MIDDY CHASSIS FOR A BUCK

[stig mills]

Thats a wooden pattern not a dollar.
There seems to be a growing demand for a product on which to base a one off middy sports car.
Lots of people seem to have ideas as to how a car should look but dont start a project because of all the other design complications of chassis/engine/suspension/steering/BIVA etc etc.
So I am going to make it easy.
I will provide a Sonic7 chassis that is panelled in ply and has a box to drop on the front and rear that clears the engine and radiator/pedals.
The cost, £1700 + VAT.
The buyer can then screw/bond anything they want to it to make the desired body buck. If after 12 months of work it all looks a shambles then it can be removed and a Sonic7 body fitted. If others have by that time produced a preferred option then theirs could be purchsed and fitted if the maker was prepared to share his design or maybe hire out his/her moulds.
That will make life much easier for budding car manufacturers that could start a business on a very low budget and bring more new products to the crazy world of kit cars. Not trying to sell chassis by the way, just encourage folks to do what I do. I will even offer the new options if they turn out well.
Should this be a new thread? Regards Stiggy

[seansverige]

Great idea Stiggy - hope you don't mind that I've modified an image of the Sonic7 from the website for use as an underlay for anyone who is tempted to have ago:



out of interest, what windscreen is being used here?

will upload a more soon

[seansverige]

rear 3/4....

[seansverige]

alternate front 3/4

[stig mills]

That makes life easy to pencil and rubber on to. Sonic7 screen is bespoke. Would suggest screens are offered to the buck by builders b4 going too far with the styling. Maybe a Smart roadster screen, I nearly used one but the width dictated the lines and they wouldnt flow all the way through the car with the Smart one.

[Davi]

you're a generous man stig, a middy chassis for a buck! I'll give you whole tenner if you'll stick one in the post

[fuoriserie]

stig mills said:

Thats a wooden pattern not a dollar.
There seems to be a growing demand for a product on which to base a one off middy sports car.
Lots of people seem to have ideas as to how a car should look but dont start a project because of all the other design complications of chassis/engine/suspension/steering/BIVA etc etc.
So I am going to make it easy.
I will provide a Sonic7 chassis that is panelled in ply and has a box to drop on the front and rear that clears the engine and radiator/pedals.
The cost, £1700 + VAT.
The buyer can then screw/bond anything they want to it to make the desired body buck. If after 12 months of work it all looks a shambles then it can be removed and a Sonic7 body fitted. If others have by that time produced a preferred option then theirs could be purchsed and fitted if the maker was prepared to share his design or maybe hire out his/her moulds.

Should this be a new thread? Regards Stiggy

Stiggy
That sounds like an excellent concept for the kitcar industry and do have a few designs that could fit the chassis.......

Looking forward to others showing their design sketches and ideas in this thread......

Cheers
Italo

Edited by fuoriserie on Friday 8th May 22:28

[fuoriserie]

seansverige said:

fuoriserie said:

Actually these sketches were based on the original Rocket chassis and not the Atomic

I know, my original question was why was the Atomic developed rather than another alternative body for the Rocket (btw are your sketches pre- or post Sonic7?); ;-)

My rough sketches were pre-sonic7.....

[fuoriserie]

seansverige said:

Definitely one to pop in the mental microwave to see if it comes out steaming (for any Drop the Dead Donkey fans out there): sounds like a great idea - and might encourage armchair experts like myself to put their money where their mouth is.

By all means start a new thread. Funnily enough I've also been thinking of a Seven rebody; although I've ruled it out for my own project if one were to develop a rebody for commercial purposes, then this would seem to offer biggest potential market and I think there's room for a half decent body that drops on. Also this weeks Autocar features the Westfield 1600 Sport Turbo - which apparently conforms to mainstream car legislation: would that mean that a compatible body be like existing rebodies for mainstream cars - which are easier to certify aren't they?

Anyway, one element which would be equally applicable to either discussion is what does the PH collective think would appeal in terms of styling theme? My observation is that the kitcar world seems fairly conservative in terms of styling, so something towards the retro end of the spectrum would probably be best bet. As old kit car moulds don't seem to die so much as get sold on, something that's not too 'of the moment' is probably a good thing anyway.

I would agree with you that retro designs last longer, but I think that modern classic designs, inspired by classic shapes, should be considered, something like the new Sebring Exalt.

Shouldn't designers create new designs, that one day could become classic?, aren't we all tired of the same shapes? we need new ideas, concepts, shapes....


Looking forward to seeing your design sketches of your concept..

Cheers
Italo

Edited by fuoriserie on Friday 8th May 22:41

[seansverige]

fuoriserie said:

...inspired by classic shapes, should be considered, something like the new Sebring Exalt

Italo, I'm sorry but I think we have very different opinions concerning the Exalt: it's not 'inspired' by anything, it's a b*st*rdisation of a classic design, and represents a lot of what I think is wrong about kit car industry when they think professional / competent exterior design input is an optional extra. I would further argue that to successfully and sympathetically update a such a design is actually more demanding than a clean sheet design. About the only nice thing I can say about this that they've not effed up the Austin-Healey as badly as PGO did the 356 with the abomination that is the Hemera.

If the Exalt is a sales success I can only assume that there is need out there not being satisfied and it succeeds only in that vacuum.

fuoriserie said:

Shouldn't designers create new designs, that one day could become classic?, aren't we all tired of the same shapes? we need new ideas, concepts, shapes....

I'm too lazy to go into the retro debate in any depth here, & on a purely creative basis I do agree with you, but I mentioned the word 'commercial' intentionally: it's about what the market is willing to accept. In a sector where the two pre-eminent sellers are variations on two designs each nearing 50 years old, a retro influenced design surely has a better chance of commercial success?

For good or ill, retro now seems established as a sector in the mainstream industry too and I think it's no longer a black & white issue: I detested the new Beetle, still think the new Mini is an overblown, overdesigned, overpriced cartoon of the original, but I think the 500 is a more true reinterpretation (especially when compared to the new Ka - which would you rather have? Be honest...)

If contemporary means the Gallardo, that's fine with me - but the 599 is also contemporary....

As regards the sketches, I'm hoping I won't be the only one posting... but don't expect anything too soon, am still getting back into it.

Edited by seansverige on Saturday 9th May 02:27

Edited by seansverige on Saturday 9th May 02:28

[seansverige]

Can't find any decent profile shots of the Sonic 7, and these are the best I can find of the Rocket - anyone got anything better (pref 1024+)?

[cymtriks]

stig mills said:

There seems to be a growing demand for a product on which to base a one off middy sports car.
Lots of people seem to have ideas as to how a car should look but dont start a project because of all the other design complications of chassis/engine/suspension/steering/BIVA etc etc.

Is there really a growing demand for a bare chassis?

You are correct that lots of people have ideas for styling but the reason they (mostly) don't progress is not due to the lack of a chassis!

Typically it's the enormous hassle and space requirement of making a buck, taking molds and finally making a decent body panel that scuppers them.

A major hurdle with the bare chassis idea is that many people who have styling ideas also have very clear ideas of what they would like to put under that styling. Even if they don't then a given chassis and drivetrain combination will often dictate so much of the car that any styling is likely to be very restricted.

Your chassis for example forces a high rear deck to clear a transverse engine. That's fine if you like the MGF profile but absolutely hopeless if you like the Ultima or Porsche Spyder profile.

Perhaps the real demand is for a bespoke body service.

Something like a 3D computer image turned into an alloy body or made into a set of molds via 5 axis CNC. There was a lovely alloy body thread on PH a while ago which featured a body for an Aston Martin starting as a 3D computer model and then been made up over a buck.

I can't see it being anything short of very expensive though (but I'd like to know how much a one off body would cost!)

Edited to add: I found that thread "Designed a car body that went into manufacture today". Take a look!

Edited by cymtriks on Saturday 9th May 15:42

[seansverige]

Apologies Cymtriks, but as far as I'm concerned Stig's bang on the money and you couldn't be more wrong ;-)

For myself, my primary interest is in the exterior and interior design - that's what my qualified in (though I don't practise.) It's not that I don't like or appreciate engineering - I just enough to know I'm not one, nor do I have any aspirations as such, so why waste my time re-inventing the wheel (and chassis, and suspension, gear linkage, etc., etc.) when it's been done - in all probability better - elsewhere? Why wouldn't one take advantage of a proven design that one can see, feel, measure, test drive? And if I get into trouble assembling the oily bits I can (hopefully) talk to someone who's been there, done that.

cymtriks said:

many people who have styling ideas also have very clear ideas of what they would like to put under that styling

Maybe they do, but if so clearly haven't had any industry exposure and even if not it's still somewhat blinkered - no designer will ever have complete freedom over their creation as long as they hope to use it on the road; I don't see there's that much difference between working within the constraints of the IVA and using an existing chassis: even if you start with a clean sheet, pick the chassis that best suits - there are plenty out there - make some adjustments, and save a load of time and hassle. I know there are people who want to be responsible for every last nut and bolt from the ground up and that's fine - but I'm not one of them; and I doubt that this was Stig's target market (especially since I may have been the straw that broke the camel's back ;-)

- Or are you suggesting that all such people are superficial?

cymtriks said:

...forces a high rear deck to clear a transverse engine

I think there a few more possibilities than an MGF and I don't see that and Ultima's proportions make it 'hopeless' - the high point of the Sonic 7's mechanical package is relatively localised. As for the Spyder (couldn't you think of anything with a lower rear deck?.... ;-P) you might just have to take your inspiration from the 550 RSK instead :-) Even if I did agree I would still suggest that it's a smaller step to fit a Honda or Impreza unit to an existing chassis to achieve a lower deck than to design something from the ground up.

cymtriks said:

Perhaps the real demand is for a bespoke body service

I hope so - if I do it well enough I might be able to give up the day job!

cymtriks said:

Typically it's the enormous hassle and space requirement of making a buck, taking molds and finally making a decent body panel that scuppers them

Soooo.... that's the stumbling block - NOT the designing, building and fettling a rolling chassis simply to get to that point? And the cure is an alloy body and 5 axis CNC? Sure; can someone please tell me the next time B&Q's doing them cheap? IIRC the thread you mention is posted by a someone who does it for a living. I can't face re-reading it again but I think he does mention an hourly rate somewhere and it's not cheap (nor would I expect it to be). As it happens, I'm not convinced about a few aspects of the styling, and a couple of things such as the front wheelarch cutout and sidevent need tidying up - but the given the effort and workmanship that's evidently gone into it I felt it curmudgeonly to say as much

For myself, 3D is out because it means learning the software: I pre-date it - Alias only arrived in my final year, there was one terminal on which only 2 of us got any significant time; and I wasn't either of them. My first priority is learning Photoshop as this might actually prove useful in the dayjob, and at this stage 3D software is an expensive indulgence. I may also farm out not only the mould taking but final finishing of the buck because I do not think I will be able to achieve the desired quality of finish myself.

Even if Stig is wrong and no-one takes him up on his offer - what's his outlay been? Minimal; but it might spark a new genre and surely this kind of thinking is to be praised? In the meantime any upstart with forthright opinions concerning styling can be challenged to walk the walk..... and if they use the excuse you seem to justify, then they can be challenged on that basis: if your 'vision' can't be realised because the wheelbase or the rear deck is an inch or two too short / long / high / low, then you ain't up to the challenge. To be blunt, car styling is a highly emotive subject about which many flatter themselves knowledgeable and seem to confuse having an opinion about it with having an aptitude for it.

At this stage I cannot in all good conscience promise I will progress beyond two dimensions but I will post some sketches based on the Rocket / Sonic 7 proportions for you to throw brickbats at...

[cymtriks]

seansverige said:

cymtriks said:

Typically it's the enormous hassle and space requirement of making a buck, taking molds and finally making a decent body panel that scuppers them

Soooo.... that's the stumbling block - NOT the designing, building and fettling a rolling chassis simply to get to that point? And the cure is an alloy body and 5 axis CNC? Sure; can someone please tell me the next time B&Q's doing them cheap? IIRC the thread you mention is posted by a someone who does it for a living. I can't face re-reading it again but I think he does mention an hourly rate somewhere and it's not cheap (nor would I expect it to be). As it happens, I'm not convinced about a few aspects of the styling, and a couple of things such as the front wheelarch cutout and sidevent need tidying up - but the given the effort and workmanship that's evidently gone into it I felt it curmudgeonly to say as much

For myself, 3D is out because it means learning the software: I pre-date it - Alias only arrived in my final year, there was one terminal on which only 2 of us got any significant time; and I wasn't either of them. My first priority is learning Photoshop as this might actually prove useful in the dayjob, and at this stage 3D software is an expensive indulgence. I may also farm out not only the mould taking but final finishing of the buck because I do not think I will be able to achieve the desired quality of finish myself.

Even if Stig is wrong and no-one takes him up on his offer - what's his outlay been? Minimal; but it might spark a new genre and surely this kind of thinking is to be praised? In the meantime any upstart with forthright opinions concerning styling can be challenged to walk the walk..... and if they use the excuse you seem to justify, then they can be challenged on that basis: if your 'vision' can't be realised because the wheelbase or the rear deck is an inch or two too short / long / high / low, then you ain't up to the challenge. To be blunt, car styling is a highly emotive subject about which many flatter themselves knowledgeable and seem to confuse having an opinion about it with having an aptitude for it.

At this stage I cannot in all good conscience promise I will progress beyond two dimensions but I will post some sketches based on the Rocket / Sonic 7 proportions for you to throw brickbats at...

I'm probably guilty of thinking from the point of view of a structural engineer! To me the triangulation of a spaceframe (i.e. one that is actually triangulated and actually lighter and stiffer than a ladder frame unlike the majority of chassis out there) isn't an issue and working through suspension calcs is just trig, which I do day in day out at work.

Seriously, a lot of one off builders do have very clear ideas regarding the whole design. Typically they describe their project as "looking like cars x, y, and z with drivetrain from a or b"

Regarding a one off body supplier the 5 axis comments were assuming some kind of limited production or very deep pockets. Perhaps there is some half way house between doing it all by hand and doing it the 3D model-5axis route that is the least expensive overall? If you used your skills for other projects to spread the cost (boat hulls, bath tub molds, etc) it might be just viable to to do some cars as well. Are you actually planning to start a kit car version of a styling house? This sounds very interesting!

Regarding the styling on the thread I mentioned, I'd do it differently to, but it's not my dream, it's theirs.

Like it or not the mechanical arrangement that goes under the body work, chassis and drivetrain, have a huge effect on the styling options. If you can see your styling on that chassis then all is well. If you can compromise a bit it's still good. But what if you really do want a different set of proportions somewhere?Many styling attempts are ruined by trying to force a look on a car that just doesn't work. I'd second your comments about styling. I think that many attempts fail because the designers fail to appreciate how a design will look when it's not on an A4 sheet of paper, in 3D, in real daylight, full size and has real proportions. That last one being my pet hate of "styling concepts", they almost never have wheels or doors or a roof line that would actually work on a real car.

I'll not throw brickbats at any ideas you post, but I will offer a constructive opinion in good faith!

[cymtriks]

seansverige said:

At this stage I cannot in all good conscience promise I will progress beyond two dimensions but I will post some sketches based on the Rocket / Sonic 7 proportions for you to throw brickbats at...

Beat you to it.

Edited by cymtriks on Sunday 10th May 10:45

[seansverige]

seansverige said:

my primary interest is in the exterior and interior design

cymtriks said:

structural engineer

Now that our allegiances are declared, let battle commence! ;-)

I did suspect from your tone you were coming from an engineering perspective. Personally maths isn't the problem, it's the fabrication - my welding's sh!te and if I measure 5 times I still cut wrong(ce), but I know one end of a spanner from another and removing and reassembling parts in a new configuration is no problem and actually fun.

cymtriks said:

Are you actually planning to start a kit car version of a styling house?

No. To be blunt, the kit car sector doesn't value styling that highly and even those that pay lip service to the importance of aesthetics rarely seem to see the necessity of professional design input; couple that with the fact that exo's are in ascendent (and likely to remain so) which have minimal styling content, and I don't see this changing anytime soon. Having said that, I've witnessed p*ssing and moaning on this topic from designers yet don't see anyone putting their money where their mouth is; I think this takes away one hurdle and if they complain that they can't work with predetermined proportions then how would they expect to practise professionally? IF there is a gap in the market at all then surely providing a rebody service to existing designs offering value add to the kit car maker?

This thread is a result of a debate that started in the MEV Atomic thread. I've lived all over Europe in the last 11 years, but my location may be stable long enough for me to build a kit, so after 10+ years away I'm researching the kitcar scene with a view to finding a basis for a personal project, and trawling through the forums I couldn't help stick my oar in. I was curious about the relative cost / risk of developing the Atomic against another body for the Rocket. Of course, I'm an outsider coming from a design perspective so to me a rebody not only seems a easier option but there are few competing good, original designs and I want to know how far adrift of reality this view is.

I'm still trying to get a feel for the current state of the industry as a whole, but from my perspective rather than the IVA being draconian I think in comparison to the mass market legislation it allows low volume makers to do things the big boys simply can't, i.e. the stylists would in fact have more freedom. So my interest has been piqued generally - what kind of design would appeal to a kitcar audience? In the other thread I suggested a number of basic themes: race, fully body retro, fully enclosed (i.e. weatherproof) - and I'll post variations on each just for fun (my own design will be selected on a purely personal basis and may not be posted at all.)

cymtriks said:

...what if you really do want a different set of proportions somewhere?

If the Sonic 7's proportions don't suit there are many alternatives out there - from the Midtec Spyder at one extreme to a sevenalike at the other. If as a designer you're ideas are limited to a given set of proportions, it's a pretty damning indictment of your abilities. For myself the thing I'm most worried about - and with apologies to Stig, this may be where the Spectre swings it - is the cabin area: the one thing I'm certain of is that a I want a fully enclosed bodywork and the relatively narrow cabin and the associated ingress / egress issues may make the car more waisted than otherwise ideal.

cymtriks said:

I think that many attempts fail because the designers fail to appreciate how a design will look when it's not on an A4 sheet of paper, in 3D, in real daylight, full size and has real proportions. That last one being my pet hate of "styling concepts", they almost never have wheels or doors or a roof line that would actually work on a real car.

Agree and disagree - I think many who have aspirations of being a stylist think that a flashy rendering is the be-all and end-all, and even more unfortunately some can complete their training and still not have the proper respect for engineering. However in the early theme sketches where the basic elements are being determined trying to represent proper tyres and wheelarch clearances not only is of little value it can actually interfere with the process. You may be able to level those criticisms at some of my sketches, especially regarding the wheels - as a personal rule of thumb, the wheel actually describes the body cut-out in early sketches.

Without wanting to sound like a grumpy old man or turn this is into a rambling broader debate I will just say that there seem to be an awful lot more places offering transport design as a degree in the last 10-ish years, and I'm not convinced by the overall qualityof the output or that there are significantly more jobs out there than there used to be - or at least not enough to correlate with the increase in students.

My problem with both PS and 3D software is that they can flatter to deceive and whatever medium we talk about, two dimensions are a poor substitute for three; 3D software is a tool and not a subsitute for a good design grounding or actually experimenting in three dimensions.

What do you meaning by "styling concepts"? If concept cars, then that's whole other debate...

[seansverige]

cymtriks said:

Beat you to it

maybe, but you seem to have butchered the chassis' upper member in the process ;-P

PS you've got mail

[singlecoil]

seansverige said:

cymtriks said:

Beat you to it

maybe, but you seem to have butchered the chassis' upper member in the process ;-P

PS you've got mail

I think a worse problem is that there is very little room for the front wheels to turn when steering. This is always a problem with open-wheeled mid engine cars, the passenger compartment needs to be wide enough to accommodate 2 people, but it is too close to the front wheels to allow the classic 7 type straight sides to the front wheels

[fuoriserie]

seansverige said:

seansverige said:

No. To be blunt, the kit car sector doesn't value styling that highly and even those that pay lip service to the importance of aesthetics rarely seem to see the necessity of professional design input;
..

Sean I do agree with you .......,

Edited by fuoriserie on Sunday 10th May 21:14

[seansverige]

Actually I ignored that on the assumption that this issue has been dealt with in the Sonic 7 / Rocket and if so, easily solved by staying faithful to the chassis at that point.