1/4 scale model feedback

[RM1SepEx]

I wish that I could have been there in person

I think that Xabier's car looks the best in the flesh so to speak. It can be out there as the most likely to have a large volume as a roadster that looks to be very easy to add a soft top. It's also very hot/smokin as shown as the "r" model, the dedicated track car.

[ScoobySnack818]

After watching the ustream live feed, I liked Xabier's design or rodney's. However rodney's was 3D printed directly from CAD and the rear track width as well as a few other things would probably have to be tweaked. I was not a huge fan of the silver one (Jim's design) both in 1/4 scale as well as the full size. I don't think it is enough of a departure from what is currently out there. I saw toyota MR2 and Murtaya and it didn't suit me.

It was clear that FFR is releasing either an affordable roaster (no top yet) or a track car first. But FFR's cars are quite capable on the track so a track-ready street roadster is probably on the way. And my vote goes to Xabier's design for that embodiment.

I will however probably wait for a gen2 or engineered targa top with windows to make my purchase.

-Justin

[SccrMan13]

I agree xabiers with a soft or even hard top would be easy and excellent looking. I say the first one needs to be a road car. Wish he would have talked about the drivetrains possibilities.

[RM1SepEx]

I should have added a 4 choice survey with the posting.... my bad

The FFR body is too derivitive tho I could live with it. The blue car is too far "out there" and is a hard top, the most difficult and expensive to do.

The black car has a great "***" but the front isn't awe inspiring, it was hard to see detail on the video tho

Only Xabier's appears to use the chassis as it sits with a roll bar, albeit narrower inside of the hoop behind the seats.

I see Xabier's as dual purpose, track and soft top roadster. Add a cheap vinyl top and windows for emergencies only and it is very streetable and inexpensive to build, maximizing market share. It translates easily to an "r" track model as well

It also has an original exotic body that just screams at you where the others all have major areas that need work.

[Doc_FFR]

However rodney's was 3D printed directly from CAD and the rear track width as well as a few other things would probably have to be tweaked.

I'm more than a little worried about this. Olmos's design is excellent, is it really necessary to adjust it?

[Pandemic Power]

Only Xabier's appears to use the chassis as it sits with a roll bar, albeit narrower inside of the hoop behind the seats.

I see Xabier's as dual purpose, track and soft top roadster. Add a cheap vinyl top and windows for emergencies only and it is very streetable and inexpensive to build, maximizing market share. It translates easily to an "r" track model as well

It also has an original exotic body that just screams at you where the others all have major areas that need work.

I agree with you on your thoughts of Xaviers design, I think it's the most road ready design for the street in terms of look and functionality with putting on a hard/soft top. It's not the most aggressive design, but I could see a track version with some wider flared fenders to allow some wider wheels and really give it a more aggressive look.

[VTX]

I posted this in the other thread, but since this appears to be the official feedback thread I'll add my feedback here as well:

1. The first place car - I like it a lot more seeing it in the scale model. I'm not sure about the side vents though. They just don't seem to match the rest of the car. Too curved and "swooping" in my opinion. If those could be fixed I think it's a winner.

2. Xabier's design - Was also very nice looking. It looks the most polished to me. Although seeing the front end in the video that's the only thing I'm not crazy about. The vents almost look too big (tall) and makes the front end just look like it would be creating needless air resistance (strictly from a looks perspective, I'm no expert on vehicle aerodynamics). If it were up to me I'd see if I could make the vents a little shorter to make the front of the the car just a little sleeker and "faster" looking.

3. Olmos design - I seem to be in the minority on this, but I really just don't like this design. It just doesn't look fast to me. It looks kind of clunky IMO. I think it's the front end that does it. It's almost like the hood got chopped off and there's just a big flat front end or something. I like the aggressiveness of the wide rear end, but overall I just really don't like it.

4. FFR Design - I really don't like this design at all. I agree with some of the others that say it resembles an MR2, and that is not a good thing. The front end also just looks strange to me with the one small opening in the middle.

Sorry to be critical on the last two. I'm not trying to hurt anyone's feelings, but just want to give my honest opinion. If one of the first two could be tweaked just slightly, as mentioned above, I think those are your winners.

[Silvertop]

This is also a double post, because it fits in both places.

After seeing the webcast (great job btw), the Xabier design still remains my clear favorite. Based on the premise that there would be three cars built -- Roadster, Track and MPG, here are my thoughts:

Roadster -- the Xabier design, preferably with a removable and on-board stowable Targa Top. I would also consider building it with a soft top if I couldn't have the Targa, or if the Targa could not be stowed on board. I might also consider the Olmos design constructed as a Roadster or Targa if available. The in-house design is very nice, but it just doesn't scream at me

Track Car -- We haven't really seen a track design yet, though the Xabier would be the odds on favorite there. The Olmos design or the in-house Concept could also serve.

MPG Car -- Probably the Nouphone Bansasi design, but constructed either as a hardtop coupe or a Targa. Olmos design might work really well for that too, if the aerodynamics are as good as they look.

FFR should definitely build the Roadster first, no matter which body they choose for it, because it likely has the highest sales potential. Neither the MPG nor the track car are likely to be on my personal build list, so I'll avoid offering an opinion about which of those to build first.

[thane]

I think that the Nuophone design hits the best balance of a presenting a striking, cohesive design statement. I think that Xabier's front end nears perfection. I think Olmos's design is awesome, but I worry about it having lasting appeal. I think the FFR design is great, except for the front end, which, to my eyes, looks too much like a product from a major manufacturer. I think all of the designs would make me happy, if I got to see them in my garage.

[scartaan]

Agree with VTX. Xabier's design is the best proposal so far. The FFR design is OK, but seems to have a disconnect at the rear of the front fender. Another thought is that the red car incorporates the roll bar. None of the designs,however appear to incorporate the diagonal frame tube at the door opening. Here is an opportunity to make this part of the design, more of a door in a triangular shape making it lighter, and providing more space for a vent to the rear fender.
I also want to add my vote for a Targa top. This would make the car so much more appealing.

[jkrueger]

Nice webcast Dave. Here is my input. If I'm going to build this car it needs a top. I've build a roadster and I've found that after having it for over a year now I do not drive it as much as a I though I would. Part of the reason why I think this is that to have a daily driver you need to be out of the weather more. Wether it is hot, cold, rainy or snow. Or just getting out of the wind.

I like the idea that it needs to aerodynamic (for top end speed and fuel mileage). My use for this kind of car would be high performance street car that I can drive to work everyday and can be used on the track for track days.

JC

[Draco-REX]

I'm all for the blue design (Rodney Olmos?) It has the greatest visual impact and just plain looks mean. I want my 818 to have a Wow-factor. Sensible designs are for boring manufacturers. The blue model looks like an X-bow that's been tamed, albeit slightly. Olmos' design with a removable Tara would be a 100% in my book. But a non-removable top would only drop that to a 95%. So, assuming that the Eco coupe is yet to be designed, I'd vote for Olmos' first, and Xabier's second.

The silver car is way too tame. Every time I see it, I think: S2000 with a body kit. I'm sorry, I was hoping I'd like it with better angles, but I just don't.

The "black" or gunmetal car is also too tame, imo. One thing that really bugs me about it are the aero cowls behind the headrests. They extend too far back. I usually like those, but only when they leave some decklid.

[GUNS]

I'm all for the blue design (Rodney Olmos?) It has the greatest visual impact and just plain looks mean. I want my 818 to have a Wow-factor. Sensible designs are for boring manufacturers. The blue model looks like an X-bow that's been tamed, albeit slightly. Olmos' design with a removable Tara would be a 100% in my book. But a non-removable top would only drop that to a 95%. So, assuming that the Eco coupe is yet to be designed, I'd vote for Olmos' first, and Xabier's second.

The silver car is way too tame. Every time I see it, I think: S2000 with a body kit. I'm sorry, I was hoping I'd like it with better angles, but I just don't.

The "black" or gunmetal car is also too tame, imo. One thing that really bugs me about it are the aero cowls behind the headrests. They extend too far back. I usually like those, but only when they leave some decklid.

I completely agree with you. Think about seeing Olmos's car in your review mirror on the track and then blowing by you and thinking WTF was that? I think the response to Xabier's car in the same scenario would be "oh, that's pretty." Either one of those two would be great, but I'm more partial the completely unique design of olmos's car.

[Silvertop]

I completely agree with you. Think about seeing Olmos's car in your review mirror on the track and then blowing by you and thinking WTF was that? I think the response to Xabier's car in the same scenario would be "oh, that's pretty." Either one of those two would be great, but I'm more partial the completely unique design of olmos's car.

Me, I like "WTF was that Oh So Pretty Thing that Just Blew By Me?". But the Olmos car is definitely very cool. Though I think it looks better as a roadster.

[David Hodgkins]

http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=5454&d=1319303462

http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=5453&d=1319303461

http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=5452&d=1319303461

http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=5451&d=1319303460

[Nelff]

IMO..

Red car:
I STILL hate the front scoops. Carbon fiber splitter is good. Dislike the headlights. Wheel arches are good. Side is umm, bland. Still hate the droopy butt.

Blue car:
I friggen love the fenders!!! Smooth wheel bulges into a flat strip that circles the wheel. Perfect! The Coke bottle shape is as sexy as it gets. I like short overhangs but, geez.... I still don't like the headlight/taillight panels.

Black car. It was my favorite to begin with. But, looking at the model and the vid it's kinda plain. The rear fenders should be pushed out and the 'lip' that flattens out and runs to the edge of the tire removed. Having tacked on 'lips' never looks right. That said, I think it's the most marketable of the four.

Silver:
I know that it's what F5 put together, But... The styling of the front looks like designs from different cars tacked on to a body. Someone said that it looks like a "body kit" The grill opening shape doesn't flow with the hard edged vents in the top of the hood. The side scoop at the front would work but the curb dragging air dam has to go. If you want an air dam/splitter, PLEASE make it replaceable and not part of the body. The styling of the fender lips looks like they was taken off of the Cobra. Seeing how those fender lips were originally a tacked on modification to fit larger tires, I'm not seeing why they should be used on something that is supposed to be a modern car. And looking at the full size car, the fender lips look even more pronounced like a body kit.

Bottom line:
Wide fender bulges are good. Take the fenders off of the blue car, put them on the black car. Or, if it looks like a MR2 or an S2000 with a body kit, I'll keep driving my M3, riding my Harley and build a F5 Cobra.

[wooward]

I have many opinions on all the cars but for now I will only address Xabier's roll bar spoiler thing. In the pic it's not so pronounced because the seats head rests are in the way. In the model, it's just hanging out there all odd looking. I wish that bar was more like the other cars with the deck lid headrest look. As is, Im not sure if I would buy the Xabier body at all. I'll have to see more pics

[apexanimal]

so dave... is there a way we could see what olmos' design looks like when actually dimensionally accurate?

that might help to clear up a lot of the decision-making stuff for a lot who are going between his design and the others...

[riptide motorsport]

Xabier, Nuophone, Vman!,Rodney....in that order.

[Gary in NJ]

I've been following the design of the 818 since almost day one. It was exciting to see the webcast this morning. My first impression; Factory Five is a class organization. I enjoyed the passion and excitement of the presenter (who I assume is the owner).

Regarding the cars, I've always liked Xabier's design. His track version is just perfect, however I don't drive on a track. I still prefer his road version over the others. Of all of the cars it's the most integrated design.

The blue car has awesome proportions, until you look at the glass area. The roof/windshield/C-Pillar looks to be a kluge. I think the fender proportions front to rear are outstanding. Every time I saw the car I found myself judging if the front track was wider then the rear and always came to the same conclusion that they are the same. But the fact that the design forced me to check the proportions was provoking.

The black car was just a bit boring. It's nice looking, but I want something more then nice.

The home-grown design is also a good effort, but I don't think the 1/4 scale model did it justice. The half-sided car looked more pleasing then the model.

But I keep coming back to Xabier's red car. I've never wanted to own/build a kit car (for more then 30 seconds) until I saw this design. I've built an airplane, restored cars and motorcycles - and now I want to build Xabier's 818.

[b1u3]

I'm all for the blue design (Rodney Olmos?) It has the greatest visual impact and just plain looks mean. I want my 818 to have a Wow-factor. Sensible designs are for boring manufacturers. The blue model looks like an X-bow that's been tamed, albeit slightly. Olmos' design with a removable Tara would be a 100% in my book. But a non-removable top would only drop that to a 95%. So, assuming that the Eco coupe is yet to be designed, I'd vote for Olmos' first, and Xabier's second.

The silver car is way too tame. Every time I see it, I think: S2000 with a body kit. I'm sorry, I was hoping I'd like it with better angles, but I just don't.

The "black" or gunmetal car is also too tame, imo. One thing that really bugs me about it are the aero cowls behind the headrests. They extend too far back. I usually like those, but only when they leave some decklid.

Well said. Agree 100% on all points.

[slopoke]

I'd like to see more photos of all four models ... just can't seem to get all the subtle details from just these four pics .... need lots of different angles and closeups. They all have merit, but will probably all need tweaking. IAH, my favorite wasn't picked to be a model (sigh)....

[kach22i]

Kind of, sort of, almost puts together many parts of my favorite cars together for it's own look. Not a bullseye, but a high point scorer.
http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=5454&d=1319303462

Aggressive in an almost brutal way, sort of Transformer toy looking. It's loud and proud, just not sure what of.
http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=5453&d=1319303461

The most refined, developed and sophisticated of the lot. It's not complex, nor does it try too hard for attention, all good things in my book.
http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=5452&d=1319303461

Sorry to say, it's just over worked. Has a few things going for it, but fails to "hold it together".
http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=5451&d=1319303460

Overall they are all nice, but not something I'd give my old Porsche up for, nor plans to upgrade to a better Porsche.

I'm taken back how they all succeed in obtaining a sporty stance (a good thing), and that they are all rather stocky or chunky looking (both good and bad). None of my designs really did the same, perhaps it was the lower belt lines and taller windshields at play.

Nouphone Bansasi's design is the least kit car looking, and the most professional looking in my opinion. It is however the least likely to grab you by the nuggets and scream at you. This is just my opinion, weigh it as you will.

[kitcarj]

Dave, Maybe I like my kids too much but I won't be selling any of them for any of these designs.

I am still a little sad-They are ALL too safe except the Olmos design which is unfortunately unsafe in a cartoonish way.

1.My favorite would be the silver car- It would be helpful to have the intakes blacked out to make the character of the car pop a little more. Hints of Carrera GT which I remember loving when it came out but now days seems kind of tame.

2.Xabier's car. Still looks closer to a Miata then an Elise and I was hoping for something more exotic than an Elise. Or at least as exotic. The roll bar seems too rounded but that may just be from the high angle of the pictures. Track version with rear spoiler may help this move up on my list some. Even if it was self defeating to have it on the high MPG version I would keep that.

3-4: both no go for me
If the rear on Olmos's is narrowed I think it would ruin the only thing that makes it stand out. But I think it still looks like a Camaro would on the Saturday morning cartoon where the cars talk and are the characters.
The black car actually looks worse then I thought it would especially the mouth in front is too cutsie and is boring overall.

Possible winner-swap Olmos's front end out for Mario Morra's.

I would rather have a MK4 despite there abundance or a Type 65. Maybe a GTM

I should add: The silver and red cars are beautiful but just not poster on the wall material. They are what you hope to be able to buy when you go to the car lot of a major manufacturer to buy a car.

[Tpa65cpe]

All I can say is WOW!! Love the blue design for a daily driver or track car 1st and then the red one for a convertible model the 2 best looking ones IMHO. Hope to see more pics in the future as this concept developes. Great job to all the people involved in this project and I know that FFR will not dissapoint!!!

[GS guy]

I must be one of the few who like the FFR design car. I think it ranks neck and neck with Xabier's. It does need some tweaking though - get rid of some of the business and "body kit" look to the lower front facia and create a horozontal trim line that defines upper and lower front end - thus allowing a natural separation point and replacable lower facia for repairs or alternate versions. Trim the cats eye ears on the headlights a bit, and need to do something with the "afterthought" looking wheel lip openings. These either need to go with full-on flares (930 style would rock!) or stretched fenders more like Xabier's (maybe less drag, but more bland). Oh - the "hump-back" rear could be done away with too, just doesn't add to the car IMHO and looking a bit "me too!". With these mild tweaks I think this one would be a winner - in my eye at least.

Xabier's care has the most finished look, but I just can get past the massive gaping "maul" openings in the front end. What's the purpose of these? The radiator certainly doesn't need that much opening - they just seem like huge drag inducing parachutes on the front of the car. Otherwise, the overall shape and design looks very pleasing to the eye.

The blue car is just too Mario-bros/cartoonish looking, and the black car too muck like an S2000 - at least in the front 3/4 views. Nice rear styling though.

Beautiful job on the modeling though, and enjoyed the video presentation. I hope you guys decide to present more videos as the car progresses.

[Jammin]

Dave
First off, the 818 will be my third FFR car and I can not say enough about the FFR experience. Building a FFR car is enjoyable, driving them is a thrill, and the people you meet along the way are friendships that will last a life time.
That being said here are my thoughts on the 818. In reading this forum there is a large number of people that want a car that can be driven in all weather. I feel there is a large market for this car, but a majority of the people are looking at this car as a daily driver, not a toy, or race car. With that being said the car should be designed with the thought of having a optional top that can be stored in the car, such as a corvette. What good is a hard top on a daily driver if you cannot keep it in the car, or takes two people to remove becuase it is so big, and creates a storage problem in the garage.

On Jims car the top is to open and a removable top would be huge. I think it would look like a Cobra with a soft top on it. And lets be honest, a soft top on a Cobra kills the look of the car. Also the hard top would be so big you could not store it in the car.

Xabier's does offer a possiblity for a hard top that could be stored in the trunk. If the car where to have a glass insert between the 2 humps and a small hard top between the windshield and the back humps, and power windows you would have a four seasons cockpit. If there is a trunk up front, all of these componets should fit in there (they would be small). Just think of all the customers you would get selling a four season car with a removable storable top, the performace, and about 1/3 the cost of a new corvette.

So Dave, what are your thoughts on the points I brought up?

[kach22i]

Based on people's comments in several threads, the poll, and my own observations, likes and dislikes I went ahead and tried my hand at a slight modification to X's car. This is just one idea, and illustrated in a rather crude fashion, sorry I don't know Photoshop.

http://s184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/xabier.jpg
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/Modified-xabier-kach22i.jpg


The gaping air catcher of a catfish mouth is gone, but some of the aggressive chin spoiler flaring is retained.

What do you think?

[2KWIK4U]

Wow that made a big difference.

[coolbluelb]

Love the Olmos, but not as much as I did with the original headlights from the submission.

[Silvertop]

Based on people's comments in several threads, the poll, and my own observations, likes and dislikes I went ahead and tried my hand at a slight modification to X's car. This is just one idea, and illustrated in a rather crude fashion, sorry I don't know Photoshop.

The gaping air catcher of a catfish mouth is gone, but some of the aggressive chin spoiler flaring is retained.

What do you think?

I LIKE it. Of course, I have no issue with the "gaping air catcher catfish mouth" either. I'd buy this car either way. But if the change made the car more marketable, allowing it to go into production -- I'd say Go For It.

[VTX]

Based on people's comments in several threads, the poll, and my own observations, likes and dislikes I went ahead and tried my hand at a slight modification to X's car. This is just one idea, and illustrated in a rather crude fashion, sorry I don't know Photoshop.

http://s184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/xabier.jpg
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/Modified-xabier-kach22i.jpg


The gaping air catcher of a catfish mouth is gone, but some of the aggressive chin spoiler flaring is retained.

What do you think?

I don't like that you got rid of the "brake duct" openings (I'm assuming that's what they are). I think the center opening just needs to be shorter and really the entire hood in the center could almost be just slightly pushed down a bit.

[evo818]

you don't need a 12" x 6" opening to feed a brake duct. Just a simple 3" round opening is more than enough to get the necessary air to cool them. I think the sides do look better like this and I agree sloping the hood down more and making the center opening smaller would finish it.

[ScottKoschwitz]

kach22i, I think it's a good improvement. The original is over the top (it looks like it's trying too hard), and I doubt it's functionality. My sense is that the size of the openings you have shown would be sufficient for cooling.

I see an interesting thread running among the potential customers for this car. Some want an exotic on the cheap that will attract a lot of attention on the street, and tend to lean towards Rodney's design.

Me, I'm looking a fantastic performance car that I can build myself cheaper than I can buy a used Lotus Elise. I'm more interested in the car's performance than public reaction. As long as it is well-engineered, a ball to drive, and has decent lines, I'm happy. I don't intend to enter car shows with it. I don't care if anyone else thinks my car is cool, points as I drive down the street, or tries to take cell phone pictures. Frankly, after hearing my friend's experience with his Elise, I'm pretty sure I DON'T want that.

Dave said he wanted to design a car that would set people's hair on fire. That a great goal, but in reality, you can't design a car that will set everyone's hair on fire, because everybody has different tastes. What sets my hair on fire is the concept of this car: a giant-killer you can build and customize yourself for under $25,000. To me, the body is secondary to that. For those who want that look-at-me car, don't forget that if you have a car with a good design, you can make it look as wild as you want.

[VTX]

you don't need a 12" x 6" opening to feed a brake duct. Just a simple 3" round opening is more than enough to get the necessary air to cool them. I think the sides do look better like this and I agree sloping the hood down more and making the center opening smaller would finish it.

I understand you don't need that large of an opening, but for me it's not about need. It's about looks. I think they probably could be a little smaller than they are, but I'm not a big fan of almost completely eliminating them. Look at the front of a 911 turbo or the 918. That's what I think looks good.

[olpro]

Kach22i "Based on people's comments in several threads, the poll, and my own observations, likes and dislikes I went ahead and tried my hand at a slight modification to X's car. This is just one idea, and illustrated in a rather crude fashion, sorry I don't know Photoshop."

Big improvement. Good call.

Why wasn't this done a couple of months ago?

[RLHornbeck]

After taking some time to mull over the designs I thought I would comment from my perspective which was hit on by Jammin

“That being said here are my thoughts on the 818. In reading this forum there is a large number of people that want a car that can be driven in all weather. I feel there is a large market for this car, but a majority of the people are looking at this car as a daily driver, not a toy, or race car. With that being said the car should be designed with the thought of having a optional top that can be stored in the car, such as a corvette. What good is a hard top on a daily driver if you cannot keep it in the car, or takes two people to remove becuase it is so big, and creates a storage problem in the garage.”

Having a large truck that I drive for my construction business and my wife has the obligatory station wagon for family duties leaves a void where a fun toy should be. The use of the “toy” must integrate well with life. Garages can be used for a build but then seem to go back to life, I have time to drive today so take the “toy” but then a customer calls and I must divert for work, now I am panicking about the evening rain showers they have called for. For myself and those I have talked to about this car the capability of being a daily driver with a roof and windows is a must and is greatly lacking in the kit car market.
Background done, onto my thoughts on the four great car designs.

FFR’s Silver design: The design looks as though the best parts of many entries are being incorporated into a single design. This design has potential but needs to be refined. It needs to separate itself from the strong resemblance of the MR2 front and Porsche Carrera GT rear.

Olmas’s Blue coupe: This is the boldest design to make the top three. The problem with this is people immediately form a love or hate relationship with the car. This quickly polarizes potential buyers.

Nouphone’s Black roadster: The subtle lines, would make a great next Honda S2000. The feel of a great production car, but not the wow factor needed to call attention to the car and therefore FF for sales.

Xabiers Red car. This design has seemed to be the best overall finisher in the forum responses if not a first pick a strong second. This in my option would also be the easiest design to have a roadster, track, soft top , and targa top version. The design is bold enough to get you attention without being over the top to polarizing to people (well except for the front grill openings).

To summarize Xabier’s car though not my first choice I feel should be FF’s first choice due to the flexibility of design. As to which variant of the design, FF has already started it will be topless, though the race version or the finished interior of the roadster is still up in the air.

FF you need to get this car out there in any variant, but the follow up models MUST be on a TIGHT predetermined schedule with continual updates or many needing a roof over their head or wanting the other variants will lose interest and go elsewhere.

[kach22i]

Big improvement. Good call.

Why wasn't this done a couple of months ago?
In another form, in the same spirit, on another car it was done by FFR already, except few people noticed.
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Industrial%20Design/818Scan.jpg

Then as now, I made the brake duct opening less dramatic and rounded the corner for better aero.
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Industrial%20Design/GKA-FFR-Markup-092311.jpg

I guess one could swap Jim's earlier lower front valance on to X's red car. However, I really like the clean lines of Nouphone Bansasi original entry which I tried to incorporate.
http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/showthread.php?2238-Project-818-Design-Contest-Winners
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Industrial%20Design/nouphone-clip.jpg

Splitters, spoilers, brake duct openings can all be customized by the customers/builder just as they do on the GTM. It might be nice if this area had a break line or seam so that the gel-coat panel could be hacked up and repainted later after the personal modifications are made. This area of a car gets an extraordinary amount of paint chips, so it's just good design to start with.

.................................................. .....................

Now to get all fussy and unappreciative (hope I earned some slack)................my complaint list.

1. The advantage of using models are many, the experience it's self (sculpting by hand - not CNC) is a major one. However the biggest is the various angles and sight lines which can be "experienced". Most people error in treating a scale model like an art object or toy which sits on a table top in an non-interactive way and just look down on. A word of advice; BEND AT THE KNEES! A second word of advice; Walk all the way around (like a crouching tiger or raise the viewing platform).

Okay, that's my only complaint, but it's a big one, and one easily remedied.

[thebeerbaron]

I don't know if anyone else from the forum went to the reveal, if so I apologize that we didn't meet, where were you hiding?!

The first thing that I'll say is that the difference between seeing the models in person and seeing them on the screen is massive. And seeing the full-scale model compared to the 1/4 scale model is different on a similar level. The screen captures from the Ustream are horrible, though I'm glad our dear Wookie put something up.

I strongly encourage everyone who can possibly go to FFR and see the models to do so. I understand that they're taking off for SEMA this week, so make sure they're actually there before you make the trip. I walked in there with my hopes for a kick-*** body hung on the Olmos design. In person, it was a completely different car than what I saw in the renderings and especially different from what I've seen of the screen caps here (I haven't watched the Ustream video). I really, really wanted it to work, but it honestly didn't.

The difference between Jim's 1/4 scale model and the full-size model is as impressive as the difference between picture and model. Blown up to full-scale, more details emerge and certain parts just work. Are there a lot of revisions I'd make to it? Yes. Do I think Jim will be revising and improving it? Definitely. I think it has a lot of potential. Jim may want to strangle me after our long chat, but pointed out to me why some of the aesthetic decisions I disagree with had to be there. In sum, this no-paint body stuff adds some serious complexity to the project.

A word about the front end of the Xabier design: as much as we all see the issue there, the RISD team was tasked with rendering Xabier's design exactly as shown, no improvements allowed. So the clay model is as close to what the artist intended as possible. Jim and Dave know that mouth has to be fixed and it will be if the body design iterates further.

Jim put a good question to me: his design takes into account the limitations of the manufacturing processes. To apply those limitations to something like the Xabier car would require significant revision of the design. So which do you do, further improve on a blank canvas, or modify an existing painting? I'm not sure. As much as I see that I like in the Xabier design (and to this point I have been vocal in my dislike of it), I'm afraid the interesting bits would get lost in the translation to something that can be manufactured.

My thought process here was to post up and encourage you to wait at least until better pictures are posted of the designs. I didn't have a camera, but I believe Mad Dog took some pictures of the bodies. Hopefully those will come out after SEMA. If you can possibly go to SEMA or FFR, do it. I'm not 100% sure that FFR is on the track I would take with this stuff, but after talking the ears off both Dave and Jim, I think a lot of the concerns I've read here will be addressed.

[adesilva]

I am not sure exactly when FF will be leaving for SEMA but if people here on the forums were interested in getting more pictures I would be happy to drive down there and try to take as many as possible.

I work about 20 minutes from them so I would be able to stop by right after work possibly tomorrow or Tuesday to take some pictures.

I regrettably was unable to go to the open house yesterday because I was called into work but if they would allow me to see them now I would be more than happy to try and bring everyone along for the experience.

[Hiryu]

How about we just re-angle the front air-dam of xabier's model? That is, move the bottom of the front air-dam back a bit. This would have a number of benefits:

It would de-emphasize the size of the front intakes because it's pulled back out of eye view more
While de-emphasizing the size to the eye, it would actually increase the size of the intakes (because of the greater angle)
Or, instead of increasing the size of the intakes, we could keep them the same size. This would allow us to pull down the front of the nose a bit to create a more rear-mid-engined look that people have been asking about.
It would decrease the actual front overhang and thus improve the approach angle (important for a daily driver when needing to go over speed bumps and steep entrance ramps, etc.)


http://www.murtaya.com/Mike/FFR/xabierMod.jpg
http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=5454&d=1319303462

The biggest drawback I can see is it also hides one of the more distinguishing features of xabier's design (i.e., the front end), making it look more vanilla.* Maybe some other details could be added to the hood (strakes, etc. like Jim's car?), etc. to liven it up. I REALLY like the vents on the rear deck; maybe something like those could be (tactfully) added to the front to liven it up/keep a design consistency? I didn't add anything here so people could use their imaginations....and plus I'd probably botch it up even more....but the front does look a bit long (for a rear-mid-engined car) to not be broken up, even/especially with this modification.

*Which is why I also modified the front headlights to look more sleek...

Thoughts? I personally like big front intakes, but thought this might be the best of both worlds...

Mike

[kach22i]

Looks good Mike.

[jkf]

Jim put a good question to me: his design takes into account the limitations of the manufacturing processes. To apply those limitations to something like the Xabier car would require significant revision of the design. So which do you do, further improve on a blank canvas, or modify an existing painting? I'm not sure. As much as I see that I like in the Xabier design (and to this point I have been vocal in my dislike of it), I'm afraid the interesting bits would get lost in the translation to something that can be manufactured.

I was wondering whether there might be some advantages to having the guy that's going to have to build the thing also do the designing; I guess that answers that question.

I know a lot of people aren't feeling the love for this design, but I do think there's a lot to like about it. I especially like kach's front end treatment -- the headlights & hood area work way better this way.
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Industrial%20Design/GKA-FFR-Markup-092311.jpg
The rear on Jim's is nice as is; I don't think the rear lip spoiler is an improvement, although it is probably good aero for an mpg oriented version. I would like to see what it looks like without the "pods" on the rear deck -- that is a trend that i'm not sold on, aesthetically.

If I had to guess, I would say the some version of this body will be one of the available choices whether the forum people like it or not. Given that Jim thinks it is more buildable than the others, and a full size model already exists, there isn't much reason not to produce it and see how it goes.

[VTX]

Mike, I like it a lot.

[Draco-REX]

I'd like to see Xabier's design with the center of the hood a bit lower. -\_/- Granted, it would emphasize the side vents, but minimize the center. I think it'd give it less of a gape-mouthed look and more of a angry grin.

[GUNS]

I'd like to see Xabier's design with the center of the hood a bit lower. -\_/- Granted, it would emphasize the side vents, but minimize the center. I think it'd give it less of a gape-mouthed look and more of a angry grin.

I agree. I will also make the fender flares more pronounced and would make it much more aggressive looking. I'd like to see it with different headlight options as well.

[GunnerG]

I'm looking to build a smokin hot, affordable exotic. By definition, it can't blend in with everything else on the road. The only car that fills the bill for me is the Olmos design. It would also have to be a road car with a hard or targa top. The one dark view of the car really doesn't do it justice. This link shows it much better.
http://rodneyolmos.com/factoryfive/v2/index.php

[scartaan]

5472
For those who have not seen other renderings of Rodney's design as a roadster click on http://rodneyolmos.com/factoryfive/v2/index.php This design is unique with very short overhangs front and rear. It looks like the shortest car of the four. Questions that need to be answered,however include: how tough would it be to produce, how much would be necessary to modify the design for production, and how expensive to produce. I feel "A car like no other" is what Dave is looking for, and this car fits the bill.

[2KWIK4U]

I like Jim's design but I still would like some kind of targa or soft top available for it. I just can't get around the front end of Olmos, it is too flat to me. Of course that is just my opinion. :)

[adesilva]

Too low of a front end would be impossible to drive on the street

[Flashburn]

Oh, I meant a low hood line, not low clearance.

[Horhay]

I can promise you that the Olmos car would not find its way into my garage. I see many merits in the other 3 cars but if the Olmos car is my only option I'll just look elsewhere.

[GUNS]

Mike, I like what you did with the headlights on Xabier's design. It's amazing what little changes like that can do to a design. I think everyone of the 4 cars has potential, but they all need little tweaks here and there to make them perfect.

[adesilva]

Whatever car ends up in production will end up looking very different from what we see now.

These cars need alterations to be viable as production cars (not to mention to no paint design) and we arent even taking into account the difference in looks between the 1/4 and full size model

[RM1SepEx]

I also like making the brake duct area smaller on Xabier's design. Stow a small targa panel, roll up or vinyl windows would be fine by me...

[Gary in NJ]

Mike,

I really like your changes. Go pat yourself on the back.

[Inthenameofweez]

Without seeing more than a top down shot of the 1/4 models, I will wait until after SEMA to offer my criticism...

However, things I have noticed as of yet:

http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Industrial%20Design/GKA-FFR-Markup-092311.jpg

I REALLY like Jim's design. Especially after seeing the full scale. The headlights are simply too wide. It looks like too many existing cars. The MR2 statement makes 0 sense to me though. I see Silvia: http://tuningcars.us/albums/userpics/10001/normal_s15-tuning_28329.jpg

I also enjoy the modification of the side vents heading into the door. This increases the aggressiveness quite a bit and I like it. I think all of the vents look great other than that. Also, the fender lips need to be smoothed out, or more narrow to make room for a bolt on kit. The current design is flawed. The front bumper looks awesome otherwise. And why doesn't the front fender match up with the door? This seems easily addressable.

Xabier still has my 1st choice. I do however agree with the large side (brake duct) openings needing to be a bit smaller. I like the small fix that was posted. The front splitter looks really nice on this one.

The blue 1/4 model is too "Transformer-ish" and cartoon like. With the huge fenders still needing to be addressed, maybe a less aggressive and more sleek design will please my eye. The front bumper is hard to analyze with the black on blue. We need detailed pictures of all, but SEMA will provide that.

I love the headlights of the black model a lot, but it's hard to see any details of the bumper when it's black.

I think all models should've been painted silver or red with all vents/splitters/headlights/door handles/etc to be colored as well. The bodies are hard to see and imagine in productions ready form because of the colors used... Perhaps this can be a possibility with better shots from SEMA and some photoshop.

The small amount of rear end that was shown makes me like Xabier and Jim's models even more. Show the black model's rear end!!!!

[Draco-REX]

You know, I've been thinking. When I first learned about the 818, the performance potential is what really snared me. The heart of a Subaru that I know so well, in a package that only weighs 1800lbs. "Wow!" I thought. "I *must* make one of these." The body was mostly secondary.

Then I saw the bodies; more specifically I saw Olmos' design. Its so dramatic and different from everything out there. That's what drew me to it. It's a design that no big manufacturer would ever build, because it's so aggressive in design. But that's exactly why it'd be perfect for a kit car. "We made this car so different because we can." Is that reason enough to choose the Olmos design? I think so, but that's my opinion, nothing more.

But it struck me recently that I'm getting distracted. Regardless of the body, the chassis design and light running weight are the greatest weapons in this car's arsenal. The packaging is secondary. I'd drive any of the four designs, as long as it's 1800lbs or less.'

And I can always make even the tamest design look aggressive. ;) So my vote stands for Olmos, even if it is slimmed down. But I'll build any of them.

[PhyrraM]

Stuck camping for the weekend, but was able to stream the broadcast on my Droid. So, my "late to the party" comments follow.

FIRST - seriously need good 360 degree video for fair comparision. But here goes....

FFRs design - Designed by a tech guy and it shows. Provides everything a car would need technically, but no soul. Honestly, something I would come up with if I tried, but never choose to buy. I applaud the effort.

Black car, 1st place design - On paper it's got all the right stuff to make it a winner, kinda like how the rich kids have all the cool stuff to be popular. However, also like the rich kids, it just comes off as a pretender and not of substance. Jewelery. Not for me.

Rodney's blue second place design - It actually seems to look much better than the contest submission drawings that I hated. However, it still has a toy quality, like it was intended for a video game. I also question whether it can be built as it sits without major design revisions that will make it something it is not supposed to be. While I do greatly admire what it brings to the table, and that it completely stepped out of the box, - I still hate it. Marc Senger did the same out of the box thing, and his were more to my likings if I was going for sheer shock value.

Xabier's Red roadster - DON'T TOUCH THE GRILL. It's got heart and soul. Is it perfect? Nope. But that's what makes it real. That "fishmouth" is what will give it life. Why do folks remember the Muira and the Countach, but can barely remember the word Diablo? Mistakes that gave the designs life and longevity. Something that grows on you. Without that, before long you'll be looking at trading it in like your last Camry. Still my first place. (For the Subaru guys...10 years later and Bugeyes are more popular than ever. "mistakes" indeed)

[Draco-REX]

(For the Subaru guys...10 years later and Bugeyes are more popular than ever. "mistakes" indeed)
As a Subaru guy, I will say that Subaru's designs do grow on you.

..like a fungus.

[PhyrraM]

It seems like we are doomed to repeat the travesty of the GTMs horrible headlights. I'm sorry, but the "projectors behind a obviously glued in clear cover" just looks plain cheap. I prefer the "raised projectors in a black housing" like the Zonda - IF we are stuck with projectors at all.

Rodney's has a chance if they go back to the original drawing with unprotected projectors under the hood lip.

I still think a good intergrated OEM light from somebody is the best quality choice. However, it requires designing completely around the lights and we are obviously past that stage.

So - here's to hoping.....

[Inthenameofweez]

I just watched this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tnuRNu-FV4

And I have to say that no matter what happens, I hope this car rocks as hard as the GTM. I know it will.... but man. I almost don't care about all of these details after being reminded of how such a fantastic company such as the one that Dave has created and run for so long can create such an amazing machine. His smile while driving his own creation..... Somebody needs to let him drive an 11 second STi so he can share the love of the Subaru community's faith in this engine, and he'll soon understand the same joy he felt in that GTM.


Damn I'm excited for SEMA.

[adesilva]

While that video is awesome ill admit that it does scare me a bit.. seeing how Dave speaks about the car he seems to emphasize multiple times if you cant build you cant do this...

What about the people who have never built a kit car before ??
What about the average person who may love cars but hasn't done a huge amount of work besides oil changes, brake jobs, exhaust jobs, etc..

The average person doesn't exactly get the opportunity to get "training" for a project like this. Ill admit I have been lucky enough for the most part to have newer cars so maintenance has really been the majority of my experience along with some customization (mainly interior).

I am by no means a race car driver but I love cars... I have a garage with basic tools and this is a project that id like to be part of if its something I can realistically handle.. my plan was to have the most difficult parts to be handled by professionals (if I were to ever come to a point in the instructions that I was completely confused with)

The grin that Dave got when he said "I want to merge" makes me 100% willing to prove him wrong if he doesn't feel the average person can build this machine.

[GUNS]

While that video is awesome ill admit that it does scare me a bit.. seeing how Dave speaks about the car he seems to emphasize multiple times if you cant build you cant do this...

What about the people who have never built a kit car before ??
What about the average person who may love cars but hasn't done a huge amount of work besides oil changes, brake jobs, exhaust jobs, etc..

The average person doesn't exactly get the opportunity to get "training" for a project like this. Ill admit I have been lucky enough for the most part to have newer cars so maintenance has really been the majority of my experience along with some customization (mainly interior).

I am by no means a race car driver but I love cars... I have a garage with basic tools and this is a project that id like to be part of if its something I can realistically handle.. my plan was to have the most difficult parts to be handled by professionals (if I were to ever come to a point in the instructions that I was completely confused with)

The grin that Dave got when he said "I want to merge" makes me 100% willing to prove him wrong if he doesn't feel the average person can build this machine.

To make you feel better I am in the same boat as you and I fully intend on tackling this project. The $15K ish price point makes it much more justifiable than a $40k one. I

[Draco-REX]

While that video is awesome ill admit that it does scare me a bit.. seeing how Dave speaks about the car he seems to emphasize multiple times if you cant build you cant do this...

What about the people who have never built a kit car before ??
What about the average person who may love cars but hasn't done a huge amount of work besides oil changes, brake jobs, exhaust jobs, etc..

The average person doesn't exactly get the opportunity to get "training" for a project like this. Ill admit I have been lucky enough for the most part to have newer cars so maintenance has really been the majority of my experience along with some customization (mainly interior).

I am by no means a race car driver but I love cars... I have a garage with basic tools and this is a project that id like to be part of if its something I can realistically handle.. my plan was to have the most difficult parts to be handled by professionals (if I were to ever come to a point in the instructions that I was completely confused with)

The grin that Dave got when he said "I want to merge" makes me 100% willing to prove him wrong if he doesn't feel the average person can build this machine.
There is a training course held in MI a few times a year. It's one weekend and you get hands-on building a FFR roadster. I think you also get a certificate for your next Kit purchase for attending too. Might be worth planning a weekend off.

I'm pretty sure I could put one of these kits together. But I plan to take one of these courses myself. I'm sure there would be great advice and shortcuts to be learned.

[Nelff]

5477

This is a fantastic direction.

[BrandonDrums]

I don't like that you got rid of the "brake duct" openings (I'm assuming that's what they are). I think the center opening just needs to be shorter and really the entire hood in the center could almost be just slightly pushed down a bit.

I agree with the comment about the hood being shorter. While I love Xabier's design wholeheartedly as-is, I do see what some folks have issue with concerning the front end. There was some similar discussion about the Nissan GT-R pre-production concept that had giant brake duct vents that was one of the only tweaks they made for the production version. I happend to love them but most folks didn't.

Same goes with Xabier's design. While I love it, many folks think "catfish" as many thought the GT-R concept looked like a "racoon". When they removed the ducts, I just saw way too much painted area and it just added to the giant, flat looking front end the GT-R has in my book. I'm afraid by removing the brake ducts from Xabier's design you add too much painted area and the design goes a little bland.

With Xabier's design, I do also see that proportionally, the front corner panel area above the front wheel arches can appear a bit large to some folks which I think adds to it's aggressive and slightly radical look, but also draws a bit too much attention from the eye when shot at a front quarter view like the 1/4 sale model shots. Closing the vents but not quite as much as Kach22i did WHILE removing some of the visual mass from the wheel arch and outer hood crease/corner panel area could really pull the design together to appease even more folks but not compromise the overall look of the front end.

I'm more familiar with Xabier's design than any of the others, I'd love more shots of the rest from other angles, perhaps I could form a better opinion on those if they were available.

[adesilva]

To make you feel better I am in the same boat as you and I fully intend on tackling this project. The $15K ish price point makes it much more justifiable than a $40k one. I

The interesting part is the fact that from what I have heard on the forums 40k isnt even possible for that car... its more like a minimum of 50k

The GTM is the car that I originally fell in love with. Even at 50k I would rather have it than any car in that price bracket.

The idea of the 818 is amazing.. if it can actually be done for 15k then it will be the deal of the century.

I am more than willing to put in double the time of someone else building the car (due to my inexperience) to complete this car. I already have the money ready for the kit its mainly figuring out the remainder of the parts needed and if its something I can actually handle on my own (with the occasional help from friends / family)

Once the kit is ready for order I then just need to figure out the most cost effective place to purchase the necessary parts. (I am hoping for a store on ebay to have a kit like I see for the gtm) Considering how many wrx's are in the area I may even be able to make one junk yard trip and get them to rip off every part I need including the engine / tranny but thats something I will worry about when its closer to the kit even being out

[flyboy2160]

Silver Design is worst of the 4 for me:
- looks literally like the child of an S2000 and the last gen MRS
- bland styling, doesn't leap out and make viewers say "WHAT IS THAT!!!?"
- gimmicky truncated head fairings
- much, much too large front overhang. looks like a front engine car, similar to the Boxsters
- I would not buy this body no matter what.

Red design is 3rd of the 4 for me:
- ugly,gaping, drooping front intake mouth looks like a catfish/grouper and gives too much drag.
- don't like head fairings
- way out of proportion narrow roll hoop jars flow of width lines
- bland styling, doesn't leap out and make viewers say "WHAT IS THAT!!!?"
- I would not buy this body no matter what.

Black design is 2nd of the 4 for me:
- looks literally like an S2000. I can imagine viewers asking if that's what it is...
- too large front overhang. looks like a front engine car
- don't like head fairings, especially these large ones
- bland styling, doesn't leap out and make viewers say "WHAT IS THAT!!!?"
- I would not buy this body no matter what.

Blue design is clearly the winner for me and is the only body I would buy of these 4:
- unlike the others, has dramatically short front overhang that screams "I'm mid engined like a race car. Take that you front engined look-a-likes!"
- dramatic muscular wheel arches scream performance, like the Cobra.
- what an improved, 'smoothed,' roofed KTM Xbow would look like or what a possible improved new Lotus Elise could look like.
- already has removable hard top integrated into the design, which I require.
- allows for integrated roll hoop
- the only design that of these 4 that will make viewers say "WHAT IS THAT OUTRAGEOUS THING!!!? IT LOOKS SCREAMING FAST."
- if this body isn't offered, I would try to build it (or Jim Foglini's design) on my own. I wouldn't buy any of the other bodies. (Does FF own the rights to this or could Olmos help with a non-FF fabrication? Rodney, please email or PM me....)

Flyboy Steve

[scartaan]

I agree with flyboy- The 50's Ferraris and Jag XKE were not memorable because they looked like a modified box.

[Flamshackle]

PLEASE DAVE SMITH AND TEAM, SORT OUT SOME GOOD IMAGES OF THESE MODELS!!!!!!!
TO MAKE A FAIR CALL WE NEED BETTER IMAGES AND FROM REAL LIFE ANGLES NOT FROM A HELICOPTER OR BIRDS EYE VIEW.

We are judging these cars in real time based on a dodgy iphone recording and stills from that same dodgy recording.

Any way back to the judgements based on terrible images...

To me the Red street car is a good looking mid engine car. I totally disagree with flyboy on the styling and think that its so far from bland that I wonder what kind of cars he see's every day to make that call????

Its a stunning look with dramatic and stand out front end.

The black car looks like a front engine car I agree and really looks like it will be struggling to fit a rear engine in it without many changes.

I like Rodneys design as well and hope it doesn't get narrowed in the width to much to make into production.

The silver in house special is ok but I would rather build the other two first

So to summarize I would build all bar the black one.

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE GET BETTER REAL LIFE ANGLE IMAGES OF THESE CARS UP ASAP SO WE CAN MAKE BETTER JUDGMENTS ON THEM.

[bromikl]

There is a training course held in MI a few times a year. It's one weekend and you get hands-on building a FFR roadster. I think you also get a certificate for your next Kit purchase for attending too. Might be worth planning a weekend off.

I'm pretty sure I could put one of these kits together. But I plan to take one of these courses myself. I'm sure there would be great advice and shortcuts to be learned.

More info on the build school: http://www.factoryfive.com/roadster/build/school.html

I understand the complexity of the GTM is much more than any of their other kits. I've heard the interior is almost all custom work. I have also heard of the $50K minimum, but what car at that price even comes close to super-car territory?

I'm no mechanic, either, and I would never attempt a GTM as my first kit. But I can follow directions. And I know how to ask questions. And I'm sure mistakes will be made, and then they will be corrected. And I'll have accomplished something few people on the planet have done. And I'll have the trophy to prove it.

Note to FFR: Hire a really good technical writer to write the build manual. Very clear instructions (with photos) will make a big difference - especially to guys (and girls) like me.

[kach22i]

There was some similar discussion about the Nissan GT-R pre-production concept that had giant brake duct vents that was one of the only tweaks they made for the production version.
I could not find the exact car in your example (a photo would help), but did find some after-market kits which may be similar.

http://www.gtrblog.com/tag/abflug/
Close to description:
5479

Closer to stock, but not stock:
5480

When Mike lowered the front end, he opened up a bag of worms which includes people parking by braille and sliding up your hood, plus a few other real life issues, mostly Urban, not Suburban. Needless to say, if you want a good city car, buy a Smart car, this is a country road or track sort of car.

Now if Mike would only reduce the size of the two outboard openings, we may have a winner. It would be half-way between my first attempt and his, a collaboration based on the popular "X" design (first letter of creator's name).

Food for thought, the race version of the GTR has a lowered front end, I hate the GTR, but this track monster goes a long way towards softening my position (and no massive brake duct openings).

http://www.autowallpaperhd.com/nissan-gt-r-gt500-race-car-2008.html
5481

[Olimk2]

Still Xabier n°1 for me but i agree that the brake intake should be rounded and smaller (ending in line with the headlamp). The blue car is quite striking but a little OTT? Black one classy but bland, grey one reveals a mismatch of pieces put together, no strong lines, no harmony, says kitcar at first sight...(no offence)

[bromikl]

The blue car is quite striking but a little OTT?

Those who like Olmos' design love it because it's Over The Top.

Those who don't like it, do so for the same reason.

As my stage acting friend once told me, "Nobody pays to see under the top." I'd rather drive an outrageous design than one that might get lost in a sea of metal. Don't get me wrong, the Audi TT, Nissan 350Z, and Porsche Boxter are beautiful cars. But they are all (relatively) common. The Lotus Exige is an outrageous design. And I bet you can count on one hand how many you saw on the road in the last year. I'd even wager you can even tell me what color they were.

[mekeys]

In my opinion,now that I have seen 539 entries I am more convinced than I was a month ago that there are other designs that I like a lot better than the four The expert judges picked..

The models should have all been painted the same color and put on a turntable so we could see them from every angle.

Mel

[Silvertop]

.............Note to FFR: Hire a really good technical writer to write the build manual. Very clear instructions (with photos) will make a big difference - especially to guys (and girls) like me.

About five years ago, I bought an assembly manual from FFR for a Mark III Roadster because I had the same concerns that you are voicing. My opinion on the manual, though I have not yet built or even ordered a car..... -- These guys do a truly excellent job of creating assembly manuals. You will not need to be a technical genius to build one of their cars -- just a moderate degree of mechanical acumen, and/or a strong will to get it done.

[scartaan]

Separated at Birth?
5494 Steve McQueen's Jaguar XKSS

5495 Olmos Blue car as roadster
click on photos

[kach22i]

In my opinion,now that I have seen 539 entries I am more convinced than I was a month ago that there are other designs that I like a lot better than the four The expert judges picked..

The models should have all been painted the same color and put on a turntable so we could see them from every angle.

Mel
A lot of talent in this forum, I'm sure somebody reading this can Photoshop the four images David H. posted and paint them all silver/gray. The blue car (Olmos) in particular with it's bold two tone paint job may become a different animal under these circumstances. I would leave the glass tinted but that is all on that one.

[305mouse]

As I stated in the poll thread, it was hard to see any detail on the black contest winner's design. The front reminded me of a 370Z and I just liked the other designs better. Better road level views are really needes, no overhead.

[sickgrin]

Just my 2 cents, so take this with a grain of salt...

Unfortunately, aside from Olmos's design (and I'm not sold on the front-end) all of the cars are very forgettable. I keep hearing that 'you have to see the designs in person' and 'it's different in full-scale' or 'we need clearer pictures', etc... I don't buy it. If I showed you a crappy picture of a 1/4 scale Ferrari 458 in gray primer, you'd still feel the emotion of that car. And that's just it, aside from Rodney's concept (love it or hate it), these cars don't really convey any emotion.

To take my own opinion out of the mix, I did a little experiment. I showed each of the entries in 1/4 scale along with their original renderings (as well as Vman's un-submitted concept) around the office. Then I asked which car, if any, they'd be willing to buy. Hands down, almost everyone picked Vman's un-submitted design, with Olmos's trailing in second. People just feel something when they look at them.

In my opinion, that's what f5 needs to capture. If you can take someone who knows nothing about the 818 and make them want to throw their money down just by looking at a picture of it, you've got it right. Until then, no matter how amazing the 818 is otherwise... as far as most people will be concerned, it'll just be another car.

Vman's design thread:
http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/showthread.php?2180-Vantage-Design-Project

[Hiryu]

When Mike lowered the front end, he opened up a bag of worms which includes people parking by braille and sliding up your hood, plus a few other real life issues, mostly Urban, not Suburban. Needless to say, if you want a good city car, buy a Smart car, this is a country road or track sort of car.


Actually, I should have actually said what I did on my photoshop (it has since been edited)...all I was doing was not lowering the nose, but pulling the bottom of the air-dam back. The new angle is what hides a lot of the front intakes. Granted, it opens up the option of also lowering the nose while keeping the same size intakes as the original model.

As for the approach angle, it sounds like a lot of people might be using this as a daily driver, so I thought anything that might help this car be a better DD would help. The hard-core tracksters can always add big splitters, etc.

Mike

[xabier]

kach, I could try and photoshop the images so that they all have the same colour, but I don´t think the photos that are already posted are the best ones for that, if you want I could photoshop the ones that are about to be released, taking the ones from similar angles so that they are as similar as possible.

By the way, great presentation, I watched it live and although english is not my native language I understood quite a lot! Great job guys!

[VTX]

Separated at Birth?
5494 Steve McQueen's Jaguar XKSS

5495 Olmos Blue car as roadster
click on photos

I have to admit that, although I hate the blue Olmos design, that white roadster version looks a LOT better. There's still something I just don't like about the front oval shaped grill though, and the little silver (brake ducts?) look tacky. If the oval opening were changed and the brake ducts were integrated into the front body molding I think I might do a complete 180 on my feeling about the design.

[16g-95gsx]

I have to admit that, although I hate the blue Olmos design, that white roadster version looks a LOT better. There's still something I just don't like about the front oval shaped grill though, and the little silver (brake ducts?) look tacky. If the oval opening were changed and the brake ducts were integrated into the front body molding I think I might do a complete 180 on my feeling about the design.

I agree completely, the front end needs to be paint matched, the rectangle ducts look tacky to me but all around it looks decent. I really was not a fan of the original drawing but the model looks far better than I would have thought. I really like the way the black roof flows into the glass and makes it look very unique. I really do not like the images where it has decal work on the sides, I think that heavily "cheeses" up the car.

[16g-95gsx]

Something else that I wanted to comment on in regards to these designs, please consider adding hood vents for the radiator similar to a gt40 or noble m12. Without adequate venting you are going to create a large pressurized zone that will only create lift at high speeds. With a mid engined design like this you can easily solve this issue and really add to the look of the car IMO. I think a vent like this on Xavier's design as well as the black car would really compliment the look greatly. I also feel that the "arch", which I assume hides a roll bar on Xavier's design really misses the mark and would be better replaced by two roll hoops behind each seat. I feel that it would drastically change the design, and I really don't see that hoop being conducive to a targa top in that form anyway.

[vozproto]

Overall I would say that the FFR design variant is the best comprehensive model that takes into account all the characteristics that I alove, that front end does need to change.

JKF did a quick sketchover of one option earlier in this thread.

Vman posted his incomplete and non-submitted ideas here.
http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/showthread.php?2659-818-Project-Updates-From-Dave&p=37491&viewfull=1#post37491

End of the day, although I understand the matching of hard lines between the front and back, I think the front hood ridge lines need some tweaking because THAT is likely where much of the "MR look" comes from. And maybe play with headlights that mimic the lines of the car a bit more. The current ones just dont seem to jive.

[jkf]

JKF did a quick sketchover of one option earlier in this thread.

...

And maybe play with headlights that mimic the lines of the car a bit more. The current ones just dont seem to jive.

That was a repost of kach22i's treatment from an older thread.

I agree that from what we've seen so far the headlight treatment is the only thing I really don't like abt. Jim's design -- kach22i's hood/fender lines are also real nice though.

[kach22i]

This is just an attempt to take color out of the equation, and I flipped them to the same direction, which I thought might help us compare apples to apples.

X's
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/bw-xabier.jpg
O's
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/bw-.jpg
N's
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/bw-nouphone1.jpg
J's
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/bw-jimshenk.jpg
J&K's
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/bw-GKA-FFR-Markup-092311-1.jpg
X&K's
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/bw-Modified-xabier-kach22i.jpg

EDIT-1: My first impression is that I like O's, it really pops. In fact I'd like to see O's front to get the same amount of time, attention, and multiple redo's by various artists which X's and J's designs have received by myself and others.

I did not expect this to be the result, but it's just my initial response, I need to let this stew a while before I commit. I also still like what I did to Jim's earlier effort, maybe that deserves to be redone with more care too. To my eyes, it's the only design which clearly looks mid-engined.

[kach22i]

I also feel that the "arch", which I assume hides a roll bar on Xavier's design really misses the mark and would be better replaced by two roll hoops behind each seat.
I have to agree that there is something odd about that arch. I don't recall that being part of his original design, but I also do not recall a rear 3/4 view either, meaning this was perhaps a well hid weak spot. Hard to hide stuff in model form with "best angles" and all. More angles should clarify if this is the problem we fear it is. More photos are required, wish I could see the models in person.

[3000gttom]

yea, in xabiers picture the top arch was actually flat, dont know why they arched it but it looks better flat, i also feel like they made the front vents bigger than the original design, they should have done a laser scan for all of them

[wooward]

I also feel that the "arch", which I assume hides a roll bar on Xavier's design really misses the mark and would be better replaced by two roll hoops behind each seat. I feel that it would drastically change the design, and I really don't see that hoop being conducive to a targa top in that form anyway.

I agree with this entirely. I like Xabier's design but that "arch" thing really puts me off. So much that I don't think I'd buy it. If it was two roll hoops, then I believe it would look so much better and would once again be back on the table to order.

[VTX]

Here's a quick and dirty photoshop of the front of O's car. Not sure if it's there yet or not, but I thought I'd throw something out there.

5503

[crackedcornish]

I have to agree that there is something odd about that arch. I don't recall that being part of his original design, but I also do not recall a rear 3/4 view either, meaning this was perhaps a well hid weak spot. Hard to hide stuff in model form with "best angles" and all. More angles should clarify if this is the problem we fear it is. More photos are required, wish I could see the models in person.

that "bar' was flatter and went to the outside edge of the headrest fairings in the drawings unlike on the model

16g: I recall reading in another thread that for track use you can't use the double hoop style bars

http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s147/crackedcornish/cars/405855e9.jpg

[wooward]

Dual Hoop > Arch

http://www.roadtaxprices.co.uk/images/Ferrari-430-Open.jpg

http://www.newemotion.it/img/prodotti/motori/motori691g_1.jpg
http://www.newemotion.it/img/prodotti/motori/motori691g_2.jpg

[wooward]

I recall reading in another thread that for track use you can't use the double hoop style bars

Since I want to build the street version, I'm ok with it not being for track use. But that's just me and I'm sure others here want a dual use car.

[crackedcornish]

Dual Hoop > Arch

http://www.roadtaxprices.co.uk/images/Ferrari-430-Open.jpg

http://www.newemotion.it/img/prodotti/motori/motori691g_1.jpg
http://www.newemotion.it/img/prodotti/motori/motori691g_2.jpg

I agree for a street car the dual hoops look better...especially without those stupid headrest fairings
http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s147/crackedcornish/b4a57870.jpg

[D2W]

First of all I want to say what a great job with the webcast. Loved it!

After mulling over what I saw and heard for a couple of days here are my thoughts.

As far as which model to release first I think it has to be the street roadster. It will be the best seller, returning some initial investment capital to FFR. It will still garner a lot of press if it delivers on all the promises which I know it will. And lastly it will be super easy to change it into a track car. The Xabier R model that Dave liked so well was just the normal car lowered, short windshield and a spoiler added, and a great paint job. Very similiar to the Koni GTM just built. It looks like a race car but its not that different from a regular GTM. Make the windshield removable and the possibility of adding a full cage and you are there. The suspension and brake technology is also ready.

In regards to the bodies I have to say that I was disappointed in the fact that the models they showed us may not be able to be built as is. If what Beerbaron said was true the Blue car (Olmos'), and the red car (Xabier's) need to be changed. This could totally change my opinion of what I like the best, making it hard to pick a design to go further on. I don't understand why the models weren't changed to the proper wheelbase/track and anything else needed to be more production ready. Why show us something we can't have? It would be nice if Dave would comment on this.

1) Xabier's design is my #1 at this point. The car has great lines, looks good but not too over the top. It looks Targa ready and the Targa bar that some don't like would do the best job of blending in with the roll bar which will go all the way across. I would like to see a level side view to be able to see front to back curve and how much of a rear spoiler there is. I would like the spoiler to be a bit bigger, like an elise. Overall a winner with probably the most mass market appeal.

2) Olmos' design is totally over the top and that's what I like about it the most, and what makes it my #2. It's a love it or hate it design so it probably doesn't have the mass market appeal of Xabier's. I would like to see the front end redesigned without the rectangular brake ducts, and with the original projector headlights. It would also be nice to incorporate some of the design elements from his roadster design like the convex hood. I also liked the grill opening better on the roadster version. I really love this design but can't commit to it until I see how changing the rear track affects the flow (does it really need to come in 6" per side?), and tweaking the front end makes it look. This car has the potential to set my hair on fire, and its the one I would buy if these things are fixed. (Edit: VTX I love what you did with the photoshop of the roadster front end. Makes it much better.)

3) The black car looks better in 3d than it looked as a drawing. However it just doesn't do anything for me. It looks too much like a bland sportscar for the masses from one of the major automakers. It should be the next S200, not the next FFR. I would not buy this car.

4) Jim's car has lots of problems to my eye. While the rear end looks ok, the front does not flow with it at all. Some of the suggestions about improvement to the front might improve it but its too hard to tell right now. I didn't mind the scoops like a lot of others, but the rear humps are terrible. They won't work with the roll bar, or a top unless it is one that covers them up. Someone else said it looked like a car designed by a tech guy. I think this really summed it up, Jim is an engineer not an artist and the design just doesn't have any soul.

[kach22i]

that "bar' was flatter and went to the outside edge of the headrest fairings in the drawings unlike on the model.....
The rear view you posted looks fine, it's just a targa bar with a slight arc.

We will have to wait for better picture of the red model, the one we have looks very inaccurate in that area.

I also agree with comments that the front openings may have been made too large on the model.


Here's a quick and dirty photoshop of the front of O's car. Not sure if it's there yet or not, but I thought I'd throw something out there.

Dang, that's looking good.


4) Jim's car has lots of problems to my eye................

I think we are looking at a pre-production mule, seeing how far they can go before they muck it up. It's mucked up, now we know they went to far, and need to come up with a production method for hanging a door flush both leading edge and aft.

I also think those overly creased headlight surrounds are an experiment to counter the flush ones used on the GTM. Again they found out how much is too much, at least I hope they read it that way.

[crackedcornish]

what would you guys think of using two circles, with one being larger than the other, per side as brake duct holes on X's car...sort of mimicking the tail light configuration

[dclin]

Here's a quick and dirty photoshop of the front of O's car. Not sure if it's there yet or not, but I thought I'd throw something out there.

5503


I REALLY, REALLY like that! I move to modify Olmo's design (with apologies to the original artist) with something like VTX's front end (keep the new shape, but pull the entire leading edge back up just a tad and I think its there) !

*edit* whoops, posted w/o quote

[GUNS]

Here's a quick and dirty photoshop of the front of O's car. Not sure if it's there yet or not, but I thought I'd throw something out there.

5503

That is a step in the right direction! It looks much better with the front area smaller. I'm not sure how I feel about the lights, but overall it's much improved. I'd like to see his original design with the same treatment.

[adesilva]

that is a bit of a step in the right direction but I still just dont feel that design goes with a wrx motor.. I look at that and expect it to have a big V8 and be more of an old school muscle car that cant turn.. not a more nimble turbo 4 cylinder lol I feel like I would see one drive by and first thought would be that it sounded terrible just because it didnt sound like what I would expect from how it looks.

[GUNS]

that is a bit of a step in the right direction but I still just dont feel that design goes with a wrx motor.. I look at that and expect it to have a big V8 and be more of an old school muscle car that cant turn.. not a more nimble turbo 4 cylinder lol I feel like I would see one drive by and first thought would be that it sounded terrible just because it didnt sound like what I would expect from how it looks.

I completely disagree with you. The car is actually pretty small, probably similar to an elise. To me It looks very nimble with short overhangs. If it was a big car I could see your point, but it's not.

[VTX]

I completely disagree with you. The car is actually pretty small, probably similar to an elise. To me It looks very nimble with short overhangs. If it was a big car I could see your point, but it's not.

I think part of the thing he might be seeing is the tall hood. I think if it actually was lower so that it didn't "bubble up" in the middle that would give it a less bulky look up front. I just wasn't able to photoshop that in in the limited time I spent on it. Maybe someone else can do some further modifications? It also needs a vent or something on the hood to release some of the pressure build up that's going to happen from the front intake.

I also agree that the headlights should be changed. I have some ideas and will work on them when/if I get some time. Hopefully some other people will do some photoshops and add their input.

[adesilva]

You may have a point there. Sometimes it is difficult to remember the actual size of the car when only looking at concept drawings.

Makes me wish we could look at completely finished cars and decide which we like at that point but we all know thats not going to happen lol I think that the Elise and Exige are very sexy vehicles but for some reason dont feel that same way about that design. I suppose it really is a love or hate model. Who knows in time it may grow on me more.. I know I certainly dont hate it now as much as I did when it first won second place.

[D2W]

One thing I was surprised at was how much better Jim's full size mock-up looked over the model. I wouldn't give the model a second glance, but the full size had some interesting features. I wonder what different impressions I would have of the others if they were full size?

[Flamshackle]

One thing I was surprised at was how much better Jim's full size mock-up looked over the model. I wouldn't give the model a second glance, but the full size had some interesting features. I wonder what different impressions I would have of the others if they were full size?

This is why we need photoshop images of the models at 'real life angles'. The models viewed from a helecopter will look very different to at street level.

PLEASE FFR UPLOAD SOME HIGH QUALITY REAL LIFE ANGLES?

[bbjones121]

Is it just me or is the blue car the only one that shows some exotic curves? I think separate headrest loops are a must with fairings out back. Without the fairing, they look like a Miata or MR2 body kit. I think every car except the blue one would have people guessing Miata, Celica, MR2, or S2000. This is my impression from models, hopefully they create a different impression up close. Sleek curves or lines, and large vents scream exotic. Flat sides, fake vents or too many, and no headrest fairings mutter body kit.

I think they would be a lot better if they where not so flattened in the models and held the curves from the design sketches. The blue one seems to be the only model that held the dynamics in shape from the sketches.

[sub322]

More pictures and different angles would be really nice and tag the designers name with the pictures.

[Michael Lye]

I'm glad to see the 818 models are getting so much discussion going. I know Dave, Jim and crew are probably pretty busy getting ready for SEMA - I think I heard that some of the stuff they're taking is leaving Wareham today - so I don't expect we'll hear much from Dave until afterwards. In the meantime, I really enjoyed seeing all the models in person on Saturday (as well as the full-size version of Jim's.) So here are just a few thoughts/replies to some of the posts. I have no inside knowledge but Saturday was just a quick preview and I expect that more and clearer photos will be forthcoming. It's really hard to get a clear impression from Ustream and the photos that are out there so far. So be patient (is that possible!?) on that front and I'm pretty sure you'll get to see better views of the models. At the very least I'll be taking some hi-rez images of Xabier's so the RISD group can have some copies for their portfolios. But none of that will happen until after SEMA, and probably after a bit of a break for FFR.

I won't speak to the modeling on the other designs but will be happy to answer questions about the one the RISD team worked on. Regarding the "arch" or rollbar cover. This was something we discussed with FFR quite a bit. The original design that Xabier did had an interesting but very difficult to make detail where the arch connected to the fairings. The rear view posted earlier shows that fairly clearly. So in this one area we definitely deviated from the renderings. The curve of the arch actually matches the renderings almost perfectly - it's no more curved on top than what Xabier drew. So Xabier's is not flatter but it is quite a bit thinner, which was another area of concern. In that same rear view, if you scale the thickness of the "arch" or "targa bar," it leaves about enough thickness for a 1" or less rollbar. It was felt that we should cover the rollbar which necessitated thickening that area up substantially. So that's why it looks like it does. The way it was modeled, that center section could be removed to show the fairings without the arch, though I don't know how the paint will look under there. Maybe we'll get some pictures without it at some point.

In general FFR wanted us to stay as faithful as possible to Xabier's renderings. And in most other respects we were very accurate. The front openings are as close as we could get to what was rendered while still making it work in 3D. There are a few other smaller discrepancies but nothing as big as the rollbar housing. One area that's also a bit different is the rear quarters. There are some subtle differences in the surfaces and lines between the left and right but since you can't see both simultaneously the differences don't really jump out at you. But it was an opportunity to try a slightly different interpretation in that area.

One small point on the photos, remember that it's not just the viewpoint that affects your perception of the form, the focal length of the lens can make a big difference as well. Some of the hi-rez shots I took on Saturday used a wider angle lens than others and can really change the feeling of the car. So it's shame that all of you couldn't make it to see the models in person. It's really the only way to see them. But it's exciting to see the process and the potential for the 818 as it goes through development.

Michael

[kach22i]

So Xabier's is not flatter but it is quite a bit thinner, which was another area of concern. In that same rear view, if you scale the thickness of the "arch" or "targa bar," it leaves about enough thickness for a 1" or less rollbar. It was felt that we should cover the rollbar which necessitated thickening that area up substantially.
Maybe it's just my opinion, and I was not there, but I would have built it as illustrated and left the technical solutions to FFR. Who knows, maybe they would have ponied up for a custom shaped aerofoil steel section which doubles as a roll bar. The extra thickness is not a killer, thank you for the detailed explanation.

I think a lot of us are liking O's design because it has crisp sharp edges. So did X's design in his renderings, the model.......not so much.

If the 1/4 scale models get a make over, I'd like to see some of X's crispness restored (the hind quarter's have been jelly beaned).

[crackedcornish]

I'm glad to see the 818 models are getting so much discussion going. I know Dave, Jim and crew are probably pretty busy getting ready for SEMA - I think I heard that some of the stuff they're taking is leaving Wareham today - so I don't expect we'll hear much from Dave until afterwards. In the meantime, I really enjoyed seeing all the models in person on Saturday (as well as the full-size version of Jim's.) So here are just a few thoughts/replies to some of the posts. I have no inside knowledge but Saturday was just a quick preview and I expect that more and clearer photos will be forthcoming. It's really hard to get a clear impression from Ustream and the photos that are out there so far. So be patient (is that possible!?) on that front and I'm pretty sure you'll get to see better views of the models. At the very least I'll be taking some hi-rez images of Xabier's so the RISD group can have some copies for their portfolios. But none of that will happen until after SEMA, and probably after a bit of a break for FFR.

I won't speak to the modeling on the other designs but will be happy to answer questions about the one the RISD team worked on. Regarding the "arch" or rollbar cover. This was something we discussed with FFR quite a bit. The original design that Xabier did had an interesting but very difficult to make detail where the arch connected to the fairings. The rear view posted earlier shows that fairly clearly. So in this one area we definitely deviated from the renderings. The curve of the arch actually matches the renderings almost perfectly - it's no more curved on top than what Xabier drew. So Xabier's is not flatter but it is quite a bit thinner, which was another area of concern. In that same rear view, if you scale the thickness of the "arch" or "targa bar," it leaves about enough thickness for a 1" or less rollbar. It was felt that we should cover the rollbar which necessitated thickening that area up substantially. So that's why it looks like it does. The way it was modeled, that center section could be removed to show the fairings without the arch, though I don't know how the paint will look under there. Maybe we'll get some pictures without it at some point.

In general FFR wanted us to stay as faithful as possible to Xabier's renderings. And in most other respects we were very accurate. The front openings are as close as we could get to what was rendered while still making it work in 3D. There are a few other smaller discrepancies but nothing as big as the rollbar housing. One area that's also a bit different is the rear quarters. There are some subtle differences in the surfaces and lines between the left and right but since you can't see both simultaneously the differences don't really jump out at you. But it was an opportunity to try a slightly different interpretation in that area.

One small point on the photos, remember that it's not just the viewpoint that affects your perception of the form, the focal length of the lens can make a big difference as well. Some of the hi-rez shots I took on Saturday used a wider angle lens than others and can really change the feeling of the car. So it's shame that all of you couldn't make it to see the models in person. It's really the only way to see them. But it's exciting to see the process and the potential for the 818 as it goes through development.

Michael

Michael, do you think that if the roll bar cover had an elliptical cross section so the edges appeared to be smaller/thinner, and the underside of the arch was painted black, we could have the necessary thicker cover, with the illusion of looking thinner (and then it could be made longer and truer to the original drawings)?

[Dave Smith]

Remaining silent for these last few days (to allow honest and direct feedback) has been exceptionally difficult. While we are loading up for SEMA I have a few thoughts.

The bottom line is that the car HAS to light your hair on fire, and while the cars all look better in person (I will never forget the crow I ate when I saw pics of the Ferrari 599 and dissed it as ugly and wimpy only to later see it in real life and be BLOWN away-hair on fire, with it's muscular stance and perfect coupe lines), the bottom line is that the car HAS to render a visceral reaction to all who see it.

The GTM and Coupe and Mk4 and Hot Rod ALL have a only few detractors and each enjoy a HUGE number of fans due in part to great looks. Each day I watch as guys literally melt when they walk thru our doors and see the cars. The 818 HAS to join those ranks and even without perfect photos, we are simply not there. period.

I am going to head out to SEMA and consider very carefully the correct path forward on design. We'll probably take one of the four models (probably Jim's) to the show as a potential. Based on the feedback I dont want to take al four models as I trust the feedback from our core group.

The car has to be a Ferrari-level/K1-attack on steroids type car. A beautiful shape that will set FFR higher than everything we've done before. The car HAS to deliver to a guy who has the skill to build his/her own car, a look and feel that is truly exceptional. This may take more money than time as we are so far along in development and so capable on the solid modeling side. I personally think Jims hybrid design can morph into a much more aggressive car as the others can change in ways that can make them look better. I know Micjael Lye at RISD is DYING to get his teams hands untied and onto Xabiers car as baseline!

Going forward I think some real good photos of each, perhaps asking the community to help modify or smooth out some of the objections in each (or pump 'roids into the cars)... Still I am very very grateful for the feedback and can only promise you guys one thing... The car will light your hair on fire or we won't make it. I'll consider paths and suggestions, but wont make any decisons till after SEMA. The roadster is where I want to spend my launch money, followed by track and mpg model, but that isnt set in cement.

Dave

[bbjones121]

I feel very confident that the final car will impress, after an honest, passionate assessment like that.

[slopoke]

I agree for a street car the dual hoops look better...especially without those stupid headrest fairings
http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s147/crackedcornish/b4a57870.jpg I think this could be the car and its variants could fill the bill. Sorry Dave, but this car in coupe form, SCREAMS at me. It looks like it would be fun to drive on sunny days ( the roadster), the coupe could be the track car or an everyday driver ... maybe even the mpg car.... Just one mans visceral opinion.

[nickarub]

My vote from seeing the pod cast is Definatly the...
1) 1st place winner(black Car)- looks the sexiest,very exotic/expensive aston martin-ish. The tail lights look very modern.
2) the FFR fullscale model.(silver) it looks very sexy also. IDk if its because its full scale but yes it does look beautiful.

[bbjones121]

Usually the more exotic cars have the fairings. Porsche Boxster, no fairings. Porsche Carrera GT, headrest fairings. I think it would look lower end, cheaper without them.

[Michael Lye]

Maybe it's just my opinion, and I was not there, but I would have built it as illustrated and left the technical solutions to FFR. Who knows, maybe they would have ponied up for a custom shaped aerofoil steel section which doubles as a roll bar. The extra thickness is not a killer, thank you for the detailed explanation.It was a tough call and I understand your position but it was what was decided with FFR at the time.


I think a lot of us are liking O's design because it has crisp sharp edges. So did X's design in his renderings, the model.......not so much.

If the 1/4 scale models get a make over, I'd like to see some of X's crispness restored (the hind quarter's have been jelly beaned).That's really more an impression from the photos posted here than the reality. The model itself has more sharp edges and "crispness" than what I'm seeing in these images. The video and photos were taken in the FFR showroom and the lighting was less controlled than would be ideal for photos. So be assured that Xabier's concept was not "jelly beaned." I firmly believe jelly beans are for eating - not car bodies!

[kach22i]

Xabier's concept was not "jelly beaned."
Cool, good to hear.

This is one area in which the photo is blurry and does not help "first impressions".


I think this could be the car and its variants could fill the bill. Sorry Dave, but this car in coupe form, SCREAMS at me. It looks like it would be fun to drive on sunny days ( the roadster), the coupe could be the track car or an everyday driver ... maybe even the mpg car.... Just one mans visceral opinion.

This is one of the designs which strayed far from the template. As good as my imagination is I just could not see it maturing into a real car. I even tried some freehand sketching over it to transform it, but failed so bad I never posted it.

[bbjones121]

I am sorry, but if all this commotion is caused by blurry, poor, or lack of photos. Why was the first response not to get more photos up?

[Dave Smith]

Been a bit busy. We'll try and get some detailed photos up shortly on each car for you. This may help with feedback as many have asked and we have been literally buried. If you guys remember, I threw together the presentation in 2 days so that you guys could see some stuff before SEMA. The original plan was to unveil the models at SEMA and perhaps I should have stuck to that plan.

Nevertheless, I'll see if Mad dog can get some photos up shortly for you.

Dave

[ScottKoschwitz]

Michael and Dave, thanks for posting. I appreciate your self-control in delaying your responses. It's good to get some more information from those in the direct development process.

I hope you found our comments most importantly constructive, useful, and respectful. Given the interest and passion people have about this concept, our primary means of communication being an Internet forum, and the few days that have elapsed, the discussion could have devolved pretty badly. It certainly didn't become Lord of the Flies, thankfully.

In regard to the model of Xabier's car, I understand the need to alter the bar between the fairings. It's a reasonable modification of a design as it progresses from simply audience reception to technical and cost feasibility analysis, to possible production. I actually like the fairings (which I understand we're developed for aircraft and then cars for aerodynamics, and not just style), and the bar between them is cost-effective way to keep chassis modifications to a minimum, retain a rear window, and make it easier to add a soft or hard top to the design.

I look forward to hearing from SEMA, including the reaction to the concept and the designs.

[Dave Smith]

I think some super clean detailed, well-lit photos of the scale models will help the discussion and I wish I had the manpower and time to have done it sooner. Still, the purpose of the presentation was ALSO to give you guys an idea of where the project is currently in development.

[crackedcornish]

Usually the more exotic cars have the fairings. Porsche Boxster, no fairings. Porsche Carrera GT, headrest fairings. I think it would look lower end, cheaper without them.

sorry, but I think on a street car they just add unnecessary visual bulk to the rear of the body...and in a low, street driven car makes it harder to do a quick glance over the shoulder when doing a lane change to the right
http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s147/crackedcornish/0e0ba68b.jpg
http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s147/crackedcornish/fcb3340c.jpg
http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s147/crackedcornish/fe4b5bce.jpg
http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s147/crackedcornish/fc8fa9bf.jpg
http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s147/crackedcornish/7660625b.jpg
http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s147/crackedcornish/b4a57870.jpg

[bbjones121]

Even a short video clip walkaround on each would alleviate the time needed for going through a set of pictures. Then people can take screenshots of the video where they think a good picture would be on there own time.

[bbjones121]

We will have to agree to disagree, crackedcornish. I think those samples you just put up with the fairings looks much more professional and exotic. The more exotic, expensive, refined a sports car is, the more likely they will have the fairings. The cheaper, high volume production cars (s2000, Miata, etc.), and more "kit" like design is where I see the fairings taken away. I for one, appreciate the feel of the road rather than the wind buffeting behind my head if there were none.

[BipDBo]

Been a bit busy. We'll try and get some detailed photos up shortly on each car for you. This may help with feedback as many have asked and we have been literally buried. If you guys remember, I threw together the presentation in 2 days so that you guys could see some stuff before SEMA. The original plan was to unveil the models at SEMA and perhaps I should have stuck to that plan.

Nevertheless, I'll see if Mad dog can get some photos up shortly for you.

Dave

Don't worry Dave,
You seem less than excited about the feedback you've gotten so far, and understandably so. This is about what I expected. Anyone involved in the contest is going to be pre-disposed to having critical eyes for a few reasons. Not the least of which, of course is that everyone wants the winning car to look like the one that they designed. I know that I tend to prefer designs with features similar to my submission. We've also seen these designs before, so the initial allure has worn off, so we tend to nitpick the details. We've seen very radical submissions that look really cool, but due to either proportions, or buildability, just weren't eligable for consideration. Jim's full size mock up looks way better than the model, so I expect that the other designs will look much better in real proportions as well. Also, I think that these will look much better at SEMA, in the eyes of people seeing them for the first time. Another great thing that you are doing is providing options. People don't share the exact same tastes, so there will eventually be something for everyone. I hope that you will not get discouraged, but see this as constructive feedback, to hopefully improve the final product. I've got some of my own, that I hope to get down here soon.

[GunnerG]

Remaining silent for these last few days (to allow honest and direct feedback) has been exceptionally difficult. While we are loading up for SEMA I have a few thoughts.

The bottom line is that the car HAS to light your hair on fire, and while the cars all look better in person (I will never forget the crow I ate when I saw pics of the Ferrari 599 and dissed it as ugly and wimpy only to later see it in real life and be BLOWN away-hair on fire, with it's muscular stance and perfect coupe lines), the bottom line is that the car HAS to render a visceral reaction to all who see it.

The GTM and Coupe and Mk4 and Hot Rod ALL have a only few detractors and each enjoy a HUGE number of fans due in part to great looks. Each day I watch as guys literally melt when they walk thru our doors and see the cars. The 818 HAS to join those ranks and even without perfect photos, we are simply not there. period.

I am going to head out to SEMA and consider very carefully the correct path forward on design. We'll probably take one of the four models (probably Jim's) to the show as a potential. Based on the feedback I dont want to take al four models as I trust the feedback from our core group.

The car has to be a Ferrari-level/K1-attack on steroids type car. A beautiful shape that will set FFR higher than everything we've done before. The car HAS to deliver to a guy who has the skill to build his/her own car, a look and feel that is truly exceptional. This may take more money than time as we are so far along in development and so capable on the solid modeling side. I personally think Jims hybrid design can morph into a much more aggressive car as the others can change in ways that can make them look better. I know Micjael Lye at RISD is DYING to get his teams hands untied and onto Xabiers car as baseline!

Going forward I think some real good photos of each, perhaps asking the community to help modify or smooth out some of the objections in each (or pump 'roids into the cars)... Still I am very very grateful for the feedback and can only promise you guys one thing... The car will light your hair on fire or we won't make it. I'll consider paths and suggestions, but wont make any decisons till after SEMA. The roadster is where I want to spend my launch money, followed by track and mpg model, but that isnt set in cement.

Dave



Dave,

I'm wondering if, at its core, the problem is the selection process itself . The "professional judges" do not reflect the sentiments of the FFR community . Their 1st place winner came in a distant 3rd in initial community polling. It would be interesting to see the results if the FFR community ( potential customer base), judged the same entries as the "professional judges" .

[mekeys]

The trouble with those headrest is that it makes it hard to put a folding soft top on.The two roll bars would be better..

Mel

[Oppenheimer]

What ever happened to FFR not automatically following the contest judges picks as the design for the 818? I was surprised at some of judges picks, but more surprised that they all made it into 3D modeling as potential 818 bodies.

I know I'm not alone in liking many of the non-winning contest entries way more than most of the cars that have become 3D models.

[VTX]

What ever happened to FFR not automatically following the contest judges picks as the design for the 818? I was surprised at some of judges picks, but more surprised that they all made it into 3D modeling as potential 818 bodies.

I know I'm not alone in liking many of the non-winning contest entries way more than most of the cars that have become 3D models.

Nope, you're not alone. Marrio Morra's is still my favorite by far.

[Oppenheimer]

Ever seen a 3D topographical map? I remember there was one at the base of Mt Washington. The mountain didn't look very impressive at all in 3D map, yet they said they actually made the map disproportionally tall to try and offset that effect.

Same deal with a Barbie doll. Blown up to full scale, she looks hideous. Likewise a to-scale 1/10 size model of a woman that most think is seriously hot would look quite bland as a doll.

5512

I think this effect is going on with the 818 models as well. There seems to be a disconnect with what some see in the 818 models, and what others see. Obviously some of this is personal taste, but I think a lot of it is how we filter what we see.

Some are using their Barbie doll filter to imagine what the shape will look like full scale. Others just see a doll with a hot looking body and say 'that's cool'.

I think scaled up to full size the Olmos is going to look like the scaled up Barbie. The other more 'bland' 818 models OTH I think are going to look surprisingly outragious full scale.

[Dave Smith]

Let me get some better detail photos up first. If you guys want to volunteer a few cars that you think are best (this cannot be a thousand individual posts) that's cool, but the designs that were picked were organized and really are exceptional. I am not saying I am throwing in the towel, rather I think its maybe a good idea to do some extrapolations and maybe let the creative energies loose on some mods to the designs after some detail photos are posted and allow people to really judge the cars well on even ground and with clear shots from all angles.

Opp: That's a very good point (Barbie) and the full size 818 that Jim made crushed down to 1/4 scale showed some of that... My concern over Rodney's design was the WAAYYY radical curves that might be affected by the Barbie syndrome.

Ha. Im looking at several options right now as we can (for $15K per car) do full size body shapes... Still, I think some refinement and clear pics before we go all crazy is a good idea.

[PhyrraM]

A few comments:

Headrest fairings.....I want none to very shallow shallow ones. They were once a racing tool, and like many racing tools they have become a "go-to" fad on street cars. Even on the exotics they are a (IMHO) unneccisary styling gimmick. Look at the Pontiac Solstace - horrible. I guess they are another thing on the "love-it-or-hate-it" list.

1st-3rd place....Agreed, I was suprised to see all three "winners" go to models. I was equally suprised to see that none of the "others" got the same opportunity. I still think Scott Bradford's would be a slam-dunk to add to FFRs classic race car inspired lineup.

Forum feedback.....While I greatly admire the idea of offering up some information and even an ear to feedback, Dave - keep moving forward in the direction you see fit. I once said, months ago, that "looks won't matter". I was horribly misinterpreted then, and I will be this time again. However, as long as the design is appealing, and the performance and objective goals are met, then the car will sell well regardless of which particular design gets produced. It will even sell to some of the folks who are currently stomping thier feet, throwing tantrums, and utting words like "no-go", "will not buy", and "cash in hand if you do it my way".

[bbjones121]

Yeah, pontiacs fairings were terrible, but the bubble car look is what really kills it. The headrest fairings on the Saturn sky look much better because the overall look of the car. You cannot judge it based on those cars alone though. What do the majority of convertibles on the road have? Nothing but a double looped roll bar with no fairings. People have grown to accept them without fairings because that is what we see day to day. I want a car style with aspects you don't see day to day.

It is not a fad, it has aerodynamic purpose at high speeds, hence the reason most convertible exotics have them.

[scartaan]

Dave-
Why would you not take all 4 models to SEMA for more feedback. This would be the perfect audience. Let them vote too.

[kach22i]

It is not a fad, it has aerodynamic purpose at high speeds, hence the reason most convertible exotics have them.
You are right when you say it's not a fad. However the aerodynamic purpose is not high speed drag reduction. The value is in creating a pocket of dead air in the cockpit. This is done with a rear glass shield placed between the two humps. The moving air moves over the dead air with less turbulence and wind noise to the occupants.

Now don't go showing me a 550 or 718 Porsche spyder with a tiny windscreen in front of the driver and a hump behind him, that's a different animal.

[Hiryu]

Dave-
Why would you not take all 4 models to SEMA for more feedback. This would be the perfect audience. Let them vote too.

I agree on this--especially since I'm lucky enough to be heading to SEMA this year, mainly just hoping to see the four FFR models in person!!

Mike

[bbjones121]

You are right when you say it's not a fad. However the aerodynamic purpose is not high speed drag reduction. The value is in creating a pocket of dead air in the cockpit. This is done with a rear glass shield placed between the two humps. The moving air moves over the dead air with less turbulence and wind noise to the occupants.

I agree. I guess I didn't post that in this thread. It is to prevent buffeting. Some rollbar only designs without fairings have an ugly large wind screen come up behind your head. When I am driving on our highways here(75mph- 80-85 with traffic) in Colorado, I would prefer to enjoy the ride with top down and not get minor concussios from wind buffeting.

[D2W]

I think some super clean detailed, well-lit photos of the scale models will help the discussion and I wish I had the manpower and time to have done it sooner. Still, the purpose of the presentation was ALSO to give you guys an idea of where the project is currently in development.

Don't be discouraged, I'm glad you shared the models and development path. Somebody I admire once said "constuctive criticism is just that, constructive. If you are able to get past your ego and listen great things can happen." I think you have a great start. A chassis ready for final development, and a great start to the bodies. I think you got a much more honest reaction by revealing the models here than if you would have at SEMA. There anybody who is not familiar with the project would of been all "oohs and aahs". While that does make you feel good about what you're doing it doesn't present you with the kind of feedback people who are beyond that stage are able to give.

[rori]

The Olmos Design has been far and away my favorite of the finalists all along. It has the right look that I want from my kit car. The other three aren't edgy enough. They look like they could have come from Toyota, Honda, and Mazda in that order. That's not a bad thing, but I want to build something with a very distinctive look that you just can't get from a major manufacturer.

[VTX]

Don't be discouraged, I'm glad you shared the models and development path. Somebody I admire once said "constuctive criticism is just that, constructive. If you are able to get past your ego and listen great things can happen." I think you have a great start. A chassis ready for final development, and a great start to the bodies. I think you got a much more honest reaction by revealing the models here than if you would have at SEMA. There anybody who is not familiar with the project would of been all "oohs and aahs". While that does make you feel good about what you're doing it doesn't present you with the kind of feedback people who are beyond that stage are able to give.

I agree completely. While I may add my criticism, I'm certainly impressed with what FFR is doing and I'm sure that when the final car comes out it will be awesome.

[bbjones121]

I think that just based on what Dave has stated today, despite how the photos may look, shortcuts are not going to be taken that produce a dull non-inspiring car in the end. I am now very optimistic that the wow factor takes highest priority, which is great!

[slopoke]

So far too much Honda, Mazda,and Lotus wannabe... it needs to evoke heart pounding PASSION ... the kind of stuff that made you shake your head in amazement when Mark
Donahue would downshift that incredible 917/30 into a corner and disappear with a roar of turbo spool and a flash of exhaust into the next corner. This car needs to be ART at 100 mph standing still in the dark and still make you gasp and jump back when you turn on the lights. Dave knows what I mean. I truly wish I had more than the aristic talent of a five year old with a number 2 pencil and no eraser. Maybe it would be beneficial to go back and look at some of the other designs from the contest and maybe rethink " THE ALMIGHTY TEMPLATE". .... No more editorials ... I promise

[bbjones121]

I was wondering if Shawn Whetstone's design missed the submition deadline. I thought that got a lot of positive remarks.
http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2387&d=1308586587
http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2388&d=1308586590
http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2389&d=1308586593
http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2392&d=1308586600
http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2393&d=1308586602
http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2394&d=1308586604
http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2395&d=1308586607

The headrest fairings become functional as air scoops into engine bay.

[GUNS]

I was wondering if Shawn Whetstone's design missed the submition deadline. I thought that got a lot of positive remarks.
http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2387&d=1308586587
http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2388&d=1308586590
http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2389&d=1308586593
http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2392&d=1308586600
http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2393&d=1308586602
http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2394&d=1308586604
http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2395&d=1308586607

The headrest fairings become functional as air scoops into engine bay.

http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2392&d=1308586600
http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2388&d=1308586590
http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2387&d=1308586587
To me that car is just about perfect. Especially the silver one. Dave, IMHO this is the kind of car that sets my hair on fire. This is one of the few designs I've seen here that I really lust for. And to add it looks easy to manufacture.

I also want to ditto the comments to dave about some of the criticisms. I am still very excited about this project and being that I am so excited I feel very involved in this process and I want to see this thing turn out as good as it possibly can. I think most other people here feel the same way. I have so much confidence in you guys that I already purchased my donor car. Thanks again for all that you are doing and keeping us involved in the process.

[PhyrraM]

I like that one also.

Visually small, no heavy haunches syndrome. Realistic wheel sizes. Not too exotic looking.

Don't care for the front lights or the rear diffuser treatment, but those are minor complaints on an overall good design.

[bbjones121]

I think it is exotic in a Bugatti, jaguar, lotus concept kind of way. I love the way it looks and every vent seems to have a function. The body panels look pretty simple in manufacturing as well.

[Oppenheimer]

Let me get some better detail photos up first.

Cool. Will be eagerly waiting. I really liked how those early leaked pics of the 1/4 scale models were staged to look full scale in the shop. The lighting was good in those, you could see what you were looking at, with some context as well. I think if we got all the models to compare in pics like that, from several angles (and, as mentioned, at eye-level), at that point we could really start a useful dialog of feedback.


My concern over Rodney's design was the WAAYYY radical curves that might be affected by the Barbie syndrome.

Anyone got any ideas how to 'see' the Barbie syndrome without having to go through the effort of full scale mock-up? Maybe add some to-scale reference points, like a to-scale human? Maybe some other to-scale cars, cars we all know, to get a better sense of what one of these would look like out on the road? Where do you quickly source to-scale models of modern sports cars?

[bbjones121]

Anyone have a camera with miniature/ tilt shift function? I will see if I can find any cool cars to try it on.

[wooward]

OMG, Shawn Whetstone's it is. There are small things here and there I don't entirely care for but overall I would be quite happy with this car. It has a very good look that looks very reasonable to manufacture.

[bbjones121]

It looks like a lot of thought went into design functionality and I thought it got a lot of positive comments from people on here, then it disappeared. I figured that maybe it didnt make submition deadline.

[scartaan]

Really like this Shawn Whetstone design. Sort of a toned down Rodney blue car. The logo's are also excellent. Well done.

[olpro]

Anyone got any ideas how to 'see' the Barbie syndrome without having to go through the effort of full scale mock-up?

It is simple. Just take photos from the correct views with a fairly long focal length lens and non distracting backgrounds.

[wooward]

Really like this Shawn Whetstone design. Sort of a toned down Rodney blue car. The logo's are also excellent. Well done.

The Logo's are excellent. I think FFR should use those as their logo

[RM1SepEx]

I think it is exotic in a Bugatti, jaguar, lotus concept kind of way. I love the way it looks and every vent seems to have a function. The body panels look pretty simple in manufacturing as well.

very nice, esp as a targa!!

[Twinspool]

Debating aesthetic preferences is about as useful as trying to draw a smell.

Going fast IS looking good.

A camel is a horse that was designed by committee.

Xabier's design has a handful of cues that will be useful in the Hair on Fire design (HoF) but is otherwise overrated.

Vaya con Dios Factory 5! You're on the path to an historic enthusiast's car that should be a generational benchmark for value and performance.

[keys2heaven]

Shawn's design deserves a second glance. It is very simple, sexy and stimulating! (High Mileage)

But, if I want to go crazy and freak out the guy I'm passing like they're standing still, then I'd have to go with Rodney's design. (Roadster)

And if I wanted a track demon, Xabier's track version it is! (Track)

[ScottKoschwitz]

The Whetstone design IS very nice: simple, elegant, looks good (and, dare I say it, exotic) without trying too hard. I see Lotus and Alfa 4C cues, which I like. This design very well captures my sense of the 818 concept. I can quibble with some of the details, but wouldn't bother at this stage. I'd be all over the targa version.

[VTX]

I really like the Whetstone design as well. My only complaint would be the seemingly long front overhang. If that could be shortened up without ruining the front end and making it look chopped off it would be really nice. I definitely think it's a design FFR should consider.

I also wonder if there would need to be a vent in the hood to eliminate pressure build up, but maybe the vents behind the front wheels would be enough? And what about vents into the rear engine bay for things like the intercooler and intake?

Edit, nevermind about the engine bay vents. I see he added those. Nice and clean too.

[Inthenameofweez]

Whetstone for MPG car. For sure.

[GUNS]

Whetstone for MPG car. For sure.

I vote for it for the everything car!

[crackedcornish]

We will have to agree to disagree, crackedcornish. I think those samples you just put up with the fairings looks much more professional and exotic. The more exotic, expensive, refined a sports car is, the more likely they will have the fairings. The cheaper, high volume production cars (s2000, Miata, etc.), and more "kit" like design is where I see the fairings taken away. I for one, appreciate the feel of the road rather than the wind buffeting behind my head if there were none.

I can live with that, after all if people didn't have different tastes in cars we would all be driving the same thing right :D

[olpro]

I have always wondered about the Whetstone car. I understand he had done work for a competitor of FFR and then we heard no more about his entry in this competition. I assumed that his entry was pulled out of consideration, perhaps by him. I have not seen it in the FFR gallery of entries that has been put together (Mad Dog) but maybe I just missed it?
It is a superior design without doubt.

[flyboy2160]

There is a way for those without a CAD system to view, in full 3D, the models that exist as 3D CAD models. A company called Right Hemisphere offers software that allows for a 3D CAD model to be imbedded within a Powerpoint or pdf file. The 3D model can be viewed, spun around, sliced, and disassembled using a free to download viewer.

FF may have to pay for the software to create the imbedded models, but the viewer is free. (A guy at work claims he could create the 3D models without the paid-for software. Since I had the paid-for seat, I used it to create these imbedded models in Powerpoint all the time.)
http://www.righthemisphere.com/products/client-products/deep-view. I believe this can also be downloaded from the Solidworks site.

I'be been told that the latest version of paid-for Acrobat reader has the Right Hemisphere viewer built in and that other companies have similar products with free 3D viewers, but I can't vouch for these.

Flyboy Steve

[bbjones121]

I can live with that, after all if people didn't have different tastes in cars we would all be driving the same thing right :D

Haha. Yeah...we don't want that.

[bbjones121]

Yes, I think my adobe pro at work can do 3D.

[David]

While that video is awesome ill admit that it does scare me a bit.. seeing how Dave speaks about the car he seems to emphasize multiple times if you cant build you cant do this...

What about the people who have never built a kit car before ??
What about the average person who may love cars but hasn't done a huge amount of work besides oil changes, brake jobs, exhaust jobs, etc..

The average person doesn't exactly get the opportunity to get "training" for a project like this. Ill admit I have been lucky enough for the most part to have newer cars so maintenance has really been the majority of my experience along with some customization (mainly interior).

I am by no means a race car driver but I love cars... I have a garage with basic tools and this is a project that id like to be part of if its something I can realistically handle.. my plan was to have the most difficult parts to be handled by professionals (if I were to ever come to a point in the instructions that I was completely confused with)

The grin that Dave got when he said "I want to merge" makes me 100% willing to prove him wrong if he doesn't feel the average person can build this machine.

If you are reasonably mechanical, the 818 is doable, no problem. Thhe Gtm is a different beast on many levels(I've built one). Just a much more sophisticated build. Don't let Dave's comments impact your goal to build this car. He was correct, but they don't apply to this car.

If you have wrenched on cars, changed clutches, don mods and upgrades you should be fine.

David

[David]

sorry, but I think on a street car they just add unnecessary visual bulk to the rear of the body...and in a low, street driven car makes it harder to do a quick glance over the shoulder when doing a lane change to the right
http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s147/crackedcornish/0e0ba68b.jpg
http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s147/crackedcornish/fcb3340c.jpg
http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s147/crackedcornish/fe4b5bce.jpg
http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s147/crackedcornish/fc8fa9bf.jpg
http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s147/crackedcornish/7660625b.jpg
http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s147/crackedcornish/b4a57870.jpg

still my favorite design!!!!! I agree regarding the raised areas in the back. Cleaner without it

[Dave Smith]

Ha! HoF quotient. I love that! The guys finish detailed one of the models with part lines for panels, lights, etc. and I'll post detailed pics in the am. Different beast and I swear my hat was mighty warm.. Still have time and I may sound a bit negative, but my one-million percent commit and stoke to the project is undiminished and I will NOT relent on the body design until it is simply perfect and beautiful and if I have to line up ten guys and watch as they do a "this is spinal tap drummer" impression I will (spontaneous human combustion). Pics in the am

Shawn Whetstone's design is really ideal as Coupe for a high mpg capable design. I wonder if we did flow analysis on it how it would do.. it looks to have a small frontal area. really beautiful. Good suggestion as elemental coupe with clean, modern lines.

[bbjones121]

still my favorite design!!!!! I agree regarding the raised areas in the back. Cleaner without it

Maybe the design would grow on me, but right now I envision the 818 carrerra roadster looking like the following kit cars in the near future(google these, I don't want to clutter up this thread with photos):
-Manta Montage
-Sterling Nova
-Bradley GT
-Cody Coyote

Sorry, I meant to say that I envision it like those kits cars if it is not done perfectly.

[apexanimal]

i think olmos' design looks like a pissed off nb miata with a viper hood and lines... i think the front looks massive because it's black, but the opening is actually quite small and would help lend itself to quite a bit of front downforce...


with that said i'd like to see it in realistic proportions - ie the narrower rear dave was talking about... i think that'll really help me figure out if this is the design i want to back or not...


but i know ff is busy with sema coming up and all too... keep on it!

[kach22i]

I see reposting of some designs which required major redesigning to be occupied by adults. So I'll repost a few things to let you all see some of the packaging issues you would face.

http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/KobayashiMaru.jpg
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/GKA-Perspective-ht-study.jpg
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/height-study.jpg

I am convinced that in order to keep the price down using the stock seats will have to be part of the base design. For this to work, the driver will be about 4 inches higher than in the original template shown. Now take one of these toy car designs, and alter it to those specifications (4'-4" top of roof). Not an easy task.

[Draco-REX]

From what I understand, the original template had a gas tank under the seats which has since been relocated. So the initial template has too high of a seating position.

[bromikl]

What ever happened to FFR not automatically following the contest judges picks as the design for the 818? I was surprised at some of judges picks, but more surprised that they all made it into 3D modeling as potential 818 bodies.

I know I'm not alone in liking many of the non-winning contest entries way more than most of the cars that have become 3D models.


Originally Posted by VTX

Nope, you're not alone. Marrio Morra's is still my favorite by far.



My sentiments, exactly, and +1 for Morra's design, though I like Olmos' car just as much.

It'd be great if we could choose which designs get modeled, but it is, after all, Dave's company.

[NicksPapaw]

Dave,
I have respectfully not posted on here until now due to the fact that the designs were not HoF inspiring. (In my personal opinion) The thing that brought me into Factory Five was the passion of one Dave Smith. I am an extremely happy spokesman for your product every time I have my roadster out. The mere fact that you are taking in the somewhat negative feedback from this thread says volume about the company and man we are dealing with here. I have to believe that once this process is finished, we will stare in amazement with our Hair On Fire! The reason I believe this is that this is the culture of Factory Five. No compromises, no excuses, no shortcuts, no product until it is right. I am looking forward to the next step in the process.

[onyx_riddle]

Dave,
I have respectfully not posted on here until now due to the fact that the designs were not HoF inspiring. (In my personal opinion) The thing that brought me into Factory Five was the passion of one Dave Smith. I am an extremely happy spokesman for your product every time I have my roadster out. The mere fact that you are taking in the somewhat negative feedback from this thread says volume about the company and man we are dealing with here. I have to believe that once this process is finished, we will stare in amazement with our Hair On Fire! The reason I believe this is that this is the culture of Factory Five. No compromises, no excuses, no shortcuts, no product until it is right. I am looking forward to the next step in the process.

I whole-heartedly agree. Couldn't say it better.

[kach22i]

From what I understand, the original template had a gas tank under the seats which has since been relocated. So the initial template has too high of a seating position.
I've posted a series of human templates which proved beyond any reasonable doubt that there was never any room for a gas tank under the seat, lowering was never an option. Well, if you remove the seat and just sat on the floor, you could lower your head height three inches, but do you really want a no seat car?

[BipDBo]

So here's my 2 cents. First, I'll make some general comments. I'm a minimalist and see form in function. I tend not to like anything that doesn't have a purpose. When I see a fast car, I should be able to imagine the wind flowing over its curves with minimal effort, while driving the tires down onto the asphalt.

One item I think all of these could improve on is air flow through the radiator. The radiator should discharge up through the top of the hood to relief negative pressure on the hood. There's no reason a mid engine car should discharge radiator air downward. The intake should be minimally sized for low drag, smaller than the discharge.

Here's how I rank the models.
5th (yes, 5th): Xabier
I never really liked this one. I can't get past the big mouth. It just looks like a drag chute or a gafftopsail catfish. The hood is also too high. It looks like its trying to be a front engine car.
I'll also join the chorus of critics of the roll bar. The B-pillars are trying to double as headrest fairings, which makes it unnaturally narrow. I think it would look better a little wider and with a smaller diameter curve, possibly even a crease to transition the B-pillar to the roll bar. A flat top may be better as well.
5534

4th: Jim
It looks like Jim basically took Xabier's design and fixed some of the issues. I want to like it, but can't seem to. I see a Camry draped with a truck load of fiberglass mods. I do very much like the smaller intake and the hood discharge, but the hood discharge is too small for the job. The intakes seem to crowd the rear fenders. I think they should be either on the top or the side, but not both. I don't know why, but the full sized model looks much better than the model. I hope this means that all of the models will look better full sized. Kach22i sketches over this make it look much better.
5535

3rd: Olmos
I really like this car. It doesn't look slick, and has no down force, but it does have attitude. It looks like it wants to go throw dirt while driving sideways. The rear fenders are great. I like the original round headlights much more than the ones seen on the model. In the renderings, everything in black fades away, but in real life these features will be much more visible. I'm not crazy about the oval intake. It looks like the one on the Miata, which destroys the look of an otherwise decent looking car. I prefer this rendering with a rectangular intake.
5536
Unfortunately, that sexy hour glass figure I think has some drawbacks that are possibly severe enough to make it impossible to turn it into an 818. This is already a small car, yet it constricts at the cockpit. I'm not sure that this could accommodate a wookie couple. The side windows slope inward as well, further cramping the cockpit. This reminds me of Bill Cosby's description of getting into a VW. You close the door, and smash against the window. The doors also swoop down, which isn't good for side impact. Modern cars have very high doors for a reason. In conclusion, this cool, funky design seems to be all form and no function.

2nd: Xabier with Kach22i modifications
This change makes a world of difference to me. It's now a respectable, no, a great looking car.
5537

1st: Nouphone
I don't want a radical looking car. Tuner cars and the K1 attack seem kind of tacky. I want a car to perform radically, but I want it to look sexy and elegant. This car is sexy and elegant. I love this design. It flows. It has balance. It has class. Unfortunately, I think that its dark color hides its sexy lines.
5538
I do have some constructive critism, however, even for this one. The intakes in front of the rear wheels seem a little off. They remind me of the intakes on a Mustang, and for some reason, they don't seem to flow with the rest of the car, but I don't know exactly why. I would prefer them to be higher, where it is easier to duct to the intercooler and they will ingest less water and dirt. They could go on the top of the rear fender like the Alfa Romeo 4C or on the B pillar like the Miura. To me, though, this is a very minor issue. The headrest fairing “humps” look fine in this form, but I predict that they will look very odd with any kind of top or with a functional roll bar. I'd rather either very minor “humps” like the Pontiac Solstace, or none at all. I love the sloped hood, but I think it could stand to be slightly lower, with more slope. I've said that I would like to see radiator air discharge through the hood. This would look good with hood vanes much like the GTM in the place of those hood “nipples”.

There are so many good submissions that did not win, but the Vantage and Whetstone designs are among my favorites. I like the front end of the Vantage and the rest of the body of the Whetstone. But of course I'm still in love with my own baby:
5539

[Draco-REX]

I've posted a series of human templates which proved beyond any reasonable doubt that there was never any room for a gas tank under the seat, lowering was never an option. Well, if you remove the seat and just sat on the floor, you could lower your head height three inches, but do you really want a no seat car?
I'll be using racing seats which will be as low as possible. Even in the WRX the stock seats are too high.

[16g-95gsx]

I vote for it for the everything car!

Agreed, I don't see why a low drag coef car needs to solely be focused at high mpg.

I have added in what I feel that most of these cars are lacking, and some things that should be removed. IMO this is a mid-engine car and should therefore LOOK like a mid-engine car. Whetstone's design to me LOOKS like a mid-engine car, which in addition to the smooth lines, is what gives it that exotic look.

I would absolutely love to see this as a 5th design, because as it stands right now it would get my vote.

[onyx_riddle]

Pics in the am.


Subscribed. And my phone is now set to tell me instantly when I get an email. :)

[kach22i]

I'll be using racing seats which will be as low as possible. Even in the WRX the stock seats are too high.
Is the type of racing seat shell with padding less than 3" hight? I do not know, just asking.

The original template allowed the top of the seat to be around 3" off the floor, this assuming zero depth for structure. The car would still be around 48" high with roof up.

All I've been saying is the winning entries are marginal to just shy of providing proper headroom following the original template, nothing which cannot be fixed. The great unknown to me, but if I were forced to guess is if the donor seats will be reused to meet budget goals. I guess they will, and predict at least 4" more in roof height as a result. This is of course a worst case, from what people are saying is they would rather install a racing seat at extra cost. However, this would leave no low cost option, which is why my guesses are what they are.

[BipDBo]

I think that maybe some of these would look better with fender intakes like the Artega GT:
5553

And Arifin Santoso's submission:
5554

[BipDBo]

Nobody seams to like Xabier's hoop, or to be more specific, the fiberglass B-pllars and covering over the roll bar. It's also not as wide as the roll bar needs to be, and it's just extra weight and cost anyway. I propose 2 options:
* Widen it to where the roll bar should be and where your eyes would expect a B-pillar to be. Narrow the B-pillar so that it no longer has a headrest fairing aspect to it. Use a plexiglass panel to reduce wind buffeting.
* Just delete it. Leave the back of the car flat and have a naked roll bar, maybe with chrome.

[Oppenheimer]

Nobody seams to like Xabier's hoop, or to be more specific, the fiberglass B-pllars and covering over the roll bar. It's also not as wide as the roll bar needs to be, and it's just extra weight and cost anyway. I propose 2 options:
* Widen it to where the roll bar should be and where your eyes would expect a B-pillar to be. Narrow the B-pillar so that it no longer has a headrest fairing aspect to it. Use a plexiglass panel to reduce wind buffeting.
* Just delete it. Leave the back of the car flat and have a naked roll bar, maybe with chrome.

I for one, really like the whole way Xabier designed the B-Pillar headrests and the rollbar hoop cover/Targa attachment point. What I don't like as much is how the rollbar hoop cover (the piece that connects the two headrest humps together) was translated from 2d paper to 3d model. A joint decision was made between RISD and FFR to thicken this piece to fully cover the rollbar. In the drawing it was only about an inch (scale) high.

I'd prefer the way it was done in the drawing, and just let the flatblack rollbar stick out exposed under this hoop. I doubt it would be very noticeable under there. I fear leaving the back of the Xabier flat would ruin much of the appeal.

[AVIONX]

sorry, but I think on a street car they just add unnecessary visual bulk to the rear of the body...and in a low, street driven car makes it harder to do a quick glance over the shoulder when doing a lane change to the right
http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s147/crackedcornish/0e0ba68b.jpg
http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s147/crackedcornish/fcb3340c.jpg
http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s147/crackedcornish/fe4b5bce.jpg
http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s147/crackedcornish/fc8fa9bf.jpg
http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s147/crackedcornish/7660625b.jpg
http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s147/crackedcornish/b4a57870.jpg
This is one design that lights my hair on fire. I cannot understand why this is not a runaway favorite. It's the love child of the Porsche 550 Spyder and the Porsche 918.

EDIT...I guess Kachi kind of mentioned why above. Does the elimination of the fuel tank below the seats and the fact that FFR never reuses stock seats bring it any closer to being buildable?

[GUNS]

^ Really? I think the back end is horrible.

[onyx_riddle]

[QUOTE=GUNS;38190]^ Really? I think the back end is horrible.[/QUOT

I agree with you. I do think that this car could be a lot more appealing as a model. But to look at these pictures and see a car worth 10k without a driveline, I just can't. But to each his own. I'd hate to be on the decision end of the new beast. There are SO many ideas and preferences to consider..

[kach22i]

.................. and the fact that FFR never reuses stock seats..........

Except, maybe this time.

http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/showthread.php?3671-SHHH!-I-m-at-FFR-today-10-01-2011-WITH-A-CAMERA!

..........These next shots are of me sitting in the cockpit of the full size mockup, which is being built to the scale of the 818 chassis. I sat in a production Subaru WRX seat that was at least 4 inches above where the frame floor will be.

[Flamshackle]

with that said i'd like to see it in realistic proportions - ie the narrower rear dave was talking about... i think that'll really help me figure out if this is the design i want to back or not.

Your wish is Rodneys comand...
http://www.unoverse.com/factoryfive/venom/

:D its stunning with the simple track modification and looks even better than prior IMO...

[crackedcornish]

This is one design that lights my hair on fire. I cannot understand why this is not a runaway favorite. It's the love child of the Porsche 550 Spyder and the Porsche 918.

EDIT...I guess Kachi kind of mentioned why above. Does the elimination of the fuel tank below the seats and the fact that FFR never reuses stock seats bring it any closer to being buildable?

I don't know why the Carrera car couldn't be made to fit the "template", after all the original 550 was 10" shorter in the wheelbase than the 818 and it managed to have people fit inside it...of course they did practically sit on the floor. But for styling that would set my hair on fire, I'd be willing to sit low in the car
http://vintagespyders.com/media/images/mseats_jpg.jpg

I think the main problem with Carrera's design is that the cab is a tiny bit too far forward and the roof line being too low (if we really need a roof on a roadster). Would sitting the seats directly on the floor give enough space to leave the roof line intact.....I don't know, but it would be nice to find out.

perhaps a lot of the styling ques from this car could be transferred to the 4th model that nobody likes ;)

[ICY WRX]

Your wish is Rodneys comand...
http://www.unoverse.com/factoryfive/venom/

:D its stunning with the simple track modification and looks even better than prior IMO...

I just played around with the 3D modeller... FWIW, I'd build this -especially with a removable top. Climate is a concern (Edmonton, AB Canada)

[kach22i]

I don't know why the Carrera car couldn't be made to fit the "template", after all the original 550 was 10" shorter in the wheelbase than the 818 and it managed to have people fit inside it...of course they did practically sit on the floor. But for styling that would set my hair on fire, I'd be willing to sit low in the car..........
I think you asked a good question. Let me go further, have you sat in one of these cars in traffic? I've been in a 356 speedster (a larger car) and it could get scary sitting that low with other cars and SUV's unable to see you.

Look at how forward the front feet are in the 550, this should pause you to think. Safer than a motorcycle, but not by that much. You know how James Dean died, right?

http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/550_spyder_cut_2.jpg

Some images with various topsides.
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/550_spyder_variationen_wind.jpg

The 550, RS60/718 are tiny cars. I love them, but I'll stick with my 34 year old steel body 911 for a while longer.

[apexanimal]

here's the thing...


i know everyone is on and on about how it looks... but the HoF factor for me is knowing what it's capable of underneath...

yes, if it is drop dead sexy it will help that to be sure, but take a look at the gumpert... it's ugly from a physical standpoint, but i get all riled up about this car just looking at it because we've all seen what it can do and what it can decimate...

i think as long as it looks capable and functional, and not a complete train wreck, it's going to be a winner...

just sayin...

5574

[slopoke]

I don't know why the Carrera car couldn't be made to fit the "template", after all the original 550 was 10" shorter in the wheelbase than the 818 and it managed to have people fit inside it...of course they did practically sit on the floor. But for styling that would set my hair on fire, I'd be willing to sit low in the car
http://vintagespyders.com/media/images/mseats_jpg.jpg

I think the main problem with Carrera's design is that the cab is a tiny bit too far forward and the roof line being too low (if we really need a roof on a roadster). Would sitting the seats directly on the floor give enough space to leave the roof line intact.....I don't know, but it would be nice to find out.

perhaps a lot of the styling ques from this car could be transferred to the 4th model that nobody likes ;)

The 904 had the seats molded into the cabin as part of the assembly process. They were subsequently padded and upholstered ... the pedal cluster and the steering wheel were adjustable. ... just a different solution

[bbjones121]

It is just like a motorcycle in one obvious way. YOU have to pay attention and anticipate other vehicles moves on the road. Sitting low is not a big deal if you pay attention like you should, stay out of blind spots, make sure the guy next to you isn't going to switch lanes quickly to your open lane at a stop light, watch for lane switching from the car two lanes over, anticipate people reactions when someone else cuts them off, be ready for other cars evasive manuevers, and be aware of an aggressive driver 3 cars back and the broken down car on the side of the road 100 yards ahead. It requires a lot of attention and you probably shouldn't be on your cell phone.

[Oppenheimer]

A MC has one advantage here, you sit high up enough that you have decent visibility around other vehicles. You can even stand up to see over stuff. Sitting in a very low car you are stuck in a valley between mountainous SUV's.

[BipDBo]

If I wanted a vehicle thatis incredibly quick at an affordable price, and I didn't care that it was a death trap, I'd buy a bike. I want the 818 to be reasonably safe. I've got a wife and 3 kids to think about, and I can't rely on my own alertness to out manuever some of the idiotic drivers out there.

[2KWIK4U]

A MC has one advantage here, you sit high up enough that you have decent visibility around other vehicles. You can even stand up to see over stuff. Sitting in a very low car you are stuck in a valley between mountainous SUV's.


This is a valid point, I own several motorcycles and I could see better on them than in my FFR Roadster.

[2KWIK4U]

If I wanted a vehicle thatis incredibly quick at an affordable price, and I didn't care that it was a death trap, I'd buy a bike. I want the 818 to be reasonably safe. I've got a wife and 3 kids to think about, and I can't rely on my own alertness to out manuever some of the idiotic drivers out there.

Anything can be a "death trap" if you don't drive it properly. You can have fun as long as you don't exceed your talent as I have seen many do.

[PhyrraM]

If I wanted a vehicle thatis incredibly quick at an affordable price, and I didn't care that it was a death trap, I'd buy a bike. I want the 818 to be reasonably safe. I've got a wife and 3 kids to think about, and I can't rely on my own alertness to out manuever some of the idiotic drivers out there.

There is that grey area we all spend so much time debating here.....

What is "reasonably safe"? That's going to be drastically different across the range of forum members. I also fear that if too much time is spenttalking about safety, then potential customers will become complacent and feel that a FFR car is no different than any other mass produced car. THAT would be dangerous to all.

I think alot of these discussion, while very fun and engrossing, are reaching the point of "Let FFR build it first and THEN decide if it's right for you."

The thought has also crossed my mind that FFR *might* do well to release the 818 like the Hot Rod. Chassis as seperate kit/purchase from the body. Then some of our "experts" can go to town with some of thier ideas and opinions. :p

[dclin]

....

The thought has also crossed my mind that FFR *might* do well to release the 818 like the Hot Rod. Chassis as seperate kit/purchase from the body. Then some of our "experts" can go to town with some of thier ideas and opinions. :p

I agree; I sense the debate is slowly degrading from people simply expressing subjective opinions over design aesthetics (which is a great thing) to people reaching really deep to discredit any given design via implied and unsubstantiated engineering concerns, to promote another.

I think F5 would do well to do as you suggest; that would pretty much take care of that.

[bbjones121]

I think it would be extremely unsafe no matter what you do if you try to get yourself, wife and 3 kids fit into a small 2 seater sports car. The whole mentality of an excuse to not pay attention is why we have so many SUVs on the road. People, not everyone of course, who want to talk on their phone or have a deep conversation with their passenger while driving, go out and buy a large vehicle so that if they accidentally run into another car or hit something, they are at least safe. Forget the other people hurt by your large vehicle.

It seems to me like an excuse for a lack of personal responsibility. If it is rush hour or 2am(when bars close around here) it might not be the best time for a family outing in the little sports car. You obviously can't account for everything, but you can sure reduce your chances of problems by analyzing other vehicles movements on the road rather than thinking about dinner plans.

[BipDBo]

I agree; I sense the debate is slowly degrading from people simply expressing subjective opinions over design aesthetics (which is a great thing) to people reaching really deep to discredit any given design via implied and unsubstantiated engineering concerns, to promote another.

I think F5 would do well to do as you suggest; that would pretty much take care of that.

As an engineer, I can't help but to think like one. These engineering considerations do affect the style of a car. You can conceptualize a car on purely aesthetic aspects, but the final stages of design (which Factory 5 is nearing) must be heavily driven by engineering considerations.

The NASCAR CoT is a great example. They never would have ditched the old formula for this new design because of aethetics, or even areodynamics. In both cases, the new design is inferior. They increased the cage dimensions, and therefore the exterior dimensions of the car, making it 2.5" taller and 4" wider. They did this to put more distance between the driver and the cage steel, ie; more crush zone. The end result is a car that is thicker and taller in the middle, the opposite of the Olmos design. It's certainly not sexy, but its much safer than the previous formula.
5578

[QUOTE=bbjones121;38345]I think it would be extremely unsafe no matter what you do if you try to get yourself, wife and 3 kids fit into a small 2 seater sports car.QUOTE]

Nice.

[kach22i]

RE: I think it would be extremely unsafe no matter what you do if you try to get yourself, wife and 3 kids fit into a small 2 seater sports car.

I think the original poster was saying that he wanted to come back home to them - alive.

[bbjones121]

RE: I think it would be extremely unsafe no matter what you do if you try to get yourself, wife and 3 kids fit into a small 2 seater sports car.

I think the original poster was saying that he wanted to come back home to them - alive.

That makes sense and I know he wasn't going to put everyone in the car. Toys are toys. No matter what it will be safer than a bike. Four tires, rollcage, seatbelts, you name it. Granted, I can see everything from my motorcycle ride height probably better and you can fit unto the shoulder or middle of the lane if someone turns into you. But you should be able to pull a fast and furious and fit under a semi-truck with this if they cut you off or you need to switch lanes through them :p

[Nelff]

If someone is looking for a vehicle that will be seen, drive a pickup. That way you can drive like a lot of the other pickup drivers out there, where ever they want, when ever they want. I ride bikes and drive a sports coupe. I would rather ride a bike in city/highway commute traffic than a 'regular' car. As for all the idiots out there that aren't looking where they are driving, all of them are mobile apexes to me. I would rather be in a smaller car that is quick and agile than something that is a lumbering sedan. I'm already past them before they know I'm there. Done with my rant...

[onyx_riddle]

If someone is looking for a vehicle that will be seen, drive a pickup. That way you can drive like a lot of the other pickup drivers out there, where ever they want, when ever they want. I ride bikes and drive a sports coupe. I would rather ride a bike in city/highway commute traffic than a 'regular' car. As for all the idiots out there that aren't looking where they are driving, all of them are mobile apexes to me. I would rather be in a smaller car that is quick and agile than something that is a lumbering sedan. I'm already past them before they know I'm there. Done with my rant...


AMEN! If you don't think you'll be seen, come borrow my bike. I mean, just look at my avatar! ;)
Seriously, the whole visibility argument is simply non-issue when you're talking about an FFR.

[bromikl]

The 818 will be an order of magnitude safer than a motorcycle in an accident. The gel-coat body design will not matter one whit re: safety as all versions will all have the same frame. If safety is your number one concern, buy an SUV. I ride a sportbike, but my defense is my awareness of the other drivers. I guarantee you I am the most alert driver on the road. The trick is, don't let anyone hit you. It's defensive driving at its core, and if you don't know how to do that, take a course, or buy something with airbags.

[onyx_riddle]

I wish these posts had "like buttons"

[Flamshackle]

I guarantee you I am the most alert driver on the road.

Doesnt matter in some instances. Many people that are dead (including more than 1 good friend of mine) could they talk would tell you. You can be as alert as a mere cat but if someone does something 'brain dead' then the net result on a motor bike or poorly thought out vehicle can end up that 'your dead'.

I also ride a sports bike and am acutely aware that I take my life in my own hands when I ride. But I am also placing my life in the hands of the public as they are infinitely more likely to kill me than me injure myself.

I think safety on the eight eighteen (while not the primary point by any stretch of the imagination) should certainly continue to receive attention and forethought.

[BipDBo]

The track version will probably not have doors but rather have a high angled cross bar like the Challenge car and maybe even a full cage. I have little doubt that version will be reasonably safe. I do have concerns about the roadster, though, especially if the steel in the door looks like the type 65 (just about non existent). With so little steel in front of you, and the mass of the engine in the back, the passenger compartment is likely to become the crumple zone.

[prematureapex]

Since I want to build the street version, I'm ok with it not being for track use. But that's just me and I'm sure others here want a dual use car.

I just can't see how the "main" version of this car could be sold not legal for track use.

You're building an 1800#, stripped down, mid-engined kit car designed with serious trackday performance in mind (that's straight from the horse's mouth). The damn thing better have a legal bar in it. ;)

IMHO, it's much different from a typical FF Cobra/roadster, which to me has much more skew to a rumbling boulevard cruiser (in basic-build trim) than this car does.

It would be a shame for owners never to experience the car in a setting where its performance can be appreciated. While it would of course be a fun car on the weekends, shaving 10ths off the trip to the Seven Eleven would be a sad environment for this car's only use.

In any event, if there's no legal bar, it's not a "giant killer". It's never in the game.

At a minimum, there needs to be some factory option for a bar in the roadster. You can't exactly just bolt one in like you can with a unibody.

Legal hoop stays on the dual hoops (all roadsters), and offer a cross bar between them as an option?

[dclin]

As an engineer, I can't help but to think like one. These engineering considerations do affect the style of a car. You can conceptualize a car on purely aesthetic aspects, but the final stages of design (which Factory 5 is nearing) must be heavily driven by engineering considerations.

The NASCAR CoT is a great example. They never would have ditched the old formula for this new design because of aethetics, or even areodynamics. In both cases, the new design is inferior. They increased the cage dimensions, and therefore the exterior dimensions of the car, making it 2.5" taller and 4" wider. They did this to put more distance between the driver and the cage steel, ie; more crush zone. The end result is a car that is thicker and taller in the middle, the opposite of the Olmos design. It's certainly not sexy, but its much safer than the previous formula.
5578
Nice.


The hourglass shape looks to make for a cramped cockpit, much like the C3 Corvette. The C3 was maligned not just for it's 70's era engine, but also for being one of the largest Vettes, with the smallest interior. It also has very low door panels. This all makes for a car that you would not want to be in while in an accident, especially side impact. The NASCAR CoT has a chassis that has expanded dimensions in all directions to give as much crush zone as possible.

If you had based your verdict/dismissal on hard measurements, I would be receptive to those points - however, unless I'm mistaken, it seems based just on the way the rendering looks.

To your point of an apparently cramped cockpit; it's been stated that the flares add 6 inches to each side. Therefore, it's reasonable that the cockpit itself is not much more, if at all, narrower than any of the other designs.


... I feel so bad that I didn't check the width of my car after I doubled checked it in 3d space, I was about 6+ inches on each side.
http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/showthread.php?3962-Design-Model-O-s-Feedback-and-Suggestions&p=38017&viewfull=1#post38017

To your point of low door/beltline, the average maximum bumper height for vehicles under 7,500 GVWR (read trucks) is 26"-28", depending on state. Most passenger vehicles is around 22"-24". 10,000 GVWR+, average around 30" (Let's face it, if one where hit by a 10k GVWR vehicle, it really wouldn't matter which design you're in)

http://drivinglaws.aaa.com/laws/bumper-height/

I'm pretty sure the top of the Olmos door is at least 25" at it's lowest point (which is only for a couple feet along the door, at most, then slopes up) and, given that most production vehicles have a bumper width of at least 65", it would likely mean that the errant bumper would likely contact one of the flares before intruding into the door (unless one was unlucky enough to be struck at particular angle, I suppose. But the same sorta bad luck could apply to any design, in any conceivable scenario). As an aside - HEY! I just came up with a reason to keep those extra 6" of beefy flares on each side - it's for safety! :D Besides that, I seriously doubt that the other designs have a significantly higher beltline. I'm guessing the Olmos design looks much lower than it is, simply because the front and rear arches are so tall.

Let's be clear here; the 818 suppose to be a 1800lbs, ultra compact roadster/coupe/whatever. That will not be extensively crash tested, like production cars. That will be assembled by ourselves (most of us anyways). In our garage.

Unless all the designs are to include the additional barrier per the NASCAR picture (and I seriously doubt anybody is willing to support that, no matter which design they prefer), there is going to be an element of risk. I'm old enough to know I'm not immortal and, as such, I'm not going to take any risk I'm not comfortable with, but I find it difficult to dismiss a rendering as unnecessarily unsafe until I have reasonable proof otherwise. :)

[Ryno]

I would like to start by saying that I am looking forward to photographic posts for better resolution, but I agree that based on the webcast, I like Xabier's submission the best. I do think that some details from Jim's car were excellent - the headlight shape and the side vents in particular. I'd be really interested to see how they migh integrate into Xabier's design.

It was quite interesting the translation from 1/4 scale to full - I did fell that Jim's design became more appealing in the full scale. I suspect that color will also make a big impact.

As far as sequencing, I think I'd probably go with track first for speed to market, PR, and quick feedback which could be incorporated into the high performance roadster. Many track upgrades would also make sense as options for the roadster. It would hopefully also start providing FFR some revenue while developing the additional components and trim required for the roadster.

A TDI high mileage car is intriguing, but I suspect there's a somewhat lower demand there. What might change that would be the performance the 818 variant might be able to provide along with the high mileage.

[BipDBo]

If you had based your verdict/dismissal on hard measurements, I would be receptive to those points - however, unless I'm mistaken, it seems based just on the way the rendering looks.

To your point of an apparently cramped cockpit; it's been stated that the flares add 6 inches to each side. Therefore, it's reasonable that the cockpit itself is not much more, if at all, narrower than any of the other designs.


http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/showthread.php?3962-Design-Model-O-s-Feedback-and-Suggestions&p=38017&viewfull=1#post38017

To your point of low door/beltline, the average maximum bumper height for vehicles under 7,500 GVWR (read trucks) is 26"-28", depending on state. Most passenger vehicles is around 22"-24". 10,000 GVWR+, average around 30" (Let's face it, if one where hit by a 10k GVWR vehicle, it really wouldn't matter which design you're in)

http://drivinglaws.aaa.com/laws/bumper-height/

I'm pretty sure the top of the Olmos door is at least 25" at it's lowest point (which is only for a couple feet along the door, at most, then slopes up) and, given that most production vehicles have a bumper width of at least 65", it would likely mean that the errant bumper would likely contact one of the flares before intruding into the door (unless one was unlucky enough to be struck at particular angle, I suppose. But the same sorta bad luck could apply to any design, in any conceivable scenario). As an aside - HEY! I just came up with a reason to keep those extra 6" of beefy flares on each side - it's for safety! :D Besides that, I seriously doubt that the other designs have a significantly higher beltline. I'm guessing the Olmos design looks much lower than it is, simply because the front and rear arches are so tall.

Let's be clear here; the 818 suppose to be a 1800lbs, ultra compact roadster/coupe/whatever. That will not be extensively crash tested, like production cars. That will be assembled by ourselves (most of us anyways). In our garage.

Unless all the designs are to include the additional barrier per the NASCAR picture (and I seriously doubt anybody is willing to support that, no matter which design they prefer), there is going to be an element of risk. I'm old enough to know I'm not immortal and, as such, I'm not going to take any risk I'm not comfortable with, but I find it difficult to dismiss a rendering as unnecessarily unsafe until I have reasonable proof otherwise. :)

Wow, so Rodney's car is a full 12" wider than the template? That explains the proportions that were causing me concern. I was going under the assumption that a frame for the Olmos design would actually need to be slightly more narrow. I guess I was wrong about that.

With regard to door height, I don't think that the doors on modern production vehicles are higher to make sure that they are above the average bumber. I think the intent is so that more of the occupant comes in to contact with door rather than window.

With regard to risk, the roadster is inherantly risky. Roadster's just are. I would think that keeping the triangluar structure on the side would sure help. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that the track version could have a capable protective structure.

[kach22i]

Wow, so Rodney's car is a full 12" wider than the template?
If true, I don't think they even make spacers that big (safety concerns). Just looking at all options before tossing things away.

[Draco-REX]

Wow, so Rodney's car is a full 12" wider than the template? That explains the proportions that were causing me concern. I was going under the assumption that a frame for the Olmos design would actually need to be slightly more narrow. I guess I was wrong about that.
If you check out his thread here: http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/showthread.php?3962-Design-Model-O-s-Feedback-and-Suggestions he has a 3D render up that he's making changes to. It's already been trimmed in width so you can get a better idea of what it should look like.

As for safety, frankly I don't have concerns. EVERY other driver out there is a moron that's capable of trying to kill me, and a lot of them do. I always keep that in mind. But really what it comes down to is risk assessment. The car you buy, the way you drive, the opportunities you take or pass on, all these choices are risk assessment. I make these decisions for myself and I won't depend on anyone else to make them for me.

When I was a kid, I took Karate for a short period. I don't remember much, but one thing the instructor said has always stuck with me: "The best defense is not being there." I want to avoid accidents in the first place, just just assume I'll get into one and just survive it. A car must be quick enough to choose my place to merge in traffic. A car must be nimble enough to maneuver around dangerous situations as they develop. And a car must be able to stop quickly enough so that in the event of no escape routes I come to a stop before the person in front of me. An SUV fails most or all of those. Today's big 2-ton cars fail as well. Drivers today want to take a passive attitude to crash avoidance. They assume they'll get into an accident and want to push the responsibility of keeping themselves alive onto the shoulders of the manufacturers.

Think about this: Do you believe that people would drive they way they do if there was a large metal spike in the center of their steering wheel instead of an airbag?

Now I'm not saying we should all be riding motorcycles. Myself, I'll never ride one. It goes right back to risk assessment and being able to actively reduce your crash risk. Nor am I saying that safety measures in cars are a bad thing. My point is that pursuing safety above all else, while sounding noble, will not work with a car like the 818. The end result will be a 3000+lb mini-SUV that won't sell. It's not that people won't buy it because it's safe, but they will pass it over because the changes that will be made to the car to incorporate a safety-first focus will make it unappealing.

Ultimately, you can die in ANY car crash.

If someone's risk assessment decisions demand a safety-first car, there are many other options out there that may protect better than an 1800lb car with a fiberglass body. Let's not turn that 1800lb car with a fiberglass body into one of those other options.

[kach22i]

Think about this: Do you believe that people would drive they way they do if there was a large metal spike in the center of their steering wheel instead of an airbag?
Hilarious imagery this brings forth.:D


If someone's risk assessment decisions demand a safety-first car, there are many other options out there that may protect better than an 1800lb car with a fiberglass body. Let's not turn that 1800lb car with a fiberglass body into one of those other options.
A death trap look may attract as many people as it repels.;)

[Draco-REX]

Hilarious imagery this brings forth.:D
People often fail to realize that the airbag is FAR from a comfortable pillow they can fall into. What they need to realize is that an airbag is like having a gun aimed at their face primed to go off in the event of an accident. And that when it does go off, they will get hit in the face with a scorching hot bag of exploding gasses that will leave 2nd degree burns all over their face.

Give me a harness any day over an airbag.



A death trap look may attract as many people as it repels.;)
But we're not designing a death trap. :) Though to some people, anything less than a 5000lb SUV is a death trap. FFR doesn't sell to them.

[onyx_riddle]

My senior year I was in a car wreck at 75mph. Hit a ditch. I was passenger. Both sober.. but there were a couple of girls in a mustang and he wanted to show off. The windshield was cracked infront of my seat. Not by me, but by the airbag. I say we need expandafoam like on Demolition Man.


edit: yep wrong movie. Thanks!

[BipDBo]

My senior year I was in a car wreck at 75mph. Hit a ditch. I was passenger. Both sober.. but there were a couple of girls in a mustang and he wanted to show off. The windshield was cracked infront of my seat. Not by me, but by the airbag. I say we need expandafoam like on Total Recall..

I think you're thinking of demolition man.
Lenina Huxley: I thought your life force had been prematurely terminated!
John Spartan: Yeah, I thought I was history too. What the hell happened? All of a sudden, this car turned into a cannoli.

And I totally agree with Draco-REX about air bags. I think that the only reason we have them is because the car companies are required to test with dummies not belted in. You are safer in any flimsy deathtrap of a car while using a basic seat belt, than you are in any SUV tank not belted in. Harnesses, racing seats, helmets and cages are all the more safe, and don't require the weight of a production car.

[PhyrraM]

A 3 point seatbelt keeps you in the general vicinity of the seat, but allows your body to flex and move when the roof or sides of the vehicle start to push on you. This is why they are still used on production cars. Airbags are a "second layer" when you start to come forward out of the belt slightly.

A harness (without a roll cage) will not allow your body to escape a crushing roof or impacted door. The roll cage keeps the intrusions from happening, making the harness work as intended. A roll cage without a helmet is a case study for head trauma.

The street vesion should have a good ROLL bar, but not a full cage for - get this - SAFETY. The track car should, of course, have both a cage and a harness to go with it.

I agree with the above poster...Give safety some consideration and do the easy stuff, but don't turn this car into some fat over weight slug in the persuit of something it can never be with FFRs resources.

[Oppenheimer]

Why is it that whenever someone asks about improving any other function other than 'sport' in a sports car people have a knee-jerk reaction? It always seems to include going to the extreme: "If you want gas mileage over all else, get a Prius". If you want safety over all else, get an SUV".

I don't see it as a bad thing to try for low hanging fruit with regards to things un-sport related. If the 818 can be made safer, without compromising the other goals, or can be made to get better mileage, or any other non-go-fast goals, why not do it?

Just because someone raised the idea of safety doesn't mean they are saying the 818 should put safety as its #1 goal. I don't see why its a problem to discuss safety, or fuel mileage, or whatever, even if those aren't the #1 goal of the project.

[olpro]

I don't see any problem with using the steering column from the donor, with its energy absorbing shaft and steering wheel airbag. And you don't get any burns from one.

[PhyrraM]

Why is it that whenever someone asks about improving any other function other than 'sport' in a sports car people have a knee-jerk reaction? It always seems to include going to the extreme: "If you want gas mileage over all else, get a Prius". If you want safety over all else, get an SUV".

I don't see it as a bad thing to try for low hanging fruit with regards to things un-sport related. If the 818 can be made safer, without compromising the other goals, or can be made to get better mileage, or any other non-go-fast goals, why not do it?

Just because someone raised the idea of safety doesn't mean they are saying the 818 should put safety as its #1 goal. I don't see why its a problem to discuss safety, or fuel mileage, or whatever, even if those aren't the #1 goal of the project.

Actually, I agree with all of that.

For me,personally, I have watched the OEMs get fatter and fatter over the last few decades. Every generation needing more and more power to overcome all the safety, comfort and conviences, electronics, driver egos (Hummer anyone?) and government mandated crap. I find it amazingly ironic that a 1980s Honda gets better mileage than the current one. All because of the lead. Now we are chasing fuel economy again, but for some reason we can't get rid of the MAIN REASON for "poor" fuel economy....weight, of course.

The auto manufacturers HAVE created some AMAZING technology to compensate for all the added size and heaft. Now, I want to see what some of that technology can do when unstrapped from the weight and restrictions.

I have nothing against safety, and as I said earlier - your low hanging fruit... go for it. But, if this 818 creeps to 2000 pounds......well, to me, that's scary and self defeating of the purpose of the car.

I am firmly in the camp of "You know the risks and you choose to purchase or move on". (that applies to the rest of the car too - Styling anyone?)

I also completely agree that it seems most folks want safety to be passive. That's just a train wreck waiting to happen, not sure when, but it will. Even for the Fords, Toyotas, and Ferraris will eventually end up in one big court-case trainwreck that ruins the industry for everyone else. I see it as just another symptom of our biggest problem....lack of personal responsibility for you own life and descions.....everybody wants everthing given to them and with no-strings attached or suprises......entitlement. (sorry for the political ending)

[Draco-REX]

I don't see any problem with using the steering column from the donor, with its energy absorbing shaft and steering wheel airbag. And you don't get any burns from one.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11226663

http://rides.webshots.com/photo/1157814331057016080bgYPvZ

[Draco-REX]

Actually I doubt the airbags will be saved from the donor. Because of the nature of airbags and the force of deployment, I'll be FFR tells you not to mess with them. Additionally, the impact sensors are calibrated for the car they go into. I don't think they'd risk accidental deployment if the 818 does something a WRX can't.

[Nelff]

One of the things that I was planning on doing was fill any open area between the body shell and cockpit with expanding foam. I figure that if I get caught in a crash that the foam may help absorb some of the energy. Other than that I was hoping that it would quiet the cockpit. And back to the safety between motorcycles the 818, a sedan and a Suburban... I am moving from a bike to the 818 looking for quick, light maneuverability and a cage, not a 5000lb lumbering beast. What I don't want is weight. And I'm getting tired of hot, cold and water. That said, I have to have a vehicle that gets me out of the weather, (roof and windows) or I'm not that much better off than my bike. Safety? nowdays you just can't touch a vehicle on anything. I don't even think about a crash, I think more about driving in traffic and not getting touched by anything.

[olpro]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11226663

http://rides.webshots.com/photo/1157814331057016080bgYPvZ
Trotting out some freak exceptions doesn't prove your point. The fact is that airbags are much safer than the alternative (nothing).
You may be correct on the problem with trying to use this kind of system in a completely different vehicle than they were designed for.

[onyx_riddle]

Yep this car is my way to have as much fun but with climate control and all-weather capability.
< would you ride that in cold rain? Nope.

That and I refuse to ride 2-up. But I would prefer to not have to leave my "toy" just because my wife is tagging along.

[picaman]

Ok well, I don't know if a decision has been made yet or not but here is my elbow...

The Olmos design really should be the only one being considered. It is the only one that grabs your attention immediately. I would like to see further iterations of this design especially a non-coupe version. IMHO the whole idea is to make a car that commands attention for both performance and looks. Love it or hate it the Olmos car certainly does this.

The Factory 5 model, looks like an MR2 rear end with a Honda/Acura front end and a bunch of vents added to it. Sorry, but I really think this is completely the wrong direction to be taking.

The other two, while nice and certainly would make nice looking cars have little that makes them stand out when compared to the Olmos design.

So, I guess my votes are: 1. The Olmos design, 2. Anything but the Factory 5 design (sorry!)

Again, just my elbow, but half the point of building/owning one of these cars is to have something that is unique, the Olmos design certainly is that.

[Psay]

Ok well, I don't know if a decision has been made yet or not but here is my elbow...

The Olmos design really should be the only one being considered. It is the only one that grabs your attention immediately. I would like to see further iterations of this design especially a non-coupe version. IMHO the whole idea is to make a car that commands attention for both performance and looks. Love it or hate it the Olmos car certainly does this.

The Factory 5 model, looks like an MR2 rear end with a Honda/Acura front end and a bunch of vents added to it. Sorry, but I really think this is completely the wrong direction to be taking.

The other two, while nice and certainly would make nice looking cars have little that makes them stand out when compared to the Olmos design.

So, I guess my votes are: 1. The Olmos design, 2. Anything but the Factory 5 design (sorry!)

Again, just my elbow, but half the point of building/owning one of these cars is to have something that is unique, the Olmos design certainly is that.


Could not agree more.

[BrandonDrums]

In discussing the safety of the 818 I have a motto and a logo for the car.

"Safety 3rd"
http://i996.photobucket.com/albums/af89/BrandondrumsWRX/Safety3rd.jpg

[PhyrraM]

The Olmos design..... It is the only one that grabs your attention immediately.

Please don't put words in my mouth. Please use the term "my" when appropriate.

To be perfectly honest, the only two designs that stopped me in my scrolling tracks were the original pencil sketch by Xabier and the original black and white drawing by Scott Bradford. Since then many designs have grown on me, but those were the two original ones that caused knee jerks reactions.

Different strokes, Different folks.

[Xusia]

Although I've been following Factory Five for about 15 years now, I'm new to the forum. I watched the USTREAM video and just HAD to give my opinion (which is why I joined the forum). I am so excited about this car because it's the first one from Factory Five that meets both my price and [hopefully] weatherization requirements (more on that below)! I really want to build my own car, and I have my hopes set on this one.

My vote for body design is Xabier's. While Rodney's design is unquestionably striking, it also radical enough to turn many potential buyers off - myself included. I would prefer something unique, but a less radical. Something classy, and easily recognizable as exotic, but not identifiable. In my opinion Xabier's design embodies this.

Jim's design is a just a little too generic and plain looking for me (Sorry Jim - I still love your work!). Nouphone's design isn't bad; I just think Xabier's is more visually appealing.

My vote for the type of car is a street version because that's what I'd buy. While a track version may be quick to bring into production, the potential customer base probably isn't as great as for a street version.

Also, I've seen some talk about soft tops, windows, etc. When people tell me stick it where the sun doesn't shine I tell them I'm already in Oregon! Buying a care without a top or Windows is just NOT an option for me because I just wouldn't get to drive it enough - and then what's the point of owning it? I want my car to be a daily driver (albeat a bad *** one!) Lack of decent weatherization is the reason I don't already own a Factory Five Roadster. A top, doors with windows, etc., to secure the insides and hold out the elements is a must. For the 818, I'd prefer a targa over a soft top, but I'd still buy a convertible - as long as it has a soft top option. if that made it go over the target price, then so be it - call it an option if you want. Just don't call windows an option. Heat should be standard, and AC should be dependent on the donor.

I will also say, I'm intrigued by a high MPG version. I might actually prefer such a version to the regular one - it would depend on the details. Anyway, I sure hope it gets built at some point.

Thank you for listening. I look forward to buying one of these soon. :)

[mekeys]

Now that I have seen 539 submitted designs,there are quite a few others that I like better than the four chosen.

Mel

[Best of the best]

Xabier's design is just too familiar to another car to me. It's an instant graditfication for a moment, but Nouphone's design is timeless and modernized. Very cohesive in form and lines. Nouphone's design has that classy European look that I like. 15 years from now his design will still look current and exotic, because of its unique distinct form and lines. That just MHO. I hope they don't go with Jim's design. If that is the case I am running the direction.

[Best of the best]

oops...I meant I will run to the other direction.

[bbjones121]

I think the models will look pretty nice when they get some details to the other three. If they can make Nouphones design similar to the original submitted drawings as shown below, I think it will look very sleek and exotic as I think that Shawn's design is.

56575658

[Grantourer]

I think the models will look pretty nice when they get some details to the other three. If they can make Nouphones design similar to the original submitted drawings as shown below, I think it will look very sleek and exotic as I think that Shawn's design is.

56575658
Agreed, and a lighter color to better show the lines of Nouphones' design. I think its concept car hot, very svelte and modern.

[Best of the best]

I don't get this....Jim's design get a full sized scaled model AND! a 1/4 scaled! Yet, they still managed to make times to put details on his 1/4scaled model? They should of used that time & engery on the other three model for details so its fair. I think they are trying to push Jim's design and it's back firing. When I saw Nouphoone's design I was like...Yeeeeeaaah!! I'm opening up my wallet for this car! Now with the direction they are going...not feeling it and not going to get my money. My friends around the world was also excited about the winner(s) design!

[adesilva]

It has also been stated that we will more than likely be getting multiple bodies (for different purposes) so the fact that Jims design appears to be getting a bit more attention should not be a big deal in the long run.

Dave has also stated that he will not release anything if it does not have the HOF feeling for him. He has stated that it is not close to being done and he could start all over for all we know.

He has also stated that after sema it would appear that the other three models will get this sort of detail added to them so that we can really compare them. I am personally really looking forward to seeing some major detail added to the first place design because I feel it was extremely hard to see anything in the 1/4 scale model because it was black.

[05xtsy]

I don't think these models did any of these designs justice. For me, there is just too much going on with these models that makes them look too unrealistic and difficult to fall in love with. It's definitely not an easy job taking this from paper to pedal, so bravo to everyone for all the hard work, but at this point, none of these are designs that I would take apart my wrx to build... but that could change when we see the final product. Im still working on my own designs and have finished 3 of them that I already showed. I figure if factory five owns them, I can still, with more time, complete the project in a similar way with 3d and clay modeling, I don't want to post my progress where it doesn't belong, so if anyone is interested, pm me for more info.

[PHATsuby]

Personally I think those speedster and targa models are 100x better in terms of creating the reaction desired than what is currently offered. I would consider redesigning the chassis dimensions/gas tank placement if it will help create the emotion wanted. I understand that is likely a huge financial undertaking but I think it could be necessary to really get what you are after.

Ben

[kach22i]

I don't think these models did any of these designs justice. For me, there is just too much going on with these models that makes them look too unrealistic and difficult to fall in love with. It's definitely not an easy job taking this from paper to pedal, so bravo to everyone for all the hard work, but at this point, none of these are designs that I would take apart my wrx to build... but that could change when we see the final product. Im still working on my own designs and have finished 3 of them that I already showed. I figure if factory five owns them, I can still, with more time, complete the project in a similar way with 3d and clay modeling, I don't want to post my progress where it doesn't belong, so if anyone is interested, pm me for more info.
I understand your grief on this one. However recall some of the very first model images released. I'm thinking of the rear 3/4 view (two cars side by side) which fooled many of us into thinking they were fabricated full scale. Everyone, and I mean everyone went wild over these at first.

Better photos at angles people would see the real cars at are important, more important than even I want to admit to.

Be patient, I think your mood may change a little for the better.

[BipDBo]

One of the things that I was planning on doing was fill any open area between the body shell and cockpit with expanding foam. I figure that if I get caught in a crash that the foam may help absorb some of the energy. Other than that I was hoping that it would quiet the cockpit. ...

I have had the same thought. Polystyrene (styrofoam) is used often in bumpers. It has very low density and has a high modulus of toughness, meaning that it can absorb a lot of energy before it fails. It's also very cheap. If Factory 5 manufactured certain panels of the car with polystyrene under the fiberglass skin, they could potentially use less fiberglass for the skin and use less supporting structure. This would make the car safer, but it may actually make it a little bit lighter. It could also make the body panels a more consistent shape if they use the right method. In manufacturing windsurfing boards, they first machine a foam core from a solid, extruded blank. Then they layout the skins of the top and bottom of the board in carbon fiber and fiberglass into two female molds. While the resin is still wet in the molds, they sandwich the foam core between the two molds with a vacuum. The foam core holds the carbon fiber into the right shape while it finishes curing. Without a foam core, fiberglass tend to warp slightly after it is taken form the mold because it continues to cure for a week or more. In the application of car body panels, you would not have a 3 layer sandwich, but rather just one single layer of glass sealed to the foam. The obvious disadvantage to this process is that it has more steps and would be more labor intensive and therefore more costly. This process wouldn't be used for the entire body, though just the front and rear bumper panels, and possibly the doors, since they have no windows that roll into them. Beyond my hobby of backyard windsurf board building, this is not my area of expertise, but allow me to speculate on possible modifications to make this process cheaper. The machined foam core may be replace by a molded core if they can find a way to get a consistent enough foam molding process. An alternative method would be to lay out the fiberglass panel in a female mold as they always do, and before removing the panel from the mold, inject the panel with foam. If the foam can cure faster than the glass, than the panel can be removed from the mold sooner with less worry of deformation.

[BipDBo]

I don't get this....Jim's design get a full sized scaled model AND! a 1/4 scaled! Yet, they still managed to make times to put details on his 1/4scaled model? They should of used that time & engery on the other three model for details so its fair. I think they are trying to push Jim's design and it's back firing. When I saw Nouphoone's design I was like...Yeeeeeaaah!! I'm opening up my wallet for this car! Now with the direction they are going...not feeling it and not going to get my money. My friends around the world was also excited about the winner(s) design!

We now know that many of the entries don't exactly adhere to the contest guidelines. The Olmos car , for example, is 12" wider than it should be. Jim's car was designed to take some cues from the popular entries (mostly Xabiers) and meld them into one, while making sure that it would fit into constraints not just of the guidelines and the template, but of considerations that we are not privy to like the panel molding process. For example, someone suggested that the gap between the front fender and the door on Jim's car is there so that you only need to line up one edge of the door. It also has some aerodynamic improvements over the designs from which it was inspired. For example, it has improved air flow around the front of car and through the radiator and engine bay and a lower, sloped hood, all aspects that give it less aerodynamic resistance and more down force. While many people don't seem to like the style of Jim's car, it may be the best design from a technical standpoint. This may be one avenue of "crowd source" design that Factory 5 is exploring, to have a contest, and then create their own unique design, in house taking cues from many different contest entries. It's no surprise that the result has illicited many people to say that it looks like a mismatched mash-up. I hope that instead, they go a different route, and take a winning style, and make tweeks as needed.