mainlandboy
|
| posted on 8/2/07 at 08:46 PM |
|
|
The "Lomid" (my version of the Locost midi)
Hi all,
I'm in the finishing stages of my Locost and have started designing a mid-engined version. My main criteria for the design are:
- Use Mac Struts in the rear to make the rear suspension easier to package
- Little or no fiberglass body making
- Be able to use a Locost scuttle and fenders
- Use a modified (widened) Locost nose cone.
Here are some screen shots of what I have modeled up so far:
http://usera.imagecave.com/mainlandboy/LOMID/
Note there there is still some more triangulation members that need to go in the frame.
Any comments good or bad are welcome.
My hat's off to Alan B and Steve G for making original bodywork, but I am looking to design somthing that can be built without all the time and
effort required to make a one-off body.
Cheers,
Mark
|
|
|
|
|
trialsman
|
| posted on 8/2/07 at 09:01 PM |
|
|
Looks good. Front drivers are a dime a dozen. Seats look a little out of proportion to me. Look too large, Russ
|
|
|
RazMan
|
| posted on 8/2/07 at 09:11 PM |
|
|
That looks pretty good to me. You have kept the spirit of the seven but in a middy theme.
I agree about the seats though - way too large and out of proportion.
Cheers,
Raz
When thinking outside the box doesn't work any more, it's time to build a new box
|
|
|
stevebubs
|
| posted on 8/2/07 at 09:24 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
trialsman
|
| posted on 8/2/07 at 11:00 PM |
|
|
Wow. What is that? Is it a BEC?? Russ
|
|
|
mainlandboy
|
| posted on 8/2/07 at 11:05 PM |
|
|
Thanks for the feedback, I'll work on remodeling the seats.
stevebubs, the Sylva R1ot definitely did provide some inspiration for my design. I don't care for back end of it though, or the shape of the
cutout on the side that you step into. Also, living in North America, the R1ot is not readily available here. It would cost a lot to buy it and ship
it over. I wanted to follow the Locost principle of allowing one to build it from scratch, based on plans. This makes it cheaper and can be modified
along the way to suit whatever donor you end up choosing.
Mark.
|
|
|
MikeR
|
| posted on 8/2/07 at 11:07 PM |
|
|
Looks interesting, i've got some questions ......
why not panel all the way across the front bulkhead?
look at the terrapin / late lotus 7's that where space framed. They have some ideas that added a lot of strength around hte front / middle /
rear hoops inside the chassis.
probably really difficult to do, but what about mounting the entire engine section on a detachable subframe? make working on it easier. (again
staniforth did something similar on one of his single seaters)
Steering wheel is on the wrong side 
Why have a full length transmission tunnel (if you do, make it into a stressed member, should add some strength that way)
See if you can find any pictures of the Robin Hood mini based seven - used almost identical principles. Steal the good bits 
Good luck.
|
|
|
mainlandboy
|
| posted on 8/2/07 at 11:24 PM |
|
|
MikeR,
The opening in the middle of the front bulkhead is to allow the fuel lines and coolant lines to pass through from the front to the back. The full
length transmission tunnel covers these lines and also houses the shifter linkage and E-brake linkgage (neither are shown yet).
Regarding the steering wheel, I'll let the builder sort out his preference!
Mark
|
|
|
the_duke
|
| posted on 9/2/07 at 01:44 AM |
|
|
Not a bad start, impressive work so far.
Here's what I would change if it was me:
1) I'd continue to have the fuel cell behind the seats and push the position of the seats forward. I figure that's gonna be less fuel
lines in the grand scheme of the things so it'll be less to break down and ultimately, will be cheaper.
2) Perhaps I'd like to see another picture of the steering setup. It looks like in one picture that the tracking rod is towards the top in one
photo and it looks like it's across the bottom in one photo and still in the middle in one.
3) That exhaust looks hideous! Way too many bends after the motor. Can you say lost of HP? Not to mention how long and how much it'd cost to
make that?
4) The seats gotta change as everyone else has said.
Other than that it looks good. And always, what I see might not be what you want, so to each his own.
1992 Chevrolet C1500 Stepside, 4/6" drop, stuff shaved, etc.
|
|
|
mainlandboy
|
| posted on 9/2/07 at 01:57 AM |
|
|
Thanks for the feedback. I have remodeled the seats to look more proportional.
I agree that having the gas tank behind the seats is a better location, but i'd have to add some length in the frame behind the seats to
maintain the same leg room, and aestetically it starts to look funny to me when the back wheels are too far behind the seats. I'll try modeling
a tall thin gas tank to tuck behind the seats that won't add too much length to the back.
regarding the exhaust, yes, there are a lot of bends. The cat and muffler position are pretty much fixed though, so I had to get
"creative" to connect them together.
The steering setup is designed to use a rear-steer steering rack. I did this so that you wouldn't have to snake a steering shaft around the gas
tank (won't be a problem if I move the gas tank to the back), and because rear-steer racks seem to be more plentiful.
Keep the feedback coming and I'll keep updating the model
|
|
|
the_duke
|
| posted on 9/2/07 at 04:08 AM |
|
|
gas tank: to each his one i suppose. I'd try to rake the body a little bit to make it not look so funny. i'd still keep the tank behind
the seats just cause i don't like running the long fuel lines. cheaper that way and the name of the car is a locost, low cost.
you might look at running the cat under the air cleaner and relocate the air cleaner, might take less bends out of the exhaust and free up more
bhp.
that makes sense. good idea.
1992 Chevrolet C1500 Stepside, 4/6" drop, stuff shaved, etc.
|
|
|
the_duke
|
| posted on 9/2/07 at 04:12 AM |
|
|
just thought of an idea for the intake, put it ontop of the manifold, put an inlet for the air to come in from above and you'd have a ram air.
1992 Chevrolet C1500 Stepside, 4/6" drop, stuff shaved, etc.
|
|
|
Ratman
|
| posted on 9/2/07 at 11:08 AM |
|
|
I don't think you need the central structure that contains the "drive shaft" in a front engined car. One of the biggest advantages
of a midi over a regular 7 is all the extra roominess in the cockpit because you don't have to share it with half of the car's
mechanicals.
Suggest triangular shaped fuel tank behind the seats. easy enough to get 20 litres with a base length of not much more than 200mm. Probably need the
filler to be remote from the tank.
I like your strut rear. makes a nice simple structure and gives you oportunity to fine tune ride height and camber etc at a later stage. It's
very hard to make any other system work with any elegance. Make the strut top mounting point a separate removable piece of the Chassis, so you can
make new versions of it without having to reweld the chassis. I suggest a removable subframe that links the top of each strut and bridges over the
engine.
Nice project. best wishes.
|
|
|
RazMan
|
| posted on 9/2/07 at 01:38 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ratman
I don't think you need the central structure that contains the "drive shaft" in a front engined car. One of the biggest advantages
of a midi over a regular 7 is all the extra roominess in the cockpit because you don't have to share it with half of the car's
mechanicals.
There is a suprisng amount of 'north south' stuff in a middy so a service tunnel is essential unless you can use side pods. If the rad is
front mounted (most effective place really) then you've got plumbing including heater, gear shift mech, loom and brakes & clutch lines. Mine
is all crammed into a 120mm width which isn't too intrusive and allows a little more strength in the chassis as a side benefit.
Cheers,
Raz
When thinking outside the box doesn't work any more, it's time to build a new box
|
|
|
