Designing a kit, what to consider APART FROM THE DESIGN!

[singlecoil]

Lots of threads dealing with design, but I reckon that although a good design is good, and a bad desigh bad, that it's not by any means the most important aspect of any potential kit car.

The most important aspect, of course, is the price. However, there are many others, and this thread will, hopefully, provide an opportunity for us to discuss them.

I will start off with ease of building. Some kits demand a lot more of their customers than others. Usually this is reflected in the price (one notorious make at the cheap end of the spectrum being particularly bad in this respect). I don't see any reason why anyone designing a kit shouldn't pay attention to this area, making sure that the kits can be assembled by an inexperienced builder.

[seansverige]

singlecoil said:

design... not by any means the most important aspect of any potential kit car.

The most important aspect, of course, is the price

Can't agree with either point and would argue that these kind of statements are why there are aren't any new Midas' or Libras being developed. And although you say price I'm taking that to mean cost, which I think is an obsession in the industry when it should be focussing on value: the lowest cost doesn't necessarily offer best value. I may be in a minority but personally I would pay more for a higher quality product, but I don't think anyone buys anything they think is overpriced.

I don't believe it's inherently more expensive to develop a good design rather than a bad one (though skillset is clearly an issue) and - all else being equal - people WILL pay more for good design, but I don't think design alone is enough.

I'm just shooting the design breeze & don't have any aspirations in the industry. I'd call myself a impassioned onlooker giving a largely outsiders view of what I'd like to see made for which I think there is a market, but these days frankly if it's not Exo then it has no chance.

singlecoil said:

ease of building

Agreed, and given your line of business maybe you could cite good examples - or common failings. For myself, I think single donor is the way to go, and I'd like it if it was simply unbolt from donor attach to kit

I am a qualified transport designer who's never practised professionally (long story) and am looking at a personal project. I'm interested only in exterior / interior design, which is why the intention is to rebody an existing kit - I'm looking at the Sonic7 or formerly-Spectre. Could you nominate some other good kits as potential rebody subjects? Might be fun to play with some ideas.

Edited by seansverige on Monday 19th October 10:37

[cymtriks]

Donor vehicle:
Some choices are just bizzare. The best choice has to be a newly introduced model from a major manufacturer. This ensures plenty of parts long into the future.

Engine/driveline choice:
Closely related to the above and again there are some odd choices. The Midtec for example used a renault box that often came complete with a ready fitted Renault engine but the options list actually assumed that you'd be paying extra to fit a Ford Cortina engine for no reason at all.

Marketing and advertising:
You must do this. Most companies don't do it very well. It doesn't stop at a few mail shots and a website.

Build Options:
Limit them to, ideally, one route to the finish which is tried and tested. Do not tell people that any engine will fit with any transmision and any wheel size.

Ease of build:
Take doors for example. Have you ever tried shiming a hinge to adjust a door gap? I've often thought that it would be easier to fix the hinge and adjust the mountings of the door skin on the door frame.

Encourage an owners club:
Free publicity and help for customers

[JoePublic]

I'd second the ease of building comment. I was doing some jobs on my current toy over the weekend and it occured to me I could probably now have a bash at building a very straightforward complete kit, but - having seen a friend struggling with an old Sylva Stylus kit - I wouldn't even consider one of the more 'involved' offerings.

To that end I think you need a very clear, comprehensive build manual. Don't be afraid to patronise people - state everything for the lowest common denominator (someone like me!)

In a similar vein, you need to establish support at the factory, or better still a rudimentary dealer network. I've owned (pre-built) kits in the past and one of them was a rare design (now out of production), where I had to work out everything for myself, which was occasionally daunting. With a production car (even something quite specialist) there's a wealth of knowlege and support. Obviously you can't magic a dealer network out of thin air, but if you could provide a regularly checked owners' forum or something that would be a good start. Anything to prevent an inexperienced builder/owner feeling they're on their own.

[seansverige]

cymtriks said:

Donor vehicle:
Some choices are just bizarre.

Agreed - and could be the subject of its own thread. You've got stuff like the Scorpion GTZ which I guess is simply old: the 240z probably was a good donor choice way back when - and surely is screaming for redevelopment on, say, a BMW platform?

Then you have, as you say, the truly bizarre - am I imagining a Lancia 037 replica, based on a Lancia Beta Monte Carlo or did it really exist? The 037 is one of my favourite, favourite cars and I can of course see the logic - but who thought this was ever going to be a profitable enterprise??

Single donor car should (if done right) go a long way to addressing the engine / driveline issue. To me many older kitcars seem to be 'eye of newt, leg of frog' list of cobbled together components.

Marketing & advertising: yep - having a finished product is in many ways the start of the process not the end

Don't know much about doors, but having worked my way through some threads Italo suggested this does seem to be a hot topic for you - should I even ask why?

Encourage an owners club: sort of related to marketing & advertising - I cannot believe how underused the internet is by most manufacturers (though the kitcar industry is not especially atypical in this regard). It is possible to set up a 5 page website, with links to a blog and a gallery for nothing more than your time - that will only be a few hours worth. If you know of an owners club or a build blog - publicise on your website: it's all brand building.

[thescamper]

JoePublic said:

To that end I think you need a very clear, comprehensive build manual. Don't be afraid to patronise people - state everything for the lowest common denominator (someone like me!)

Caterham are the only 'kit' manufacturer that does this properly. To write a monkey see monkey do build manual is very very time consuming and unless manufacturers are prepared to pay for the services of an author or genuinely have the skills themselves then anything else is going to be guidance and not a set of instructions.

There have been discussions on this forum recently about how tight particular bolts should be and the correct procedure for torquing them. This is the sort of data that would need to be included. Think haynes manuals and you wont be far wrong.

[Joe T]

seansverige said:

I don't believe it's inherently more expensive to develop a good design rather than a bad one (though skillset is clearly an issue) and - all else being equal - people WILL pay more for good design, but I don't think design alone is enough.

I'm just shooting the design breeze & don't have any aspirations in the industry. I'd call myself a impassioned onlooker giving a largely outsiders view of what I'd like to see made for which I think there is a market, but these days frankly if it's not Exo then it has no chance.

I am not convinced about the above statement, I suppose its a matter of defining a good design, I am sure a lot can be spent on a bad design but you would hope someone would call a halt on the process and a rethink carried out.
But I believe generally to design a body & chassis from scratch a significant amount has to be spent. Does the kit car market support that kind of expenditure currently?

When you look at Exo's specifically you can see that the cost of developing these can be reduced, but is that only on the back of all the work the early players in the market like Arial etc did. So to be clear they spent a lot of money on a design thats now been modded and developed by others.

To be subjective I wonder if potential customers can spot a good design? what do others think? to me it does seem as though price is more important than design in this industry.

Single Donor all for that, but it can be hard to predict what the availability of parts for certain cars will be like in the future.

Thanks

Joe T

[JoePublic]

thescamper said:

JoePublic said:

To that end I think you need a very clear, comprehensive build manual. Don't be afraid to patronise people - state everything for the lowest common denominator (someone like me!)

Caterham are the only 'kit' manufacturer that does this properly. To write a monkey see monkey do build manual is very very time consuming and unless manufacturers are prepared to pay for the services of an author or genuinely have the skills themselves then anything else is going to be guidance and not a set of instructions.

There have been discussions on this forum recently about how tight particular bolts should be and the correct procedure for torquing them. This is the sort of data that would need to be included. Think haynes manuals and you wont be far wrong.

Yep. Caterham in general have that 'almost a production car' thing that makes them a very easy ownership prospect.

I don't think you have to be inept to wonder what torque a bolt should go to. Yes, kit car builders tend to be a fairly well informed bunch and you get some absolutely superb cars improvised from some very basic kits, but you get some monstrosities too. Anything that takes away that random element has to be a good thing - it would certainly make kits a lot more accessible.

[singlecoil]

seansverige said:

singlecoil said:

design... not by any means the most important aspect of any potential kit car.

The most important aspect, of course, is the price

Can't agree with either point and would argue that these kind of statements are why there are aren't any new Midas' or Libras being developed. And although you say price I'm taking that to mean cost, which I think is an obsession in the industry when it should be focussing on value: the lowest cost doesn't necessarily offer best value.

Perhaps I should have provided some context.

What I mean is that it is pointless anyone designng a kit which is easy to put together, with an excellent manual, perfectly fitting doors (etc etc) if the price meant that most people could not afford to buy it.

Also it is true that value is more important than price, but my point above still applies, the value might be very good indeed but if the price is too high......

seansverige said:

Don't know much about doors, but having worked my way through some threads Italo suggested this does seem to be a hot topic for you - should I even ask why?

Well, one big problem with kit car doors if that they very often don't fit. Part of the problem is that the doors need to be double skinned, and when the two parts are bonded they distort, and the finished assembly no longer fits the door aperture. Which is a nuisance and very difficult to put right if that is ewven possible.

[singlecoil]

Thinking about the value thing again- I think part of the problem is that it is very difficult for a potential customer to assess the value of an offering. Kit car builders are all inclined to be ( I know I was with my first kit) dreamers. They have a picture of how it is all going to go together, how long it is going to take, and how much it is going to cost. After the build starts they usually have to revise that picture, and it won't be until quite a way into the build will they be able to make an assessment of the value of the kit they have bought.

In any case, value is a comparative term, and unless they have built other kits in the past (and haven't wiped the memories from their mind ) then they won't have a yardstick to compare the respective values.

This means that a person setting out to design, build and offer to the public a kit will have to make his own judgement of how much value to offer, and at what price.






Amongst other things that a kit designer will want to consider is how much room to provide to the occupants. Most car designers, it seems, are people of limited physical stature, and as long as they can get in it they seems to think that's ok. Lotus have been carrying on the tradition set by their founder til the present day.

Providing an extra few inches of legroom or hip width is quite difficult, which is why I expect so many manufacturers don't bother. I once had a Marlin in for some work, and I simply could not get in it. It wasn't that I could get in but be somewhat uncomfortable, such as would be the case in a Rover Mini, but this Marlin was actually impossible.

[seansverige]

Joe T said:

you would hope someone would call a halt on the process and a rethink carried out

Really - who? A lot of these ventures are one man bands and no-one knowingly designs badly. Is there a masked man roaming the land, saving these people from themselves - not that they'd listen anyway

To clarify, when I say design I mean exterior / interior design - the oily bits are engineering, and the market your aiming at is defined by the overall concept.

I guess it's that generally I'm losing tolerance for fools who think having an opinion about car design is the same as having skill for it. Car design is a highly skilled task, but dismissing it as superficial styling promotes this idea that anyone can have a go. It doesn't help that there's barely any critical debate within that sector when compared to Architecture, Graphics or Fashion: why not - the car was one of the most significant artifacts of 20th society.

Although subjective, there are rules and you do need an aptitude for it: unfortunately I know from personal experience that even some of the more established courses are pretty woeful, and whilst a talented amateur can still have a go, those with actual talent is very small percentage of those who think they have talent. Music is also highly subjective but most people realise they couldn't write a No.1 simply based on what they like and don't like.

It also doesn't help there's a lot of bullsh*t out there in the mainstream and crap that is the product of 'professionals'. The Aztek was mainstream, so was the Scorpio, so is the Rodius. I know from friends in the industry that the designers don't always have the final say, but my brother is an automotive engineer and I'm embarrassed at some of the sh*t he's had with designers: it seems that the terms 'design' & 'designers' cover a broad spectrum in which a multitude of sins can hide.

Joe T said:

I believe generally to design a body & chassis from scratch a significant amount has to be spent

No argument here, my point was that for that same amount you can end up with results of very differing quality, and exterior design is very much seen as optional rather than mandatory. I was going to repeat the point about have a go charleys, but I'm sure Cymtriks and others have the same complaint about some of the chassis' out there. For myself, if my venture progresses, even though it's only intended as a one off, I will be buying in the necessary expertise.

Joe T said:

they spent a lot of money on a design thats now been modded and developed by others

errr, no - unless you're saying all Exos are developed by copying - in detail - the Atom. Whilst the development costs of an Exo are inherently lower because of their stripped out nature, all the Atom was give them the idea. The MEV Rocket might not have existed were it not for the Atom, but I'd be interested to hear if Stuart thought he was saved any development costs simply because the Atom exists

Joe T said:

To be subjective I wonder if potential customers can spot a good design?

YES! Another music analogy - recognising a great tune is not the same as creating one. Did you really need to be told that an E-Type is beautiful - or a Rodius is ugly?

Joe T said:

hard to predict what the availability of parts for certain cars will be like in the future

You reckon? I predict parts for the current, past and future Focus, Fiesta, and Mondeo with be available for the 15-20 years (barring climate change meltdown, in which case I think parts availablity will be the least of our concerns). Ditto every mainstream BMW, M-B, VW, Opel, Peugeot and so on and so forth. And what is this obsession with long term anyway? If you can't recover your costs in 5 years, then your design/strategy/business case needs rethinking; or is this an admission that old kits never die?

Re: manuals - again with the interweb: make some videos and upload them onto youtube. Was researching some custom printed pint glasses a few weeks ago and salesman had done 15-20sec on each model: really, really useful.

[The Black Flash]

cymtriks said:

Build Options:
Limit them to, ideally, one route to the finish which is tried and tested. Do not tell people that any engine will fit with any transmision and any wheel size.

Interesting point of view. One of the factors which steered me towards my choice of kit was the ability to go "off piste" as it were, and to know that the manufacturer would support that.

I'd agree that one or more tried and tested routes is a good thing, but being completely rigid about it will put some people off.

[seansverige]

singlecoil said:

What I mean is that it is pointless anyone designng a kit which is easy to put together, with an excellent manual, perfectly fitting doors (etc etc) if the price meant that most people could not afford to buy it.

Agreed - not quite the same but in my view Noble is making any potential M600 customers pay for it's tortuous development and aborted M14 & M15. I wish them well but I just can't see them finding anywhere near 50 customers - a year - in the UK alone!

singlecoil said:

value might be very good indeed but if the price is too high......

disagree - do you mean quality? Good value = optimal quality / price ratio, 'overpriced value' is an oxymoron. And in this context by quality I mean something that offers a reasonable alternative to the mainstream in terms of exterior / interior design sophistication. In eighties, Car magazine was happy to test Midas' as a credible alternative, the landscape now is very different but I think the principle still remains (though whether you'd make a living out of it....)

Don't get me wrong, quality in the sense I think you mean it (ease of build, etc) is critically important, but is difficult to debate in any great detail as an abstract. This kind of thread and your kind of knowledge and experience would be fantastic in conjunction with a 'live' project; or maybe we should start and 'open source' kitcar project (like that wouldn't cause any arguments )

Let's be honest, a lot of the design threads I think you're referring to are war stories: self indulgent rather than rigorous, and maybe even a little masturbatory... (a classification that could be applied to much internet debate? )

singlecoil said:

...how much room to provide to the occupants

Agreed - were I designing a kitcar from the ground up, ergonomics would very much be my starting point of the detailed design phase. As with exterior design, good ergonomics aren't inherently more expensive than bad ones

Edited by seansverige on Monday 19th October 15:04

Edited by seansverige on Monday 19th October 15:07

[andygtt]

Seems Im completely off the mark with peoples views with my car then as Im using more than one donor (porsche 996 and BMW) and Im an amature who hasnt spent a lot designing my body & chasis.

I think cost is a consideration but I see quality being more important to buyers... how many choose a robin hood if they can afford an MK indy?... if cost was the major driver then Ultima wouldnt sell kits!

Of cause there is a limit to how good the quality needs to be and this is were the skill will come in as if you go overboad the product then becomes poor value.

I must say that I did put a lot of thought into my donor parts and in fact only use the parts due to their specific quality of each item... for example I used porsche hubs in bespoke alloy uprights so that I could use the bigger wheel bearings they offer.... it also allows aftermarket upgrades for porsche to be used such as brakes and wheels which are a significant cost on a porful mid engined car.
EngineI chose BMW because of the quality and also to differentiate myself from other mid engined cars were the norm is a V8 (mines a V12).

Its all about Adding Value... think carefull about every item that goes into the kit and make sure the quality is matched throughout.. ie dont have one high quality item if the rest is poor and visa versa.

Of cause the most important thing is that the kit looks good, but then for this thread we are ignoring that right lol

[seansverige]

singlecoil said:

one big problem with kit car doors if that they very often don't fit. Part of the problem is that the doors need to be double skinned, and when the two parts are bonded they distort

Showing my ignorance here, but when you say double skinned do you mean inner and outer? Are most doors solely GRP - no metal subframe? Assuming they could be sourced cheaply and have been properly integrated into the exterior design, what problems would there be using a donor door, and either replacing the skin or fitting a panel on top?

[singlecoil]

seansverige said:

singlecoil said:

value might be very good indeed but if the price is too high......

disagree - do you mean quality? Good value = optimal quality / price ratio, 'overpriced value' is an oxymoron.

I don't want to take this thread off topic by discussing the finer meanings of cost, value or price.

Can we just agree that as there is no feasible way in which a potential buyer can assess the value of the kit (beyond the obvious- eg Ultima worth more than Robin Hood, therefore if the same price, Ultima better value) before he buys it, that the price that he has to pay is the most significant factor?

[singlecoil]

seansverige said:

singlecoil said:

one big problem with kit car doors if that they very often don't fit. Part of the problem is that the doors need to be double skinned, and when the two parts are bonded they distort

Showing my ignorance here, but when you say double skinned do you mean inner and outer? Are most doors solely GRP - no metal subframe? Assuming they could be sourced cheaply and have been properly integrated into the exterior design, what problems would there be using a donor door, and either replacing the skin or fitting a panel on top?

A Cobra replica door would be the most frequently encountered example of a kit car door (many/most kits not having doors at all). Lets take a brand X Cobra for instance. The outer skin is glass fibre, and the inner skin is also glass fibre, shaped to provide a mounting for the door card, door catches and door hinge. Simililar to what you might find in a steel production car.

The brand x has some metal bonded into the laminations to give the hinges something to bolt too, but nothing beyond that.

It's part of the GRP process that some shrinkage will take place, and with a structure like a double skinned door that will almost certainly involve some distortion. The better manufacturers will control this, or allow for it, or deal with it in whatever way works for them.

Ginetta made some cars that used the donor doors, but I can't think of any current kits that are able to do so (ie donor door the wrong shape)

Edited by singlecoil on Monday 19th October 18:27

[singlecoil]

andygtt said:

I think cost is a consideration but I see quality being more important to buyers... how many choose a robin hood if they can afford an MK indy?... if cost was the major driver then Ultima wouldnt sell kits!

Of cause there is a limit to how good the quality needs to be and this is were the skill will come in as if you go overboad the product then becomes poor value.

Perhaps this a point of view thing. The Ultima is a very good example, because there are a great many people who would love to have one, but simply can't afford one. To them, the cost is indeed the most important thing when they come to choose a kit, inasmuch as it sets the most important selection parameter. The buyer can only choose between those kits that fall within his price range.

I recognise that, for instance, a new Volvo 4WD would be better quality than my M reg 960, but it certainly wouldn't be better value (to me, anyway). Why not? Because it would cost a great deal more. So quality, value and price are all closely interwoven, but when it comes time to write the cheque, it's the price that gets written in

[seansverige]

@AndyGTT: I must admit I've not read your build story in full, but I was under the impression that you were building this as a one off for yourself , not to offer as a kit per se. Am I wrong - and if so, is this a common development path for kitcars?

[andygtt]

singlecoil said:

andygtt said:

I think cost is a consideration but I see quality being more important to buyers... how many choose a robin hood if they can afford an MK indy?... if cost was the major driver then Ultima wouldnt sell kits!

Of cause there is a limit to how good the quality needs to be and this is were the skill will come in as if you go overboad the product then becomes poor value.

Perhaps this a point of view thing. The Ultima is a very good example, because there are a great many people who would love to have one, but simply can't afford one. To them, the cost is indeed the most important thing when they come to choose a kit, inasmuch as it sets the most important selection parameter. The buyer can only choose between those kits that fall within his price range.

I recognise that, for instance, a new Volvo 4WD would be better quality than my M reg 960, but it certainly wouldn't be better value (to me, anyway). Why not? Because it would cost a great deal more. So quality, value and price are all closely interwoven, but when it comes time to write the cheque, it's the price that gets written in

But buying within your price range is a different issue all together... those that dont have £1k to spend are also priced out of the market just a much as those that dont have £40k.
Are we not talking about kits generally and the point Ultima prove is that given enough money in their pocket a lot of the potential kit builders would choose their product because of the perceived quality.
And Ultima despite their huge cost sell a lot more kits than a large number of the cheaper kit producers!