Car builder required
Discussion
Steve_D said:
Have you considered just how much this is going to cost?
You have likely put some hundreds of your (free) hours into this and there will likely be as many hours again at £45-60 per hour if you put the work out. Can you not do it yourself?
Steve
I was thinking this. Best idea would be to get a kit builder on board and develop it some more with their input. Then once everyone is happy, maybe sell them the design or work in partnership or similar?You have likely put some hundreds of your (free) hours into this and there will likely be as many hours again at £45-60 per hour if you put the work out. Can you not do it yourself?
Steve
Of course it would no longer be "your baby", but it may offer a source of income/make larger production.
What do you mean by "I've completed my design" ?
- You've got a few simple styling sketches
- you've got decent sketches and diagrams of how the major parts will fit together
- You have full dimensioned drawings or CAD models for all, or most, of it with firm-ish ideas for the rest
- You have done the above and have considered aerodynamics, chassis design and suspension geometry carefully and/or talked to people who can actually do this stuff.
- You have done all the CAD, aerodynamics, suspension geometry and chassis analysis properly (scale models,FEA or copying known designs) and not just left it to chance
- What is the design? A seven? An Exo? A midengined supercar?
cymtriks said:
What do you mean by "I've completed my design" ?
Absolutely spot on. More information is essential to progress.- You've got a few simple styling sketches
- you've got decent sketches and diagrams of how the major parts will fit together
- You have full dimensioned drawings or CAD models for all, or most, of it with firm-ish ideas for the rest
- You have done the above and have considered aerodynamics, chassis design and suspension geometry carefully and/or talked to people who can actually do this stuff.
- You have done all the CAD, aerodynamics, suspension geometry and chassis analysis properly (scale models,FEA or copying known designs) and not just left it to chance
- What is the design? A seven? An Exo? A midengined supercar?
designer said:
Hello, i have already looked closely at your site 
but do you have any 3/4 rendered images/videos or CAS/CAD work of the body?
from a simple orthographic illustration, its impossible to get an idea of what it is going to look like. In the grand scheme of things, no one will ever view or see this car without perspective, colour or shadow/light.
1. I am an aerospace engineer with thirty years experience.
2. All the parts fit together.
3. I have dimensioned drawings and 3D CAD models for all parts.
4. Aerodynamics have been considered, but ease of manufacture has been a priority.
5. The chassis is simple to construct and fit for purpose.
6. Suspension geometry has been carefully worked out.
7. NOTHING has been left to chance.
2. All the parts fit together.
3. I have dimensioned drawings and 3D CAD models for all parts.
4. Aerodynamics have been considered, but ease of manufacture has been a priority.
5. The chassis is simple to construct and fit for purpose.
6. Suspension geometry has been carefully worked out.
7. NOTHING has been left to chance.
designer said:
1. I am an aerospace engineer with thirty years experience..................
So back to my earlier question....why are you not building it yourself?I would suggest that with your level of involvement so far it will prove very difficult to work with a kit manufacturer who will have their own way of working and ideas on how the fine detail is to be resolved. My business is building cars so I know the problems you will face.
Steve
Glad to see that there is somebody who understands the term 'engineering'.
The 'talent' an engineer has over others is that he/she sees a 2D drawing in 3D. Design should start in the inside, not with a 3D rendering, and the important things (the mechanicals) being made to fit. Form will follow function; the body is an envolope to cover the mechanicals.
Being a billy-wizz at 3D rendering and CAD does not make you an 'engineer'. CAD is brilliant for manipulating drawings, but it can't make a bad engineer, or designer, into a good one!
As the car is a reverse trike, the roll issue is totally different from a 4 wheeler and the suspension bridge acts as the roll bar.
I am trying to get a 'retro' feel to the styling. I like the open, low sided cockpit of the Cooper 500's, and as there is no requirement for a front intake a simple shape was adopted.
Here is a basic design, where a complete kit (chassis, body) can be put together and marketed at £1300, and a complete car put together, with a good bike, for £2500.
The 'talent' an engineer has over others is that he/she sees a 2D drawing in 3D. Design should start in the inside, not with a 3D rendering, and the important things (the mechanicals) being made to fit. Form will follow function; the body is an envolope to cover the mechanicals.
Being a billy-wizz at 3D rendering and CAD does not make you an 'engineer'. CAD is brilliant for manipulating drawings, but it can't make a bad engineer, or designer, into a good one!
As the car is a reverse trike, the roll issue is totally different from a 4 wheeler and the suspension bridge acts as the roll bar.
I am trying to get a 'retro' feel to the styling. I like the open, low sided cockpit of the Cooper 500's, and as there is no requirement for a front intake a simple shape was adopted.
Here is a basic design, where a complete kit (chassis, body) can be put together and marketed at £1300, and a complete car put together, with a good bike, for £2500.
From a pure visual design aesthetic you can't tell what the stance and proportions are going to be like without proper sketches and 3/4 views. It's all very well starting from an engineering point of view. But if a car doesn't look good then it ain't gonna sell.
With all due respect, when a pure engineer does a car they tend to sort it out mechanically and then cover it in a body. Why do you think OEMs don't work like this. Yes, an engineer might be able to work out the surfacing by studying the orthographic views. What you can't tell is surface inflection, stance lines and proportions.
In terms of OEMs they start off with a sector, then advance design, then they temper it down to concept form and packaging. Then final concept and then it gets passed over to the engineers. Then it gets batted between design and engineering until its a viable production able vehicle.
Kit manufacturers tend to do the whole process backwards, and, IMO that's why there aren't that many good looking kits.
With all due respect, when a pure engineer does a car they tend to sort it out mechanically and then cover it in a body. Why do you think OEMs don't work like this. Yes, an engineer might be able to work out the surfacing by studying the orthographic views. What you can't tell is surface inflection, stance lines and proportions.
In terms of OEMs they start off with a sector, then advance design, then they temper it down to concept form and packaging. Then final concept and then it gets passed over to the engineers. Then it gets batted between design and engineering until its a viable production able vehicle.
Kit manufacturers tend to do the whole process backwards, and, IMO that's why there aren't that many good looking kits.
designer said:
Being a billy-wizz at 3D rendering and CAD does not make you an 'engineer'. CAD is brilliant for manipulating drawings, but it can't make a bad engineer, or designer, into a good one!
With all due respect, CAD is computer aided design. What you are talking about is CAE. What I was mainly referring to was CAS- computer aided surfacing. I have no doubt you are a very accomplished design engineer. But you can't claim to have a finished design until you have a finished exterior or interior design, even if the engineering part is completely finished, tested and proven....
designer said:
Glad to see that there is somebody who understands the term 'engineering'.
The 'talent' an engineer has over others is that he/she sees a 2D drawing in 3D. Design should start in the inside, not with a 3D rendering, and the important things (the mechanicals) being made to fit. Form will follow function; the body is an envolope to cover the mechanicals.
Being a billy-wizz at 3D rendering and CAD does not make you an 'engineer'. CAD is brilliant for manipulating drawings, but it can't make a bad engineer, or designer, into a good one!
As the car is a reverse trike, the roll issue is totally different from a 4 wheeler and the suspension bridge acts as the roll bar.
I am trying to get a 'retro' feel to the styling. I like the open, low sided cockpit of the Cooper 500's, and as there is no requirement for a front intake a simple shape was adopted.
Here is a basic design, where a complete kit (chassis, body) can be put together and marketed at £1300, and a complete car put together, with a good bike, for £2500.
Well in the 10 years I've been employed as an aerospace design engineer, we have been doing it wrong all along then. The 'talent' an engineer has over others is that he/she sees a 2D drawing in 3D. Design should start in the inside, not with a 3D rendering, and the important things (the mechanicals) being made to fit. Form will follow function; the body is an envolope to cover the mechanicals.
Being a billy-wizz at 3D rendering and CAD does not make you an 'engineer'. CAD is brilliant for manipulating drawings, but it can't make a bad engineer, or designer, into a good one!
As the car is a reverse trike, the roll issue is totally different from a 4 wheeler and the suspension bridge acts as the roll bar.
I am trying to get a 'retro' feel to the styling. I like the open, low sided cockpit of the Cooper 500's, and as there is no requirement for a front intake a simple shape was adopted.
Here is a basic design, where a complete kit (chassis, body) can be put together and marketed at £1300, and a complete car put together, with a good bike, for £2500.
I'm not having a go at your concept, it seams feasible, but to me that is not a mature design ready for manufacture.
slomax said:
From a pure visual design aesthetic you can't tell what the stance and proportions are going to be like without proper sketches and 3/4 views. It's all very well starting from an engineering point of view. But if a car doesn't look good then it ain't gonna sell.
With all due respect, when a pure engineer does a car they tend to sort it out mechanically and then cover it in a body. Why do you think OEMs don't work like this. Yes, an engineer might be able to work out the surfacing by studying the orthographic views. What you can't tell is surface inflection, stance lines and proportions.
In terms of OEMs they start off with a sector, then advance design, then they temper it down to concept form and packaging. Then final concept and then it gets passed over to the engineers. Then it gets batted between design and engineering until its a viable production able vehicle.
Kit manufacturers tend to do the whole process backwards, and, IMO that's why there aren't that many good looking kits.
I think you actually make some VERY good points and are actually closer to the truth. With aircraft, and autos, by the time actual designers and analysts get down to brass tacks, the configuration, surfaces and concept is already been determined by the aerodynamicists, configuration specialists and marketing people. The designers work within the confines of this to lay out the structure, and the analysts do the sizing with an eye toward weight-optimization (redesigning for the designer when necessary). Unless it's a really small airplane, no designers actually determine much what it will look like, and to be honest, these days most designers are hardly more than drafters. If Designer has been doing this type of work for 30 years, he likely has actually done a significant amount of design work (as opposed to the typical Johnny-come-lately CATIA jockey).With all due respect, when a pure engineer does a car they tend to sort it out mechanically and then cover it in a body. Why do you think OEMs don't work like this. Yes, an engineer might be able to work out the surfacing by studying the orthographic views. What you can't tell is surface inflection, stance lines and proportions.
In terms of OEMs they start off with a sector, then advance design, then they temper it down to concept form and packaging. Then final concept and then it gets passed over to the engineers. Then it gets batted between design and engineering until its a viable production able vehicle.
Kit manufacturers tend to do the whole process backwards, and, IMO that's why there aren't that many good looking kits.
Most kit cars are freaking hideous, and merely represent a rat-hole in which to pour money down -- sad but true! In order to get a really fine, marketable design, there truly need to be a balanced approach between aesthetics (art), function (engineering), and manufacturing (shop). It's just all too often hard to make the engineer understand this (speaking as an engineer).
Gassing Station | Kit Cars | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff