Open Design Discussion and What's NEXT!

[Dave Smith]

Guys,

First of all please understand that Jim in R&D is suffering a permanent eye-twitch right now as I type this... He doesnt know why, but the start of this thread is the cosmic source. Jim is super-talented and he really has an excellent vision of this new design. He does NOT want this to evolve into a nuetered crowd-sourced, please everyone car and there is so much already fixed in the design.

Lets have some feedback though on body shape as so much chassis engineering is already done on CAD.

Here are the Goals of the car and the facts to date:

Design to be a "World Platform" Factory Five: This means running gear that is available in major parts of the world like Asia, UK-Europe, Middle-East, Australia/New Zealand... etc. We are planning on exporting the FFR experience to the world!

Based on Single Donor Subaru WRX Running Gear: Tough, economical, wide variety of source cars/models, performance capable, solid aftermarket, loyal following.

Chassis: Factory Five Space Frame Chassis, 95" Wheel Base is optimal for small-lightwieght perfomance car. Add wookie-capable interior/space as goal.

Layout: Mid-Engine, Rear Wheel Drive Configuration, two seater roadster

Target weight - 1,800 lbs.

Body: Shape in-process and design competiton, goal is no paint, gel coat panels form

Target Kit Price: $9,900

Target Vehicle Completion Cost Under $15,000: People may doubt this but it CAN be done with vectors that have only come together recently... Late mmodel and plentiful performance-based donor parts pool, and only possible by leveraging our design and manufacturing partners and recent technology on robotic welding, CNC design-based molding, and manufacturing, and our collective experience with making over 8,000 kits for 15 years.

Design Partners: Can't say it enough. No kit car company can accomplish these goals that we have set for the project without full up-front integration of chassis engineering with Solidworks, Body design and shaping on CAD and the correct combo of engineering and design that the team here has amassed. The computer and latest CNC tech will make this happen (already has been part of the project from inception).

Lets talk about what you want to see on body design and any other engineering questions you may have. I would love to see cars like the attack and Porschge 918 and lotus 211 that seem to come close (if someone knows how to post photos, I'd love to see em on this post (I'm still lagging on the forum skills), but the design competiton will be the best place to formally do this. March 1st is the competition launch date. We will have a ton more details going forward on that date.

Dave Smith
FFR001

[mrmustang]

David,

Convertible is a must, and it appears that this is the way the basic design is headed, fine, now, do you want this to be a 2 or 4 seater (2 doors of course, but with or without a functional back seat)? Drivetrain wise, if you really want this to be a "world platform", why would you not consider keeping the Subaru AWD platform. Not every country has a well traveled road system like ours and AWD would most certainly put you and your company light years ahead of any and all competition. Now, while you have the basic chassis dimensions down, you might also consider offering two different packages, both left and right hand drive (again keeping in the world platform theme) would be a start, but perhaps offering both a convertible and/or removable, fold-able hardtop. Again these are all things that cannot be ruled out by your basic wants and needs owner, regardless of where in the world they reside.


Just my two cents worth, all at first blush......


Bill S.

[RedJoker]

My must have list includes a hardtop or at least a full cage for track days. If not in the final design, maybe as an option. And I'm 6'2" so wookie compliance with helmet is important to me. :cool:

[Jmcd]

Is it possible to release the dimensions or a sketch of the chassis at this point. I think that the design will be driven somewhat by the cockpit layout, which could be vary, depending upon how much extra space there is behind the passenger firewall.

Most people don't have a suby engine / converted trans sitting around. Will the output shafts of the trans be in line with the rear hubs, or pushed forward a little? I havent fpund any specs on the engine/trans dimensions.

As far as styling goes, I would imagine that the body design would be used as a rough conceptual treatment, choose a few initial designs from the contest, and have a vote on whats best.

[forced4]

Hardtop, either fixed or removable.
Use as much as possible from WRX donor, including interior.
No frills needed and that will help keep weight down.
I don't know if you want to use the McPherson Suby front suspension but that would keep costs down.
Allow two good sized men to sit in comfort...I'm concerned mainly with width.

[PhyrraM]

I agree that too much public input will only create a less focused and less saleable product.

I'm pretty open on styling, but I prefer a finished OEM look. So, simple, easy to integrate and produce with OEM level results is better than fancy styling cues that never seem to look right. (wire mesh behind gaping openings, for example)

My only question/request would be to make accomodations for both 'widths' of Subaru chassis. CV shafts are longer on '02-'07 Impreza sedans than just about any other Subaru. If you HAVE to choose, choose the narrow cars as a base. Way more common source of donor parts.

[Jmcd]

I would also second red joker's comment on the cage, it would be good to have a six point scca/nhra legal bar integrated into the chassis, with availability of a full cage.

I tend to agree with r&d Jim that this thing should not be a watered-down hodge podge of cars that people think are cool, but rather a ground up cohesive concept with muscular looks in-line with other ffr products. So long as there is performance intent in the design, rather than garish/functionless styling exhibited in many kit cars, then the car will have the same type of international appeal that Subaru has.

More random Engineering questions-what is being used from the donor as far as running gear goes? Where are the radiator/s going? Open wheel possible? Will it have bumpers, this may be a concern internationally.

[VRaptor SpeedWorks, LLC]

Porsche 918
http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j88/vacextar/porsche-918-spyder-r-1_460x0w.jpg

Lotus 211
http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j88/vacextar/lotus-2-eleven-01.jpg

Mazda Furai
http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j88/vacextar/112_0712_07zmazda_furai_conceptfront_view.jpg

K-1 Attack
http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j88/vacextar/k1attackr22.jpg

I like the direction you're going with this, Dave. As I've posted in other threads, I think you guys have the potential to do something here that can turn this whole industry on its ear and "revolutionize" the way people view "kit cars". This has the potential of putting a car with incredible performance and awesome looks within the reach of......well, ME! My vote is for something fairly radical styling-wise.....like the Attack or Mazda Furai......something that's going to get noticed and make jaws drop. I also like the looks of the Porsche and Lotus, but to me, the Lotus is even looking a bit bland......lacking character. As I posted in another thread, having built an Attack, I still have yet to find a car that I think was better looking. It's just a down-right bad-a$$ looking car. Period. As with the GTM, what many don't realize by just looking at the pics of the Attack was how LOW it was....the top of the windshield coming right to my belt-loops.....just like the roof of the GTM.

I'm also in favor of keeping things SIMPLE with this car mechanically so it IS easy to assemble and keeps the weight and cost down. I would also be in favor of more of a targa top version or something at least in the Attack range where you have a permanent (but stylish!) roll cage behind the seats. Good Luck!

[Imp]

Layout: Mid-Engine, Rear Wheel Drive Configuration, two seater roadster
Is the engine going to be in front of, or behind, the driver?

Just saying 'Mid-Engine' could be either, as long as it's behind the front axle or in front of the rear axle.

--kC

[Jmcd]

It seems that the engine will be behind the driver, with a subaru transaxle sans rear output shaft.

[Dave Smith]

1. Engine behind driver AWD in RWD config.
2.. Mr. Mustang, I see your point in the awd, but the balance of simplicity and build has to consider this. Also when I say "world car" it is more from the simple fact that almost every FFR that goes to export (about 1 in 5!) is in the same tough spot for running gear, so the ref "World Car" was making it easy to build a, FFR in Australis as much as here (includes RHD considerations also).
3. Shane: I LOVE your feedback as youve built the attack, GTMs and really dig on the photos.
4. Forced4: agree

Does the attack have any type of top?

[Jmcd]

Hey Dave, any feedback on posts 4 or 7 regarding layout/running gear? Also, whatis the target date to start shipping kits?

[Dave Smith]

Jmcd,

The design competiton will spell out dimensions carefully and I imagine the CAD files will show shaft location, trans and engine etc. We will have OUR concept design entered into the competition and hopefully at design competition launch to give people an idea of the metrics and a potential scope/style.

As far as launch dates and production dates, we have launched four cars and as many modified versions ALL on time (Spyder GT, Mk3 Roadster, Mk3.1 Roadster, GTM, Hot Rod, Mk4 Roadster, Gen 2 GTM, and now Type 65 Coupe). At this time there is NO production dates. I dont want to get people excited about a car, get betas all lined up and promise dates, and then make excuses for a year about why the dates never happened.

Another thing about launches... Every new product we've done has gotten progressively better, more accurate, and with less snags. This car will carry that record forward. If I were to GUESS, I would say we would be in production next year. It's not as far away as you might think, and keep in mind that we've been working on the design already for a year on and off.

Specifics will come when they are for sure, but lets focus on the design competiton and on seeing if the driving chassis go-kart can do domuts at open house in the summer while the body gets made.

Hope that answers your questions.

Dave

[VRaptor SpeedWorks, LLC]

Hey Dave,

When I built the Attack, there was no top of any kind available for it. The ones I've seen in photos here, I don't know if that's something K-1 came up with later on, or something that owners/builders came up with on their own. IMO, the simplest thing (you know I like to keep it simple!) to do to try to please everyone would be to build your car as a Targa top......simple removable fg panel, much like the C5 Corvette. This might also satisfy the guys who want full roll cages, as they could just weld in (optional?) tubes from the windshield to the rear roll bar, and the targa top could still hide the bars when installed, and still have that "open top" feel with the roof removed. Just a thought.

[Jmcd]

Thanks Dave, I will be at the open house with deposit money in hand!

[Dave Smith]

That's cool. I'd love to see what the resolution of the attack top is (convert or targa). Simple simple simple. absolutely. I spoke to a guy who is planning on entering the design competiton who is a designer at a major company and excited about taking on our guys. The key to the design since the fundamentals are relatively set is going to be the shape. The good news is that once selected, the shape will go to manufacturing quickly and there wont be a million hands in the in-process stage that can result in a bland or mis-directed style. The GTM was driven by Jims vision with help from some very qualified guys, but still, stayed on course because of Jims vision for the car and its prupose. I cant get to March 1 fast enough!

Dave Smith
FFR001

[Steve91T]

Dave, I've been a fan of Factory Five for many years. This new car will allow me to afford one much sooner rather than later. I'm sure this is true for many other people also.

My dad has a Lotus Elise. Everyone knows the reason that car is so amazing is because it's light. Even with only 190hp, it is very fast on the track. What's also really nice is that it can run back to back sessions, with no problems with heat. The water temp will raise about 6 degrees and that's it. The tires and brakes also stay cool. And because of this, they last a very long time. This makes it very cheap to operate.

I think 4wd should be out of the question. It's going to add weight and complexity. And you're just not going to need it. Imagine if the lotus was 4wd, what would you gain? Mid engine cars already have tons of traction.

You know, even if this car ends up weighing 2000 lbs and costing $20,000 total, it'll still be a hell of a car for the price. There's nothing even close.

Personally, I'd like to have a roof. I'm not an open roof fan. Removable top would be cool with me, as long as it's not a fabric top.

Do you think you'd be able to create some down force with the design? Look at the lap speeds between the regular Lotus and the Exige. Of course it's got 30 more hp, but the down force the body creates makes a big difference in cornering speeds.

Also, are you guys thinking about spec racing?

I'm excited for what you guys are doing. I really feel this car is going to be very popular.

Steve

[Mike N]

For most people a car like that is not a practical everyday vehicle but assuming that the idea is to make a usable vehicle here is what is on my shopping list in order for a road car.

The styling of any of the cars shown above works for me. I'm sure the final design that is chosen will be stunning.
I want a car that I can drive 100 - 200 miles on a weekend without getting beat up, blown away or going deaf.
I want at least some trunk storage space, enough for an overnight bag.
The driving position and control locations need to ergonomically friendly for a 6ft plus driver, shoulder room , leg room, dead pedal etc.
I want a car I can take to the track or autoX so a full roll bar compliant to typical broom stick test is a must.
I'm sure Jim will do a great job on the suspension design but it should be somewhat tunable and have a nice range of alignment adjustments.
It should be able to handle a hot-rodded Subie motor say around 500 HP without coming apart at the seams.
Donor power steering would be nice.
Donor power brakes and ABS would be nice.
Heat and AC would be nice.

[Steve91T]

For most people a car like that is not a practical everyday vehicle but assuming that the idea is to make a usable vehicle here is what is on my shopping list in order for a road car.

The styling of any of the cars shown above works for me. I'm sure the final design that is chosen will be stunning.
I want a car that I can drive 100 - 200 miles on a weekend without getting beat up, blown away or going deaf.
I want at least some trunk storage space, enough for an overnight bag.
The driving position and control locations need to ergonomically friendly for a 6ft plus driver, shoulder room , leg room, dead pedal etc.
I want a car I can take to the track or autoX so a full roll bar compliant to typical broom stick test is a must.
I'm sure Jim will do a great job on the suspension design but it should be somewhat tunable and have a nice range of alignment adjustments.
It should be able to handle a hot-rodded Subie motor say around 500 HP without coming apart at the seams.
Donor power steering would be nice.
Donor power brakes and ABS would be nice.
Heat and AC would be nice.

I don't think power steering would be needed. A car this light, and mid engine, power steering would probably make the feedback numb.

[PhyrraM]

I'm thinking full donor dash would make it really livable. That might reduce the pool of Subaru donors though, depending on how it integrates with the bodywork.

[mrmustang]

Dave,

How stuck are you at your current wheelbase? I ask that because a typical WRX is 99.4" vs your 95", is that extra 4.4" a deal killer? Do you believe that in all honesty you could not stretch the wheelbase and retain that AWD configuration in a true bolt on/in fashion?

Top wise, have you looked closely at the Lotus Elise with it's simple and elegant design/style?

Bill S.

'310307308309

[Acheron315]

What about the Rossion for styling cues? It's simple, appealing, aerodynamic, and midengined as well. http://rossioncars.com/ No big angles, extra scoops, or other bits to drive cost or mold complexity up.


A big consideration on mid-engined turbo cars is where to put the intercooler, and I would make accomodations for both the stock and much wider upgraded intercoolers that are a common mod.

I used to own a heavily modded MR2 turbo and the intercooler was a constant source of headache as there was literally no good place to put an intercooler much larger than stock.

[Jmcd]

It would be cool to have all wheel drive, but you have to look at the configuration of the wrx, having some of the trans and all of the engine ahead of the front axle line, in a lighter car, the handling would be very much compromised. Plus, they are sticking to the chassis they have.

[Mike N]

I don't think power steering would be needed. A car this light, and mid engine, power steering would probably make the feedback numb.

Steve. I agree that power steering would not be a deal breaker but for things like autoX it is a very big plus. I enjoy my roadster with manual steering but it is a handful on a fast slalom just because of the effort required in quick left to right transitions. In fact I cannot drive a fast slalom at the limits of the car purely because I cannot steer the car quick enough.

[Imp]

Why would this car *need* AWD? Really? No. No. No. "Add lightness" is a concept that has withstood the test of time and makes perfect sense with this car.

You gonna drive it in the snow? Too low.
Need to make up for the chassis/weight distrib shortcomings? It's going to be balanced better than the donor.
Just to say you have AWD? *thwack with a ruler on the knuckles*

--kC

[Imp]

Steve. I agree that power steering would not be a deal breaker but for things like autoX it is a very big plus. I enjoy my roadster with manual steering but it is a handful on a fast slalom just because of the effort required in quick left to right transitions. In fact I cannot drive a fast slalom at the limits of the car purely because I cannot steer the car quick enough.

A quicker rack > Power steering. Even with power steering, you're going to have to turn the wheel the same amount, just 'easier' to do it.

--kC

[NicksPapaw]

Dave, I cannot tell you how excited I am just watching this come together. I also would like to see a removable top that can fit somewhere in the car. Heat and air are also needed since I want to be comfortable when I drive it. I really like the attack design. It just says, get the heck out of my way!!!! Looks like you are on the right track. Keep us posted. I, for one will be watching closely.

[Olli]

I don't see doors as being necessary. It really isn't a big deal to climb into a low car and slide down into the seat. Eliminating doors would go a long way in making the body not needing bodywork and paint. Just imaging how much build time could be saved by not having to fit and align doors.

Olli

[bauhaus]

K-1 Attack
http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j88/vacextar/k1attackr22.jpg

Please do not make the design like the K-1!!!!
I am a huge fan of Factory Five cars and my brother has a roadster - it is awesome! I have been waiting for the right FF kit for me and this seems like it - as long as it looks great. The GTM is a beautiful looking car so I wouldn't mind seeing a mini-GTM look with a targa top version. I think the K-1's design is pretty bad - too flashy for the sake of being flashy - and strange proportions. If you look at the most gorgeous cars that have been ever build, usually they have a fluidness about the design.

I am pulling and hoping for a car that looks like the a Porsche 908 - that would be amazing!
http://www.imca-slotracing.com/images/908LH-nr64.jpg

[VRaptor SpeedWorks, LLC]

If you're looking for old '60s race cars, RCR has plenty of them. Lola, Porsche 917, 962, Ferrari P4, etc.....

http://www.race-car-replicas.com/rcr917.html

Yes, they are gorgeous cars, but also complicated and generally much more expensive to build than what I think FFR has in mind for this car. I'm hoping for something modern.....not a design that's already 50+ years old and everyone is going to assume it's a kit car as soon as they see it.

[FFRWRX]

A removable top, targa type, is a great idea. Having the fixed rear window, with no place for the air-blast to go is a bad idea. Maybe it's just me, but driving a C5 Vette with the targa top off just once was enough for me to keep the top on. Yes, it does feel somewhat like a convertible, but the air entering the cockpit has no place to go and just buffets around. An opening rear window or some other passage for the air would make it much better.

Rick

[VRaptor SpeedWorks, LLC]

BTW.....just thought I'd throw this fact out there.....the Attack uses the stock Honda Accord windshield.

[Mike N]

A quicker rack > Power steering. Even with power steering, you're going to have to turn the wheel the same amount, just 'easier' to do it.

--kC

kC it's speed that's the key and less effort really does equate to more speed. For a road car I agree no big deal for a track car it would be 'really nice to have'. Fitting the same power steering that FFR has for the hot rod could be an option on the kit. It would just be nice if the kit was designed to accept it.

[C.Tree]

Congratulation F5 and Dave! A brilliant idea and you will have an amazing car; power of a HO 302 under 2k lbs.!!

If I had a awd WRX donor; where would I source the single drive trans? an early impreza? and whether awd or fwd donor; do subies have paddle shifting from factory or aftermarket or not at all?

Thanks All!!

[Steve91T]

The lotus elise doesn't have PS, and it doesn't need it. I also used to have a heavily modified MR2. The PS would only work at slow speeds. Anything higher than 50 or 60, and it was completely turned off. My MR2 had 310 hp and weighed about 2800 lbs.

Seems like some people here don't understand that this is going to be light, cheap, and fast. AWD, AC, PS, radios, and big trunks just aren't possible.

But honestly, if you are building the car, you can probably do whatever you want.

As far as getting cool air to the intercooler, that probably wouldn't be a problem. The problem with the MR2 was the lack of enough cool air. I'm sure FFR will design this car with the IC in mind.

Steve

[Kerry & Kathy]

I don't see doors as being necessary. It really isn't a big deal to climb into a low car and slide down into the seat. Eliminating doors would go a long way in making the body not needing bodywork and paint. Just imaging how much build time could be saved by not having to fit and align doors.

Olli

This is not intended to be a race car... but a DAILY DRIVER for all sizes, ages and genders.

Having owned a doorless hot rod, I can tell you from experience that most women over the age of 15 will tell you to kiss off if she has to "climb in".

My wife for example, is permanently disabled and physically unable to climb out of a doorless vehicle.
Make entry and exit easily accessible to all...

K&K

[thebeerbaron]

Given that you have a target weight of 1800lbs, what portion of that is available for body panels? Unless I am much mistaken, that will have a big influence on the size and complexity of those body panels. Think Atom vs. GTM.

Very excited about this car and the competition. Sharpening my clay modeling tools as we speak!

[agepag]

Just please make it legal to drive in Canada!

[oldguy668]

I know I'll get a beat-down for this, but instead of a Lotus Elise clone that my fat butt won't fit in, how about a screaming little truck with a Targa top and A/C? Maybe something a little like this...

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRNoCDXOOwiYHRUTCuKl0lcUNqimCoZ0 Oasc8_MbU-QKKaxjf4u

The bed would have to be a little high to accommodate the boxer engine , but a couple of well placed storage boxes would alleviate that. If you are planning on bolt-on body panels, maybe a second shape could evolve once the initial concept catches on.

[keys2heaven]

^^ That'll be the "surprise" in 2 years. :)


And, since 2 cents seems to be popular, I'll add that I like the rounded rear end of the Chrysler Crossfire.

[LuisL]

I say do a GT40. I know, I know.... I just love that car...

[mikeinatlanta]

Here is what I want.

The body should as a minimum give no lift and be made to accept front and rear aero devices.
The aero devices should be removable for the street.
The car should have a bolt in cage option that can be swapped out with or added to a three point hoop for the street. Steel in the top near the doors (like the GTM) is dangerous without a helmet.

[Mike N]

The lotus elise doesn't have PS, and it doesn't need it. I also used to have a heavily modified MR2. The PS would only work at slow speeds. Anything higher than 50 or 60, and it was completely turned off. My MR2 had 310 hp and weighed about 2800 lbs.



Steve come drive my 2250 lb FFR Roadster through a fast tight Auto X slalom on DOT-R tires and then tell me you wouldn't like to have power steering. I realize that I am in the small minority, very small? but wanted to put it out there that if it could be added as a bolt in I think that more than a few people would use it. However I would defer to Jim Schenk on whether he thinks it might be nice to have or not needed for Auto X.

[UpstateCobraGuy]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_FoXyvaPSnVk/THKxvuypSGI/AAAAAAADN5s/JqyZaZkjsLs/s1600/New-Lancia-Stratos-204.jpg

Sign me up right now for something like the new/old Stratos

Needs real world ground clearance & room for "real sized humans"

Pat

[Hankl]

One of my favorites, The 906


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/eb/Porsche_906_%282008-06-28%29.jpg/800px-Porsche_906_%282008-06-28%29.jpg

Going further back in time, the 904

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7e/Lake_Underwood_driving_83d40m_Porsche_904_Sebring_ 12_Hours_1964_2psharp.jpg

Either styling would be a winner.

Hank

[VRaptor SpeedWorks, LLC]

Hey Dave......how is Jim's eye twitch getting along about now? LOL!!!! We have votes for a pure race car, a daily driver, a modern design, a 60's race car, and a mid-engine pick-up truck.............Are you going to have to get out the white jacket with the extra-long sleeves for Jim?

[Imp]

Reading this thread and the hype surrounding the car on the various Subaru forums I'm on, a movie quote popped into my head... "We're gonna need a bigger boat."

Here's why that popped into my head: is Factory Five ready to handle the volume that may come their way when this kit is released along with keeping up with other existing models? From past open houses I've been to, it doesn't seem like you have that much more expansion room to handle a relatively 'budget' kit car which would hopefully translate into more units produced.

--kC

[Dan Babb]

Will there be room for AC & Heat in the engine bay/ front end?

Turbos...for the 15k target, I'm sure you're talking about using a non-turbo WRX model...but what if we want to add some huffers? What could be reused off the donor in that case?

Will the front end have a removable compartment for storage - like some of older production mid-engine cars?

Windows...any chance of roll-up windows? Have you figured that out with the 33 hotrod? If so, could the same design be used with "new-car-o" (call it project Newcaro)


With a hard-top and A/C, this could a cool little weekend trip car.

[Imp]

FF XRW.

--kC

[Oppenheimer]

I've been following FFR for years, hoping, dreaming, "one day" I'd build a dream-car. I was thinking of a roadster that I'd drive to work on a regular, 3 seasons, basis. It'd be FI'ed, with CATS to keep it quiet, I'd leave the ABS intact (with an 'off' switch), add aftermarket traction control (for the rain, wife, etc), I'd have a good softtop (or maybe a hardtop), heated seats, AC, etc. But I knew it would never really be weather-tight, and I knew that would get old quick.

Thought about a GTM, but its just too much. Too much $$$, too much effort, too much car. I have been following the G3F, and was midly interested in that. But I've always been a Subie fan, so I'm _really_ excited about this new FFR concept (flat engine is perfect for mid-rear application, Subie parts are very interchangable, so many build options, suitable donors are plentiful worldwide, TONS of aftermarket support and car-guy Subie knowledge abundant).

Like many others here, I think it'll become a _very_ popular kit, and pull in a whole new audience to FFR. I can really see myself building one of these. I would use it as a DD (but not the only car), commuting, etc, so I'm really hoping for roll-up windows. I'm also wookie-torso'd, so I'm glad to hear provisions for such are being acknowledged (My head touches the ceiling in most production cars and even SUV I've sat in, and I look _down_ at the rear-view mirror, which always blocks my windshield view), so I'm hoping for lots of headroom.

If there were to be a solid-roof coupe version, I'd be all over that. Otherwise a hardtop option is a must for me. If heat & AC can be options (hopefully reusing donor parts), all the better.

As for looks, I'm sure I'll like whatever is chosen, so long as its not too garish (though I love the Attack photos, its over-the-top, but it _works_). I LOVE the idea of no-paint panels (available in several color choices, right?) AWESOME idea, give a bonus to the guy that thought of that one (lots of production cars use plastic panels these days, but most are still painted - WHY?!?) The G3F idea of reusing the dash and other interior bits from the donor lends a real OEM look & feel, while keeping costs down. Will that tactic be used here? I would prefer if it were (though that limits single-donor options, I don't see that as a drawback. Just source your interior bits from an Impreza, the WRX guys are likely to be leaving that stuff behind anyway when they strip a parts-car-obviously not talking about seats here).

I will be following this new kit closely. I'm thinking I'll finally be ready to build a car right around when this kit becomes available. Just PLEASE keep it DD-able.

[Dave Smith]

I'm the last one in the building... I think they all quit. Today was busy beyond measure. If you called and didnt get thru or are checking on an order, HUGE appologies, tomorrow should be better. Jim was seen leaving with a terrible eye-twitch... Kidding about Jim.

I am in a hurry to get to the March 1 design competiton and we can answer alot of questions at that time. Still, I am confident the the QUALITY of thinking and design that has already gone into this car will make it very successful. We have done a good job of nailing our design goals over the years. The ideas here are really solid gold though.

Dave

[Kasmodean]

If you're looking for old '60s race cars, RCR has plenty of them. Lola, Porsche 917, 962, Ferrari P4, etc.....

http://www.race-car-replicas.com/rcr917.html

Yes, they are gorgeous cars, but also complicated and generally much more expensive to build than what I think FFR has in mind for this car. I'm hoping for something modern.....not a design that's already 50+ years old and everyone is going to assume it's a kit car as soon as they see it.

I agree 100%, I hope for something edgy and modern. Jim did an excellent job with the GTM and I hope this cars can turn as many heads as the GTM. Following those lines, I hope this car will not look like the new/old Stratos or Lotus 211 or any other car that seems bland compared to a GTM. I mean this as no disrespect to anyone that does like theoe cars, just my opinion.

[billjr212]

I couldn't agree more that some GTM styling cues would be great. I love the look of that car, but the cost is just too steep for me (and I assume many) to justify. On the same hand, would not want to make it just a mini-GTM (as cool as that would be) since you certainly don't want to water down that brand.

Also agree with the idea of a targa or similar design with a removable (hard or soft) top. Would probably lean towards soft top for ease of removal (at the gas station, after work, etc), cost (I would assume), and in car storage potential. I like to pretend some days that my Mk3 is a daily driver, but that usually only lasts until the first random/unexpected Chicago rainstorm each spring. Something closer to a daily driver would give me a little leverage on why I "need" to build another Factory Five. Not too worried about track-ability suffering - given the balance and power, I would assume the people that want to push it to be more of a track-only car will have no problem getting it there. Turning a track car into a daily driver is much more difficult though.

Interesting point earlier about the wind swirling issues with a solid rear window. The rear window on a Lotus Elise (at least the 1st ones that came to the US) was removable, right?

Anyway, psyched for March 1st!

[jcoll55]

I ask only one thing Please Make it a COUPE. or at least a targa. I am sure Jim will do great with the rest. I just think it is impossible to make a bad a$$ car that looks fast in a small roadster style, they are girls cars. examples are Mazda Miata, Saturn Sky, Pontiac Soltice, even the K-1 Attack looks girly to me. I would love some thing more like the Lotus Exige. that is a bad a$$ small light weight car. So PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE MAKE IT A COUPE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Sorry all you top down fans, I just hate convertables. (execpt the FFR MK IV, "LOVE IT") Thanks good luck with the car Dave which ever way you go!!!

[VRaptor SpeedWorks, LLC]

I doubt that FFR is going to retain the donor dash, seats, AC, etc. If they're going to meet their weight goal, there is no way they're going to be able to keep those things. Production cars seats...even manual operated ones.....are probably in the 50 pound each range......power seats probably closer to 80 pounds.....and they're going to raise the seating position up about 6 inches...which will require the roof to be 6" higher. The bare dash alone would probably be close to 50 pounds. Probably another 50+ pounds for the whole AC heater unit under the dash...which are generally pretty huge and specifically shaped to fit that particular production car.

[jmimac351]

Dave, will this car be suitable or have the provisions easily added for track duty?

If so, removable front splitter...not a valance, an actual splitter setup as an option. Rear diffuser - a al Exige. Rear wing as an option. An aftermarket Miata track wing should fit. If not an option thru you, have provisions for it to bolt on to the rear chassis.

Essentially, make the car capable of being "track ready" with bolt-ons similar to how the Exige comes from the factory.

http://www.good-win-racing.com/miata/images/items/ARP_Miata_Wing.jpg

[Oppenheimer]

I doubt that FFR is going to retain the donor dash, seats, AC, etc. If they're going to meet their weight goal, there is no way they're going to be able to keep those things. Production cars seats...even manual operated ones.....are probably in the 50 pound each range......power seats probably closer to 80 pounds.....and they're going to raise the seating position up about 6 inches...which will require the roof to be 6" higher. The bare dash alone would probably be close to 50 pounds. Probably another 50+ pounds for the whole AC heater unit under the dash...which are generally pretty huge and specifically shaped to fit that particular production car.

Agree on all points about the seats (didn't see anyone mention using the donor seats, I'd expect it to be a given that this kit would use aftermarket seats).

Of course, for those that want more track, less street, they could easily delete such things as heater, AC, etc. Allow everyone to build it as they see fit.

But I believe that designing to allow retaining creature-comfort features should not compromise performance for those that want to delete these items. Only if the design can accomdate builders choice, without compromising things for the builder that wants to delete, should these be retained in the design.

[WhirlpoolBrewer]

I for one am also super excited for March 1st! I' crossing my fingers for an Attack styling. I REALLY like the way they did the targa top sort of thing, just something behind the passengers' heads but nothing in between the two head backings. It looks FANTASTIC! It looks modern, cool, and feels more like a real convertable instead of just sawing the roof off and calling it quits. Its just awesome, why isn't it March yet?

[GRT YT 72]

Personally I am not a convertible guy and really like the idea of targa top. With all the enthusiasm building it will be exciting to watch the design unfold. Is it March yet?

[Someday I Suppose]

It's funny to me questions about AWD and daily driver vs. sports car, to me Dave layed that out in post 1.

"Chassis: Factory Five Space Frame Chassis, 95" Wheel Base is optimal for small-lightwieght perfomance car. Add wookie-capable interior/space as goal.

Layout: Mid-Engine, Rear Wheel Drive Configuration, two seater roadster

Target weight - 1,800 lbs."

That says to me here is Jim's chance to build a kicking 4cyl turbo sports car, something that will be amazing at the Auto X and fun fun fun at a track day. Maybe even a spec series in its future???

I don't think daily driver and comfort should be the goal. I go back to Dave's comments on Musclecar about the 33 Hot Rod, Jim convinced him to do it when he said he could design a hot rod that handles like a race car, and that fit the creed of Factory Five. I'm not saying the car should be uncomfortable, but to me performance should be driving the design.

As for design, I love the idea of a Targa top, and I like the ideas of doors for the Wookies among us. A lot of us already own a true Roadster :-) With the targa type top it might be cool to be able to hide the roll bar in the body govomg the safety to run at track days but less intrusive. I like the big sweeping windscreen of some of the cars pictured where the driver can see into the corner without having to look through an A-pillar.

I'm excited about the design for sure, can't wait to see it come together.

_Scott

[MikeK]

I'm with Shane on two points, 1. the Attack is Badass, something along those lines will have 4442 going up for sale. 2. The targa top is a winner for looks as well as ease of storage. I'm already storing a Wrangler hardtop in the summer plus a multitude of other crap, I'm running out of space.

P.S. only Factory Five could make me ever consider owning/building something with less than 8 cyl. and not made in America.

[Evan78]

If I had a awd WRX donor; where would I source the single drive trans? an early impreza? and whether awd or fwd donor; do subies have paddle shifting from factory or aftermarket or not at all?All Subarus sold in the U.S. are 4wd since the mid-90's I believe, so it's unlikely that they're going to use any 2wd Subaru transmission. They'll probably convert the WRX trans to 2wd.

[Evan78]

It would be interesting to have the option of minimal body panels like an Atom or Locost/Caterham. Practicality suffers, but perhaps it could be an option to save weight and cost for those that would prefer it. I say this because I've been thinking my next car would be a Locost, and it would be awesome if FFR offered something in that segment.

[Sergio]

Here's an Attack with a top on:
http://fc03.deviantart.net/fs32/i/2008/224/f/4/k1_attack_racing_by_Ivco.jpg

I believe they never fabricated this particular top, it was done by someone else to fit to the Attack. I really like it and doesn't look to "girlish"

If the FFR Car looks like that I will definately get one, when the Attack came out I really really wanted to build one, as Shane has expressed the Attack looks fantastic once finished, unfortunately K1 the company that made it was on Eastern Europe and shipping was a real problem and they had some issues with fitment of the doors, etc.
I always tought that If Factory Five built this particular kit FFR would have sold Thousands also, (and would be easier to get since FFR is already in the US) -

K1 built the frame to accept a Honda Accord drivetrain. If FFR uses a Subaru engine, I already have an spare engine for my Legacy GT.

[Scotty-2-Hottie]

I respectfully disagree with saying the new car should include styling cues of this car or that car. It kind of defeats the exercise of starting with a clean-sheet. I would suggest this is an opportunity for FFR to further establish its own brand identity and design language. 5 years from now the basic shape should be fresh. This admittedly is hard to pull off, but if you don't aim for something you have little chance to hit it. The roadster still is an attractive iconic design all these years later because it has simple powerful shapes that are relatable across multigenerational tastes. A 32" ford is another example of a simple is better approach and still generates endless re-interpretations. I would follow the advice I give myself all the time... Keep It Simple Stupid...

[Doc_FFR]

So many cooks, but just one entree. Do us a favor Dave and ignore us all. :)

[LS MAN]

Hey Guys, 4 wheel drive is not an option. The drive train is being taken out of the front of the WRX & installed in the rear. The output shaft that went to the rear diff on the WRX is now sticking out the back of the car. Unless you wanted a 6 wheeler?, 4WD ain't gonna happen.

Ted

[fuoriserie]

Hi Dave,

A great project and I'm looking forward to working on a design proposal when the Design competition starts on March 1st.

Will the kit be sold in Europe ?

Thanks in advance for your info
Italo

[Oppenheimer]

It's funny to me questions about AWD and daily driver vs. sports car, to me Dave layed that out in post 1.

"Chassis: Factory Five Space Frame Chassis, 95" Wheel Base is optimal for small-lightwieght perfomance car. Add wookie-capable interior/space as goal.

Layout: Mid-Engine, Rear Wheel Drive Configuration, two seater roadster

Target weight - 1,800 lbs."

That says to me here is Jim's chance to build a kicking 4cyl turbo sports car, something that will be amazing at the Auto X and fun fun fun at a track day. Maybe even a spec series in its future???

I don't think daily driver and comfort should be the goal. I go back to Dave's comments on Musclecar about the 33 Hot Rod, Jim convinced him to do it when he said he could design a hot rod that handles like a race car, and that fit the creed of Factory Five. I'm not saying the car should be uncomfortable, but to me performance should be driving the design.

As for design, I love the idea of a Targa top, and I like the ideas of doors for the Wookies among us. A lot of us already own a true Roadster :-) With the targa type top it might be cool to be able to hide the roll bar in the body govomg the safety to run at track days but less intrusive. I like the big sweeping windscreen of some of the cars pictured where the driver can see into the corner without having to look through an A-pillar.

I'm excited about the design for sure, can't wait to see it come together.

_Scott

I think its a bit selfish to think the car should be designed to only accomodate what you envision building yours to be. I see here an opportunity to develop something more versatile. Something that each builder could mold to their needs. You want an ultimate track-day car, build yours that way. You want something you can drive on a regular basis as a DD, build yours that way. Something in between? The choice should be yours.

The key though would be to design in the ability to retain these creature-comfort features, but make it equally easy to delete them during the build. That the Roadster can accomodate anything from a pushrod 302 to a bigblock to a 4.6 DOHC takes nothing away from the car (does the Coyote fit? I saw that the drop-in engine program will offer the Coyote). The Roadster can be built period correct, or Resto-Mod updated, from the interior to under the hood. I think there is an opportunity to allow even more builder-descretion with this new project. Lets embrace it.

I will concede however that accomodating a creature comfort should not come at the expense of those that wish to delete it. It shouldn't make the car heavier, or uglier, or more expensive to allow, for example, AC, for those that are going to delete the AC (within reason).

[michael everson]

I really like the styling of the K1 Attack. Dave make it look similar to that I and I will be first in line
Mike

[keys2heaven]

I really like the styling of the K1 Attack. Dave make it look similar to that I and I will be first in line
Mike

I do like the top in the above pic. However, I really like that droop hood in the sketch. That is sweet. Nice, smooth, low, agressive profile.

[Brad]

I, as well, owned a heavily modified MR2 Turbo, and can say with confidence that you don't need PS in a light, 2 door, mid engine RWD beast. PS takes the feel out of it completely, and not having it was great. I can't wait for this thing to come out... I will surely be building it.. I miss my deuce coupe!

[Dave Smith]

All good ideas. I think the direction and specs released in the design competition will uncork some real creativity. I am also confident that the design can serve a few different use-masters... meaning capable track car and yet still capable street car. Obviously there will be conflicting goals and desires, as this conversation has shown, but the car will be better for the "sifting and winnowing" (quote from abe lincoln) process. There are some heavy hitters lining up to help the design process, but more on that later as the March 1 date approaches.

Dave Smith
FFR001

[Calamity J]

Will there be room for AC & Heat in the engine bay/ front end?

Turbos...for the 15k target, I'm sure you're talking about using a non-turbo WRX model...but what if we want to add some huffers? What could be reused off the donor in that case?If it's going to be street legal in the US, heat (defogger) will be a prerequisite. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong about that.

There is no such thing as a non-turbo WRX. That would be like a V6 Mustang Cobra or Camaro SS. WRX indicates a turbocharged engine. I believe FFR intends on accommodating the turbocharged EJ engines by their use of the wording "WRX running gear". The only difficulty over the naturally aspirated engines should be getting adequate airflow to the intercooler. Relocating the intercooler for better airflow should be fairly inexpensive.


I doubt that FFR is going to retain the donor dash, seats, AC, etc. If they're going to meet their weight goal, there is no way they're going to be able to keep those things. Production cars seats...even manual operated ones.....are probably in the 50 pound each range......power seats probably closer to 80 pounds.....and they're going to raise the seating position up about 6 inches...which will require the roof to be 6" higher. The bare dash alone would probably be close to 50 pounds. Probably another 50+ pounds for the whole AC heater unit under the dash...which are generally pretty huge and specifically shaped to fit that particular production car.Agreed on the seats.

The Impreza dashes from '93-'07 and the Forester dashes from '98-'08 (two generations of each) are all roughly the same dimensions so donors wouldn't be hard to come by. People have been swapping the newer Impreza dashes ('02-'07) into older Imprezas ('93-'01) when doing engine swaps without much trouble. The '89-'94 & '95-'99 Legacy dash is also very similar.

Unfortunately, those dashes were designed for a high cowl befitting a hood made to clear a MacPherson strut front suspension and the upright 'rally car' seating position. Perhaps, if the kit were to only use the top portion of the dash and the windshield from the donor car with a simple custom center console (HVAC/Radio) panel and a fiberglass lower trim panel, this would allow for a reasonable-looking interior at a low cost.

The following dashes are nearly identical for the Impreza.. but the Forester's two-tone really highlights what I'm talking about:

('98-'03 Forester dash)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v635/jordanab/FFR%20Subaru%20Roadster/383297_1998_Forester_Dash_2.jpg

('04-'08 Forester dash)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v635/jordanab/FFR%20Subaru%20Roadster/used-2004-subaru-forester-25xtsuv-8515-5371523-20-640.jpg

So, have the builder cut the dash apart at the seam where the darker upper dash is, mate it to the fiberglass lower dash and then select the center HVAC panel that fits depending on which year vehicle you're donating from (all USDM WRXs are the newer-style so those would constitute the vast majority of the kits). The entire dash could be rotated forward slightly to increase leg room (and keep the gauges pointed at the driver's head) and of course the car will use a smaller steering wheel than the giant ones that come stock on Subarus.

That's all conjecture, though. I'm really looking forward to more details (particularly on the suspension) on the 1st. :D

---
As for the daily driver discussion. I think anyone planning on driving a $15k kit car to work every day in comfort and style is dreaming. I mean, there's no stopping someone from spending $80k on re-engineering the car into the best daily driver it can be.. but why? The donor car WRX is a terrific daily driver with ample ground clearance, A/C, etc. Want a mid-engined daily driver? There are still MR2s out there that would be fantastic going, stopping, headturning daily drivers with $15k invested... They'd also be crash tested and safe to drive in traffic. I see that some of you think that it should be your daily because you already have a FFR Roadster or Coupe in your garage for the weekends.. but if you're paying attention, FFR is doing this to expand their market.. to people like me.. who don't. Consider the market.. the vast majority of people who build kit cars aren't going to be daily driving them. We'll be lucky have enough people tracking them.

[keys2heaven]

Why not just call it.... March 1

[Someday I Suppose]

Title requirements differ in pretty much every state.

Oppenheimer, I didn't mean to be selfish, and not sure what gave you the idea that I didn't think the car could be used as you describe. My comments and thoughts were just what I was reading into the post from Dave. I don't at all think the car will not be able to have AC or heat, nor should it be uncomfortable to drive, especially for us big guys.

My thought though is that comfort shouldn't be the #1 goal, maybe # 2 or #3, but not #1. If comfort was #1 then is this car not competing against Honda Fit's and Ford Fiesta's? Though if performance and style are the priorities, then your competing against Lotus and Honda S2000's but at a far better price point.

-Scott

[Kalstar]

I think FF should think 4 seater after this new kit is on the market. All of their offerings are 2 seaters. I would guess that many of the potental FFR buyers have children and need the occational back seat. Factory Five could open up a hole new segment for themselves. Think Ferrari 612, Lotus Evora, Maserati even Porsche and Lamborghini are in the four seater business. A front engine GT using a modified 65 coupe frame and a donor RX-8 or maybe even a 93-02 Camaro/Firebird as the donor would be a nice addition.

60's old school......check

Hot Rodders.......check

American exotic......Check

Tuner enthusiast........check

Four seater GT..........?????


The RX-8 has been in production for 8 years now. Donors should be cheap and they handle very well right out of the box.

Camaro/Firebirds are very inexpensive and 98+ have LS1.

[Oppenheimer]

Title requirements differ in pretty much every state.

Oppenheimer, I didn't mean to be selfish, and not sure what gave you the idea that I didn't think the car could be used as you describe. My comments and thoughts were just what I was reading into the post from Dave. I don't at all think the car will not be able to have AC or heat, nor should it be uncomfortable to drive, especially for us big guys.

My thought though is that comfort shouldn't be the #1 goal, maybe # 2 or #3, but not #1. If comfort was #1 then is this car not competing against Honda Fit's and Ford Fiesta's? Though if performance and style are the priorities, then your competing against Lotus and Honda S2000's but at a far better price point.

-Scott

Agreed on all points. Especially agree that comfort and DD type ammenities should not, NOT, be #1 priority. Not even #2 nor perhaps even #3. I just think they shouldn't be automatically excluded.

Lots of people are taking umbrage at 'DD' comments (not targeting you here Scott, just comments in general). I think perhaps some of that is what people mean by 'DD'. To me that isn't trying to duplicate the high-end ride, comfort, and ambiance of my wife's Audi. It simply means a car with roll-up windows, the option of a weather tight roof, able to make it quiet enough to prevent permanent hearing loss, and able to have enough climate control to not risk hypothermia when its near the freezing mark, or sunstroke if its above 80 (and humid, like it often is here in the East in summer).

For me, the only thing keeping the Roadster for being 'DD-able' is the weather-tight roof and roll-up windows part. And while you can 'roll-your-own' in a lot of ways in your Roadster build, those 2 things are not easy to overcome. I'm hoping this new kit won't have those limitations. If I can also get real heat and real defroster and real AC, then I've got my ideal DD-able kit.

I am not into garage queens, or even weekend only toys, let alone track-day only. I just don't have the space, resources, or time. If I built a kit car (when), I will be using it, a lot, for going wherever I need to go. When I need more room, or the road is too slippery with snow or ice, I've got an SUV for that. Otherwise I'll be driving the wheels off my 'fun' car. I'm hoping my new fun car is going to be a, whatever we end up calling the new kit.

[VRaptor SpeedWorks, LLC]

Agreed on all points. Especially agree that comfort and DD type ammenities should not, NOT, be #1 priority. Not even #2 nor perhaps even #3. I just think they shouldn't be automatically excluded.

Lots of people are taking umbrage at 'DD' comments (not targeting you here Scott, just comments in general). I think perhaps some of that is what people mean by 'DD'. To me that isn't trying to duplicate the high-end ride, comfort, and ambiance of my wife's Audi. It simply means a car with roll-up windows, the option of a weather tight roof, able to make it quiet enough to prevent permanent hearing loss, and able to have enough climate control to not risk hypothermia when its near the freezing mark, or sunstroke if its above 80 (and humid, like it often is here in the East in summer).

For me, the only thing keeping the Roadster for being 'DD-able' is the weather-tight roof and roll-up windows part. And while you can 'roll-your-own' in a lot of ways in your Roadster build, those 2 things are not easy to overcome. I'm hoping this new kit won't have those limitations. If I can also get real heat and real defroster and real AC, then I've got my ideal DD-able kit.

I am not into garage queens, or even weekend only toys, let alone track-day only. I just don't have the space, resources, or time. If I built a kit car (when), I will be using it, a lot, for going wherever I need to go. When I need more room, or the road is too slippery with snow or ice, I've got an SUV for that. Otherwise I'll be driving the wheels off my 'fun' car. I'm hoping my new fun car is going to be a, whatever we end up calling the new kit.

Very well put and very much in-line with my thoughts. The last GTM I built, I installed a Hot Rod Air unit in. They are now out of business, but I was thinking that Vintage Air makes a similar unit. Very compact and simple unit. Basically just a small twin blower motor blowing air thru a heater-core/evaporator combo. Cable operated ball valve in the heater core lines. You want heat? Open the ball valve to let coolant circulate thru the heater core. Want AC? Close the ball valve and kick on the compressor. No blend doors, servo motors, or complicated electronics or the space taken up by all of that. I'd guess it to be about 40% the size and weight of the FFR option GTM AC system. Simple, Simple, Simple.....

[C.Tree]

Before I was a ford fan and FF has made me a ford, chevy and now subbie dreamer. This kit is affordable, I'm sure will do well on street/track and one I would like to build. Thanks FF!

Evan78, Thanks for the response. Do you know if the awd trans can be converted to fwd? I think this may be difficult because isn't the power split (i.e. 60/40 front/rear) computer controled?

I dont see much donors in HI. Any body else having this problem?

Thanks All!

[Evan78]

C.Tree - this is the 1 kit I've seen for converting to FWD. It's from Bremar Auto in Australia:
http://www.bremarauto.com/products/subaru-2wd-conversion-kit/

[Someday I Suppose]

Totally with you, I commute by bus everyday but that also includes a 15 mile drive to the park and ride. I could without a doubt see using this car in that light plus weekend fun. :-)



Agreed on all points. Especially agree that comfort and DD type ammenities should not, NOT, be #1 priority. Not even #2 nor perhaps even #3. I just think they shouldn't be automatically excluded.

Lots of people are taking umbrage at 'DD' comments (not targeting you here Scott, just comments in general). I think perhaps some of that is what people mean by 'DD'. To me that isn't trying to duplicate the high-end ride, comfort, and ambiance of my wife's Audi. It simply means a car with roll-up windows, the option of a weather tight roof, able to make it quiet enough to prevent permanent hearing loss, and able to have enough climate control to not risk hypothermia when its near the freezing mark, or sunstroke if its above 80 (and humid, like it often is here in the East in summer).

For me, the only thing keeping the Roadster for being 'DD-able' is the weather-tight roof and roll-up windows part. And while you can 'roll-your-own' in a lot of ways in your Roadster build, those 2 things are not easy to overcome. I'm hoping this new kit won't have those limitations. If I can also get real heat and real defroster and real AC, then I've got my ideal DD-able kit.

I am not into garage queens, or even weekend only toys, let alone track-day only. I just don't have the space, resources, or time. If I built a kit car (when), I will be using it, a lot, for going wherever I need to go. When I need more room, or the road is too slippery with snow or ice, I've got an SUV for that. Otherwise I'll be driving the wheels off my 'fun' car. I'm hoping my new fun car is going to be a, whatever we end up calling the new kit.

[C.Tree]

Thanks Evan78, Your the man! Wow, that spool costs 230; you know FF will do it for a fourth of the cost.

Would you recommend the book mentioned on the website "Sub Perf Hndbk 3rd Ed."? Amazon says: "currently unavailable" or recommend other subbie performance books?

Thanks!

[Calamity J]

Evan78, Thanks for the response. Do you know if the awd trans can be converted to fwd? I think this may be difficult because isn't the power split (i.e. 60/40 front/rear) computer controled?

The non-STI manuals in Subaru's AWD lineup are all 50f/50r split. It's a basic mechanical differential with a viscous slip limiter. The STI's transmission is 35f/65r up to '05 and 41f/59r '06-present. The STI's split is determined by a planetary gearset in the center diff. In either case the center differential can be removed and replaced with a simple transfer gear (some people simply remove their WRX's center diff and weld the spider gears when they convert their Impreza to 2WD). In the case of the WRX this can be done without removing the transmission from the car. I'm not sure what the R&R process is on the STI.. I've never heard of anyone trying to make it FWD before.

Obviously one advantage of the STI transmission would be greater strength.. another would be that it's the only Subaru transmission with a limited slip front diff (Suretrac up to '04, helical '05 & later). Adding a front diff (the aftermarket is already there) will be one of those things people will have to consider on their own for the WRX transmission.

[C.Tree]

Thanks Calamity J! Man you guys are on it! Any books you would recommend? Thanks!

[Turboguy]

Perhaps drawing some inspiration from the K-1 Attack, a kit car that is no longer available from the Slovakian company K1-Engineering.

http://www.k-1attack.com/en/sucasna-modelova-rada.k1

http://jonsibal.com/bpimages/k1attackR_22.jpg

[Benji]

Perhaps drawing some inspiration from the K-1 Attack, a kit car that is no longer available from the Slovakian company K1-Engineering.

Really? :D

[D2W]

Dave I want to tell you how much I appreciate you letting us tag along this time. Tell Jim to take a deep breath and relax, the eye twitching will go away. As an engineer myself I totally understand where he is coming from. Just stay true to your design goals and keep an open mind. You never know what crazy suggestion will spark the next great idea.
For my 2 cents worth I think your design goals are right in-line with what I'd do. Lightweight, powerful and reliable donor, and a killer look. Attack, 918, your own sketch, build it with that style in mind and they will line up at your door. I can't wait!
DP

[KOUROS]

Dave,
Please keep me in mind when the time comes for design competition (march 1st). If you remember back in the day I assisted with some 3D animated renderings of the GTM that ended up in FFR's promo DVD as well as FFR's current logo. For many years, I've been in in Vehicle Design and 3D modeling especially when it comes to presentation. I'm able to quickly change design elements and display end results with quick turn arounds. I've worked with Ferrari, Mercedes Benz, Ford, GM, Landrover, Lotus, Aston Martin, Lamborghini, McLeran and may other companies alike, accurately modeling and representing their cars in top notch console games. I've been around FFR since 2000 and I'd love to help out again where I can.

Best wishes and regards,
Kouros

[Benji]

http://www.3dexport.com/img-k1-attack-10389.htm

I saw this whilst looking at more info on the Attack. EXPENSIVE though for 3D plans.

[s_martin]

Thinking of cars to emulate, I always loved the looks of the Suzuki GSX-R/4. It has pretty simple but aggressive lines. It doesn't have a top, but I think that could be added to the shape and still have something nice to look at. The shape and overall proportions are what I like, wheels at the far corners, low and lean. The surfaces are also mostly smooth, which would make them easier to produce.

Just a thought.

405404

[VRaptor SpeedWorks, LLC]

s_martin.....I think that's a great example of how utterly simple you can make something, and still have it look really nice. There's nothing outrageous about the shape of any part of that car, but the overall proportions of everything just make it a great look. Yes, there are some major problems with the design as a whole.....like trying to integrate some real working headlights without making it look like a bug-eyed dufus, and no provisions for getting cooling air to the engine bay.....but it is a pretty neat looking little car!

[AZJoker]

Not copying but a starting point for the body. Look at the 550 Spyder design. Flare the fenders out(front and back)....meatier tires.....more modern headlights(like you see in the GTM.not the same design but like it) rounded rear wing that forms to body...very light car.

p.s. cool cup holders *wink*

[D2W]

One thing I've been thinking about in relation to the doors is; make the door part of the hardtop. If the sill area around the cockpit were low enough say under 30", the step over height wouldn't be bad, and part of the roof could open with the door to the front and out of the way like an Ultima. It would be easier to step over and down into the car than to bend down and try to slide under a low hardtop. The side windows could be part of the door and just pop in and out. I know some of you want windows that roll up and down, which would be nice, but it complicates the body immensely, and adds unneccesary weight and cost. And the body would be a whole lot simpler without the door at all. Just ask someone who has a coupe or GTM how much fun it was to mount the doors.
DP

[Turboguy]

Does the attack have any type of top?


K-1 Engineering did eventually release a top for the Attack --a very, very expensive add-on piece-- but from what I have read elsewhere not many were delivered. I recall reading that delivery of back-ordered parts was one of the issues purchasers of the 37 or 38 kits that were sold in North America ran into.

Here's a picture of the Attack top pieces & hardware:

http://www.attackforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=949&d=1268107285

http://www.attackforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=930&d=1257522182

http://www.attackforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=929&d=1257522175

and the side windows:

http://www.attackforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=950&d=1269929148


And a few pics of the top on the car:

http://www.attackforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=1004&d=1290509795

http://www.attackforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=1005&d=1290509802

http://www.attackforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=1007&d=1290509835


Dave, I was originally going to build an Attack, but instead decided to build an FFR MK III roadster.

[Turboguy]

Although I understand it's a big undertaking, given the single-donor platform it would be great if the heat/ac system from the WRX could be integrated into the car as well -- or at least an option to do so.

This would add a level of "civility" to the finished car while keeping build costs as low as possible.

[VRaptor SpeedWorks, LLC]

Although I understand it's a big undertaking, given the single-donor platform it would be great if the heat/ac system from the WRX could be integrated into the car as well -- or at least an option to do so.

This would add a level of "civility" to the finished car while keeping build costs as low as possible.

I've already touched on this topic in one of these threads....but as far as fitting a production car AC system into this car, I just don't think it's going to be possible. If it's anything even close to the AC unit in the 'Vette, I can tell you that I've sold one of those on ebay out of one of the donor cars I've stripped down here, and I kid you not, the box to ship it out ended up being about the size of a 55gal drum. It is a huge, massive one-piece unit, as are most production car AC/heater systems.

[PhyrraM]

The Subaru A/C is not that large and cumbersome. While I don't see the need for A/C, heat and defrost might be nice - but not mandatory.

The way I see it is two fold:

a: If the factory dash is to be reused in the kit, an enterprising builder can most likely also adapt the Factory climate control with a bit of creativity and elbow grease.

b: If the kit has it's own 'dash', then there are many heat-A/C targeted at the hot-rod/resto-mod community that can likely be used (with the Subaru compressor)

[HealeyRick]

My first car was a Bugeye Sprite and I've owned my present one for almost 35 yrs (yikes!). I've also owned a FIAT X 1/9, which was sort of like a mid-engined Bugeye. Both these cars had some similar attributes that I find appealing, light, nimble, simple and inexpensive. What they needed was more power and for the Bugeye, more weatherproofing; for the FIAT, less rust. With that as background, here are some of my thoughts:

1. Should be capable of being street licensed in all states with emissions compliance
2. I'm thinking of something in the vein of a car with the attributes of a LoCost, but with a greater degree of comfort.
3. I like the idea of color-impregnated body panels. They should also be readily replaceable by the owner without a lot of work. Prang a fender, you should just be able to bolt on a new one. No bodywork or paint required.
4. Needs a cage or top that would be acceptable to run in most track days and autoX without further owner modification.
5. Should be able to drive it to the track and strip off everything that doesn't make it go fast in 30-45 min. Towards that end, I'm thinking of glass side windows that could be raised and lowered by winders or even a nylon strap, but could easily be removed without tools trackside. Fenders, maybe cycle type, that could be removed at the track. Stalk mounted headlights that could be unplugged and removed. Lizard Skin style insulation to quiet it down and heat insulate with minimum weight. Passenger seat easily removable. Any floormats, rugs, interior trim panels should be snap-in and out or slide-in and out.
6. A Targa roof would probably be most practical, however it can be a real drag to lift off and stow away (like on the X 1/9) Would be nice if it could be made to hinge at the rear, be flipped to vertical and then slide into the space behind the seats and in front of the motor. Also would need to be completely removable at the track,

7. Need to have enough wheel space for big rubber.

8. I can't draw a straight line with a ruler, so I can't illustrate my thoughts. I'm really thinking of a contemporary Lotus 7 or an Ariel Atom with better weather protection.

[riptide motorsport]

I want to be a beta builder....Put me in Dave Steven

[Dave Smith]

Kouros! Jim and I were talking about you on this. How are you man?! Solidworks has stepped up a bit to help with the design competiton. Jim s eye twitch seems to be getting better (kidding, he's doing greta). Ive owned and driven both GSXR motorcycles (1987 1100 beast and 2004 1000 insane-beast) and am NOT ashamed to say I drove an x19 out of college for 100k+ miles... the thing was cheap and fun to drive, you could literally throw the thing full speed into curves and it was like a slot car! Still had no power though. March 1 design competiton will be very interesting based on the ideas circulated here.

[Ike4]

I agree with simple and purist design. As Lotus use to say,"adds lightness". I like the Caterham 7 but it is ridiculously expensive with a Ford Focus motor. I currently live in Japan and could likely get a very low mile donor WRX at a low price, but it would be Right Hand Drive. Does anyone at FFR know if the donor steering system from the WRX would be used to the new kit build? If so I'll likely wait til I get back to the states to look for a donor.

[GAThunder019]

AMEN!! Those who do not have to face disabilities and/or limited mobility do not usually think about those who DO...
I am sure Olli is not purposefully ignoring that consideration, because I used to be in a similar mindset. I was VERY athletic...
until I was in an accident (NOT my fault of course!) and broke my back and rt hip, among other injuries. Does that have to mean
that from age 24 (age at time of accident) on I must be relegated to Town Cars and Minivans, and NO motorcycles?
Kerry is also correct about the ladies... No doors/difficult egress---"No Thank You!"

Floyd Burdett

[Hondaslayer]

I agree with simple and purist design. As Lotus use to say,"adds lightness". I like the Caterham 7 but it is ridiculously expensive with a Ford Focus motor. I currently live in Japan and could likely get a very low mile donor WRX at a low price, but it would be Right Hand Drive. Does anyone at FFR know if the donor steering system from the WRX would be used to the new kit build? If so I'll likely wait til I get back to the states to look for a donor.

It would make sense, though it would limit the choices somewhat (unless they had different subframes) as Subaru changed the mounts to a "cannon mount" starting around 2005 on some models.

As for design, a Lotus 7 with a hardtop is exactly what I had in mind. Minimal body panels (keeps cost down for FF) lightweight and badass looking.

[GUNS]

I think the design should be original, aggressive, but more importantly functional. I would like to see vents for brake cooling/engine cooling and an aerodynamic design that actually creates downforce.

[Roy Hewson]

Dave, I think your really on the right path of KISS! To stay in the cost goals, weight and world car criteria it has to be direct and to the point. That said it doesn't mean it can't be attractive and exciting. The Porsche 918 and Lotus 211 make a great example of what is considered exciting by today's crowd. You can't please everyone so please yourself (you haven't been far off so far. The cars mission statement is a winner in my book.
Roy

[thebeerbaron]

I am looking forward immensely to this design competition and to assembling my own as soon as possible. If I am reading the tea leaves correctly, I think Dave and Jim have a good idea of what they want to produce and I really hope they stick to their guns instead of letting this become a muddle of compromises.

Couple of quick questions:

Having never assembled a FF kit, but browsing the website, it looks like SAE hardware is the norm. If this is going to be a "World Platform" car, maybe it's time to go to metric fasteners? The engine and drivetrain are all metric, I'd hate to have to bring two toolboxes to the track for one little car. Let alone identifying them quickly by sight. I know this could devolve to a flame-war, but... I think having one coherent set of tools (DIN, JIS, ISO) would put this car in league with the non-kit cars.

Access, access, access.
1) http://antholonet.com/EngineersCars/DeltaS4/Openings.jpg
2) http://antholonet.com/EngineersCars/DeltaS4/PanelsRemoved.jpg
It would be awesome if you could go from 1 to 2 with very little fuss, maybe even without tools (at builder's option).

1800lbs. Want. I'd love to be able to sneak in under that by eliminating bits and pieces. I'm an emaciated junior wookie and I worship in the cult of Colin Chapman. As Lotus moves away from that cult, maybe Factory Five can take their place as the source for lightweight cars.

[riptide motorsport]

I have to agree with...... thebeerbaron. Steven

[Magnus]

I too had hoped for something along the minimalist veins of a Super 7 or Ariel Atom. Perhaps the next vehicle can be a "less-is-more" kind of vehicle.
As for the current design, please keep the roll-over protection clean, either by making the windshield frame part of the rollbar or integrating the rollbard into the bodywork behind the cockpit

[GUNS]

I think this design has a lot of potential: http://www.6speedonline.com/forums/concept-cars/227061-my-first-concept-supercar-purity.html


It's a very wild design and i'm not sure it can be done at the given price point, but man that thing would look awesome coming down the street!

[thebeerbaron]

Steven - thanks, I'm glad I'm not the only one!


I too had hoped for something along the minimalist veins of a Super 7 or Ariel Atom. Perhaps the next vehicle can be a "less-is-more" kind of vehicle.
As for the current design, please keep the roll-over protection clean, either by making the windshield frame part of the rollbar or integrating the rollbard into the bodywork behind the cockpit

Magnus - I don't see why that wouldn't be possible as an alternative to the full-bodied kit. Maybe FF would be willing to sell the kit less body shell and let you put together your own exoskeleton with minimalist paneling. Lots of people around who can lay up fiberglass panels for you.

One of my issues with the Seven is that it has the aerodynamic properties of a brick. I see the bodywork as an opportunity to have Seven levels of fun per dollar, but with modern levels of slipperiness. Those exposed front wheels are cool and all, but a complete nightmare in terms of airflow...

[Hondaslayer]

Having never assembled a FF kit, but browsing the website, it looks like SAE hardware is the norm. If this is going to be a "World Platform" car, maybe it's time to go to metric fasteners? The engine and drivetrain are all metric, I'd hate to have to bring two toolboxes to the track for one little car. Let alone identifying them quickly by sight. I know this could devolve to a flame-war, but... I think having one coherent set of tools (DIN, JIS, ISO) would put this car in league with the non-kit cars.
.

HAS to be metric, no ifs ands or buts about it. Most common Subaru sizes are 10mm, 12mm, 14mm, 17mm, 19mm with a few oddball 22 and 32mm here and there.

[subyrod]

Dave and FFR R&D crew, here's my thoughts.

First of all, the 918 is a great design.
http://i539.photobucket.com/albums/ff356/hechtrod/Porsches/zoom.jpg

I agree, metric stuff to work with the rest of the suby parts. I'd love for the kit to utilize as much of the donor car as possible, suspension parts/arms/sway bars as there are tons of aftermarket for control arms, sways, etc. Also stuff like radiator. I'm not sure how easy it'd be to reuse heater/a/c stuff, but I know vintage air has been used on the Cobras and is likely a simpler, cheaper, smaller package compared to what is in the WRX. Also, steering gear and factory "Momo' steerign wheel with airbag (not a biggy if no airbag, but the wife would certainly appreciate it haha) and pedals which are aluminum. I have an STi interior, I'd love to reuse the STi factory seats in my wrx.

I'd also like to use the brakes/hubs like the Cobra so that we can use the 5x100 (WRX bolt pattern) and those that dare to venture with an STi which has 5x114.3 pattern to utilize the wheels available for those patterns. Lots of wheels for the suby guys. But, most are higher offset wheels (+40-50mm). With a rear set up, that would likely work well for the front, but I'm not sure, typically the rears will want lower offsets and wider.

My 02 WRX for example i'm running 17x7.5 +45mm offset with 225/45/17. For cost I'd like to keep those wheels (probably repowdercoat) and use 215/40/17 in front and 235/40/17 in the rear. Or, go for the gusto and get some 17x8 and 17x9 wheels and use 235/40/17 fronts and 255/40/17 rears. That'd look nice and meaty.

[Oppenheimer]

So will there be 'Powered by WRX' or 'Powered by Subaru' badges for the fenders?

Seriously though, for the paintless body panels, has anyone had any experience with those vinyl adhesive 'paint jobs'? Its a set of adhesive panels cut for the exact dimensions of your car. Instead of repainting, you just apply these 'decals'. They can print whatever wild graphics you want, flames, etc. These are not those 'ad-cars' you see where some real estate company has their logo all over the side of a Mini Cooper or a city bus, they are a real alternative to painting.

Sounds rather cheesy I know, but for something that just needs to look awsome from 5 feet away, and isn't intended as a show vehicle, they supposedly work. Would this be something do-able here (to keep manufacturing costs down, but still allow a variety of no-paint color options)?

Would buyers even want that?

[thebeerbaron]

Seriously though, for the paintless body panels, has anyone had any experience with those vinyl adhesive 'paint jobs'?

You mean like this?
http://scca-susq.com/photogallery/09.10.25AutoXgallery/source/image/dsc_2419.jpg
License plate: GONE PLAID (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_balls)

My friend actually did this install (and co-drives the car). Yes, it is a totally legitimate option, but the key to it looking good is in the quality of the installer. I'm fairly certain it's cheaper than a paint job, but don't think this is something you can do on your own at home for free. Good quality vinyl is not exactly free and it really does take quite a bit of talent (and lots of hours) to get this to work.

[Bill_VA]

After driving tonight and seeing an Audi, I'd like this new car to incorporate either some existing tail lamps that incorporate LEDs, or have something custom made.

[riptide motorsport]

Remember, you can still paint it if you like, the graphics will run about the same as paint more or less.....Steven

[MikeK]

You mean like this?
http://scca-susq.com/photogallery/09.10.25AutoXgallery/source/image/dsc_2419.jpg
License plate: GONE PLAID (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_balls)

My friend actually did this install (and co-drives the car). Yes, it is a totally legitimate option, but the key to it looking good is in the quality of the installer. I'm fairly certain it's cheaper than a paint job, but don't think this is something you can do on your own at home for free. Good quality vinyl is not exactly free and it really does take quite a bit of talent (and lots of hours) to get this to work.

OMG, is that a unfair example or what

[subyrod]

For exhaust, I think it must be a center exit with some diffuser strakes surrounding it. Sort of like the 918 rear end. THe 918 picture has side exit exhaust, but for cost and simplicity, going straight out the back (although the turbo is on the passenger side, so piping added to get to the center of the car would be needed). But, I like the diffuser in the rear lower valence, but add a single exhaust (maybe with a handsome twin tip ala factory WRX (but bigger diameter obviously) and single resonator. I ran a straight pipe with my wrx for awhile with just a catted downpipe. Sounds awesome. I'd want something very similar, but a high flow resonator would be enough to get it so its not too loud.
http://i539.photobucket.com/albums/ff356/hechtrod/Porsches/porsche_918_rsr2.jpg

[subyrod]

Also, for maintenance purposes, working on an MR car from underneath is great. I can remember working on pops 914 from underneath. We simply drove it up onto those Sears standard ramps that get the car about a foot off the ground. So, maybe think about bodywork clearance when getting onto some standard ramps the average Joe will have.

[subyrod]

See if you can keep the factory shifter. Maybe the housing the shifter mounts in cannnot be utilized, but many of us WRX owners have teh factory short shifter or an aftermarket shifter. It'd be great if we could keep that the MR-X (that's my vote for the name, for now).

[Oppenheimer]

You mean like this?
http://scca-susq.com/photogallery/09.10.25AutoXgallery/source/image/dsc_2419.jpg
License plate: GONE PLAID (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_balls)

My friend actually did this install (and co-drives the car). Yes, it is a totally legitimate option, but the key to it looking good is in the quality of the installer. I'm fairly certain it's cheaper than a paint job, but don't think this is something you can do on your own at home for free. Good quality vinyl is not exactly free and it really does take quite a bit of talent (and lots of hours) to get this to work.

Um, not exactly what I had in mind. But, it sounds like its the technique I was refering to.

Anyway, I wasn't thinking of something the builder would add, but rather a cost effective way for FFR to offer lots of color options. Something factory applied.

The idea is this is to be a 'no-paint' kit. But I'm pretty sure people are going to want color options. Of course you could still paint the body if you wanted to, but then that kills the whole, 'no body-work, no paint, ease of assembly' aspect of the kit. If there are say, half a dozen gelcoat color options, that isn't much choice, yet it will still add a lot of manufacturing cost for FFR. If they used this technique, perhaps they could offer way more colors, at way lower cost.

Perhaps for some additional cost, builders could even specify their own custom graphics/colors, and FFR could have the supplier of the vinyl print them out. The technique for FFR to apply your custom stuff during manufacturing would be the same, so its just the extra cost for printing and 'handling', etc. They wouldn't have to inventory all the different color optioned panels, just apply the colored vinyl at order time.

[Jo3sh]

Seriously though, for the paintless body panels, has anyone had any experience with those vinyl adhesive 'paint jobs'? Its a set of adhesive panels cut for the exact dimensions of your car. Instead of repainting, you just apply these 'decals'. They can print whatever wild graphics you want, flames, etc. These are not those 'ad-cars' you see where some real estate company has their logo all over the side of a Mini Cooper or a city bus, they are a real alternative to painting.

Sounds rather cheesy I know, but for something that just needs to look awsome from 5 feet away, and isn't intended as a show vehicle, they supposedly work. Would this be something do-able here (to keep manufacturing costs down, but still allow a variety of no-paint color options)?

Would buyers even want that?

Westfield, in the UK, does body panels is a variety of gelcoat colors. You can even mix'n'match if you want. I think that would be harder with the comparatively more complex shapes we're likely to see on this car, but most Westy builders just seem to install the panels and call it done, or add some minor stickers.

[Oppenheimer]

Westfield, in the UK, does body panels is a variety of gelcoat colors. You can even mix'n'match if you want. I think that would be harder with the comparatively more complex shapes we're likely to see on this car, but most Westy builders just seem to install the panels and call it done, or add some minor stickers.

I'm all for the color being in the gelcoat. I just thought it would cost too much for FFR to inventory a lot of color options. If that isn't an issue, then the whole idea of vinyl color options is moot.

[Oppenheimer]

Hardtop Coupe?

It seems most are in favor of an open roof (with perhaps a hardtop option), however a few have asked for a Coupe. Perhaps if a hardtop is part of the design, it could be done such that the top could optionally be permanently installed by the builder. Bolts instead of latches, perhaps some sort of bonding agent applied for permanent sealing, prevent squeaks, etc. To take advantage of increased chassis stiffening, perhaps the 'permanent' hardtop could be done such that it had more extensive rollbars integrated, that bolted (or welded) into the rest of the frame (the take on/off hardtop would obviously need to be light, so would dispense with the extra steel).

I could see where the same basic design could accommodate building as a roadster, convertible, convertible with hardtop option, or fixed-roof Coupe.

Thoughts?

[subyrod]

I'd prefer Coupe (fixed roof). But, I'd also dig a removable hardtop (ala Porsche 914). I would not be interested in a convertible/roadster only. I'd have to be able to drive it more often than weather in Utah would allow. :)

[keys2heaven]

I'd prefer Coupe (fixed roof). But, I'd also dig a removable hardtop (ala Porsche 914). I would not be interested in a convertible/roadster only. I'd have to be able to drive it more often than weather in Utah would allow. :)

Referring to the design goals, I belive removable top is the way they want to go.

[thebeerbaron]

Hardtop Coupe?

It seems most are in favor of an open roof (with perhaps a hardtop option), however a few have asked for a Coupe. Perhaps if a hardtop is part of the design, it could be done such that the top could optionally be permanently installed by the builder. Bolts instead of latches, perhaps some sort of bonding agent applied for permanent sealing, prevent squeaks, etc. To take advantage of increased chassis stiffening, perhaps the 'permanent' hardtop could be done such that it had more extensive rollbars integrated, that bolted (or welded) into the rest of the frame (the take on/off hardtop would obviously need to be light, so would dispense with the extra steel).

I could see where the same basic design could accommodate building as a roadster, convertible, convertible with hardtop option, or fixed-roof Coupe.

Thoughts?

I don't think you want metal structure in the roof for any number of reasons, unless this is a track-only vehicle whose occupants are wearing appropriate helmets. Other than that, I don't see why, if the design goal is indeed a removable hard top, the builder couldn't take a few extra steps to make the top permanent. (At extra cost and weight!)

[Dirk]

I vote for a rollbar that would meet most club requirements (scca, nasa, ect).

Hardtop option would be a must for me and also roof clearance for a 6'1'' tall person with a helmet on.

Thanks Dave for a car in the price range of the middle class!

[thane]

In my current state of affairs, I'm not sure if/when I'll be able to swing building a car, certainly not for the next two years. It's definitely an aspiration and likely less expensive than the other aspiration, a Cayman. My vote, not being backed up by dollars, only carries so much weight, but for what it's worth, my feeling is that Mike N already said what I'd want in the product. Although I'm only 5'9"; so I don't *need* the room, a car like this needs space for a 6'+ person and his helmet. In every other way, Mike hits on the points that I feel like, if they aren't there, the car becomes too compromised. One word on the styling: I hope that the styling ends up looking like a "sports car," not a "show car." I think the cars that look like fighter planes or alien pods are nifty; I just don't aspire to own one. Kudos, for engaging your community of enthusiasts and customers!

thane



For most people a car like that is not a practical everyday vehicle but assuming that the idea is to make a usable vehicle here is what is on my shopping list in order for a road car.

The styling of any of the cars shown above works for me. I'm sure the final design that is chosen will be stunning.
I want a car that I can drive 100 - 200 miles on a weekend without getting beat up, blown away or going deaf.
I want at least some trunk storage space, enough for an overnight bag.
The driving position and control locations need to ergonomically friendly for a 6ft plus driver, shoulder room , leg room, dead pedal etc.
I want a car I can take to the track or autoX so a full roll bar compliant to typical broom stick test is a must.
I'm sure Jim will do a great job on the suspension design but it should be somewhat tunable and have a nice range of alignment adjustments.
It should be able to handle a hot-rodded Subie motor say around 500 HP without coming apart at the seams.
Donor power steering would be nice.
Donor power brakes and ABS would be nice.
Heat and AC would be nice.

[dv/dt]

Hi Dave,
Are the locations of some of the other key elements set in stone or wide open. i.e. Rad location, battery location, etc. The rad location could really impact body design.

Cheers, Rod

[Oppenheimer]

I don't think you want metal structure in the roof for any number of reasons, unless this is a track-only vehicle whose occupants are wearing appropriate helmets. Other than that, I don't see why, if the design goal is indeed a removable hard top, the builder couldn't take a few extra steps to make the top permanent. (At extra cost and weight!)

I was thinking extra metal in roof for improved structural rigidity, not just for occupant rollover protection (which would probably end up being most popular for track only, high HP, fat tire builds). But point taken on location of said metal in relation to the heads of any occupants in street applications.

Builder taking a few extra steps to make their top permanent, at extra cost and weight, is exactly what I had in mind. I'm just saying if 'hardtop as fixed-roof' is considered an option that is taken into account during design, it could make it a lot easier for said builders to accomodate, at virtually no penalty (in cost or weight) to those that decide to leave their hardtops removable. The idea being FFR gets to advertise the car as option of Roadster, Convertable (with hardtop option) or Coupe, at builders descretion (and builders extra cost), with no real penalty to those that choose the simpler (and cheaper and lighter) of these options.

It would probably just be a little extra CAD time during design to make sure the way the top fits the car would be 'permanent mount friendly', and figuring out what adhesive to use, what bolts to use, stocking these items (as optional extra cost items), and the instructions that go with it. Seems like a small price to pay for opening up additional build options.

[BrandonDrums]

Yeah, I agree. T-Top all the way. It might not be AS rigid as a full on coupe or AS convertible as a full open-air roadster but you can please both camps with a single chassis/model allowing for higher production numbers, lower costs.

It also might be easier to get a T-Top water-tight than a removable hard-top model since you can make the front and rear windshields static and therefore have more ability to permanently seal the seams with more robust weather stripping or automotive caulking. The T-top panels can then buckle down and generate the pressure needed to fill the gaps and create a seal with foam weatherstripping.

Roll-up or slide-up windows can also easily fit into a weatherstripped groove on the hard panels or up against a weatherstripped ledge.

You can weather seal a hard-top too but you won't have any "quick" options to add or remove the top since you can't carry around a whole hardtop as easily as 2 relatively flat and square panels. I imagine with a 95'' wheelbase, 2 square panels could be easily stored in the car behind the seats or in any "trunk" included with the kit and strapped secure. Then you can re-install them away from home quicker than a Kit-style soft top and you cant haul a hard-top at all if you get caught in a drizzle.

The worst thing about my bud's Cobra is the lack of a convenient portable roof that doesn't require unpacking the contents of the trunk to get to. Any overnight trip basically requires up to the min weather status checks and a caravan of other vehicles that can carry his luggage so he can get to the soft-top quickly. I really want to be able to drive to the blue-ridge parkway without any worry of exposure to adverse elements.

[Oppenheimer]

Yeah, I agree. T-Top all the way. It might not be AS rigid as a full on coupe or AS convertible as a full open-air roadster but you can please both camps with a single chassis/model allowing for higher production numbers, lower costs.

It also might be easier to get a T-Top water-tight than a removable hard-top model since you can make the front and rear windshields static and therefore have more ability to permanently seal the seams with more robust weather stripping or automotive caulking. The T-top panels can then buckle down and generate the pressure needed to fill the gaps and create a seal with foam weatherstripping.


The more I think about it, this might be one of those rare occasions when you can give everybody what they want. Design a hardtop that can (optionally) be permanently installed (see previous comments), but also that could optionally be built as two pieces (to allow a Targa style roof, or three pieces, as T-tops, whichever works best). Also build the hardtop mounts so that they could accept a soft top as well.

Builder buys what builder wants. Builds either a Roadster, a convertible (with soft-top or hard-top, buy whichever top you want), or install the hardtop with the 'permanent mount' option to produce a Coupe, or buy the two piece (or three piece, whichever it is) hard-top (same basic hard-top design, just two versions, one piece or two), mounting the 'lower' piece permanently, but the 'upper' as removable which produces a Targa (or T-tops) (or mount the 'lower' removable and have a Targa that can be turned into a convertible).

A win-win.

Design it such that those that just want an open roof don't incur extra cost or weight penalties. Everybody gets what everybody wants.

[thebeerbaron]

After further reflection - I think a problem with T-tops and other "select-a-top" system are gaskets and drains. And squeaks. I know when T-tops were all the rage years ago, leaks were a big issue. On my Miata, there are four different drains - the soft top uses all four, the hard top uses only two at the windshield header. Even with careful care and feeding, the front two do not work all the time and drip water into the cockpit. I will also say that I've had a bunch of experience with hard tops on my car. For a while I had an after-market hard top, which fit poorly and had terrible mounting hardware. Perhaps due to the Miata's floppy chassis, the interface between the hard top and the windshield header was a constant source of headaches. A big bump would often cause one or both latches to undo themselves, which was uncomfortably close to causing the entire top to fall off. I have never had such a problem with the Mazda hardtop, whose latches are far more complicated. Lesson: high quality (read expensive) latches are a must. Also, because of various design/manufacturing flaws, the thing had fitment issues that lead to leaks and squeaks. Highly annoying. Lesson: it's hard to seal a car


One thing to note with the T-tops and Targa - unless you provide an escape for the wind, it's going to buffet like crazy. A removable rear window or other outlet is likely necessary.

I think the design competition will bring out lots of options. I personally don't like the idea of forcing designers to allow for so many options. Let the best design win, and factor the hard/soft/t/targa top portion of their design into the judging criteria. I plan 2-3 options. Maybe the best design will allow 12 roof options, maybe 2. I'm looking forward to seeing it!

[Seagondollar]

I just joined this forum and am highly intrigued by the project. You could stick a normally aspirated Subie engine in this thing and it would be impressive. Now, speaking from my experience with my 88 MR2, I think I have some relevant input to provide.

I'm 6'2" and fit comfortably in this MR2. Yeah, that would be a requirement for the FFR WRX

The latest MR2 convertible does not have enough trunk or storage space to put a briefcase. So, I would recommend something like the Lotus Europa with a flat storage space over the engine - enclosed or otherwise. Small pickup truck like? An optional trailer hitch is a good idea. Small luggage trailer for trips or tire trailer for the autocross or track day.

The MR2 I drive currently has 195/50 x 15 tires on it and that's all it needs. Keep the tires & wheels small(er), lighter, and affordable. Keeping the unsprung weight lower (especially compared to the gross weight) will reap benefits.

AC would be a great benefit. If you want to race and the AC system weight is too much, leave it off. But it gets hot down here in the summer and I'm older and spoiled.

The MR2 does not need power steering at 2700 lbs. This thing won't either.

My current project:
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/_e1WBzNPg_Lg/TIzvqdOe-sI/AAAAAAAABWM/kXxDri0FxtI/s640/MR2%20in%20driveway.jpg

Is getting a supercharged JDM AE101 Corolla engine soon.
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/_e1WBzNPg_Lg/SwQM4szvXZI/AAAAAAAAA5A/LPCgxfTPG9k/s640/DSCN1606.JPG

[D2W]

I like the idea of t-tops but would take it a step further. Make the top in 4 pieces. A rear window that attaches to the twin bumps on the rear cowl which houses the roll bar. The main part of the top would be the T portion that goes between the windshield and rear window. The final two pieces would be the doors that are part of the top and swing up and out of the way. This car is going to be low to the ground so step over height will be easy. Since the doors are part of the top you step over the side and slide down into the car, no bending in half to get in. On a nice day you take off the doors and cruise with the T-top open, on a really nice day you take the whole top off. If there were any storage in the front you may be able to store the top on board since its in 4 smaller pieces. I see this as a real plus for tall guys to get in and out of the car, and it would make the main body easier to build without having to fit doors. Ever tried to get into a lotus?
DP

[mn_vette]

Dave,

First of all I would like to thank you for bringing this kit to market. I have been a fan of FFR for some years now and I love the cars, but to be honest, I can't afford to build a $60k GTM. Here are a few things that I would like to see in this new car, not in any order.

1.) Please make it water tight. I don't plan on driving it in the rain, but I said that with my motor cycle and I've gotten caught a few times. I would really like to not trash my interior because I forgot to check the weather report every 5 minutes. Oh and since I live in MI I'm required to have a windshield wiper to get the car to pass an equipment inspection.

2.) an A/C option is a big plus. I've had a car that I pulled the A/C on to fit a turbo kit and it wasn't pleasant on my commute in the summer.

3.) Integrated roll bar. Saftey first and reguarless if its a coupe or roadster, one small mistake on the wrong road could cause a roll.

4.) Some kind of trunk space. I would love to take the wife on a weekend trip somewhere with our cool sports car, but we need somewhere to put an overnight bag or something.

5.) Adjustable shocks of some form. It would be nice to have a decent ride to the track, and then spend a few minutes fixing the shocks for competition. And some of us love to drag race so the autoX shock setup may not be the best for us.


I realize that some people may not like some of these options, but from my point of view these are the main things I think about when it comes to choosing a car that I'm going to dump a large quantity of money into.

[Dave Smith]

I am pleased in the extreme with the ideas and feedback you guys have put up here. Some of the specific questions are still up in the air. Gel coat tech has come a long way and our work on molds and using this has been with an eye towards doing that. Paint is a huge cost that has to be avoided if possible... doesnt mean you cant paint it, just that if we do our jobs right, you might not have to.
An item like an adjustable shock is easy to address, other things like wheelbase and dimensions on chassis are fairly set, based on the clear design goals and targets. Right now I am focused on launching the design competition in a few days with Grasssroots Motorsports (we'll have links and announce this when it is live on the first).

Real work is going to have to be done on the top (roadster design launch probably, but who knows) and the design of the drivers compartment/cockpit... but those are affected by body design hugely. I am really stoked at the level of support Solidworks is providing on the CAD side. When body design concludes in a few months, the flood will begin in earnest! Also very excited at the level of interest and enthusiasm from the Subie crowd as well. I will keep you guys updated and be as open as possible on the work going forward, but for now, my focus is launching the design competiton.

Dave

[Flyinglow]

Dave,
Have you found or are you guys going to produce a reverse crown gear for the 6 speeds from the STI to make the tranny a 2wd? I have seen the 5 speed ones but not a 6 speed? If so that may make things great since I am eyeing a paddle shift sytem from a 6 speed. Also is car going to be set up with stock intercooler use only?

[Justen]

Flyinglow, I saw in another thread that the best option would be to use the 5sp because it is much easier to convert to RWD. You can probably use a 6sp but i would have to guess most people will be using the 5sp for the lower cost and ease of converting it.

[Nativo]

Hello Guys:
I am also a fan of F5 and for the pasta months been convincing the wife on a kit car from you guys. We have shop that specializes on Subaru cars and this announcement has been but music to my ears. Now we a few concerns:

- Please make sure a 6'3" 250Lbs driver can fit comfortably with a helmet on
- Being from Puerto Rico please make the A/C from Subaru a must
- windows must also be fitted

Keep it up as we will be watching the progress and most likely place and order .

Nativo

- As long as the project uses an EJ series engine the possibilities are endless

[BOOGIE]

- Please make sure a 6'3" 250Lbs driver can fit comfortably
That would be good

[subyrod]

6'4" and 210lbs here. Although, I drove a 914 and a 1990 Geo Metro in High School, so I like small cockpits. :) Just don't want my head to hit the roof/top or knees to hit the dash.

[Nativo]

If the car is geared towards dual purpose street/track the use of both helmet and hard top must allow for the tall driver fit inside.



By the way my other car is a '98 Impreza 2.5RS with a '03 Full JDM conversion (EJ207, 6 sp, brembos and wheels) and for the track an '85 Corolla GTS

Nativo

[Seagondollar]

Might I also suggest dash space for something like an iPad (not necessarily an Apple device) As an interface to the OBDII and MegaSquirt EFI, along with the typical GPS, etc.

[redsharK]

Or the Evoscan GPS would be even better :D
http://www.evoscan.com/gpsnav

[AVIONX]

Just to clarify a point. I owned a Fiat X1/9 for quite a while. It had a hyper simple Targa roof. It never leaked and never rattled and never squeaked. There was never any buffeting with the roof off and the windows down. The Rear window was vertical and was NOT removable. It had to simple latches on the windsheild and two "prongs" on the back that slipped onto recesses on the targa bar.

This roof was simple, was a single piece of fiberglass, was strong, made the car much quieter and warmer, came on/off in under 10 seconds by a single person, and most most MOST importantly, stored right under the front hood making the decision to go topless completely up to the whim of the driver. THERE IS NO BETTER SOLUTION FOR SIMPLE, CHEAP, WEATHER TIGHT AND DROPTOP AT WILL.

P.S. It also had a usable trunk behind the engine :D

[Seagondollar]

Or the Evoscan GPS would be even better :D
That'll run on any windows PC, so you would just need a touch screen and something like the fit-PC http://www.engadget.com/2008/09/17/fit-pc-slim-the-worlds-smallest-pc-just-dont-lose-it-on/ with a GPS antenna (or maybe something else.

I guess my point was a request for enough dash space for something the size of a touchscreen tablet. Mini Mac or something like that behind it with some of the really interesting apps that are coming out nowadays.

AVIONX - I tend to agree with you. From an engineering viewpoint it makes more sense for a targa style than a T-top. MR2s with T-Tops are prone to breakage at one end or the other. Targas are a larger box structure and flex slightly less.

[ryan44]

My idea of the next vehicle that Factory Five should produce would be one that has a world beating chassis and front suspension set up similar to what is found on the 33 hot rod that a builder would only have to apply a nose cone and body panel accents to create an exoskeleton styled vehicle (think ariel atom). This chassis would also be able to accept a body that could be configured as a coupe with the option for a targa roof. A chassis such as this would appeal to the vast majority of what everyone has been describing what they want in the next generation Factory Five product. I personally would love to build an exoskeleton styled vehicle with the support of Factory Five behind it.

[redsharK]

That'll run on any windows PC, so you would just need a touch screen and something like the fit-PC http://www.engadget.com/2008/09/17/fit-pc-slim-the-worlds-smallest-pc-just-dont-lose-it-on/ with a GPS antenna (or maybe something else.

I guess my point was a request for enough dash space for something the size of a touchscreen tablet. Mini Mac or something like that behind it with some of the really interesting apps that are coming out nowadays.

AVIONX - I tend to agree with you. From an engineering viewpoint it makes more sense for a targa style than a T-top. MR2s with T-Tops are prone to breakage at one end or the other. Targas are a larger box structure and flex slightly less.

The evoscan software doesn't log very much at a time on an atom based pc. but I think we agree on the double (triple?) din type opening.
Evoscan (and ecuflash) works really good with a lot of modern Subaru ecu's.
I am still waiting for a decent car-pc that is plug and play like a car stereo, has a hd-radio, touch screen and an external usb port that will run evoscan.

[subyrod]

So, the design goals are:

$9900 kit
$15000 completed cost

Does this include $15000 + the donor suby

or

is $15000 include purchasing a wrecked subaru?

I guess I assumed it was $9900 plus a donor suby and that completes the car.

[Oppenheimer]

So, the design goals are:

$9900 kit
$15000 completed cost

Does this include $15000 + the donor suby

or

is $15000 include purchasing a wrecked subaru?

I guess I assumed it was $9900 plus a donor suby and that completes the car.

Its ~$10K for kit, plus whatever you spend for your donor. After you buy a wrecked WRX (or whatever), and sell off all the parts you didn't need, the guesstimate of what the net cost was $5K.

Its important to keep in mind that builders of the other FFR kits often invest in enhancements to the kit which can drive up costs. So while it may be possible to build one for the quoted price, many builds often exceed that.

One area where this could especially be true with previous FFR kits is paint and bodywork. So this kit having a paintless body should greatly reduce build cost for the majority of buyers. I would think it would be much more plausible to build within the stated cost estimates with this car than previous FFR kits, and still be VERY satisfied with the results.

[VRaptor SpeedWorks, LLC]

I take it that the $15k is the completed cost of the car counting all expenses. I'm guessing to get to this figure, it will be the "one donor" concept where if you have the $9900 kit + the donor car, you have everything you need to complete the car.

$9900 Kit
+
$7k good donor
=
$17k

Minus $2k for un-needed parts sold off = $15k completed cost. That's my logic anyway.

As with anything like this, yes, it will probably be Possible to do this, but most likely, by the time you factor in EVERYTHING like nuts, bolts, coolant, oils, new wheels and/or tires, and consumables like adhesives, cleaners, sealants, etc...... the reality price will hopefully still end up under $20k.

[subyrod]

^Oppenheimer and VRapter, that's what I was thinking too. My plan is no paint, use my 2002 WRX as the donor, sell off parts and hopefully be right around that $15k mark.

[Justen]

I have been looking for wrecked wrx's and there are A LOT on this site:http://www.carfrom.us/?carmake=SUBARU&page=1
If anyone actually buys a car from this site post back here because it seems to be an auction site and I would like to know how it works out.
Thanks

[Jo3sh]

Just to clarify a point. I owned a Fiat X1/9 for quite a while. It had a hyper simple Targa roof. It never leaked and never rattled and never squeaked. There was never any buffeting with the roof off and the windows down. The Rear window was vertical and was NOT removable. It had to simple latches on the windsheild and two "prongs" on the back that slipped onto recesses on the targa bar.

This roof was simple, was a single piece of fiberglass, was strong, made the car much quieter and warmer, came on/off in under 10 seconds by a single person, and most most MOST importantly, stored right under the front hood making the decision to go topless completely up to the whim of the driver. THERE IS NO BETTER SOLUTION FOR SIMPLE, CHEAP, WEATHER TIGHT AND DROPTOP AT WILL.

P.S. It also had a usable trunk behind the engine :D

I agree with all of the above. As a 6' human crammed into an X-1/9 with the top off, my hair was gently ruffled at highway speeds, but there was none of the ear-pounding, wardrobe-disarranging wind in the cockpit that other convertibles exhibit. Even on a cool night, you could drive comfortably with the top off and the heater on. Then, if it started to rain, it was very easy to break out and lock down the roof.

[BrandonDrums]

After further reflection - I think a problem with T-tops and other "select-a-top" system are gaskets and drains. And squeaks. I know when T-tops were all the rage years ago, leaks were a big issue. On my Miata, there are four different drains - the soft top uses all four, the hard top uses only two at the windshield header. Even with careful care and feeding, the front two do not work all the time and drip water into the cockpit. I will also say that I've had a bunch of experience with hard tops on my car. For a while I had an after-market hard top, which fit poorly and had terrible mounting hardware. Perhaps due to the Miata's floppy chassis, the interface between the hard top and the windshield header was a constant source of headaches. A big bump would often cause one or both latches to undo themselves, which was uncomfortably close to causing the entire top to fall off. I have never had such a problem with the Mazda hardtop, whose latches are far more complicated. Lesson: high quality (read expensive) latches are a must. Also, because of various design/manufacturing flaws, the thing had fitment issues that lead to leaks and squeaks. Highly annoying. Lesson: it's hard to seal a car


One thing to note with the T-tops and Targa - unless you provide an escape for the wind, it's going to buffet like crazy. A removable rear window or other outlet is likely necessary.

I think the design competition will bring out lots of options. I personally don't like the idea of forcing designers to allow for so many options. Let the best design win, and factor the hard/soft/t/targa top portion of their design into the judging criteria. I plan 2-3 options. Maybe the best design will allow 12 roof options, maybe 2. I'm looking forward to seeing it!

True about all of that. As Dave has pointed out, the chassis pretty much is set in stone here so unless they already incorporated roof line structural beams my whole argument for a T-top is probably out the window.

I do however think there should be more flexibility with whatever design comes to be in providing a portable roof for this car. As I've said before, the worst part about my buddy's FFR Roadster is the lack of any easy to carry and easy to erect top. The soft top is crude and about as easy to put together as an old tent in the wind.

Aside from a much more complex and therefore, expensive soft convertible top for this kit, a Targa or T-Top system probably provides the simplest and cheapest option other than a full hard-top which we know is not a portable system and would probably place a lot of limitations on the long-distance drive-ability of the car. A hard top would probably mean installing A/C so summer trips don't kill you and not ever being able to go top-down while out of town unless the hard top fits through a hotel door...

[wvoutpost]

Hmmm, love the basic direction - lower build cost, turbo 4cyl, manual shift, light weight, sort of an affordable Lotus. Very relevant in today's world. However, I hate to admit, I can't think of a mid engine roadster I like. Coupes, targas look great. All the convertibles I like are front engine. Hoping the design includes some type of "hard top", removable or otherwise. Or maybe the design competition will come up with an amazing modern body style that blows away my paradigm. Sure hope so, this sounds like the model I would want to build.

[Slowwrx]

Dave, can you give us a little more detail on what the suspension design is going to be. Is it going to utilize the subaru front control arms etc.

What kind of tire size are you planning on be able to run on these cars?

Thanks
Matt
TopSpeed Motorsports
Subaru Specialist.

[Oppenheimer]

I recall reading once on the FFR site about getting the 'look' right when creating a replica kit car. They mentioned that wheelbase was critical. Even if its off just a little, it won't look right, for the same reason your eye picks up immediatly when a picture is hung just a little crooked.

We know there is a pending body design competition, but that the basic dimensions of the chasis are already laid out. This includes a wheelbase of 95 inches. We also know that although the announcement included a 'napkin-sketch' concept, the Lancia Stratos was also mentioned as a potential 'target' design.

Interestingly, the wheelbase of the new Stratos is 94.5 inches.

I guess all I'm saying is it seems they had this car in mind when they laid out the chassis.

[D2W]

I could be wrong but I don't think Dave or anyone else from FFR mentioned the Stratos as a target design. That came from the author of the Automobile magazine article who said "I'm imagining something that looks like a Lancia Stratos". Again I don't think Dave was ever thinking Stratos as he has said roadster with a removable hardtop. That doesn't sound like a Stratos which only came as a coupe as far as I know.
DP

[Rotr8]

I agree with D2W, while the Stratos target be it out of context or not might be an mark to hit, the napkin sketch fits anything but a stratos profile. Wether that was intentional, to stray away from a Stratos or not, may just be so that designers don't get pigeonholed into thinking "just" Stratos.

[Nativo]

What's wrong with a coupe?
http://www.arpem.com/coches/coches/ferrari/458-italia/fotos/2009/ferrari-458-italia-aerea-lateral6.jpg

I wouldn't mind an EJ207 powered Coupé...


Nativo

[Rotr8]

Nothing at all, both my designs are coupes, with open top variants.
When I design I tend to design a coupe in the first place to get the lines right.

[redsharK]

This is a cool modern interpretation of the Stratos in a spyder form... the only stratos I like btw...

http://www.diseno-art.com/images/stratos.jpg

[subyrod]

I really like the basic design of the fender flares. It's a great way to get more width out of a car and look muscular and purposeful

[keys2heaven]

It's going to be very interesting to see what body design will meet the criteria and STILL allow for a kit cost of under 10G.

[archangel]

I just hope it looks better than the GTM!

I understand not wanting your kit to look like another Lambo-clone, but it could have been a much better looking design.

One suggestion of a perimeter frame vehicle with easily (read inexpensively) replaced body "skin" parts was an idea I thought was worth serious consideration.

[Oppenheimer]

I could be wrong but I don't think Dave or anyone else from FFR mentioned the Stratos as a target design. That came from the author of the Automobile magazine article who said "I'm imagining something that looks like a Lancia Stratos". Again I don't think Dave was ever thinking Stratos as he has said roadster with a removable hardtop. That doesn't sound like a Stratos which only came as a coupe as far as I know.
DP

Good point, now that you mention it, it was the Automobile article (that was quoted on FFR site) that mentioned Stratos. But then, where did they get the Stratos idea from? That it matches the new FFR wheelbase exactly would be quite a coincidence if they just thought of it on their own.

[redsharK]

My opinion is if Factory Five can do what they are proposing
and the drivetrain is strong enuff to run 300+whp thru a modified transmission...
we are all in for a freaking awesome ride, please nail the design and well... you know exactly what I am saying!
How soon do I need to have $10k ready to get mine?

[Rotr8]

300whp is cake work, a Cobb AP can tune up to 400+ with some hardware uncorking mods, it will be a beast

[subyrod]

I'm gonna crap my pants with "just" 280hp from my Cobb Stage II tuned 2.0L stock turbo mill. :) hehe can't wait!

[redsharK]

in an 1800lb subie based 2wd car... anymore then 300+whp will be an issue for the tranny design.
The motor isn't the issue, I want it to be insanely fast and reliable and cheap (ok that is a holy grail, I know)
The Javan R1 weighs about 1700lbs and is optional to 230hp and 12.2 1/4 miles
I think FFR can do much better :D

Red

[Pierre-Alexandre]

I really like the look of the K1 attack, but it got an out of range price and it's out of production.

For me, it as to be an onpen top, Targa ou complete convertible with soft top like a miata, vette, z3 etc... not like the roaster that takes few minutes to instal.

If you go for the Targa Style, the Honda Del Sol was a great idea to me. Remove the top and store it in the trunk and lower the rear windows (electric). The rollbar could be hidden in teh rear windows frame,

You also could go with Lamborghini Diablo Roadster top, that slide on top of the engine bay.

I also like the Porsche Carrera GT tops, but I don't know about how to store it.

I also like the idea of the exoskeleton style. Maybe a body option that works for the same frame.

Finally, what do you think of a Carbon fiber bopy pannels (as an option) I woul pay a few more bucks t get it carbon fiber and it look great in natural. That my ideas.

[Rotr8]

Cmon sharky you know the golden rule- Cheap, Reliable, Fast, pick two. Hopefully FFR can rewrite that...

[Rotr8]

I used to own a 2nd gen MR2, the tops stored away behind the seat in front of the firewall, was super convenient for unexpected weather.

[D2W]

What's wrong with a coupe?
http://www.arpem.com/coches/coches/ferrari/458-italia/fotos/2009/ferrari-458-italia-aerea-lateral6.jpg

I wouldn't mind an EJ207 powered Coupé...


Nativo

I have nothing against a coupe. Especially one that looks as good as a 458 italia for 15K. Plus I think the car should be designed with a top from the beginning so it doesn't end up looking like an add-on. However Dave said this car will be a roadster.
dp

[D2W]

It's going to be very interesting to see what body design will meet the criteria and STILL allow for a kit cost of under 10G.

I too am wondering about this. How wild and agressive can it be and still meet target costs? On a side note will one design from the competition be picked? If so, will designs deemed too expensive and/or to complicated to build be automatically eliminated? It will be interesting to see the specs for the competition to see what is outlined beyond basic chassis dimensions. Will they spec the windshield to be used? How about other body features?
Dp

[Bill_H]

I think one of the biggest issues that might come up with the body is the idea of a no-paint-necessary gel coat. That means there can't be any mold lines.

[LS MAN]

Some of the latest concept designs are getting pretty complex, & would be hard to mold. I am not such a big fan of all the "large mouth bass" stuff will all the huge grill openings. I like this look.

http://wallpapers-diq.org/wallpapers/17/Acura_NSX_Concept_Car_2008.jpg

[LS MAN]

duplicate

[Someday I Suppose]

100% correct there, that issue of Automobile also had the new Stratos in it. Call me a cynic but I couldn't help but wonder if they didn't mention the Stratos in the FFR piece as a tie in to the main article on the new Stratos.




Good point, now that you mention it, it was the Automobile article (that was quoted on FFR site) that mentioned Stratos. But then, where did they get the Stratos idea from? That it matches the new FFR wheelbase exactly would be quite a coincidence if they just thought of it on their own.

[Jon A]

I think one of the biggest issues that might come up with the body is the idea of a no-paint-necessary gel coat. That means there can't be any mold lines.

I agree 100%. I do not see how you can have a complex shape (hard edges, etc) in a one-piece mold without having parting lines (i.e. the ability to separate the mold to extract the molded part/body). I suspect to keep within the design requirements the body shape will have to be fairly simple.... I hope I am wrong... I guess we will know soon when we get more details from Dave.

As for a coupe or a Ferrari 458 type design... isn't that what we have the GTM for? I don't think FFR sees this design as a super-car/Ferrari/Lamborghini/Bugatti type thing.... Remember, this isn't a big engine beast, it is a small, light quick 4 cylinder. I think the body should reflect that.... think of it this way.... would a Saleen S7 feel "right" if you knew it had a 4 banger in it? I think the design has to be smaller in scale than the "big" super-cars. More like an Elise, Lotus 7, Atom, etc. That said, I still think some of the lines on the Porsche 918 (but in a smaller scale) would be really cool.

-Jon A.

[VRaptor SpeedWorks, LLC]

I too am wondering about this. How wild and agressive can it be and still meet target costs? On a side note will one design from the competition be picked? If so, will designs deemed too expensive and/or to complicated to build be automatically eliminated? It will be interesting to see the specs for the competition to see what is outlined beyond basic chassis dimensions. Will they spec the windshield to be used? How about other body features?
Dp

This is why I've been "preaching" to keep things simple. IMO, simple doesn't necessarily mean bland! That's the beauty of fiberglass. You can do things with it that you can't do with steel. It's not going to cost much (or any) more to do a complex shape as it will do do a simple shape of the same size once the molds are done. Yes, getting that first plug made is going to be more difficult/expensive on a complex shape, but once the mold is made, laying up the parts in the mold is pretty much the same process for any shape with the same amount of materials used. In a nut-shell, whether the shape of the body is drop-dead sexy, or butt-ugly, it's going to cost roughly the same amount to make, so might as well make it sexy! ;-) Where the SIMPLE is going to have to come in, is not in the shape of the body, but how things are integrated into the body......like the headlights, tail-lights, what they choose for a windshield (the Attack used the donor Accord windshield), etc. If FFR has to have a custom windshield made just to fit this car, it's going to be more difficult for them to keep their price. If the body is made to accept production car headlights and tail-lights (supplied by the builder), the costs to build will still go up. Production car headlight assemblies run from $300 EACH for a cheap one, on up. We just replaced the tail light assembly on one of our cars. $300. Do you want to spend $1200-$1500 just on headlights and tail-lights to build your car?

[LS MAN]

I agree that the complexity of the design will also add cost to the molds, & the kit price.

[Oppenheimer]

100% correct there, that issue of Automobile also had the new Stratos in it. Call me a cynic but I couldn't help but wonder if they didn't mention the Stratos in the FFR piece as a tie in to the main article on the new Stratos.

Oh, didn't see the Automobile mag, just the article snippet reprinted on FFR site. Didn't even know there was an article on the Stratos. That makes sense then, that mag would tie in Stratos.

[Xelerator]

The Stratos would be a great target design.

I'm looking for a track oriented specification, wide-track suspension, optional splitter/wing, removable top/windscreen, somewhat like the Lotus 2-Eleven track car.

http://www.worldcarfans.com/10703014937/lotus-2-eleven-track-car/lowphotos#8

[D2W]

For the record I wasn't saying that this car should look like the 458 italia, only that I like the 458 italia. As far as simplicity of the design, I think the designers with the most success with this project are going to be the ones who use simpler inspiration. The Lotus 211, the Espera-Sbarro, the Porsche 918, are simple, look fast standing still, and would be fairly easy to build. Add a windshield and hardtop, design the head and tail lights into a simple housing that uses off the shelf projector lamps. FFR's original napkin sketch while simple, looks great. All the concept cars that have been posted get people excited but if they aren't simple they are going to drive up the cost and we end up with another GTM.
DP

[keys2heaven]

Just design it so my wife will feel like getting in it. :)

[PhyrraM]

.........I think the designers with the most success with this project are going to be the ones who use simpler inspiration. The Lotus 211, the Espera-Sbarro, the Porsche 918, are simple, look fast standing still, and would be fairly easy to build. ...............design the head and tail lights into a simple housing that uses off the shelf projector lamps. ....... All the concept cars that have been posted get people excited but if they aren't simple they are going to drive up the cost ......

Agreed. Designing with the intended goals in the forfront will give much nicer results than simply designing a dream car.

Can't wait to see the chassis and get some *real* ideas flowing. Too bad I can't draw, or use CAD.

[Oppenheimer]

The Stratos would be a great target design.

I'm looking for a track oriented specification, wide-track suspension, optional splitter/wing, removable top/windscreen, somewhat like the Lotus 2-Eleven track car.

http://www.worldcarfans.com/10703014937/lotus-2-eleven-track-car/lowphotos#8

Wow, put a windshield & top on that, and I'm sold. As it has been said, this new FFR needn’t be a Ferrari-esque dream car. It does need to look cool, but it can be simple. Not bland, simple can still look impressive.

I'm also thinking I don't necessarily want to look like I'm driving a $200K snob-missile. One of the cool things about the Roadster is, although its a supercar, its really down-to-earth. Even when neophytes see you driving it, they know you are a real car-guy, not a rich wannabe. I'd like it if this car exuded that same feel.

The GTM is the FFR exotic supercar. They don’t need another one. I fell like this one should be more car, less cruise-missile.

[Dave Smith]

Ive been out for a few days and have to take time answering the posts here. Alot of these things can take the design in different directions. I can clarify a few things. While I loved the Stratos from an early age, the car body shape is not designed. Jim has set the wheelbase for optimizing the handling/balance of the car since performance has to be one of the highest considerations, but not exclusive. The next ish of Grassroots Motorsports will announce the design competition but it will have already launched this coming Tuesday on-line. Jim (who is IN CHARGE) of the final car and design will be one of the Judges on the body competition. The parameters will make more sense on tuesday. The quality of thinking on this thread is pretty impressive. Obviously it will not be possible to satisfy every demand and yet Jim and his FFR team has done an exceptional job with each design, keeping it faithful and close to the charter and design goals.

Dave

[Dave Smith]

I have a more "Idealistic" vision of this car. I think 15 years of Factory Five has given us the skills to deliver on this, our biggest challenge yet...

15 years of DESIGNINGcars (Mk1, Mk2, Mk3, Mk3.1, Mk4, Coupe, 2nd Gen Coupe, Spyder GT, Mustang parts, GTM, 2nd Gen GTM, Challenge car, 10 years of racing with the NASA-FFR Challenge Series, 33 Hot Rod...

15 years of MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGIES, robotics, tooling, molding, mold making, welding, CNC cutting, inventory suppliers, quality, facilities, etc...

15 years of ENGINEERING solutions, AutoCAD, Pro-Engineer, Solidworks...

15 years of PARTNERSHIPS with media companies, suppliers, major car companies, tech companies, molding experts, racing communities...

15 years of SUCCESSFULLY ACHEIVING GOALS, from beating ****** 3 times in Federal court to surviving the recent economy, the team of pros at FFR have overcome everything thrown at them!

If you know me, you know that I love this company. More though, I love the idea that this company has made a difference in peoples lives. I'm going to make a point here. I think this car is a challenge that we've been training for for 15 years. To deliver a sub $10k car package that meets the criteria we've discussed, and that can be finished for $15k or less is a tremendous challenge. I think the technology and our team exists today that can make this happen. I think we can use all the experience we've accumulated to deliver on this promise. We KNOW so well the mistakes we've made, what works, what things can be done, what technologies are a waste. We have learned so much on the performance front and truly understand value engineering. With the final part added, namely the collective wealth of knowledge and creativity of the mature FFR community, I think the design goals of the car are achievable. I KNOW they are achievable. The coolest thing about the project is that we all (in FFR) want to build and drive the car ourselves. If you've been on a 90 mph drifting test-drive with me thru the FFR industrial park and parking lot, then you know how much I want to drop the hammer on this new car. THAT is where great designs are born. This one is the most fun and exciting challenge yet. The car will be a beautiful, affordable, elemental yet useful, high performance build-it-yourself, export-capable, addition to the FFR line-up.

Dave Smith

[Oppenheimer]

Amen, Dave.

We are all so excited about this new car, and sometimes our excitement comes out as bickering about this detail and that. Things that deep down we know FFR will get right, so there really is no need to fret. Its just we are so eager!

[Raceral]

Well crap, let me jump in. I am kinda with Magnus on this one. I was hoping for something simple. Like the Atom.
But for a different reason. Economy.I think there is a market for the folks that don't have 50k. You have the GTM, its over the top. The Roadster, what can you say that already hasn't been said. The 33, everybody likes a hot rod. You have all the niche's covered, or do you.

I think a ton of folks are yearning for a bad ***, blip the throttle, light'em up high powered , low weight, pocket rocket.
Something that can be built for 15k. You already have the 25 to 100k market covered.
We have all seen the videos of the Busa powered rockets just lighting them up at a touch of the go pedal.
Something like a 2 stroke motorcross bike of the 80's with 4 wheels.

You motorcycle guys out there.. you remember the Bimota... some of those Italian designed bikes with frames to die for... let your design juices flow with an out of sight , over the top frame that will give you cold chills that the world can see.

It don't need know stinking body... I remember my roadster sitting out in my garage bodyless.... I loved looking at that thing

Welp..... there is my 2 cents worth.

[riptide motorsport]

I need a sexy body......mine as well as the kit!!:)

[HealeyRick]

I have a more "Idealistic" vision of this car. I think 15 years of Factory Five has given us the skills to deliver on this, our biggest challenge yet...


Dave Smith

Dave,

This is just such an exciting idea. I love the enthusiasm that has come with a design competition and the opportunity to create a totally new kind of enthusiast car. Seeing everyone's ideas of designs is fascinating. I'm old enough to remember when the Cobra was introduced and the excitement created. I think you have the opportunity to recreate that with this car.

Best of luck,

[MikeK]

I to need a sexy body, I will have to settle for the cars. I think a removable hardtop on a Atom or Lotus 7 type car will look rediculous, I'm also really excited about this car but I have to say if I can see the frame, and I'm not on a laying on the ground, it's a deal breaker. I want a hot looking Lotus Elise type of car that I can hop in and drive to Florida without an inclosed trailer.

[iamsam]

THAT is where great designs are born. This one is the most fun and exciting challenge yet. The car will be a beautiful, affordable, elemental yet useful, high performance build-it-yourself, export-capable, addition to the FFR line-up.

Makes me giddy with anticipation reading this. I can't wait.

[Cooluser23]

I really hope the design is something daily driveable.

That means I want a windshield and a roof, and windows and it has to be street legal.

Besides the Lancia Stratos already mentioned, I like the design of these compact cars:

Lotus Evora
http://www.cartype.com/pics/6419/full/lotus_evora_sf1_10.jpg

Mc Laren MP4-12C
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_wSUG_ibJWC4/Sv24ThgjwsI/AAAAAAAAAs0/oAW_ZBwQ8Qw/s400/2011-McLaren-MP4-12C-Super-Sports-Car-1.jpg

Artega GT
http://www.cartype.com/pics/6938/full/artega_gt_1_09.jpg

Tesla Roadster
http://www.favstocks.com/wp-content/uploads/cache/0642d_filesphpfileTeslaRoadster25jpg
While I don't want a copy of any of them, I hope they can serve as inspiration for a truly modern and fun design.

[iamsam]

I'm also really excited about this car but I have to say if I can see the frame, and I'm not on a laying on the ground, it's a deal breaker. I want a hot looking Lotus Elise type of car that I can hop in and drive to Florida without an inclosed trailer.

I 2nd this. Even if the body is just minimal, I'd say stay away from the exo-skeleton look. There is a company who has started production on an exo-skeleton RWD, Subaru powered ~1300lb car. The KTM X-bow will soon be available here and of course the Aton itself is available. I say put a great body on it, but keep it light and keep it minimal.

[Bill_H]

Can anybody provide some insight into the WRX electrical system? Will the wiring harness require a "diet"? Will we be able to hang onto the electronic goodies like ABS and traction control? Will switching from 4wd to 2wd require reprogramming the "symmetric all wheel drive" electronics?

[Rotr8]

No answer for ya, but here are some fun pics of the STIs harness at Prodrives shop,,,

http://i51.tinypic.com/p3jth.jpg

http://i55.tinypic.com/2dh9261.jpg

[iamsam]

Here is another one, albeit a bit hard to read: http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash2/hs562.ash2/148422_1430627132251_1430063084_30936506_3230278_n .jpg

This is from a thread on Nasioc where a guy is putting a JDM 2.0 into a 914. The thread is worth a read. Link: http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2055900

[PhyrraM]

Can anybody provide some insight into the WRX electrical system? Will the wiring harness require a "diet"? Will we be able to hang onto the electronic goodies like ABS and traction control? Will switching from 4wd to 2wd require reprogramming the "symmetric all wheel drive" electronics?

WRX 5-speed AWD is completely passive. Meaning that as long as the hubs/knuckles that FFR chooses will support the speed sensors a builder could choose to keep ABS. WRXs before '08 did not have any traction control as the AWD system pretty much made it redundant.

STI and automatics, I cannot speak to.

[Flyinglow]

ABS in the front of the vehicle will be the issue since it will most likely not be a Subaru donor part. Harness will not need that much of a "diet" like doing to a civic diet or anything, they are failry simple system already. For traction control it is stated above. However, I would highly recomend a LSD for traction, since this in now in the rear of the vehicle. Also unless F5 has a solution that I haven't found, it looks like only a MT will work with this program and not an automatic.

[subyrod]

I was thinking about the brake system. MR sports car vs front engine/awd 4 door sedan. It has brake bias to the front and larger rotors up front too. Obviously FFR will be designing the brake system and will take into consideration this difference when trying to use the donor parts.

[carrera]

Given the $15k price target, I bet it will be a bare bones fair weather week-end driver / track toy. How about something along the lines of smaller (9/10s) Gardner Douglas T70?

[carrera]

Something along the likes of this but about 10% smaller given FFR's target of 200-300 pounds lighter, 100-200 HP fewer ponies and about $50k less. I believe GD is developing a hard top option for this.


716

[Olimk2]

Funny you 're talking about Gardner douglas, i've worked for them in UK and designed this 10 years ago...A modern Cobra project...Hope i can do the same soon...

http://www.madabout-kitcars.com/images/imgtxt/608/1138643243-gdgt.jpg

[Olimk2]

Funny your talking about GD, i've designed this for them 10 years ago, modern cobra concept...hope i can do the same soon...

http://www.madabout-kitcars.com/images/imgtxt/608/1138643243-gdgt.jpg

[agepag]

I think we all have to keep in mind the $9999 price tag, but them again the MK4 has a pretty nice looking body and the price is $12,995

[mn_vette]

There isn't any reason that the new car can't use the existing WRX brakes. Since the donor is AWD you can use the rear hubs for the drive wheels in the new car and keep the front hubs for the fronts with no drive shafts attached.

As far as ABS goes there isn't any reason that it shouldn't be useable. The one problem I see is that the ABS unit is what controlls the brake biasing. If the weight distribution is greatly different from the WRX then the rear brake biasing may be thrown off. If there isn't an ABS unit then a biasing valve will need to be used.

[Hondaslayer]

There isn't any reason that the new car can't use the existing WRX brakes. Since the donor is AWD you can use the rear hubs for the drive wheels in the new car and keep the front hubs for the fronts with no drive shafts attached.

As far as ABS goes there isn't any reason that it shouldn't be useable. The one problem I see is that the ABS unit is what controlls the brake biasing. If the weight distribution is greatly different from the WRX then the rear brake biasing may be thrown off. If there isn't an ABS unit then a biasing valve will need to be used.

Very cheap and simple solution is to use the 2000-2004 Legacy / Outback rear brake rotors and caliper brackets. IIRC the pads are the same shape / size as the 02 (or was it 03?) WRX. Figure ~ $350 for new OEM parts. Those rears with the OEM 2006 / 2007 WRX front 4 piston calipers, decent pads / lines / fluid and you will be detaching your retinas in a sub 2k car :)

[subyrod]

Ya, I don't think I'd wanna use ABS. Too complicated, the brake bias issue, etc.

So, do Porsches and Mid engine cars still have larger rotors and more pistons on their brakes in the front? How does these cars size their brakes for front and rear?

[Steve91T]

Ya, I don't think I'd wanna use ABS. Too complicated, the brake bias issue, etc.

So, do Porsches and Mid engine cars still have larger rotors and more pistons on their brakes in the front? How does these cars size their brakes for front and rear?

Still bigger in the front. Even though it's mid engine, still most of the braking is done by the front wheels. Not anything like my 97 Camaro, which has the weight distribution of a pick up truck, but still, under braking, weight shifts forward.

My 91 MR2 turbo had 2 piston brakes front, and 1 piston rear. The rotors were about the same diameter, but the fronts were much fatter.

Rear brakes in this car will be more important than most are used to, but not by a whole lot.


I'd be building with no ABS, and a simple brake bias controller.

Steve

[thebeerbaron]

Also remember that pad choice plays a large role in brake bias. On the Miata, the hot Stock autocross setup was to use stock pads up front and more aggressive pads in the rear, to minimize front lockup with the fat, light Hoosiers. On the track, the correct setup is the more conventional aggressive pads up front, slightly less aggressive pads in the rear.

I'm guessing that for cost reasons the WRX disks and calipers will be retained and the bias question will either be solved using a simple controller, or staggered pads.

[Steve91T]

That's true. I forgot about that. Even with my tiny rear brakes on my Camaro, I still run a less aggressive pad in the rear to control axle hop on the track.

Steve

[Seagondollar]

One more (fairly simple & aerodynamic) design to toss into the pot: Chaparral 2J

http://www.photoessayist.com/canam/chaparral/images/chaparral-01a.JPG

Note: not that we need the suckers to assist in downforce.

http://www.photoessayist.com/canam/chaparral/images/chaparral-04.JPG

Note 2: Projection headlights, such as the Hella 009998021 (12V/65W 90mm Bi-Halogen High/Low Beam Headlamp Module) or comparable from yer local junkyard simplify or likewise improve the front end design(s)

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51y7Wv6maQL._SL500_AA300_.jpg

And lastly - how much of this (below) are we going to use?

http://photos.webridestv.com/datastore/images/user/11f137c495080055faf1a7e770bad7a0/Subaru_WRX_Photos_30593_20080223_l.jpg

[Rotr8]

I think we all have to keep in mind the $9999 price tag, but them again the MK4 has a pretty nice looking body and the price is $12,995

Looks have very little if anything to do with cost. Its just you don't see "beautiful" bodies on small production cars/kits because those companies tend not to put much effort into it. Usually its a small shop that just wants to have a performer and little emphasis on aesthetics. Its easy to see what companies spent some time on the looks of the car, others just want a track car half the time.

[slopoke]

maybe a body shell something along the lines of a Mercedes C1000 with some minor changes to simplify the manufacturing process... sorry having trouble posting photo. It's sleek, aerodynamic and would probably look good as a spyder.731

[riptide motorsport]

the c100 body looks like it would be easy for FFR to produce.

[archangel]

I was also hoping for something simple. Like the Atom.
I agree with you about there being a market for the folks that don't have 50k.

Something that can be built for 15k as they already have the 25 to 100k market covered.

It would also be nice to have another kit like those Busa powered rockets with an over the top frame that will give us all cold chills that the world can see.

It don't need know stinking body (on the out side of the vehicle anyway), just an inner water tight shell around the passenger compartment and some engine weather protection.

[FRANKRAT]

Hardtop, either fixed or removable.
Use as much as possible from WRX donor, including interior.
No frills needed and that will help keep weight down.
I don't know if you want to use the McPherson Suby front suspension but that would keep costs down.
Allow two good sized men to sit in comfort...I'm concerned mainly with width.

I agree with this, we have to be careful when we take the roadster out and it might rain.

[BigLeo69]

i like the thought of a stunted down Aston Martin Vantage, shorter hood, longer rear window, like a cab forward Aston :)
my 2nd most favorite next to the cobra

[slopoke]

can it be made to look like this??? http://www.gtr-xs.com/gallery.htm# ... it's called the Dagger GT

[subyrod]

Dagger GT looks rad! Wish it had a top. I like the lines!

[keys2heaven]

can it be made to look like this??? http://www.gtr-xs.com/gallery.htm# ... it's called the Dagger GT


Wow. Really like these lines. Take 11" from wheelbase and keep proportions with removable top and you have a winner.

[redsharK]

remember we are talking inspiration for the new design, not blatant rip-offs of a current production car :D

[keys2heaven]

remember we are talking inspiration for the new design, not blatant rip-offs of a current production car :D

k, how bout "I really like the lines of the Dagger. Perhaps something like this?"

[Olimk2]

The Dagger is nice. The FFR will be a lot smaller so difficult to have the same "stance". The project is in elise/boxter territory not Murcielago or Zonda. As many people want a "roomy" cockpit, proportions won't be the same.

[Hondaslayer]

The Dagger is nice. The FFR will be a lot smaller so difficult to have the same "stance". The project is in elise/boxter territory not Murcielago or Zonda. As many people want a "roomy" cockpit, proportions won't be the same.

Glad somebody gets it. Everybody keeps posting super cars when FFR already has that in the GTM. This car is more MR2/MR-S, Lancia Stratos, Tommy Kaira ZZII etc......

[redsharK]

Tommy Kaira ZZI:

http://www.diseno-art.com/images_2/Tommy_Kaira_ZZ1.jpg
http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s142/perbk/tommykaira/tommykaira3.jpg

Tommy Kaira ZZII:

http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee233/GreyWulf1/Game%20Gallery%20-%20Over%2040%20Subfolders/Gran%20Turismo%204%20-%2027%20Subfolders/Road%20And%20Track%20-%2017%20Subfolders/Performance/IMG0072u.jpg
http://www.diseno-art.com/images/tommy_kaira_zz2.jpg

[Olimk2]

Big improvement between 1 and 2...

Nevertheless performancewise, the ffr will be around 350hp/ton or more (with engine mods) so yes in this case we are in (near) supercar world...

[slopoke]

Style and performance should walk hand in hand, so why shouldn't it be styled to be somewhat elegant and puposeful instead of looking like some bug-eyed brick? .. My humble apologies to Austin Healy(still one of my all time favorite H prod racers).

[HealeyRick]

Style and performance should walk hand in hand, so why shouldn't it be styled to be somewhat elegant and puposeful instead of looking like some bug-eyed brick? .. My humble apologies to Austin Healy(still one of my all time favorite H prod racers).

Hey, they could do worse:

http://i56.tinypic.com/20rwacj.jpg

MINE!

[Ophitoxaemia]

There's already plenty of Lotus 7 kits, and FFR (and me!) have lots of retro already. Make it modern, beautiful, and something I can drive most days. Time is a big limitation these days: require less time to complete than GTM.

A co-worker has a Tesla, not a good looking car IMO. 918, much better looking car :)

I'm looking for a new car to replace my nearly 8 year old RX8, so give me an exciting option instead of the boring choices of a Porsche Cayman, 911, Lotus Elise, or Evora.

[Cooluser23]

I really hope it'll be a futuristic car and not some retro looking thing. Factory Five has enough of those already. Besides the GTM, most cars look like they're stuck in the '60's, or earlier.
(that's not a bad thing, but we'd like variety)

Most potential builders under 30 that I've spoken to don't want do build a kit of a car that's been around before they were born. It be great to cater to that crowd as well. :D

[Benji]

Tommy Kaira ZZI:

Tommy Kaira ZZII:


The cars and ideas behind the ZZI and ZZII were totally different, one is not the evolution of the other.

I've always LOVED the ZZII, what it became with Autobacs sucked.

[LiquidPT]

What about going old school. I know, don't directly copy anything, but I LOVE this car (though it's front engine):

http://www.instylecars.com/wp-content/gallery/307/morgan-aero-super-sports-32.jpg
Morgan Aero Super Sport

[Nativo]

I do not know if it has been discussed but, What's going to happend about the fact that the wrx ecu normally connects to the main harness to which engine harness connects to?
Would the kit provide an alternate harness in order to use the factory ecu? or Would it be necessary to use the donor's complete (Bumper-to-Bumper harness)

Efrain

[LiquidPT]

I do not know if it has been discussed but, What's going to happend about the fact that the wrx ecu normally connects to the main harness to which engine harness connects to?
Would the kit provide an alternate harness in order to use the factory ecu? or Would it be necessary to use the donor's complete (Bumper-to-Bumper harness)

Efrain

And please tell mt the plan is to reuse the WRX ECU. There's so much aftermarket support for it, it's rediculous...

[MDRex]

I don't think you'd need the full Impreza body harness, just the engine harness to use the ECU. There are sensors that could be removed and then tuned out of the ECU programing with open source Subaru ECU tuning tools.

[Nativo]

And please tell mt the plan is to reuse the WRX ECU. There's so much aftermarket support for it, it's rediculous...

My plan is to go with HYDRA EMS


I don't think you'd need the full Impreza body harness, just the engine harness to use the ECU. There are sensors that could be removed and then tuned out of the ECU programing with open source Subaru ECU tuning tools.

Yes but my question is:
What is the plan? Would the kit come ready to Plug-N-Play or would it be required to unplug and replug to one single ECU-To-Engine Harness?

Nativo

[Evan78]

What do they do on the GTM?

[subyrod]

AGreed on running factory ecu, mine has Cobb AccessPort with stage II map. I don't want to have to go a different route when I have the setup I want to run in the kit.

[slopoke]

I'll apologize for the lack of professionalism and artistry in advance. But I thought I'd throw this out there just for a response.

[Olimk2]

Don't apologise, it's not bad at all, you sould buy some "patterns" to draw curves (i don' t know the us word sorry) it will help you make your drawing neater, and be carreful on the rear overhang (see official base drawing). For the windscreen you will have to source a LOLA T70 or P4 replica. Good overall balance!

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQD6HMEfmD6gScSdnkKFp-bN3uCuO0vu8p7XQdcFF8CmSq4ZYI0-Q

[JRL]

They are called French Curves and are available at most office supply stores.