, bike engined version of the Ariel Atom.
Oh, Alez is the nick, Alex is the name, well actually the name is Alejandro (Spanish) but even my family calls me Alex. So just call me anything, eh,
no jokes!
Yesterday I sent a U2U to Steve G to point him to the thread so he could share his thoughts. He just replied to my U2U, it's a very nice and
clarifying explanation, so I'm now copying it here.
Cheers,
Alex
___________________________
Hi Alez,
Why are there so few mid-engine builds? You must know the answer lies in the aesthetic, not the technical.
A chassis design is a technical excercise. You can quantify it's performance and analyze it with tools and evaluate it's performance a
million different ways. No one critiques it on it's aesthetic values. At the end of the day, it's all in the numbers. How does it perform.
Unfortunately, beauty is judged by the cover. No one wants to drive an ugly car, right?. When you drive a car down the street, no one can see the
technology underneath the skin. They decide if your car is worthy to desire by how it looks. It is very subjective.
The (Lotus 7) is a very rare item. A bare chassis with a few well placed panels that looks so right. It's so simple to build too. And that makes
it very popular for the self-builder.
You can't easily make a mid-engine 7 clone because the ass end is simply too large to be aesthetically pleasing. So you end up having to design
an entire car from scratch. That's why many people who want middy convert an existing hatchback into a mid-engine car.
It's easy to design an good performing mid-engine chassis, BUT It is so hard to design an attractive, original design, mid-engine car! Most
people won't even try. They look so, "home-built"... You know what I mean?
IMHO - You would not have good results simply applying panels onto a mid-engine chassis. The form factor simply begs for bodywork.
If you can design a simple body for a middy, you may become the next Colin Chapman!
Steve G
|
|
|
ned
|
| posted on 27/11/03 at 11:23 AM |
|
|
If I do build a middie, which i would like to , just no time/space/money and the locost needs to be finished first, I'd get a shell from
somewhere else (a mate of mine owns some lola t86/90 sports 2000 moulds ) which I'd then build something under..
Ned.
beware, I've got yellow skin
|
|
|
TheGecko
|
| posted on 27/11/03 at 01:46 PM |
|
|
Alex,
I'm building a mid-engined car which is intended to be very much in the same spirit as the Locost. It has a quite similar shape, with the
cockpit area moved forward about 500-600mm and the tail enlarged somewhat. Here's a pic of my rough model and the beginnings of a chassis
model.
The intent is that the bodywork could almost all be made in the same way as a Locost; ali panelled sides, f'glass nose cone, front cycle guards
and rears. Biggest outstanding question is how to panel the rear. I still hold hope that I can make a reasonable looking tail with wrapped ali in a
greatly extended version of a "book" Locost tail panel. Time will tell If I can't, then f'glass it will be.
Powerplant is basic Toyota Corolla 1600 four (JDM 20-valve motor though) with standard 5-speed transverse box. Suspension is Chevette (Gemini in
Australia) at the front (same 4x100 PCD as Corolla and many other small FWD cars) and Corolla struts at rear with custom lower arms and ant-steer
links - basically the same rear layout as a Mk1 MR2.
I think this is the future of the Locost-type car - based on common FWD running gear and with simple to make bodywork. The Sylva Mojo and Car Craft
Cyclone are two production examples of this form. However, the Cyclone is out of production and the Mojo's styling doesn't appeal to all
tastes (mine included ).
Best regards,
Dominic
|
|
|
Alan B
|
| posted on 27/11/03 at 02:13 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by TheGecko
....... this is the future of the Locost-type car - based on common FWD running gear and with simple to make bodywork. The Sylva Mojo and Car Craft
Cyclone are two production examples of this form. However, the Cyclone is out of production and the Mojo's styling doesn't appeal to all
tastes (mine included )...
Totally agree Dominic, while those aren't the most beautiful cars in the world (IMO) they are definitely a step in right direction.......
Your's is taking shape very nicely..looking good.
|
|
|
Alez
|
| posted on 27/11/03 at 04:55 PM |
|
|
Dominic,
Very interesting post indeed. Your project is looking very good, and is actually very similar to what I'd like to see ideally. In fact, my ideal
would probaby be a Locost-like (panelled), mid bike engined car. And actually it looks quite do-able to me since for instance the Fireblade engine is
a quite small one. Not that I have the skills to try to design anything though.
Good luck with the project, it's looking fantastic so far and much in line with the Locost spirit.
Cheers,
Alex
|
|
|
Hugh Paterson
|
| posted on 27/11/03 at 08:13 PM |
|
|
GRP Body panels
I have built both single seat race-car bodies, and multi skin saloon car bodies for a living in GRP, and to get a high class product for retail use,
except in the most simple of shapes is 6 months to 1 year of work. If its any indication of the timescale required in the development of the
chassis, running gear and engine package allow a minimum of 1 1/2 to 2 years work, if u manage it quicker your a bloody genius working 18 hour days 7
days a week I am looking at the development of Modern body for a 7 type chassis but its on the back burner till spring, watch this space. Not
cheap and cheerful but sub £900, thats the difficult bit
Shug.
|
|
|
suparuss
|
| posted on 27/11/03 at 11:22 PM |
|
|
what do you say alan?? these guys just dont have any ambition
cant wait to start mine, nearly finished me bathroom now, then its the new kitchen and general decorating, then the loft conversion. (doing all this
myself btw) then the car!! woohoo! hmm i might convert the garage into a double first tho.
Russ.
|
|
|
