Discussion
stig mills said:
Thanx for that, couldnt find "ale" though. Regards Stuart
Just been looking through the list of entrants and the manufacturer of the alé is not there. They claim to have a new way of injecting the fuel, hnce their name FuelVapor TechnologiesFlossyThePig said:
Intrigued by the Aptera and "alé", both three wheelers.
I agree with you guys, it needs to be longer, my reworking has a longer wheelbase thus giving a lower seating position, different canopy opening and a few more other things.....
Will try to post more realistic rough sketches later today....
Will try to post more realistic rough sketches later today....
Edited by fuoriserie on Monday 21st January 09:00
The motor I have is a special. The Lymch or LMC has brushes. Mine runs at 3600rpm@72 volts and is only 14kg. I seem to remember PML having a smaller unit EW30 I think , this may suit Hoop's requirement. Also see EVT, cant find a link but they do a 4hp unit. Regards Stuart
Sorry to but-in chaps. Very interesting thread and nice drawings. I like the concept.
I reckon doing away with the roof/screen would make it far less usable though i can see the engineering appeal.
How about making it a 4 wheeler with side pods reminicent of an F1 car. You could then perhaps have a side opening doors with a Y shaped bar going over the top framing the windscreen in the fork of the Y. The side pods could be used to give a greater perception of width (and safety) to the punter. Adittionally they could be used to house (extra?) batteries and/or the cooling for the batteries or internal combustion engine. The 4 wheel concept and associated extra stability and grip (assumed as i am only a punter myself) may be a tool to rid the concept of any stigma associated with 3 wheeled vehicles and allow increased performance by using two or more hub mounted motors.
I reckon doing away with the roof/screen would make it far less usable though i can see the engineering appeal.
How about making it a 4 wheeler with side pods reminicent of an F1 car. You could then perhaps have a side opening doors with a Y shaped bar going over the top framing the windscreen in the fork of the Y. The side pods could be used to give a greater perception of width (and safety) to the punter. Adittionally they could be used to house (extra?) batteries and/or the cooling for the batteries or internal combustion engine. The 4 wheel concept and associated extra stability and grip (assumed as i am only a punter myself) may be a tool to rid the concept of any stigma associated with 3 wheeled vehicles and allow increased performance by using two or more hub mounted motors.
hahithestevieboy said:
Sorry to but-in chaps. Very interesting thread and nice drawings. I like the concept.
I reckon doing away with the roof/screen would make it far less usable though i can see the engineering appeal.
How about making it a 4 wheeler with side pods reminicent of an F1 car. You could then perhaps have a side opening doors with a Y shaped bar going over the top framing the windscreen in the fork of the Y. The side pods could be used to give a greater perception of width (and safety) to the punter. Adittionally they could be used to house (extra?) batteries and/or the cooling for the batteries or internal combustion engine. The 4 wheel concept and associated extra stability and grip (assumed as i am only a punter myself) may be a tool to rid the concept of any stigma associated with 3 wheeled vehicles and allow increased performance by using two or more hub mounted motors.
Very good suggestions and comment...and you hinted at something I was working on(i.e. the roof).I reckon doing away with the roof/screen would make it far less usable though i can see the engineering appeal.
How about making it a 4 wheeler with side pods reminicent of an F1 car. You could then perhaps have a side opening doors with a Y shaped bar going over the top framing the windscreen in the fork of the Y. The side pods could be used to give a greater perception of width (and safety) to the punter. Adittionally they could be used to house (extra?) batteries and/or the cooling for the batteries or internal combustion engine. The 4 wheel concept and associated extra stability and grip (assumed as i am only a punter myself) may be a tool to rid the concept of any stigma associated with 3 wheeled vehicles and allow increased performance by using two or more hub mounted motors.
WE have to define if this is going to be a home to work city commuter, and thus replacing your car when driving to work, or it's more of a leisure vehicle.
If it's a city commuter, it needs to be narrow to fit in between cars, I could think of a maximum width of 1.10m max.
Zagato did work on a similar concept in 2007 called V.O.L.P.E.
dimensions: 2m. long, 1m wide, 1.5 m. high., with 2 electric motors.
Edited by fuoriserie on Monday 21st January 13:36
Edited by fuoriserie on Monday 21st January 13:38
Your comments are very kind. Actually, what I was getting at was more of a fusion between your sketch (of the red "car"
and the roadrazer.
My personal thoughts are that for a commuter, even 1100mm width would be too wide to nip through gaps or jump ques. Indeed, it would also doubtless be too wide to use parking bays designed for bikes.
My opinion on the silver car is that it looks rather "noddyish" and top heavy with it's small inboard wheels and bulky body and screen. In comparison, your own concept looks lithe and sporty and make it wider at the bottom than at the top.
For this reason, I would suggest that even a commuter car could increase it's width to the levels of a very small car to give it higher levels of performance and a sportier look. As long as it is short enough, it can still be parked sideways in a standard parking bay. The racecar look may also give more "showroom" appeal to the punter making him less concious about driving arround in a "commuter" because it looks and goes like a racecar allowing him to justify the purchace to his ego on performance and to his head on economic running. The wide bottom and relatively narrow glass house might also make it easier from a stylistic point of view, to incorporate proper wing mirrors.
This leads me on to the packaging advantages of using side pods to carry the batteries. If they are in side pods they may be easier to cool, however, this will allow for the center of gravity to be kept low with the driver's seat right on the floor of the tub whilst still maintaining decent ground clearance. The open wheels will also allow the designer more freedom to specify different wheel sizes as he sees fit.
My opinion is that such a "crossover" vehicle with the right looks and performance will have a worldwide market that is as yet completely untapped.
and the roadrazer. My personal thoughts are that for a commuter, even 1100mm width would be too wide to nip through gaps or jump ques. Indeed, it would also doubtless be too wide to use parking bays designed for bikes.
My opinion on the silver car is that it looks rather "noddyish" and top heavy with it's small inboard wheels and bulky body and screen. In comparison, your own concept looks lithe and sporty and make it wider at the bottom than at the top.
For this reason, I would suggest that even a commuter car could increase it's width to the levels of a very small car to give it higher levels of performance and a sportier look. As long as it is short enough, it can still be parked sideways in a standard parking bay. The racecar look may also give more "showroom" appeal to the punter making him less concious about driving arround in a "commuter" because it looks and goes like a racecar allowing him to justify the purchace to his ego on performance and to his head on economic running. The wide bottom and relatively narrow glass house might also make it easier from a stylistic point of view, to incorporate proper wing mirrors.
This leads me on to the packaging advantages of using side pods to carry the batteries. If they are in side pods they may be easier to cool, however, this will allow for the center of gravity to be kept low with the driver's seat right on the floor of the tub whilst still maintaining decent ground clearance. The open wheels will also allow the designer more freedom to specify different wheel sizes as he sees fit.
My opinion is that such a "crossover" vehicle with the right looks and performance will have a worldwide market that is as yet completely untapped.
hahithestevieboy said:
Your comments are very kind. Actually, what I was getting at was more of a fusion between your sketch (of the red "car" and the roadrazer.
My opinion is that such a "crossover" vehicle with the right looks and performance will have a worldwide market that is as yet completely untapped.
Volvo had a similar thought, with the Tandem Concept car... and the roadrazer. My opinion is that such a "crossover" vehicle with the right looks and performance will have a worldwide market that is as yet completely untapped.
Interesting concepts. I like the volvo ones best although the red one reminds me of that volkswagen thing, and the yellow one seems to me to echo those 1920's land speed cars.
One thing all of these concepts seem to have in common is that they are relatively long, narrow and low.
What I propose is something that is relatively short, wide and high but with a bottom heavy stance and a relatively tall and narrow glass house. For proportion, think of a faired in kart (bodywork hugging the driver and mechanicals very closely) with relatively large diameter and width wheels and with no bodywork protruding for or aft of the wheels. A driving position and ride height somewhat similar to an elise.
So basically taking your original concept, delete the rear wheel and associated bodywork, add two outboard rear wheels and some sort of kamm tail. Then add the side pods. I'd love to see one of your excelent sketches of what I have described by the way.
One thing all of these concepts seem to have in common is that they are relatively long, narrow and low.
What I propose is something that is relatively short, wide and high but with a bottom heavy stance and a relatively tall and narrow glass house. For proportion, think of a faired in kart (bodywork hugging the driver and mechanicals very closely) with relatively large diameter and width wheels and with no bodywork protruding for or aft of the wheels. A driving position and ride height somewhat similar to an elise.
So basically taking your original concept, delete the rear wheel and associated bodywork, add two outboard rear wheels and some sort of kamm tail. Then add the side pods. I'd love to see one of your excelent sketches of what I have described by the way.
The max width to allow motorcycle sva is 1.4m. This form of test is much easier to pass and even allows the driver to drive without a seatbelt providing a helmet is worn. The lights can be centrally mounted and no front number plate is required. To acheive a lightweight yet stiff structure, it is best to have no doors and get the driver in from above. This restricts the roof and side pod dimensions. I have built a packaging buck to study this and it can be suprisingly difficult to get into an F1 style tub even without these obstructions.
fuoriserie said:
first very rough sketch, of my revised 3wheeler with a longer wheelbase and a formula 1, driving position.
I thought about a lift-up full length polycarbonate canopy.
Just a doodle......
Great silouette, the cab forward look and minimal overhangs give it a very modern look. The driver could be a little vunerable from side and rear 3q impact though. Where would the battery pack be packaged? Also, the double curvature in the pivoting screen would be very expensive to tool up. The closest shape and tool I've seen first hand was that of the Eurofighter and the cost ran into millions. It is possible to do such a sreen on a budget of 15K but optical quality would be poor and polycarbonate is not legal in front of the drivers head. Is the rear wheel driven? Keep up the good work!I thought about a lift-up full length polycarbonate canopy.
Just a doodle......
hoopdiddy07 said:
fuoriserie said:
first very rough sketch, of my revised 3wheeler with a longer wheelbase and a formula 1, driving position.
I thought about a lift-up full length polycarbonate canopy.
Just a doodle......
Great silouette, the cab forward look and minimal overhangs give it a very modern look. The driver could be a little vunerable from side and rear 3q impact though. Where would the battery pack be packaged? Also, the double curvature in the pivoting screen would be very expensive to tool up. The closest shape and tool I've seen first hand was that of the Eurofighter and the cost ran into millions. It is possible to do such a sreen on a budget of 15K but optical quality would be poor and polycarbonate is not legal in front of the drivers head. Is the rear wheel driven? Keep up the good work!I thought about a lift-up full length polycarbonate canopy.
Just a doodle......
....I thought that polycarbonate in 3wheelers was acceptable, I know it is in the States, because 3wheelers follow the motorcycle rules. I ave no idea what they are in the UK or Europe. I agree with you that the canopy should be costed to make it through production, but maybe a kit or sailplane manufacture could supply some info on this...I thought about a battery pack running through the spine of the 3wheeler, check the CREE in the earlier link.
I don't have the dimensions of a potential battery pack, but that was the idea....will show a few more roughs in the coming days.., you would need thin and long batteries.
I would need more info to work out something more realistic.
By the way...You have mail.
Italo
Edited by fuoriserie on Wednesday 23 January 09:22
Glider and sailplane canopy info and prices.
http://www.wingsandwheels.com/page37.htm
I think that for something similar to my design prices should be really low.
You could even think of adapting an of the shelf unit...just a thought.
http://www.wingsandwheels.com/page37.htm
I think that for something similar to my design prices should be really low.
You could even think of adapting an of the shelf unit...just a thought.
Gassing Station | Kit Cars | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff