Design Model - O's - Feedback and Suggestions

[Jeff Kleiner]

What about option 3: Use an off the shelf part that is DOT approved? I'm sure they exist.

Sorry I wasn't clear; that was what I meant when speaking of using something from a donor. Not necessarily from the Subie but a part readily available either from salvage or OEM replacement from an existing vehicle. Many of the aftermarket, please excuse the term, "ricer" or "tuner" style replacement head and tail lights (HID headlights, clear tail lenses, LEDs, etc.) look cool and flashy but are not DOT approved which can cause grief to builders in some states.

Jeff

[dclin]

I still would like to see the tail lights wider apart and the main line over the rear wheels connect with the upper corners of the taillights while staying lower over the wheels. That would bring the *** end lower and wider visually and make the car look more aggressive. Right now the rear end just sits too high making the wheels look smaller and giving the tail a 'puckered' look. I don't want the tail to look droopy at all, I just want it to not look too perky as it does now.

Just a nitpick really. The car as-is still is above and beyond what I even hoped for this car....

You might not realize how small this car is. The problem with lowering the rear fender line too much is that the greenhouse will begin to look dis-proportionally large. F5 set a prime directive that the 818 be 'wookie compatible', resulting in a relatively tall height. Here's the side view:

http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=7632&d=1327703303
7632

The greenhouse is on the very edge of looking too large IMHO at 47" overall height, but Dave/F5 was very specific that taller customers fit.

All of the cars that you showed for comparison, a few pages back, are larger - in many cases, significantly larger (and shorter). The closest is probably the Noble, but it sits a couple inches lower, and is still longer, wider and a slightly longer wheelbase:

Ferrari 458
Wheelbase 2,650 mm (104.3 in)[1]
Length 4,527 mm (178.2 in)[1]
Width 1,937 mm (76.3 in)[1]
Height 1,213 mm (47.8 in)[1]

Pagani Huayra
Wheelbase 2,795 mm (110.0 in)
Length 4,605 mm (181.3 in)
Width 2,036 mm (80.2 in)
Height 1,169 mm (46.0 in)

Lamborghini Aventador
Wheelbase 2,700 mm (106.30 in)
Length 4,780 mm (188.19 in)
Width 2,030 mm (79.92 in) (w/mirrors: 2,265 mm (89.17 in)) [1]
Height 1,136 mm (44.72 in)

koenigsegg Agera
Wheelbase 104.8 in
Length 4,293 mm (169.0 in)
Width 1,996 mm (78.6 in)
Height 1,120 mm (44.1 in)

Noble M400
Wheelbase 2,438 mm (96.0 in)
Length 4,090 mm (161.0 in)
Width 1,880 mm (74.0 in)
Height 1,143 mm (45.0 in)

Porsche Carrera GT
Wheelbase 107.5 in
Length 4,623 mm (182.0 in)
Width 1,930 mm (76 in)
Height 1,168 mm (46.0 in)

RodneyO's design

....
Width of the Car is 68"
Length is 151"
Height at its highest point is 47"
......
Wheelbase, per the template, is 95"

[dclin]

Sorry I wasn't clear; that was what I meant when speaking of using something from a donor. Not necessarily from the Subie but a part readily available either from salvage or OEM replacement from an existing vehicle. Many of the aftermarket, please excuse the term, "ricer" or "tuner" style replacement head and tail lights (HID headlights, clear tail lenses, LEDs, etc.) look cool and flashy but are not DOT approved which can cause grief to builders in some states.

Jeff

Almost every single headlamp from Hella are available in a DOT version:

http://www.rallylights.com/SearchResult.aspx?CategoryID=359

[Flamshackle]

Just something thats been bothering me as I look at the viewer is the cockpit. Keen to hear from Rodney in this regard but its hard to imagine where the dash board will be in regards to driving position. at the moment the space between driver seat and dash is far to big to work unless the steering wheel is sticking right out. it may be just perspective but im sure Rodney will have something to say that can answer my quiestion?

Also the roadster is actually a very different shape even at the front than the targa. Is this something that will be remedied? I dont see FFR making a bunch of different molds for the front of the car just to take the roof off?

I just cant stop looking at this car however and REALLY love the roadster style without the spoiler. so clean and exotic :D

[keys2heaven]

I.....WANT.....THIS!

'nough said. :)

[Benji]

http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=7612&d=1327549772

To me, whilst I always 'liked' R-O's design, it was never something I could see happening.

To me, this is the first step into evolving into something that I can see happening.

I really do hope the rumour mill is correct and that R/O is working with FFR behind the scenes.

[Kalstar]

X2. Hot, hot!!

[2KWIK4U]

At first I was not to keen on this design but with the slight changes I would be happy to put this in my garage. I hope they leave the ability to put the top back on it.

Danny

[dclin]

.....
Also the roadster is actually a very different shape even at the front than the targa. Is this something that will be remedied? I dont see FFR making a bunch of different molds for the front of the car just to take the roof off?

....

It was asked a couple of times before for Rodney to try a rocker that curves in a bit, and I think this is just a way to compare the two. I don't think necessarily that both will be implemented. I could go either way, though I lean slightly to the curved rocker. Has a more classic look IMHO, while the straight rocker is a little more modern.

Once a rocker design is settled on, really the only different body panel I can see between the Coupe/Targa and the Roadster is the rear, upper clam shell,with the Coupe/Targa having the additional 'collar' ('B' pillar panel) and targa top.That should keep the parts differentiation low, and make manufacturing either design easier. Heck, I hope that means one could have the option of buying extra parts and convert from either design.

http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=7657&d=1327997692

7657

[John Buzoianu]

Well... Im sold, I'll take a coupe/targa... FFR couldn't do much better than this design in my opinion...

[Oppenheimer]

...really the only different body panel I can see between the Coupe/Targa and the Roadster is the rear, upper clam shell,with the Coupe/Targa having the additional 'collar' ('B' pillar panel) and targa top.That should keep the parts differentiation low, and make manufacturing either design easier. Heck, I hope that means one could have the option of buying extra parts and convert from either design.

I'm thinking they could design one rear clam shell panel, and make the 'Targa Triangle' or 'collar' B pillar panel simply a bolt-on piece. If they are able to make the mounted piece look clean enough, without some ugly seam messing up the smooth look, they could have a lot of advantages:

- less pieces to manufacture, less cost for FFR
- easy to choose Roadster now, upgrade later
- easy to buy all the pieces, and switch from Roadster to Targa to Coupe (Targa with panel installed) at will
- make the collar bondable, if you're sure you don't want Roadster, bolt & bond in place (more permanent, better selaed, less chance of squeaks)
- other reasons I can't think of right now

[Xusia]

Heck, I hope that means one could have the option of buying extra parts and convert from either design.
7657

That would be totally awesome. I seriously hope that's how it's done.

[Xusia]

I'm thinking they could design one rear clam shell panel, and make the 'Targa Triangle' or 'collar' B pillar panel simply a bolt-on piece. If they are able to make the mounted piece look clean enough, without some ugly seam messing up the smooth look, they could have a lot of advantages:

- less pieces to manufacture, less cost for FFR
- easy to choose Roadster now, upgrade later
- easy to buy all the pieces, and switch from Roadster to Targa to Coupe (Targa with panel installed) at will
- make the collar bondable, if you're sure you don't want Roadster, bolt & bond in place (more permanent, better selaed, less chance of squeaks)
- other reasons I can't think of right now

Either way, I would be overjoyed to be able to switch between roadster and coupe/targa.

[16g-95gsx]

I prefer the flatter rocker panel as the curve doesn't match the body lines IMO and leves the frontal area of the tire exposed.

[mekeys]

7674

See how clean it looks without a black rocker panel ???
This would be my choice.

Mel :)

[dclin]

7674

See how clean it looks without a rocker panel ???
This would be my choice.

Mel :)

A rocker panel is the lower sill of the car, so the alternate render has a rocker panel too lol. :) What has been a reoccurring character element of the design is the black, contrasting panels front, sides, and rear. Take that away, IMHO, and the design losses its character, and starts to look like other designs.

One of the compromises made was to make the side panels more flush with the body, which I believe was to allow those that don't like the contrasting panels to order them in body color. That would make it really easy for F5 to provide different looks. Personally, I prefer a lower sill/rocker panel something along the original, inset design, which was much more radical:

http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=5547&d=1319609839

The latest, for comparison:

http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=7604&d=1327533947

The latest design allows a more traditional look should you not like the contrast, simply by requesting it in body color.

[dclin]

Here's a better view, showing how flush the latest lower sill design is.

http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=7675&d=1328079993

7675

[mekeys]

I on the other hand prefer "O's" without the look of the seperate molded black piece that everyone else is rerfering to as a rocker panel.

Mel :)

[DrieStone]

One of the compromises made was to make the side panels more flush with the body, which I believe was to allow those that don't like the contrasting panels to order them in body color. That would make it really easy for F5 to provide different looks. Personally, I prefer a lower sill/rocker panel something along the original, inset design, which was much more radical.

The latest design allows a more traditional look should you not like the contrast, simply by requesting it in body color.

It's interesting to see how far it's come. I do admit that there's something sexy and bold about the old inset design. I'll admit that this is much more about form over function for me, and I really do love the way the old rocker panels look. The contrasting body color over black was clearly defined in dimension as well as color. It's a bold statement. With the flush design it opens the question of "why the color difference?" I think the contrast is needed as it creates an interesting slimming effect in the mid-section of the car.

[mekeys]

I think it looks better all in one color (my opinion) :)

Mel

[Oppenheimer]

http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=5547&d=1319609839

It seems the original design was polarizing. Many loved it because it was so radical, different than anything else. This inset panel look, which some described as looking like a bare essentials naked car with a body just draped over it (which just now thinking about it strikes me as like a race fairing on a motorcycle), probably had a lot to do with that.

But it was that very thing that made me not like the original Rodney design. I don't want it to look like a race bike with an aero fairing as an afterthought. I want it to look like a car. I'm not into the exo-look. So the latest Rodney I like much better. Hopefully Rodney is able to make it look clean enough for guys like me, without toning it down too much to lose too many of the original supporters.

I do still like the black rocker and front and rear. I do think I might like body colored roof, however.

[Draco-REX]

I'm firmly in the "keep the black rocker" camp. I also miss the fact that it is no longer recessed. The old style with the recessd black elements gave the colored body a look of being stretched over a car it could barely contain. Like skin over a werewolf beneath.

[Xusia]

Oh, my. choices, choices... Seeing the original again, I like the front more than I did the first time. I'm thinking I prefer it (minus the vertical exhaust looking things). I also like the doors/sills depicted by mekeys without a pronounced rocker panel. That said, even though I have my preferences, I'd take this car in almost any variation I've seen - I like it that much!

[DrieStone]

Oh, my. choices, choices... Seeing the original again, I like the front more than I did the first time. I'm thinking I prefer it (minus the vertical exhaust looking things). I also like the doors/sills depicted by mekeys without a pronounced rocker panel. That said, even though I have my preferences, I'd take this car in almost any variation I've seen - I like it that much!

Curious, I'm exactly the opposite. I like the original doors/sills with the new front end (actually I loved everything about the original design with the exception of the nose). That said, the current design is a mature design with its feet on the ground compared to the original which was probably more fantasy than reality.

I totally agree with you though, I'd take this car in almost any variation I've seen. I think that may be the only consensus we have with those browsing this thread since we all seem to like different details. I've said it before, but if this is the shape of the 818 I wouldn't have a second thought about becoming an owner.

[Xusia]

I'm sure production costs will limit options, but it would sure be nice to have some different choices in front end, back end, sills, etc. It's a fantasy, I know. The car isn't ready yet, so I've got to dream about something! LOL

[mjpeters]

I love this version 7699 I could see this in my garage :)

[bbjones121]

Here's a better view, showing how flush the latest lower sill design is.

http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=7675&d=1328079993

7675

I would love this if it had an intake where the shadow is just behind the passenger's head. Also on the other side of course.

[Vman7]

I would love this if it had an intake where the shadow is just behind the passenger's head. Also on the other side of course.

I suggested upper intakes way back in post #108, but ppl just didn't like the idea, oh but now it's cool.......lol

[Flamshackle]

I suggested upper intakes way back in post #108, but ppl just didn't like the idea, oh but now it's cool.......lol

hahaha... I think it is more of an indicator of the fact this design is ready to roll when people start suggesting things already tried/suggested. its a very well refined concept now that just begs to be built!

[bbjones121]

I suggested upper intakes way back in post #108, but ppl just didn't like the idea, oh but now it's cool.......lol

I said I liked it at that time also.

[Vman7]

I said I liked it at that time also.

Yeppers! :)

Some of us just have this knack for knowing what looks good and works, just takes some to just see it in the right light :)

Rodney's is really starting to shine now! Looks great in the dark grey btw, gives it that "rich" look.

[mekeys]

Keep working on the grill..It's almost there. :)

Mel

[Flamshackle]

Keep working on the grill..It's almost there. :)

While I have loved watching the evolution of this design I am now at the point where I don't want it to change.

However I know that it must change. Making this car in the flesh on a real chassis and real rubber/rollers means compromises.
I would love now for Dave and the FFR team to throw us a bone and tell us what direction they are heading and maybe talk openly about the changes that could/will be made to Rodneys design to make it work. PLEASE UPDATE DAVE;)

I just keep coming back again and again to gawk at the unity player rendering hoping like crazy that the necessary compromises work with the shape to keep the radical and unique look.

I thought maybe we could start a bit of a list here of the components that we could foresee will need changing to make this design fit the bill?
I don't mean any of this as a criticism of Rodneys work as he has done a sublime job of shifting the shape through the evolution of this forum into the mean machine we have. But I want to be realistic also in what will roll out of the FFR factory in a years time.

1- Front and side glass? It looks awesome in the pics but where is that coming from?
2- Driver vis? While those front guards are like candy to the eye they may be hard to see past? I seriously don't mind this personally but will FFR neuter the front shape for that reason?
3-intercooling? intakes down low will be problematic/expensive when getting air to the top mounted cooler. I know that mine wont retain the top mount but this will be an issue for the base line car
4-ride height? it is VERY low in the render. 1" of travel is not enough for a road car.
5-Roadster is my fav but still need bonnet vent or side vents to make the radiator work well?
6-Keen as for a render of a 6 foot driver sitting in this car. It may be deceptive but where will the steering wheel go? The distance between the seat back and the dash looks huge.
7-Exhaust. its been talked about already.
8-Lights? looks like they can be sourced easily enough. Projector lamps though?


Anything else that people can see needs to change from FFR's perspective?

[kach22i]

6-Keen as for a render of a 6 foot driver sitting in this car. It may be deceptive but where will the steering wheel go? The distance between the seat back and the dash looks huge.
I did my best to align the vertical, split the difference in wheel height and lower pan of car (wheels are larger than template, and car sits lower than template).

What do you think?
http://s184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile%202%20-%20Odds%20and%20Ends/
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile%202%20-%20Odds%20and%20Ends/overlay-RodneyV3Side.jpg

Mind you the stock seat height would be about 3-inches higher, plus you need some headroom on top of that. The car could end up a whopping 6-inches taller, but I don't think FFR will allow that to happen.

The distance to the windshield is not currently a big issue to my eyes.

[Flamshackle]

I did my best to align the vertical, split the difference in wheel height and lower pan of car (wheels are larger than template, and car sits lower than template).

What do you think?
http://s184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile%202%20-%20Odds%20and%20Ends/
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile%202%20-%20Odds%20and%20Ends/overlay-RodneyV3Side.jpg

Mind you the stock seat height would be about 3-inches higher, plus you need some headroom on top of that. The car could end up a whopping 6-inches taller, but I don't think FFR will allow that to happen.

The distance to the windshield is not currently a big issue to my eyes.

Thanks Kach22... Its good to see it was my eyes tricking me in regards to the distance between the driver and the dash.

The height is concerning however when you realize that this car will be "wooky compatible" this will add a further few inches to the design.

The rear will need to be longer to accommodate the transaxle. Will the needed design Changes butcher this cars beauty? In regards to the height I think it really will!

[Xusia]

Will the needed design Chavez butcher this cars beauty? In regards to the height I think it really will!

I don't think that has to be the case. I think you could "grow" the design by enough to accommodate the additional room needed for wookies and the transaxle, while retaining the same same ratios so the car looks right. Assuming the front wheel location stays the same in such a scenario, the rear wheel would appear closer to the door (because the rest of the body is larger), and when looked at from the front some of the lines would need to change slightly so as not to increase the width. I think it can be done, though, and keep the same character. I have faith in Rodney, but if he needs any help, I think there might be a few really good designers on this forum he ask! ;)

[kach22i]

Flamshackle; To add a little perspective based on old thoughts and threads.

1. It has been suggested that true Wookies toss out the stock seats and bolt something lower to the floor.

2. It has been suggested that the transaxle part of the template is inaccurate, maybe 5" too long.

3. It has been suggested that the windshield be 1 to 1.5 times head depths away from the face (forehead to be specific). 1 is for more upright windscreens. 1.5 is for a more rakish angle. Anything over two head depths and we get into dustbuster van (Pontiac TransVan) territory, which causes driver disorientation.

The above suggestions and comments I agree with and have made, most often with critical development input from other forum members.

Item #3 may not have been talked about in the forum before, it's just something I eye-ball on other cars. Olpro has shown us diagrams with viewing angles, so we have touched on it in a manner of speaking.

Porsche Boxster seating attached: (for 1.5x head distance)
http://s184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/#!cpZZ8QQtppZZ20
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/GKA-Seating-detail-3.jpg

[Oppenheimer]

1. It has been suggested that true Wookies toss out the stock seats and bolt something lower to the floor.

Kach, The template view of Rodneys that you did already has lowered, non-stock seats, right? The driver still doesn't quite fit headroom wise.

How tall is that driver in the template? What is your calculation of distance from butt to ceiling (when measured plumb vertical) in the Rodney design?

[kach22i]

1Q. Kach, The template view of Rodneys that you did already has lowered, non-stock seats, right? The driver still doesn't quite fit headroom wise.

2Q. How tall is that driver in the template? What is your calculation of distance from butt to ceiling (when measured plumb vertical) in the Rodney design?
1A. Yes, the arse is shown lower than a stock seat, but somehow my template person's torso is roughly one inch taller than a standard 6'-0" male. Also keep in mind, that even with a stock seat it slides at a downward angle when going back for the tallest of drivers. We are in the splitting hairs zone. I mean to say that O's design is not as bad as the overlay may imply. It is in the ballpark and workable in my opinion.

2B. As mentioned 6'-0" also known as a 95 percentile. From my own planning purposes I've always followed that an interior dimension of 3'-6" works 100% of the time - barring semi-truck cab seating. With a nominal 6" height from the ground (leaving 1.5" for floor structure plus 4.5" clearance) you get a 48" tall car every time (42" + 6"). And I'm not just talking low slung sports cars, I'm talking daily drivers. FFR could certainly make a car lower than 48", but keep in mind the Porsche Boxster/Cayman is 51" or 52" high if memory serves. I'm in no position to predict the car height beyond the 45" to 53" range. I can tell you what I would do, but that is sort of irrelevant.

[dclin]

1A. Yes, the arse is shown lower than a stock seat, but somehow my template person's torso is roughly one inch taller than a standard 6'-0" male. Also keep in mind, that even with a stock seat it slides at a downward angle when going back for the tallest of drivers. We are in the splitting hairs zone. I mean to say that O's design is not as bad as the overlay may imply. It is in the ballpark and workable in my opinion.

2B. As mentioned 6'-0" also known as a 95 percentile. From my own planning purposes I've always followed that an interior dimension of 3'-6" works 100% of the time - barring semi-truck cab seating. With a nominal 6" height from the ground (leaving 1.5" for floor structure plus 4.5" clearance) you get a 48" tall car every time (42" + 6"). And I'm not just talking low slung sports cars, I'm talking daily drivers. FFR could certainly make a car lower than 48", but keep in mind the Porsche Boxster/Cayman is 51" or 52" high if memory serves. I'm in no position to predict the car height beyond the 45" to 53" range. I can tell you what I would do, but that is sort of irrelevant.

Between 50.47" and 51", depending on generation (newest generation being the lowest), but keep in mind that is the overall stock height, without consideration of how much the Boxster is lowered. It's hard to say exactly of course, but I would say the Porsche could be lowered an inch and half, and then it would be nearly identical to the way Rodney's rendering sits.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porsche_Boxster

http://wikicarspedia.com/wp-content/uploads/porsche-boxster_1600x1200_55108-4ec869f98b82b.jpg

My point is, it may not be entirely accurate to compare overall heights to derive actual cockpit room; there is the suspension height to consider, for example.

[dclin]

Other cars with similar dimensions (wheelbase vs overall height anyways) to the proposed 818 specs:

Mazda RX7 (3rd gen) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazda_RX-7 :
Wheelbase: 95.5"
Height: 48.4"

Honda S2000 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_S2000 :
Wheelbase: 94.5"
Height: 50.0"

BMW Z3 (roadster) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_Z3_(E36/4) :
Wheelbase: 96.3"
Height: 50.7-50.9"

The next two are at the other extreme, less practical supercars, but interesting to compare. My guess is they have relatively 'lowered' suspension.

Noble m400 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noble_M400 :
Wheelbase: 96.0"
Height: 45.0"

Lotus Esprit (5th gen) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotus_Esprit :
Wheelbase: 95.3"
Height: 45.3"

[Xusia]

I don't know about the Noble, but I've been in an Espirit. It's definitely NOT wookie compatible. I'm only 6'1", 180 lbs., and it would have been a real problem for me to drive it safely.

[Flamshackle]

1A. Yes, the arse is shown lower than a stock seat, but somehow my template person's torso is roughly one inch taller than a standard 6'-0" male. Also keep in mind, that even with a stock seat it slides at a downward angle when going back for the tallest of drivers. We are in the splitting hairs zone. I mean to say that O's design is not as bad as the overlay may imply. It is in the ballpark and workable in my opinion.

This is good news for me as I am 6ft 4 and a half! :D

[dclin]

I don't know about the Noble, but I've been in an Espirit. It's definitely NOT wookie compatible. I'm only 6'1", 180 lbs., and it would have been a real problem for me to drive it safely.

Lol, not trying to say that any of the above is wookie compatible (WC), just trying to find comparables. The 3rd gen RX7 isn't WC either; I have single piece Sparco buckets sitting on the floor board on mine, and I can barely squeeze in with a helmet (and I'm 5'9"). Mine is sunroof equipped though, so that eats a bit into headroom.

[dclin]

Oh, the last time I read Rodney speaking to it, the overall height of the RodneyO model is 47". This was a revision or two back, and with what I'm speculating as aggressive suspension. Rodney, is there any way to use the 3D model to see how the interior packaging works out?

[riptide motorsport]

And where has Rodney been?

[Xusia]

Hopefully working with FFR!

[kach22i]

Lol, not trying to say that any of the above is wookie compatible ............
The Boxster mentioned earlier can fit wookies without tossing out the excellent and expensive stock seats.


.............. RodneyO model is 47".
My memory says 47.5", I remember this because I felt making it a clean 48" would have ended some of the past, and continuing controversy.

Here is the spec on the Mazda RX8 for the curious: WB = 106.4"...HT = 52.8" If this car don't fit wookies, I would be really shocked.
http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/displayPage.action?pageParameter=modelsSpecs&vehicleCode=RX8
7813

EDIT: Boxster according to Wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porsche_Boxster

Wheelbase 1997–2002: 95.2 in (2,418 mm)
2003–04: 95.1 in (2,416 mm)

Height 50.8 in (1,290 mm)

A couple of inches is splitting hairs, but I'm a short guy so they will not be my hairs.

[Niburu]

Lol, not trying to say that any of the above is wookie compatible (WC), just trying to find comparables. The 3rd gen RX7 isn't WC either; I have single piece Sparco buckets sitting on the floor board on mine, and I can barely squeeze in with a helmet (and I'm 5'9"). Mine is sunroof equipped though, so that eats a bit into headroom.

I beg to differ I'm 6" @220 pounds I fit in a FD just fine with stock leather touring seats. I think fit is more of an issue of bodytype than overall height. I also fit in a 90 Miata just fine too, obviously my legs are longer than my torso. FFR as any manufacturer will build for general body types, the custom fitting will left in the hands of the builder.

[Oppenheimer]

Here is the spec on the Mazda RX8 for the curious: WB = 106.4"...HT = 52.8" If this car don't fit wookies, I would be really shocked.
http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/displayPage.action?pageParameter=modelsSpecs&vehicleCode=RX8
7813


I test sat an RX8 once. If the roof was 6 inches higher, I still don't think I could have fit. But I know I mostly fit in other cars that are not as tall, so maybe the seats in RX8 are just higher off the floor or something.


FFR as any manufacturer will build for general body types, the custom fitting will left in the hands of the builder.

Which I am OK with, but not if I have to modify the frame or start cutting holes in the roof. Obviously they can't make a car that can fit Yao Ming, but I don't think that is what Dave has in mind with WC.

[DrieStone]

I don't know about the Noble, but I've been in an Espirit. It's definitely NOT wookie compatible. I'm only 6'1", 180 lbs., and it would have been a real problem for me to drive it safely.

As you may notice. I have an early '80s Esprit and I'm 6', 180lbs. I agree that I probably max it out (and I don't have rails on my driver's seat). One thing of interest in comparison to kach's drawing is that on the Esprit, the foot room is limited because it is in the same plane as the front wheel wells. If we can move the pedals forward the hand position can move forward and the seat back can recline a bit more to allow additional headroom. I imagine it may require increasing the track width of the vehicle. I assume the steering rack would support it easily, but it may require replacement axles for the rear.

[Niburu]

Which I am OK with, but not if I have to modify the frame or start cutting holes in the roof. Obviously they can't make a car that can fit Yao Ming, but I don't think that is what Dave has in mind with WC.

can we at least wait to see what we're getting before we start complaining about it
it's like a constant theme on this forum
complaining about a problem that doesn't even exist yet
take the gas tank location for example

[Flamshackle]

can we at least wait to see what we're getting before we start complaining about it
it's like a constant theme on this forum
complaining about a problem that doesn't even exist yet
take the gas tank location for example


Actually I started it by suggesting we look at some of the practicals that will have to be changed to make the design work.

I dont think its all in vain as it will give us a clearer picture of what will in real life roll out of the FFR workshop end of year.

The front glass for example. where does that come from? is it realistic to expect a custom screen for a budget racer?

[Oppenheimer]

can we at least wait to see what we're getting before we start complaining about it
it's like a constant theme on this forum
complaining about a problem that doesn't even exist yet
take the gas tank location for example

Didn't mean to sound like I was complaining. When you have fit issues, you get sensitive to comments that you are an outlier, and won't be part of the target audience.

[DrieStone]

Didn't mean to sound like I was complaining. When you have fit issues, you get sensitive to comments that you are an outlier, and won't be part of the target audience.

Maybe we need to start an infamous survey of "user height".

[Oppenheimer]

Maybe we need to start an infamous survey of "user height".

Seated height

[kach22i]

I test sat an RX8 once. If the roof was 6 inches higher, I still don't think I could have fit. But I know I mostly fit in other cars that are not as tall, so maybe the seats in RX8 are just higher off the floor or something.
I'm in shock, and stand corrected.

The seat height seems to be similar to a WRX's, but I would have to measure to be sure.
RX8
http://3.7mustang.com/vb/f12/rx8-seats-221283/
7824
WRX
http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2282809
7825

[dclin]

I beg to differ I'm 6" @220 pounds I fit in a FD just fine with stock leather touring seats. I think fit is more of an issue of bodytype than overall height. I also fit in a 90 Miata just fine too, obviously my legs are longer than my torso. FFR as any manufacturer will build for general body types, the custom fitting will left in the hands of the builder.

You, my friend, are only a wookie jr. :) But your correct that torso/leg ratio matters too; now that I think about it, I do have a relatively longer torso. I also prefer a more upright position.

Just out of curiosity, what do you wookies find acceptable in adjustments to fit into a smaller car? How far are you willing to lean and still have a comfortable grasp of the controls, etc? kach22i's template does show a relatively upright position; how far can you lean and still maintain good control?

[Oppenheimer]

...what do you wookies find acceptable in adjustments to fit into a smaller car? How far are you willing to lean and...?

I too, prefer a somewhat upright driving position. I'm willing to use custom seats, custom mounting, minor floorpan mods, even to foresake my prefered body design to one that was taller (presumming they end up making several body designs, more than one with some sort of hardtop roof option). Not willing to drive with seat all leaned back like some I-tal-yun sports car.

I'm only wookie Jr, @ 6' 185, long torso, but darned if I can't find sporty cars, or even some SUV's, that I can sit in without head hitting ceiling.

[bbjones121]

Not willing to drive with seat all leaned back like some I-tal-yun sports car.


They did that so the cars would look good. Like I have said before, this is a small car and there is no way to argue against that fact. If you are a larger person, do not get your hopes up. It would be a shame to damage a potentially good looking car and try to design around a smaller percentage of the population.

[Oppenheimer]

If you are a larger person, do not get your hopes up. It would be a shame to damage a potentially good looking car and try to design around a smaller percentage of the population.

Dave has said from the start that the 818 would be Wookie Compatible. I think his reasong is he sees Wookies as making up a larger percentage of FFR population (those that already have an FFR and those that want an FFR) than that of the general public.

It seems every disagreement about what this car should, or should not be, can be boiled down to, 'what is my vision' for the car? If something appears to greatly vary from that view, the response always seems to be, 'These are not the sportscars you are looking for' and 'No 818 for you!'

Meanwhile Dave seems to be thinking, how can I make most number of people happy with the 818? To that end, one of his ideas is to build a bunch of variations of the car. So if I end up fitting in only one of those, even if its not my favorite, I'm OK with that.

If FFR builds the Rodney design, and making it fit taller people ends up damaging the look, then I am not in favor of doing that. They could just make one of the other designs they are expecting to do be something that can fit larger people without looking horrible (which can be done, as the posts above about P Cayman attest).

[bbjones121]

I guess we will see. That makes no sense to design the 818 around the existing FFR population. I heard this was a global design and picking the subaru drivetrain allows that.

[Niburu]

No matter FFR does there are going to be people unhappy with the decisions they'll have to make.
And I'm OK with that.



As long as I'm not one of them......just sayin.

[bbjones121]

No matter FFR does there are going to be people unhappy with the decisions they'll have to make.
And I'm OK with that.



As long as I'm not one of them......just sayin.

Haha, true. As a good business model, you usually dont try to make the higher percentage of potential customer base unhappy. There may be some very active wookies posting on the forums, but that is a far stretch to say they are the majority of potential buyers for the 818.

[Oppenheimer]

There may be some very active wookies posting on the forums, but that is a far stretch to say they are the majority of potential buyers for the 818.

Majority? No. The question is, are they a sizable enough group to warrent making sure the product accomodates them? Apparently Dave thinks so. Does that mean he is going to build some hideous bubble-mobile just to make that group happy? Obviously not.

Dave has said he wants HoF, and he wants WC. It will be interesting to see how Dave ends up balancing these two self-imposed, yet seemingly conflicting, requirements.

[PhyrraM]

Dave has said he wants HoF, and he wants WC. It will be interesting to see how Dave ends up balancing these two self-imposed, yet seemingly conflicting, requirements.

I took alot of heat when I proposed that low-slung semi-exotic shapes were pehaps not what we (as a group) should be getting all worked up about. It was these two statements by Dave, early on, that pushed me away from getting hung up on one particular vision of HoF.

For example, if Marc Senger's designs were given as much pointed revision as Rodney's have they could very well be just as HoF - and likely more WookieCompatable (WC). I'm sure there are many non-exotic or - even quirky - designs from the compitition that can evolve to HoF if given the proper attention. However, it seems that almost everything non-lowslung was virtually dismissed by the community as not appropriate. I always thought that was kinda wierd and short sighted.

Don't read that wrong, Rodney has done a great job. But IF it STILL doesn't fit some of the primary requirements (not stating it does or doesn't) then we still don't have an accurate shape to evaluate HoF quotent.

[D2W]

I also thought Marc Senger's designs had HOF/WC potential in an elemental sports car package. It was definately unique.

I'm also curious to see how Dave handles the WC compatible/HOF conundrum. Will making 5% of the population happy ruin the look of the car. David Hodgkins is a self proclaimed Wookie who has a FFR roadster. He must look like he's sitting on a peddle car when he's driving it. Can you imagine what it would look like with a hard top to fit him. (No offense meant David, you're the only Wookie I know of with a roadster)

Rodney has made some great changes, but the fact that it still doesn't fit the template for WC leads me to believe he's not working with FFR. Or the car will not be Wookie Compatible. At least not in coupe form.

[Draco-REX]

As a 6'4" 250lb wookie, I think a 95% design is fine. Wookie Compatible doesn't necessarily mean wookie-preferred. My mother owned a 1st gen Miata which is probably a 90-93% design, and I could fit in that well enough to drive from MA to NY and back without any major issues.

Another thing to keep in mind is that us wookies are used to living in a non-wookie world. We know how to cram ourselves into small cars, and we're more likely to put up with a little discomfort.

Also, there's a few inches to be gained with an aftermarket seat.

Edit: Post #818!! WOOT!

[RodneyO]

Here are some measurement numbers and a couple of images with a 6.5' tall person (right) 5.6' (Left)
I did an experiment with scaling the cabin width and height, the model did not get destroyed, I felt that I was able to accommodate up to 57" wide and 48" tall, the car did look a bit rounded but the design did survive.

note.
The adjustments on the cabin are quick and dirty I just deformed it with a volume but with proper deforming the lines should flow better. (yellow car)

http://unoverse.com/factoryfive/818_m_1.jpg
http://unoverse.com/factoryfive/818_m_2.jpg
http://unoverse.com/factoryfive/818_m_3.jpg
http://unoverse.com/factoryfive/818_m_4.jpg
http://unoverse.com/factoryfive/818_m_5.jpg
http://unoverse.com/factoryfive/818_m_6.jpg
http://unoverse.com/factoryfive/818_m_7.jpg

[RodneyO]

http://unoverse.com/factoryfive/818_m_8.jpg
http://unoverse.com/factoryfive/818_m_9.jpg
http://unoverse.com/factoryfive/818_m_10.jpg
http://unoverse.com/factoryfive/818_m_11.jpg
http://unoverse.com/factoryfive/818_m_12.jpg
http://unoverse.com/factoryfive/818_m_13.jpg

[RodneyO]

http://unoverse.com/factoryfive/818_m_14.jpg
http://unoverse.com/factoryfive/818_m_15.jpg

[Jeff Kleiner]

We see 51" from, I am assuming, top of door to top of door translating to 25.5 of width at the shoulders. Can you grab an inside dimension across the top of the greenhouse? By doing some scaling of the image on the monitor it appears like it will be ~34"-36" maximum. As a point of reference my FFR roadster measures 50" from inside doortop to inside door top however at the top of the headrests with high back "Clubman" seats I've got over 42". Just trying to see how it's going to work together...

Jeff

[Draco-REX]

Is it the aspect ratio of the screen grabs, or is the car narrower now?

[kach22i]

Great work Rodney, but I would still like to see the people inside of the car at all angles. I think 6'-5" is a bit much and would use a 6'-0" (95% male).

I agree that the raising of the roof to 51" does make the car appear more narrow. However, I feel 51" or even 53" is more realistic than 48", although they would all work.

I think that side head room is a bit tight, but I'm debating if I would even change it. Top off, windows down will be 90% of the driving for this sort of car (based on my current habits).

http://s184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile%202%20-%20Odds%20and%20Ends/
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile%202%20-%20Odds%20and%20Ends/figure-818_m_7.jpghttp://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile%202%20-%20Odds%20and%20Ends/people-figure-818_m_5.jpg
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile%202%20-%20Odds%20and%20Ends/people-figure-detail.jpg

[Jeff Kleiner]

I believe you and I have the same concerns George.

Jeff

[VTX]

I actually think the orange car looks better. I also like the integrated spoiler better than the original one. Good job.

[SW1]

Based on previous comment by Kash22i (see below) the car you drive on the street should be as tall as other cars on the road so you don’t feel like you are risking your life. Where I live the majority of cars on the road are minivans, SUV’s, and pickup trucks so it seems to me the 818 should be at least 65 inches tall. Besides, a car that is roughly 45 inches tall can only accommodate dwarfs and small children so 65 inches seems like the sweet spot. Rodney: Do you think your design would still hold together? Could we maybe see a few pics when you get a chance?






1. Take your tape measure out and measure a few cars, at least in the old days before the Internet this is how I gained some rules of thumb.

2. Most cars are about 6" off the ground (not true obstacle clearance) and have a cabin height of 3'-6", bringing most cars to about 48" high.

3. The FFR template with a generous or pessimistic height is also about 48" high.

4. A car you can drive in traffic, and be seen in without feeling like you are risking your life, would be as tall as the other cars.

5. An eight foot (95" actual) wheelbase is more than enough for a mid-engine car. In fact if you slip the FFR template under a Boxster/Cayman to scale drawing and put it up to the window (poor man's light table) they line up exactly.

[kach22i]

Based on previous comment by Kash22i (see below) the car you drive on the street should be as tall as other cars on the road so you don’t feel like you are risking your life. Where I live the majority of cars on the road are minivans, SUV’s, and pickup trucks so it seems to me the 818 should be at least 65 inches tall. Besides, a car that is roughly 45 inches tall can only accommodate dwarfs and small children so 65 inches seems like the sweet spot.
Shawn your comments sound like an attack, please reel yourself in.

The original post which describes the 818 as one in which we would "feel comfortable driving in traffic" should not be credited to me. I do believe it is a Dave Smith comment. If you have issues with it, I suggest you petition him in a polite manner for a reevaluation of goals.

[305mouse]

I don't like the deformed yellow car, it looks bloated. I'm sure you could clean up the lines, but the orange looks great just as is. Thanks for all the measurements.

[RodneyO]

We see 51" from, I am assuming, top of door to top of door translating to 25.5 of width at the shoulders. Can you grab an inside dimension across the top of the greenhouse? By doing some scaling of the image on the monitor it appears like it will be ~34"-36" maximum. As a point of reference my FFR roadster measures 50" from inside doortop to inside door top however at the top of the headrests with high back "Clubman" seats I've got over 42". Just trying to see how it's going to work together...

Jeff
You are correct, it is from the top of the doors inside, I need to double check the top though since I'm not near my computer at the moment. If memory serves me right the top of the window shrinks down to 40.
This I think will need adjustment to accommodate more room.


Is it the aspect ratio of the screen grabs, or is the car narrower now?
The direct front and side view are orthographic views, there is no perspective applied what so ever. I think it makes the car look strange, but most things looked at without perspective feel weird. If you are a bit worried don't be is an strange illusion.


Based on previous comment by Kash22i (see below) the car you drive on the street should be as tall as other cars on the road so you don’t feel like you are risking your life. Where I live the majority of cars on the road are minivans, SUV’s, and pickup trucks so it seems to me the 818 should be at least 65 inches tall. Besides, a car that is roughly 45 inches tall can only accommodate dwarfs and small children so 65 inches seems like the sweet spot. Rodney: Do you think your design would still hold together? Could we maybe see a few pics when you get a chance?
[INDENT]
[COLOR="#0000FF"]
1. Take your tape measure out and measure a few cars, at least in the old days before the Internet this is how I gained some rules of thumb.


=) I don't think he meant anything by it Kach, I know the feeling that Shawn is going through. I've been reserving my opinion on subjects, but here is one just for fun.

I believe not matter how you look at it, IMHO a Miata (MX-5) is already small to not feel safe whether is super wide or super tall, the car feels small that it would worry me on a car accident, I feel similarly with the lotus. When I first starting designing off the template I didn't really know how a 95" was like in real world because honestly, I buy my sports cars based on looks, speed and feel, I'm not a stat junkie. One night I went to measure my winter little MX-3 and wow to my surprise It really hit me how small this car really was (818), the measurements were so close it really got me to start rethinking some things on the 818 design, so there is something to what Shawn is saying, measuring stuff in real life has at least for me been a great lesson.
http://www.ehow.com/facts_7271018_specifications-mazda-mx3.html

I think the adjustments moving forward will have to be with a real chassis and framework, I've been thinking about placing a 6 foot human in the car but to be honest I don't think that will go anywhere. I don't know how low the seats are placed or how the framework sits inside my current design, at this point it will all be inaccurate guesswork. I've just barely sent the 3d model to FFR and I'm pretty sure that once they place it with their chassis a lot of this concerns will be looked at, and the next steps will follow. I think this guesswork should now be done by the pros

So I feel the next steps for me is just to sit back and see what changes FFR would like and go from there. I will also be starting a new Thread with an updated viewer, and I will use the first post to put the latest links and final stuff in it, this current thread feels long for new comers, you kind of have to hunt down links, or may be I will just use the first post in this thread and update it with all the latest links.

I have to say though, the feedback and nitpicking of stuff has been very helpful, however to much of it can turn off a lot of people. I worry that the quiet ones don't want to jump and express their opinions, and for newcomers this forum should make them feel welcome, we get a bit aggressive or better say opinionated at times (not a bad thing), It is to our benefit and to FFR for more people to keep coming to this forum and show interest on wanting to build an 818.

[kach22i]

One night I went to measure my winter little MX-3 and wow to my surprise It really hit me how small this car really was (818), the measurements were so close it really got me to start rethinking some things on the 818 design, so there is something to what Shawn is saying, measuring stuff in real life has at least for me been a great lesson.
FYI: the quote in blue which Shaun posted was supposed to be an old quote of mine.

The problem with measuring interiors and exteriors is you cannot measure the depth of structure in between. You can calculate it, and place a finger tip on either side of let's say a roof panel to get an idea. However short of sawing it in half, it is a best guess.

You are right about Miata sizing, the fact that your design looks very un-Miata like, is a credit to the hard work you have put into it.

[D2W]

Rodney I will say again how good of a job you have done of listening to feedback, sorting out the good from bad and utilizing those ideas into your design. Personally I like the original "Orange" design better than the updated "yellow" one. The yellow one isn't bad, it just doesn't flow as well, but I also think FFR should build this for a max 6 footer and those taller will have to make adjustments. It would be interesting to see your design on the chassis and what the passenger compartment looks like. Again, job well done.

[Flamshackle]

I... like the integrated spoiler better than the original one. Good job.

7933


I LOVE THE NEW SPOILER! This is in keeping with very stylish and current cars and just looks plain awesome!

Amazing work as always Rodney. Thanks for the update. :D

[Draco-REX]

I think I prefer the older wing style or even a duckbill spoiler. I see what people wanted with the "yellow" wing, and I agree, that style usually looks really good on performance cars with large rear fenders. However, I think this body is too narrow to pull it off. Instead, the wing looks more for show than function.

This is purely personal opinion.

So please, Factory Five, Dave, hear my plea! Options! Options! Options! Make this car truly a "swatch-watch" design and give us many options to choose from to tune our own 818s to each of our tastes. The base model can hit your $9000 goal. I'm willing to pay extra for a front lip, side skirts, rear diffuser, wing, etc.

[mattster03]

Rodney, I just want to congradulate you on a really awesome design. The front 1/4 view always sets my hair on fire... Well done sir! Are you still working with Dave at all?

[bbjones121]

Shawn your comments sound like an attack, please reel yourself in.

The original post which describes the 818 as one in which we would "feel comfortable driving in traffic" should not be credited to me. I do believe it is a Dave Smith comment. If you have issues with it, I suggest you petition him in a polite manner for a reevaluation of goals.

There is a contradiction then. Actions speak louder than words. Since FFR has designed the dimensions and given those out, I consider that an action. Saying, "feel comfortable driving in traffic," is exactly what it is, words. People can dwell on words if they want, but i prefer actions.

I prefer to interpret the words from Dave about how awesome this design will be and to me, given the chassis dimensions, means it will not be very visible to other cars on the road. If words are what you are looking for, find some more inspiring ones than those that give you an awkward 60+ inch tall sports car. If actions are what you are looking for, be inspired by the size of the chassis and the HoF dream.

[kach22i]

............an awkward 60+ inch tall sports car.
I have no idea where you get 60 inches from. I don't know where Shawn gets 65 inches from either.

48" to 53" is where most sports car seem to be, there have been many lists posted in this forum. The list of sub 48 inch tall cars is short, and the list of people that fit into them is just as short.

I have seen a 40 inch high Lotus/Caterham/Locost 7 in heavy traffic, it ain't for the timid.

See post #34...............the poor guy almost got squashed right after I took the photos.
http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/showthread.php?2446-Competition-and-Comparables-for-the-Project-818

[bbjones121]

For some reason there are people that think that is what you suggest. I dont know what to recommend for that not to be the case except to stop the constant promoting of this thing to be visible in traffic. I would highly recommend that if you are not comfortable in this size of vehicle in traffic, either dont buy one or drive it when there isnt any traffic.

[Jeff Kleiner]

RE: Driving in traffic. I don't see this as being much different than a Miata and certainly not any worse than my FFR roadster (90" wheelbase, 46" tall and BLACK!) which gets driven in traffic on both city streets and interstates among 18 wheelers all the time. I'll admit to intimidation once on the interstate getting caught in heavy rain in the middle of a pack of semi trucks (and on Kumho XS tires no less!) but in normal circumstances it is just like any small car or motorcycle---be aware of what's around you and do not assume that you have been seen. Paint it red, yellow or lime green ;) No malice intended with this statement but anyone who can't get comfortable with that might be better served by building a Rally Fighter from Factory Five's cousin Local Motors.

Jeff

[kach22i]

Boys, the car will be the height it needs to be, feelings in traffic aside. I do recall trying to read the original comment as; are they talking about a doorless car, a low car, a fenderless car, or just in general a car with more "presence' than a sport motorcycle?

Here is what you need to know, we have several posts indicating stock WRX seats are being considered as a base item to save on kit costs. We know that people fit into these seats, and the current size of a WRX. Let's do the math and see what we get.

WRX
http://www.cars101.com/subaru/subaru_comparisons2.html
Overall Height - 56.7"
Ground Clearance = 6.1"

56.7 - 6.1 = 50.6" cab height, underbelly to roof top.

Based on examination of other vehicles I'm going to guess that the floor structure with reinforcing ribs in the floor pan and other depth adding features is in the neighborhood of 3" to 4", let's call it 4" because of the off-road ability. I'm going to guess that FFR-818 will have a floor and steel tube frame of half that, because they are using a different type of chassis construction. Let's call it 2", therefore 50.6 - 2.0 = 48.6" for the new floor to roof cab height.

I will assume the roof of the 818 fitted with targa top to be about 1" thick, or similar to an finished WRX roof. Either way, not going to affect this number pushing exercise.

So there we have it, if we desire the same cab head room as a WRX, we add 48.6" + 4.5" ground clearance and get = 53.1 inches, lets just call it 53" even.

Like I said before, I think FFR will attempt to keep it below 53", and as close to 48" as possible. This could mean that drivers taller than the 50 % American Male height (taller than average) will have to use custom seats situated lower to the floor than stock WRX seats.

This is 2nd grade math, even the idiots in this forum should be able to keep up this time.

My apologies to Rodney for the hi-jacking of his thread.

O's car is the correct height, if Rodney wants to change anything, please consider the side headroom issue.

[bromikl]

Let's give it a rest, guys. There's more than one way to fit a big person in a small car. Let's leave it up to FFR to figure it out. All we can do here is lose friends.

[Niburu]

Let's give it a rest, guys. There's more than one way to fit a big person in a small car.

Astroglide?

[StatGSR]

^ you seem to be confused about the proper applications for that product..... ;-)

[Niburu]

^ you seem to be confused about the proper applications for that product..... ;-)

I don't just use duct tape in bedroom anymore either, you gotta multi purpose stuff

[bobzdar]

I have no idea where you get 60 inches from. I don't know where Shawn gets 65 inches from either.

48" to 53" is where most sports car seem to be, there have been many lists posted in this forum. The list of sub 48 inch tall cars is short, and the list of people that fit into them is just as short.

I have seen a 40 inch high Lotus/Caterham/Locost 7 in heavy traffic, it ain't for the timid.

See post #34...............the poor guy almost got squashed right after I took the photos.
http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/showthread.php?2446-Competition-and-Comparables-for-the-Project-818

I've mentioned this before, but I have a 96" wheelbase, 45" tall car sitting out in my garage that can comfortably sit a 6'2" driver (that I've had in the car). I'm 6' tall myself with a longer torso and have no issues. It is apparently ok for up to 6'5" driver with helmet. Please stop propagating as fact that the car has to be taller than 48", because it doesn't.

[kach22i]

I've mentioned this before, but I have a 96" wheelbase, 45" tall car sitting out in my garage that can comfortably sit a 6'2" driver (that I've had in the car). I'm 6' tall myself with a longer torso and have no issues. It is apparently ok for up to 6'5" driver with helmet. Please stop propagating as fact that the car has to be taller than 48", because it doesn't.
bobzdar, you left out some critical information for any meaningful comparison, are you claiming that you use a stock WRX seat per the discussion? Please measure and report back the seat height at the low point where your arse would be. I'd be willing to bet it is a lowered seat of around 4 inches (to floor, not ground), and not a stock WRX seat height of about 8 inches (rough guess based on photos). Add 4 inches to your 45 inches and we get 49 inches.

A photo of your car and close up of seat with relation to floor would help as well.

EDIT: I'd rather measure a car than go this round about way, but as a ballpark rough estimate method let's try this.

http://www.cars101.com/subaru/impreza/wrxsti2011.html#dimensions

Seat height to ground 18-21"
Ground Clearance 6"
Guessed at floor structure previously estimated at 4"

6" + 4" = 10"

18" - 10" = 8" (to 11"?) approx seat height to inside of cab floor.

There must be a dozen better ways to get a seat height dimension, but so far no one has come out and provided one from their donor car.

http://www.cars101.com/subaru/impreza/wrxsti2011.html#dimensions

Manual height adjustable driver seat
That may be the answer!

......and so is this:
http://www.norcalroadsters.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=6016
7985

Brackets are not included, since they are WRX seat brackets.

[Xusia]

Hey Kach, unless I missed his point entirely, I think it was only that there are ways (your seat example above being 1 of those ways) to accommodate taller drivers, therefore the overall height of the car doesn't NEED to be taller than 48" (although, that is yet another way to accommodate taller drivers).

I feel for the wookies (though I am not one, I've had my challenges fitting into some cars), and certainly hope there is a way for them to fit. At this point, however, I am trusting FFR to have that covered. I don't know - nor do I even want to postulate - what the solution will be; just that there will be one! :)

[kach22i]

Xusia, I hear you and agree.

When someone tells me a 45" tall car fits a 6'-5" person, I ask for a photo so I can see that it's been lowered within inches of the ground, they have seats bolted to the floor, plus sit at a very reclined angle, and the roof is off so they are actually measuring to the top of windshield not the roof. I've always said it could be done (sub 48"), and went far beyond the template to find out how, and by how much.

What will be, will be...................and it ain't got noth'n to do with what I want, feel, and or can calculate. Nor does it have anything to do with what anyone else in the forum wants, feels, and or can calculate. Like the Beatles said: Let it be.

I would still like to see a seated manikin in Rodney's car, mostly so I can imagine myself as that person.:)

[bobzdar]

7994

Well, my car actually sits at 43.5" tall as it's got different springs in it that drop it a bit, stock is 45". I don't remember seeing any requirement to use the stock seat? I can take any picture or measurement you like as long as it doesn't involve taking it out of the garage (it's snowing).

Here's a pic with a 6'2" driver.

[mekeys]

I don't think that is going to satisfy George ,he needs to see a profile :) :) :)

[PhyrraM]

..... I don't remember seeing any requirement to use the stock seat?.......


No requirement at this point, but for budget reasons there is a strong chance the base kit will utilize a stock WRX seat.

[StatGSR]

^ well on the topic of "big guys" maybe they will just have plan on a few extra dollars for some low profile seats. problem solved?

[Draco-REX]

^ well on the topic of "big guys" maybe they will just have plan on a few extra dollars for some low profile seats. problem solved?

I think I can speak for most every big guy out there.

We'll make ourselves fit, or make the car fit us. Give us a good looking car over one that's easy to get in and out of. If we wanted easy, we wouldn't be looking at a car this size.

[Oppenheimer]

^ well on the topic of "big guys" maybe they will just have plan on a few extra dollars for some low profile seats. problem solved?

Yes.


I think I can speak for most every big guy out there.

We'll make ourselves fit, or make the car fit us. Give us a good looking car over one that's easy to get in and out of. If we wanted easy, we wouldn't be looking at a car this size.

No.

I'm willing to use any extreme seating arrangement. I'm not willing to hack up the frame trying to find a way to buy more room between floor and roof. Thankfully, I'm sure I won't have to, since FFR promised Wookie Compatible. But I for one don't want to see any compromises to the WC.

[Draco-REX]

I'm willing to use any extreme seating arrangement. I'm not willing to hack up the frame trying to find a way to buy more room between floor and roof. Thankfully, I'm sure I won't have to, since FFR promised Wookie Compatible. But I for one don't want to see any compromises to the WC.

I didn't mean hacking the frame. The current design is fine. With the stock seats it'll be tight but doable, but aftermarket seats with low rails will make it spacious. No need to get the sawsall.

[kach22i]

[ATTACH=CONFIG] I don't remember seeing any requirement to use the stock seat?
Nice car, feel free to post as many pictures of that as you want.

The first hint of using a stock WRX seat was a test fitting of Jim's buck by David H., it happened to be in the shop - or was intended to be used, we didn't know at the time (and still cannot say for sure). This was followed by what I think was the SEMA video presentation given by Dave Smith in which he said they would use many Subaru donor parts, including the seats. Keep in mind that no one from the company has come into the forum to post a parts list yet, things may be in flux and could change.

A friend if mine who used to play professional hockey (+ 6 foot, + 300 lbs) claims he fits much better in my 1977 Porsche 911, than in my Chevy S-10 pick up truck. Based on how he looks in both, I'd have to agree. I have taken a tape measure to both, the seat height is the same (7"), the headroom is comparable (3'-7"), and I'm sure the S-10 is wider so I don't know which factor is making the difference (leg room?).

Rodney, do you have an underbelly view? Maybe some aero-thoughts on the underside would complete your presentation.

[Oppenheimer]

FFR has taken a lot of (unfair) criticism with their Roadster for using 'used', 'junkyard' parts. Just because you have the option of doing a donor build, never meant you had to. But that didn't stop the critics. Eventually FFR offered an option to allow buying all needed parts brand new, in part to try and squash such misperceptions.

So it kinda feels the same way with this WRX seats thing. Just because FFR may allow us to reuse the stock WRX seats, does not mean you have to. If FFR is smart, and they are, they will allow paths to build the car very economically. That way you can 'upgrade' in any of the areas you want to (or even downgrade). So you want a nicer interior, go that route. More power, you know what to do. Want to get in as cheap as possible, you can use a NA Impreza RS donor. Need more space, use other seats.

FFR said (some) of their goal(s) for the 818 were <$10K kit price, ~$15K built price, Wookie Compatible TM, 1800lbs. That doesn't mean all those goals have to be accomodated by the same build. To achieve ~$15K built price may require reusing stock seats, while achieving WC may involve using aftermarket seats, which if they are available from FFR, could push the kit cost a little over the $10K bar.

I don't think anyone has a problem with that. So I don't see a need to try and figure out how to do WC with stock seats. I would like to see eyes on making sure it is indeed WC when aftermarket seats are used.

So Kach, I encourage you to measure the lowest feasible installed height of aftermarket seats, as compared to stock WRX seats, to see how much room using such would buy us. Then base your 'how tall does 818 need to be to ensure WC' speculations on that, instead of stock seats. I'm very interested in this topic.

[Draco-REX]

The nice thing about the 818 being able to use stock seats is that aftermarket seat brackets will just bolt in.

[kach22i]

So Kach, I encourage you to measure the lowest feasible installed height of aftermarket seats, as compared to stock WRX seats, to see how much room using such would buy us. Then base your 'how tall does 818 need to be to ensure WC' speculations on that, instead of stock seats. I'm very interested in this topic.
As a regular forum poster I think you may be familiar with some of the old threads and many posts on this topic. I do not want to hi-jack Rodney's thread any further, as it may be taken as a sign of disrespect or at least a lack of self restraint.

Back to topic: Not many people mentioned the top intake grille-work for the engine Rodney put in a while ago. I really like it, looks like it was meant to be.

[Jeff F]

I have been quietly reading these posts for a year and GTM posts for many years. I have finally found my replacement for my Evolution X. Dave, Please build Rodney's design so I can buy my first kit from you!

[bobzdar]

I haven't offered much design input, but I really like this design. A couple of comments - and this may be more some of my personal preference - the car 'coke bottles' too much which seems purely for aesthetic reasons. This will cramp the cockpit more than necessary and doesn't need to be so exaggerated to achieve the effect.

What size wheel/ tire combo is shown in the renders?

[Exidous]

I have a 94 RX-7 that I manage to fit in a 6'3" and 200 lb with stock seats.(not so well with a helmet on) If I sit upright with little back lean I cannot use a helmet. I'll take some measurements later tonight for interior height and leg length.

[kach22i]

I have a 94 RX-7 that I manage to fit in a 6'3" and 200 lb with stock seats.(not so well with a helmet on) If I sit upright with little back lean I cannot use a helmet. I'll take some measurements later tonight for interior height and leg length.
Sounds right, looks to be just over four feet high, and has a low seat.

Concave hood curve................just a tiny bit like "O's" if you squint your eyes and hit yourself on the head several times.
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/off-topic-discussions/391522-random-transportation-pictures-684.html
8030

[Niburu]

there's a word that describes that thing but I'm pretty sure it's blocked

[Exidous]

I did a little measuring for the Rx-7. Total height 45" Seat to headliner 38" Ground to seat 7". The car is lowered about .5". The non-touring version adds about an inch of headroom due to no sunroof. Mine has a sunroof. :-(

[kach22i]

I did a little measuring for the Rx-7. Total height 45" Seat to headliner 38" Ground to seat 7". The car is lowered about .5". The non-touring version adds about an inch of headroom due to no sunroof. Mine has a sunroof. :-(
Picked up some more data from Wiki and here:
http://www.rx7club.com/showthread.php?t=694523

4.5" ground clearance (from link above) but lowered .5" would be 4", right?

When you say "Ground to seat 7"" you really do mean the ground and not bottom of cab floor, right?

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


FYI: I found some approach angle information which could be useful when tweaking a sports car design.
http://www.6speedonline.com/forums/gt3-gt2-gt/161889-gt3-ground-clearance.html

The regular Porsche 911 has an approach angle of 11.8 degrees, the GT2 only 5.5 degrees. I have not measured Rodney's, but I bet it's close to the GT2's angle if I recall correctly.

8064

EDIT
Quick Study - measured on screen with an adjustable triangle
http://s184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile%202%20-%20Odds%20and%20Ends/
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile%202%20-%20Odds%20and%20Ends/detail-approchangle-818_m_4.jpg

[RodneyO]

the added lip at the bottom is a track upgrade, you should measure it from the black part :)

[kach22i]

the added lip at the bottom is a track upgrade, you should measure it from the black part :)
Cool, that just about doubles the angle for street use.

[Exidous]

I measured again. 45.25" ish total height. Ground clearance is about 4". Little lower in a spot due to exhaust. The seat where my butt touches it to the ground is about 8". I am 38" hip bone to top of head standing. If you lean back a little in the car there is definately room to be created. I think wookie with be very possible with a 45" height however my seats are considerably shorter than stock wrx seats.

[kach22i]

.........about 8"..............my seats are considerably shorter than stock wrx seats.
Defiantly possible to fit it all in at 45" with all other conditions prime. What I cannot get over with your car is the structure depth of the floor assembly. It must be at zero, or the thickness of the sheet metal floor pan it's self. If I use 4" ground clearance and a 4" seat to floor height, that adds up to the 8" from seat to ground plane.

On other cars such as the Porsche Boxster there are structural elements accounting for an approximate 4" floor structure depth.

On the earlier generation of RX7, it looks like Mazda places the floor rib on the inside, cannot find 3rd gen photos, but have to assume they are similar.
http://slcsubaru.freeforums.org/my-winter-projects-rx7-and-subie-t6679.html
8087

On this page below are photos of floor reinforcement for a race seat on a sedan. I find this sort of work/mod very interesting.

Merkur XR4ti Rally seat frame fabrication
http://izzyscages.wordpress.com/

[olpro]

As one considers lower seats for large drivers, it is important to maintain the proper angles. This graphic is from one study on seat comfort.
8097

[riptide motorsport]

interesting bit of knowledge there.

[dclin]

Defiantly possible to fit it all in at 45" with all other conditions prime. What I cannot get over with your car is the structure depth of the floor assembly. It must be at zero, or the thickness of the sheet metal floor pan it's self. If I use 4" ground clearance and a 4" seat to floor height, that adds up to the 8" from seat to ground plane.

On other cars such as the Porsche Boxster there are structural elements accounting for an approximate 4" floor structure depth.

On the earlier generation of RX7, it looks like Mazda places the floor rib on the inside, cannot find 3rd gen photos, but have to assume they are similar.
http://slcsubaru.freeforums.org/my-winter-projects-rx7-and-subie-t6679.html
8087

On this page below are photos of floor reinforcement for a race seat on a sedan. I find this sort of work/mod very interesting.

Merkur XR4ti Rally seat frame fabrication
http://izzyscages.wordpress.com/

I think it really comes down to is that, if we want the most accurate indication of how WC the design is going to be, we need to be looking at the height from seat cushion to top of roof as the the most reliable indicator. Of course, that's a harder measurement to come by, unless we have any given car to measure. I'll try to stop by the storage next weekend to yank out the seats and pull back the carpet as well.

While we have no idea how the interior will be constructed at this point, I think it should be easy enough to offer a 'headliner-less' version of the roof, to give wookies that extra inch or so that they will need (or simply layup a layer of alcantara on the underside of the roof, for minimal thickness). Won't help with keeping wind/road noise down by any means, but then again, I never considered this as a replacement for a Lexus.

*edit - taking a looking at your pic, IIRC, the 3rd gen is nearly identical to the 2nd gen in floorpan lay-out. There is a rib that runs laterally where the front mounts of the seat rest, and the rear mounts rest on the 'floor-pan', which gives the seats their 'rake'.

[Exidous]

There is almost no structural support directly under the seat. It really is just a plain floor pan. There are ribs where the rails mount. The front is above the floor pan about an inch and the back is actually recessed into the floor pan. You can actually see through the floor when you remover one of the seat rear mounts.

Keep in mind that the seat is probably 2-3" thick near the back where the butt meets the seat. The rails add about an inch but they are very low profile.

8098

Also when I sit vertically my angle B trunk to thigh is probably <90*.

[RM1SepEx]

Exactly correct,

there is no floor thickness to consider, even in a normal production car, just sheet metal with some sort of bends and definition to make it stiffer. On a tube frame car, just the seat brackets and floor material. In my trike (1 inch tube drame, .060 aluminum floor) just 1/8 or 3/16 tabs welded to the frame tubes and the center tunnel tubes. The seat rails can be as little as 1/2 thick to get ball bearing slides fitted. The bottom of your butt, from the ground can easily be only 2 1/2 inches more than your ground clearance. If the back reclines a bit and your legs go up to the front and the knees bend you can "fold" a human into a smaller space than you expect.

I can't fathom 4 inches of floor structure below any seat

[kach22i]

there is no floor thickness to consider..............I can't fathom 4 inches of floor structure below any seat
Just to clarify that on a conventional uni-body car, there are ribs or channels (RX7 has them on the inside, non-typical) about 3-1/2" deep, there is the waffling of the pan it's self of about 1/2". And there is normally a drip edge sheet metal flange which could extend another 1/2".

None of the above applies to the FFR 818 because of the steel tube chassis. And as discussed in several other threads we will most likely end up with a sheet of something (which the seat is mounted to) under the steel tube chassis frame. This would be a near zero structure height.

Another option based on photos of the frame, would be seat bracing or mounting tubes of about 1", in between the main 1-1/2" tubes from which the seats would be mounted, see #2 below.

Structure allotments so far discussed (in other threads) for the 818 have been:

1. Zero, or thickness of a floor plate.
2. One inch, thickness of a cross spar
3. One and one half inch, estimated thickness of the steel tube chassis frame, with cross supports of same size.
4. Two inches, allowing for #3 above, plus a honeycomb composite body floor pan.
.................................................. .................................................. ..

Rodney, do you have an image of the engine bay lid open?

I would like to see one, maybe it's been posted already, I just don't seem to remember seeing it at the moment.

[RM1SepEx]

George, I see what you are saying, I just went out to survey my vehicles...

Ist gen Miata, there is a "frame rail" under the seat total Floor thickness 1.5 inches, top of seat cushion to roof 37 inches

2004 Siverado, body on frame, thickness could be measured in feet! :-) from seat to roof 42 inches

69 Saab Sonett no rail, essentialy zero thickness, to roof 35 inches (no one really fits in a Sonett)

2001 DeVille rails under the seat still only 1.5 inches deep, the seat cushion is 6 inches above the floor, low seat not desired... seat to roof 40 inches

Reverse trike tube frame ground clearance 5 inches, just tabs off the bottom of the frame tubes, aluminum floor, top of seat is exactly 2 inches above the floor at the rearmost with low profile seat rails. infinite headroom, no roof

This is the situation that we should expect for the 818 and this mirrors the setup on the GTM (I think it has a steel floor in that area.) When you have a perimeter frame setup with design constraints you run the tubes beside, infront, or in back of the seat area, not under it.

Dan

Design criteria for a unibody car is quite different as to where the strength comes from in the design.

[BipDBo]

deleted post

[BipDBo]

[QUOTE=BipDBo;52576]So they posted on Facebook...QUOTE]

That got posted in the wrong thread.

[Flamshackle]

I am really surprised that the most active thread on this 818 site has gone silent so suddenly???

Rodney? are you out there? more renderings? tweaks?

Final design getting ready for production?

[Niburu]

might be because he is now secretly working at FFR and he be publicly discuss production model stuff.......at least that's what I'm hoping
and that Xabier is being consulted too

[Flamshackle]

Yea lets hope so... Dave Smith did say something to the effect that its Rodneys design being done so I am pretty confident now that it will be.

[RodneyO]

Hi guys, I am around lurking every now and then. I have moved on to another project at the moment, but on the FFR end I have sent the 3d cad files to them, so I'm Kind of in wait mode as well just like everyone else =).

However I have been programming a few things inside the 3d viewer when I get a chance. I might upload one more final viewer if I ever get around to finishing it, there are no new changes to the design since you guys saw it last, a few little tweaks. But with this new 3d viewer I'm hoping you can customize the car with different options; Change spoilers, Tires, size of rims, colors, decals, window tint, ground kit variations and combinations, I'm improving the camera as well so you can sort fly around the car and not just spin it. But It's about 2 weeks out for that to get done.

I'm little anxious as well, I want to see what the new design that FFR has cooking looks like, I don't think FFR will disappoint.

[Flashburn]

Who knows #_#

[riptide motorsport]

cool!

[Flamshackle]

Hi guys, I am around lurking every now and then. I have moved on to another project at the moment, but on the FFR end I have sent the 3d cad files to them, so I'm Kind of in wait mode as well just like everyone else =).

However I have been programming a few things inside the 3d viewer when I get a chance. I might upload one more final viewer if I ever get around to finishing it, there are no new changes to the design since you guys saw it last, a few little tweaks. But with this new 3d viewer I'm hoping you can customize the car with different options; Change spoilers, Tires, size of rims, colors, decals, window tint, ground kit variations and combinations, I'm improving the camera as well so you can sort fly around the car and not just spin it. But It's about 2 weeks out for that to get done.

I'm little anxious as well, I want to see what the new design that FFR has cooking looks like, I don't think FFR will disappoint.

Thanks Rodney :D great to hear... Love the idea of a customizable 3D viewer as I spend to much time as it is perving at your current one!

[shinn497]

Hi guys, I am around lurking every now and then. I have moved on to another project at the moment, but on the FFR end I have sent the 3d cad files to them, so I'm Kind of in wait mode as well just like everyone else =).

However I have been programming a few things inside the 3d viewer when I get a chance. I might upload one more final viewer if I ever get around to finishing it, there are no new changes to the design since you guys saw it last, a few little tweaks. But with this new 3d viewer I'm hoping you can customize the car with different options; Change spoilers, Tires, size of rims, colors, decals, window tint, ground kit variations and combinations, I'm improving the camera as well so you can sort fly around the car and not just spin it. But It's about 2 weeks out for that to get done.

I'm little anxious as well, I want to see what the new design that FFR has cooking looks like, I don't think FFR will disappoint.

Rodney your design was perfect. Everytime you posted a new pic I shared it on my FB because it was automotive beauty. If I get any indication that FFR will build it mostly untouched I'd wait for that over what they first unveil.

[Doc_FFR]

bump.
Here's to hoping the CAD file looks like one of this

[07FIREBLADE]

I am so totally on bored for it if it was. Hopefully we will know what it looks like year soon. This is a favorite one and while Rodney was doing his tweeks to it continued to get more and more refined looking better and better like a car that they could produce. This body is what is HoF to me and all my coworkers and buddies. A hardtop wouldn't be that hard to fabricate either if this is the one. If its not I hope that it finds it way into the coupe version

[dsmithwc04]

Rodney, were you still working on the viewer with updated camera angles and more adjustable options like wheels and such? Also, I'm curious as to what wheels (offset, backspacing, etc..) are on it as it sits. I am new to this thread and 23 pages is a lot to take in... Thanks!

[bbjones121]

Anyyone know if ffr is working on aero version?

[Niburu]

I'm hoping for som Rodney-O styled body options, like a revised front fascia, rear clip, or a bolt-on hardtop.

[Mechie3]

Anyyone know if ffr is working on aero version?

Unlikely at this point. Focus is on the 818S and the 818R. Until those get released, they're not working on other 818 variants.

[tkindred]

OK, I am new to Factory Five. The only reason I started digging into this is because I saw a random photo of your car in Google images. It looks fantastic. The thing I can't figure out after pouring through countless threads and other sites is if this car will be built? From what I could piece together is that this is on of several designs that were entered into a competition for the next 818. When is the new 818 going to be released or it's design decided on? If it looks close to anything like your car I would be very interested.

[GUNS]

You are correct that this was one of the designs picked in the competition, but it will not be built. I recommend you go to factoryfive.com and check out the 818 section for actual pictures of the car.

[tkindred]

You are correct that this was one of the designs picked in the competition, but it will not be built. I recommend you go to factoryfive.com and check out the 818 section for actual pictures of the car.

Thanks for the response. I was a little confused. I see the 818 that is on the website but then it says mid 2013 for the new 818. So the two cars shown, the red and blue cars, on the website is the final product of the 818 project?

[Silvertop]

Thanks for the response. I was a little confused. I see the 818 that is on the website but then it says mid 2013 for the new 818. So the two cars shown, the red and blue cars, on the website is the final product of the 818 project?

While details are on the Street (red car) and Track (blue car) are still being finalized, these two cars will look pretty much like what you see. Both versions are expected to be in production by June of 2013. There will ultimately be other versions of the car -- a coupe, or targa/coupe, plus a high mileage eco-version -- which will be produced later. It is not clear if the bodies will be variants of the current shape, or whether they might look like something else altogether -- perhaps even like Rodney O's popular design. I think that is possible -- though not particularly probable. But only time will tell.

[bromikl]

We do know Rodney was working on something for Factory Five. Though I'll build whatever they sell, I keep hoping Rodney's design one day becomes an option.

[flynntuna]

Since we're back on this thread, just a thought, please tell me were I'm wrong. The 818 like the MK4 and hotrod use a bolt on windshield. The hot rods hard top has the windshield and top as one piece, I'm thinking to make fitting the door glass easier. The question is wouldn't fitting the windshield, top and door glass on a targa design and make it weather proof not to mention wind noise, be very difficult?

[timmy318]

....fitting the windshield, top and door glass on a targa design and make it weather proof not to mention wind noise, be very difficult?

100% Correct! That's why I think that FFR isn't going to roll out a targa but instead go with a coupe!

[Niburu]

I don't think the 818S windshield frame is bolt-on

[metalmaker12]

Offcoarse it is bolt on, it is not part of the frame.

[kach22i]

UPDATE: 04/16/13

I saw an article on the Detroit Electric today, sort of like Rodney's mated with a Tesla.

http://www.designnews.com/author.asp?section_id=1366&doc_id=261927&dfpPParams=ind_184,industry_auto,bid_318,aid_26192 7&dfpLayout=blog&dfpPParams=ind_184,industry_auto,bid_318,aid_26192 7&dfpLayout=blog
16711

http://www.detroit-electric.com/our-story.php
16710

[bbjones121]

I have seen several concept cars that you would think Rodey helped with. Maybe he got some cues from them. Either way, I wish the 818 picked up on some of the future designs out there like Rodneys designed seemed to.

[Mechie3]

Looks more to me like a lotus (since rodney's car looked a bit like a cartooned lotus). Not surprising given the former CEO of lotus engineering re-started detroit electric.

[RM1SepEx]

It's just a slightly modified Elise...

[blueafro]

Looks almost unmodified from the body on the current model. That's the updated body that never made it to the US.