818 Sample Model 4

[Dave Smith]

I asked John (who is our master shaper) to put a bit of detail into one of the models. I picked Jim's model because I was considering taking it to SEMA and wanted to see it a bit more refined than last Saturday. John added some minor details and we took some better quality pictures. I think the difference is quite dramatic and feel like the top of my head is getting warmer (higher HoF quotient).

You guys asked for some better images and if your feedback here matches how I'm feeling, we might go further with the models (the SEMA truck left this morning so to get all 4 models to a higher level of detail will have to wait until after SEMA). I think the difference is dramatic, but you guys should be the judges.

http://www.factoryfive.com/818/images/5a.jpg
I took the liberty of chopping the windshield, although I would like to see it more raked as the model appears to have been milled a bit off when it comes to windshield rake.

http://www.factoryfive.com/818/images/1b.jpg
Right front corner from a higher elevation shows the rear end that is often lost of these corner shots.

http://www.factoryfive.com/818/images/1c.jpg
This photo shows how the rear end doesn't really get proper notice.

http://www.factoryfive.com/818/images/2b.jpg
At first, I thought this was an AMG Mercedes. I really like these lines, although I'm still not sold on the radiator opening.

http://www.factoryfive.com/818/images/2c.jpg
Another hood detail since so many people had issues with Jim's hood.

http://www.factoryfive.com/818/images/3b.jpg
This shot reminds me of a 355 Ferrari stance.

http://www.factoryfive.com/818/images/4a.jpg
Here's a rear quarter elevation shot.

[Dave Smith]

http://www.factoryfive.com/818/images/4b.jpg
This is a great shot of the rear clip that shows how much detail is really in the shape.

http://www.factoryfive.com/818/images/4c.jpg
This photo shows how dramatic the rear radius are in the fender. Previous photos don't really show the rear clip well.

http://www.factoryfive.com/818/images/4d.jpg
From this angle, the flair is lost a bit, but the width of the rear end comes through better. The car really does have a wide rear end that communicates a mini-supercar feel.

http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=5451&d=1319303460
Image from Saturday's 818 Project Update shows very little detail.

[Steve91T]

Jim's model was my least favorite, until now. That looks so much better with all of the detail. What a difference! It has great lines and functionality. This one honestly is now one of my favorites.


You guys are doing a really great job.

Steve

[VTX]

Sorry, but I'm still not a fan. My initial impression is a body kitted "ricer" to me, especially the front. I also don't like those headlights at all.

I hope this isn't offensive, but I just wanted to give my honest opinion.

[riptide motorsport]

looks good to me.

[Dave Smith]

More than the degree to which you may or may not like it, I think the excercise shows that the scale model only gives an "idea" of the car. I am really struggling with commiting more money to some additional models or more time in CAD as I think the evolution of current designs vs. adding a few all-new ones is one of the battles to consider.

[BipDBo]

It looks much better with the details. I'll have to revise my statement about it looking like a Camry with a truckload of fiberglass bolt-ons to say that it's a decent looking car. It doesn't light my hair on fire, and it's not my favorite. I just think that you have some much better models. The blue Olmos car gets me excited and the black Nouphone car sets my hair on fire. Behind the wheel of the Nouphone design, I'd feel like 007. Personally, I think that you should take all of the models to SEMA. Everyone has different tastes, so you can give everyone something to swoon over. Also, you can get a lot of valuable first impression feedback. If you have time to add these details, that would be of great value.

[PhyrraM]

Why did Jim pick Camry lights as a starting point? They are huge. I think the choice of lights is dictating the lines of the front of the car too much.

The rear is looking much better.

Still think the overall is too mechanical to really set many HoF.

The radiator opening needs to be wider and ditch the brake cooling vents for some foglights or something. The street version does not need all the detracting scoops, vents, etc. All they add is visual clutter (IMHO, of course).

If your going to do a "shifted panel" type of thing for the front fender exhaust vents, why not try the same effect on the rear fender inlet. The current air scoop is not flowing with the design.

Lower the seat/deck fairings a bit.

Constructive criticism aside....It's looking pretty decent.

[flyboy2160]

I like this even less now. The body overwhelms the wheels, especially in the side view. The front overhang and bulk of the front of the car are too large. Why is the front overhang so much larger than the rear overhang? This just looks like a "kit car," like the list somebody posted on the other thread. I still like the Olmos design much more than this....

[PhyrraM]

..... The body overwhelms the wheels, especially in the side view. .......

I agree, but "Wookie size" and "Donor sized wheels" (dictated by $9900 goal) don't leave much other choice.

[ScottKoschwitz]

Overall, I like it even more now. You can definitely see more of the detail now. I li,e that we can see the shutlines as well. Looks like we'll have a trunk, and I like the fact that the body will not be all one piece.

As for constructive criticism: I like everything after the leading edge of the front wheel. I agree that the front overhang appears to be a little long for a mid-engined car. Also, I think the "face" is too exaggerated; the headlights look a little too large, and the lower portion of the front looks too like an overly large mouth.

[Steve91T]

What I'm excited about is how much of a difference adding the detail made. I agree with most of the comments here. The rear vents do need work. They still remind me of the MRS.

It's going to end up looking like a really great car. I can't wait to see the detail with the other cars.

[onyx_riddle]

I adore what's happening here. You have an excellent team. Keep it up. I am saving as we speak. :)

[adesilva]

I think that the car looks 100x better than what we previously saw. It still doesnt give me the HOF feeling but if I were to see that in person I would now think it was a pretty good looking car.

What it makes me think now is what the others would look like with this kind of detail (Mainly Nouphone model because I really feel it would have a nice Aston Martin look that I love, someone also mentioned feeling like 007 which goes with my thoughts) As of right now you guys have a difficult decision to make mainly because of how expensive it is to do all this stuff. I trust that Dave and his team will make the right decision (if their even is one) in the end and we will end up with one very sexy car

[thebeerbaron]

I've been quiet and flip-flopping internally this week, but this goes back to my statement (now on film!) that Jim's design had the most potential. I think there's still some things I'd want to refine, but adding in the panel lines and details really brought out the design.

I'd really love to see this thing in full-scale. The difference between 1/4 and full-scale is amazing.

One of the things that came out during Saturday's reveal was just how much production and assembly constraints impact the body design. And I think Jim knows those constraints better than anyone.

Is it as hair-incinerating as I had hoped? Not really. But it's getting there. I could see the Race version going to production now and a refined street version following that up.

[vozproto]

Still love the car UNTIL you get fwd of the windscreen.
Allow me to demonstrate without saying it looks like an MR...

http://www.factoryfive.com/818/images/1c.jpg

http://www.distrocars.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/2005-Hyundai-Tiburon-Front-Side-590x442.jpg

The front hood lines and headlights still need some attention.

[onyx_riddle]

As for constructive criticism: I like everything after the leading edge of the front wheel. I agree that the front overhang appears to be a little long for a mid-engined car. Also, I think the "face" is too exaggerated; the headlights look a little too large, and the lower portion of the front looks too like an overly large mouth.

I can somewhat agree with this. The front end does look a little too exaggerated. This is obviously a concept so far so I don't feel disappointed. I think the real culprit behind the negativity that some have shown when voicing their opinions is due to the fact that we all have an idea of what we would want it to look like. I want it to look like a 459 Italia or a Carerra GT. Obviously this won't happen. I guess if i had to complain though I would probably say that the front end just doesn't work as-is. It would make a great car right now. Slap in a motor and ill drive it. But this isn't meant to be a Mazda. It will more than likely rival Elise's on the track. So I say nix the blitz front end, at most. The rest is sexy as Hell. Minus the front end, it looks like a car that came from the same company that built a $50k Enzo killer.

Keep on kickin it, guys. I love it!

[vozproto]

A followup to my own post.

There will obviously be more design changes and reviews to come.

Maybe we can take THIS model (or whichever is deemed to have the most potential) and toss it to our community chock full of VERY talented designers to try and tweak it and give it a soul.

We have been a very collaborative community up to this point. Why leave this next round of design behind closed doors?

[Vman7]

I just don't like the front area that much.

[wooward]

I agree that the model does look drastically different. I'd like to see the other 3 done as well so I can make a better decision.

Will the High MPG and track bodies be bolt ons for the roadster? I'm curious because I want to get a body that sets my HoF and if the roadster body doesn't, I'd like to wait to see what the other bodies are. Hopefully one is Shawn Weston's. I could definitely do with the Targa.

[shinn497]

BIG Improvement and very good point made about how little details and picture quality can effect the design. One has to wonder why you are commiting resources to this model when it was the least liked. Esp cosidering the support for Olmos and Xabier.

I think the big complaint with this design is that it looks too much like a rounded rectangle. Especially in profile, it does not look as sleek.

[Gary in NJ]

Dave,

I think adding details made the model easier to interpret. I would be interested in seeing similar details added to the other models.

[skullandbones]

I'm not a designer but I can tell you the grille opening does not fit at all. Just as a starting point (suggestion): ditch the small vents widen the grille opening. Take the slight curve out of the bar on top and maybe add a splitter in the opening to further narrow the look of the opening. Someone concentrating just on the grille (designer) could make the front match the great design of the rest of it much better. I do like it for the most part. It's just that grille that is a turnoff. WEK.

[AVIONX]

If people think Xabiers car looks too much like an aggressive catfish. That beats this fem looking catfish face all day long. It has been said many time. And the voting clearly bears this out. We all wants Jims design to tbe the best, but designing a mind blowing world class exterior is just nit his appearent strong point.
MUST FIXES. Everything that makes this thing look like it has a Viper V10 under the front hood. Front fenders not flush with doors. Fenders look like soneone took an unflared lame original design, then flared them, then added lips to make them look "flarier" Bleck :( This is a hodge podge design. Xabiers blows it away. So do most of the other designs. Please stop trying to "elevate" this design becuase we like Jim so much. Elevate the best design. And everyone will be the happiest, and most satisfied.

[Dave Smith]

"fem looking catfish" "Hodge podge design" . Hmm. I havent elevated any design, simply picked one for reasons of time and guys, to do as you guys asked and show pictures with better detail. If the better photos/detail was helpful, it was my intention to do more. Still, bridging the gap seems pretty unlikely here and it may be that we strike out in a new direction altogether. My simple goal and about 25 man hours went into this request, to put more details on and ask sensible questions about the process in a respectful way. I am welcome to all points of view. The design goals set forth a year ago, the chassis work, running gear slection, body design competition, presentation of project status, expertise of suppliers, efforts of super-talented people, and even the present shape of one of four designs in scale form (which admitedly lacks clear translation to full-size ergo Barbie syndrome), made worse by the KNOWN translational differences between print and real space... All of them beg for some constructive criticism and a bit of lattitude. No-one here wants a bunch of "yes" men... still, I would buy this car for $9,900 and build it under $15K as it is right now. My goals are just much higher. I think I have thick enough skin because I've done this five times before in differing degrees. Thaks for the candor though, it helps us tremendously as I would rather not go to market with a fem catfish car. :)

[VTX]

The new details, camera angles, telephoto, etc., all definitely help to give a much more realistic impression of what the car would really look like. So, as far as that goes I think you succeeded in that goal. Thanks for taking the time to do that.

[onyx_riddle]

I would quote you, but I would sound like a kiss-***. The open-ended design process you have going on just blows my mind. And the patience to absorb the criticism and spit out great products. That's why you are where you are. We need more people like you running the big names in this country. The responsibilities of a CEO are hard enough and you willingly add an extra element of democracy. This is now my homepage.

[ElderDragon]

Wow, I am really impressed with how much this car looks like a real vehicle with the details added! Just glancing quickly it actually looks like a real car!

On the flip side, I still really dislike this design, especially given how many fantastic submissions were made for the contest.

[Psay]

What a difference these details have made. It is still far from my favourite design, however, what it proves is that carrying out similar work on the other three designs and with the same type of photographs we should take us a step closer to a HOF experience.

[jimgood]

The details really make a difference. I didn't have a problem with this design before but the added detail really sets it off. I'd build one. I don't have an artists eye so I'm not bothered by some of the things around which most complaints are centered. Camry headlights? Who cares. They look good to me. Catfish mouth? Hardly. I've been up close and personal with a few catfish and this looks more like a goldfish. Regardless, it looks right for this car. Build it, Dave.

[Michael Lye]

Hi Dave,

I've got to give you guys a lot of credit. You're doing a great job on the 818. And to do the detailing on Jim's car, re-photograph it and get it up here while you're getting ready for SEMA is a sign of your real commitment to the forum members and this process. I do have a little general advice (worth every penny you're paying for it...) that may also be worth considering by the folks here.

1) You'll never satisfy everyone. No matter what you do there will be those that like something else better. And if you try to satisfy as many people as possible you've got a Camry or Taurus.

2) Don't give up on a concept as a result of criticism. Understanding and incorporating the criticism (when appropriate) can help to refine a concept. But see point 1.

3) "A camel is a horse designed by a committee." Or to put it another way: design is not a democratic process. Ultimately it's FFR job to use your vision to design and make the car you think is best. I'm pretty confident (understatement) that it will be an amazing car that many people will really want to buy. If you were to make ALL the changes everyone has suggested here, you'd end up with a pretty ugly toad. It might be Prince Charming in driving dynamics but it'd sure be ugly.

4) Finally (at least for now!) the first version you create won't satisfy everyone (point 1) and neither will the second, or the third but those that don't like the first may really like the second or third versions. The swatch watch approach gives you so many opportunities. Limited edition body styles? Really wild custom one-offs? An annual design contest with a new body going into limited production to replace older versions?

Okay so those last two ideas were just to see if both Dave and Jim start twitching!

Really though, I realize Dave already knows all this stuff. But it's still good to remember it. And for the folks reading this, I hate to say it but some of you (probably very few) might be a little disappointed at first when the initial 818 is released. But if you really don't like it, the next version might just be your cup of tea - or should that be cup of Red Bull. Tea sounds to sedate and I think Dave and crew are going to have to live on energy drinks to try to deal with everyone's impatience! ;)

Michael

[onyx_riddle]

I haven't seen this asked yet.. but do we know what colors your new no-paint kits can come in? This I find very interesting.

[adesilva]

I haven't seen this asked yet.. but do we know what colors your new no-paint kits can come in? This I find very interesting.

I believe we will be able to get a selection of colors but I know Dave has stated that Dark and Light colors would need different molds so we may be restricted to one or the other when the kit is first released.

[onyx_riddle]

I believe we will be able to get a selection of colors but I know Dave has stated that Dark and Light colors would need different molds so we may be restricted to one or the other when the kit is first released.

Sounds great! Thanks for the info! :)

[slopoke]

Dave ... my faith restored .... the difference is dramatic. It's amazing what a little definition can do. I can't wait to see the others this way ... It will definately help with the tweaking of the designs

[Oppenheimer]

Remember the movie "He Got Game"? Denzel and Ray Allen, HS basketball star has to decide which College to go with? Spike Lee tells the story that he had a dilema for the lead role, pick an actor, teach him to play B-Ball, or find a B-Baller and teach him acting. He went with the athlete, Ray Allen.

Dave, it seems you have a similar dilema. Go with the model you got, teach it set HoF, or go with one of the other contest submissions that already set HoF, and teach it to be manufacturable, to fit the template, etc.

Which, in the end, will involve less effort? Which will end up with a better result?

To try and answer that, I can't help but revisit the question of why the top 3 contest winners were chosen to model? The judeges were not tasked with picking a manufacturable design. They weren't told their choices had to fit the template. FFR never committed to baseing the 818 design on the contest winner(s).

Maybe there are designs among the 700 club that didn't win, yet would be manufacturable, do fit the template enough to make work, and that already set lots of HoF. So my suggestion is the following:

- go back to the 700 club, weed out anything that isn't feasible. That can't be tweaked to be manufacturable, or to fit the template
- Then you and the FFR guys go through those and pare them down to the top 10 or so
- Then present those to us to vote on

If there are 3 or so that really stand out, that really set HoF, then work with those instead. Model them, tweak those designs further to really make them pop. If there is no clear consensus, you can stick with the models you got, you did your due diligence.

This effort would take a little time, but not much $. You don't have to worry about sinking a bunch of cash into alternate designs only to find out people like the original models better.

[slopoke]

... and just my other $.02 ... I REALLY like the wheel design on the charcoal model. Is there any way that these can be brought to fruition (offered as an option maybe? ) I think they would look good on any of the four models.

[Dave Smith]

Still, the truth is that great design is great design and for the 818 to be the car that I KNOW it can be (in three variants), we HAVE to have a shape that is jaw-dropping gorgeous. I think the criticism is fair and needed and that in the end, it will be our unwavering commitment to that shape being more than just Ok. When we get back from SEMA I will try and get the other cars shot and posted similar to keep things on an even keel. My problem is that I dont have that feeling yet... let me explain,

I bought a Ferrari 360 from a guy for very short money back when the economy crashed. I drove it a bit and planned to sell it for a small gain. The car was a very good driving car (not as fast as my GTM but with superior coachwork for sure). Anyway, the point is that the shape was better every time I looked at it. In the short time I had it I found myself looking at it for longer and longer periods of time. I do that with my roadsters, for sure my Coupe, and especially my GTM. After about a year I sold the Ferrari (broke dead even ugh), I'm not a Ferrari guy plain and simple. But the shape that pinninfarina sculpted never faded.

We are not pinninfarina, but to join the ranks of FFR cars, the 818 in all it's forms will have to be a shape that makes you look at it longer and longer. This process is helping that happen and despite my "feelings" or those of anyone at FFR (OR anyone who submitted a design that didnt make it), the discourse of our community is central to the moment in time when we pull back a car cover and reveal to the world what mad men we truly are!

[fateo66]

I'm sorry but I still do not like this design. I think it looks to close to the Subaru kit car that is already available; the Murtaya :(

http://old.fnarg.com/murtaya800.jpg

http://www.factoryfive.com/818/images/1b.jpg

[kitcarj]

This was my first pick of the 1/4 scale models and it helps a lot to see it finished like this but it isn't as exciting as I had hoped. It looks like a nice tuner kit on an Eclipse or Toyota MRS.

[kitcarj]

Dave, I think you have a whole set of guys waiting for this car that wouldn't care if it looked like a Yugo if it meets the track performance you are expecting. I am the opposite, but releasing something suitable for that (and the guys that like that particular design would be happy also) would give you something to get cash flow in case it takes longer to work out the HoF cars. It would also get some real world use to the chassis and build process to work out any remaining kinks.

[Tpa65cpe]

As the old saying goes "what a difference a day makes" thank you Dave Smith for your paitence and thick skin!! The diffeerence is just amazing in Jim's design with a little time and tweaking I cant wait to see this done to the others. My hof design is the Olmos one and Xabiers 2nd that still has not changed but this simple exercise in tweaking these designs definitly has my attention rivited for further news. I hope this forum does not get too critical of any design for they all look good IMHO!! Thanks again for your patience with the feedback,I dont think anyone is tryint to be uncivil just giving their honest opinions in this process, Keep it up its looking great!!!

[D2W]

What a dramatic difference. I'll echo the others that I can't wait to see you do this to the other models. I still think Jim's design needs some major tweeks in design, especially the front end, but solvable. I think you should definately detail the other models before you do anything else, and then see where you are. I think between the four you will find a winner liked by the majority of people. I want you to pick my #1, but I would also build my #2. If you decide to go back and pick out others I doubt you will find one design that everyone loves. If you do decide to let the community vote on other designs as favorites I would suggest changing them to fit real world dimensions. A design that is impossibly short, with 30" tires may look good on paper, but doesn't do you any good.

P.S. Also remember that everyone has an opinion, and that's all it is, one opinion. While the critical ones may stand out more you still have a lot of support for all the models.

[16g-95gsx]

It's amazing how much a little extra detail brings to the design. Honestly, while I hate the choice of wheels on this car (I think you'd be better off running something similar to your off-the-shelf GTM wheels you sell), I think the design is coming to life more. I think from the windshield forward it needs quick a bit of work, but it certainly looks better. I still don't have that HoF feel, but this at least gives more hope to me.

I still say take xabier's design, shorten/lower the front end, add a hood vent, and get rid of the absurd hoop and you'll be closer to something. It's getting there though.

[Silvertop]

I still say take xabier's design, shorten/lower the front end, add a hood vent, and get rid of the absurd hoop and you'll be closer to something. It's getting there though.

Only problem with THAT is that some of us LIKE the absurd hoop....................:)

[NicksPapaw]

It is amazing what a little bit of detail does to the look of the model, (if 25 man hours can be considered a little bit :) ). I think that once this level of detail is applied to the other models, someone will have to grab the water bucket to douse the HOF! As I said last night, I believe you will get it right before it comes to market. Thanks for letting us peek behind your wall of madness.

[16g-95gsx]

Only problem with THAT is that some of us LIKE the absurd hoop....................:)

I understand the need for a full roll bar, but something about the way it was done in the model just doesn't look right at all and it certainly doesn't flow with the car.

[David]

Dave,

How about doing the same with the Red and Black car? Jim, you know I love you man... but them are my favorites after Daves webcast.

At least bring those three to SEMA!

David

[Oppenheimer]

I understand the need for a full roll bar, but something about the way it was done in the model just doesn't look right at all and it certainly doesn't flow with the car.

A decision was made between RISD & FFR to thicken the hoop to cover the rollbar, one of the few mods to the Xabier design that took it from paper to 3D.

I would prefer the thin hoop from the drawing to remain, and the flatblack rollbar to simply be left exposed. the bar would be under the hoop, so wouldn't be very visible. The hoop would remain thin vertically, but horizontally, viewed from above, it would/could be rather thick. Thus the only way you'd see the exposed rollbar would be to peek under the hoop, from behind (or from front, but more difficult to see from that angle). Plus it being flatblack it would be obscured by the shadow of the hoop.

[Someday I Suppose]

To David's point, the additional detail makes a huge difference in Jim's design, but would love to see what it does to the Red and Black. I have to say I really like both of those designs and in the original models am drawn to Xabiers design the most, with the added detail, hmmmm.

I like Jim's design a lot as well, as some others have noted from the front wheel back really like it a lot, something about that front wrap though that I am not in love with... Maybe Jim's car just needs to be painted black though....

[Silvertop]

I understand the need for a full roll bar, but something about the way it was done in the model just doesn't look right at all and it certainly doesn't flow with the car.

Actually, we don't really know yet what that hoop really looks like, due to the second-story-window angle at which the Xabier model (and the others as well) was photographed. We should all probably reserve judgment until we get some camera angles at ground level.

In any event, that hoop, or something like it, would need to be there for application of a Targa-style removable roof panel, which many of us are hoping for. End of Threadjack..............

[BipDBo]

If you do the detail treatment to the black car, you may want to start with painting it a different color. I'm sure it looks stunning in real life, but the color is so dark, that in photos, it's very difficult to really see the car's lines. It will be better with higher quality photos, but I'm wagering not much.

[skullandbones]

I, too, appreciate Dave's patience in this process. I am surprised to see how far he is willing to go out on a limb, so to speak. But I think he sees the opportunity to get consensus but consensus for a really great design not just compromise for the sake of compromise. No one wants a "fem catfish" or a "camel".

I believe this process may be painful in some ways but it points out something as it goes forward. The design mods (or way they are presented) get better and better as you go, so little things that people don't like tend to stand out more. So we have the gorgeous woman in the little black dress and now she is being accessorized! (no feminine insensitivity intended) WEK.

[apexanimal]

dave -

thanks for taking the time to have the model touched-up and shot well...

there's a HUGE difference and gives a much more realistic feel to the car... and i do like it better now... but i still want to REALLY like it but i just don't... i think the overall shape of it is good but the details just aren't there for me...


with that said, the overhead rear 3/4 shot towards the end is, imho, the best looking angle... old-school ferrari-ish

[SccrMan13]

I dont think the basic shape is that bad, but there are far to many scoops. Its far to busy. I personally would not build that and would save my money for a 33 hot rod instead. I think there is still a long way to go on this before i would consider this design.

[jimgood]

I'm sorry but I still do not like this design. I think it looks to close to the Subaru kit car that is already available; the Murtaya :(

Hmmm...first and only post and you're schilling for a "competitor". Nice.

And the two look nothing alike, apart from having 4 wheels and silver color.

[bbjones121]

Looks much better with these photos.

[onyx_riddle]

I like what he said about making it look like something awesome. It's really what needs to happen. Personally? I think your signature cars should share a bit of character. A smaller GTM that doesn't too closely resemble a Ferrari but still deserves the FFR badge, which is actually a pretty big honor, would be absolutely brilliant. That's what I think they could shoot for. It could still be original..

Either way this thing has me more excited than I can remember being in quite some time.

[Flamshackle]

1) You'll never satisfy everyone. No matter what you do there will be those that like something else better. And if you try to satisfy as many people as possible you've got a Camry or Taurus.

2) Don't give up on a concept as a result of criticism. Understanding and incorporating the criticism (when appropriate) can help to refine a concept. But see point 1.

3) "A camel is a horse designed by a committee." Or to put it another way: design is not a democratic process. Ultimately it's FFR job to use your vision to design and make the car you think is best. I'm pretty confident (understatement) that it will be an amazing car that many people will really want to buy. If you were to make ALL the changes everyone has suggested here, you'd end up with a pretty ugly toad. It might be Prince Charming in driving dynamics but it'd sure be ugly.

4) Finally (at least for now!) the first version you create won't satisfy everyone (point 1) and neither will the second, or the third but those that don't like the first may really like the second or third versions. The swatch watch approach gives you so many opportunities. Limited edition body styles? Really wild custom one-offs? An annual design contest with a new body going into limited production to replace older versions?

Michael

This ^

Also THANK YOU DAVE SMITH and FFR for creating these awesome "life" detailed images for us to assess :D
I have been on countless forums over the last 10 years and nothing comes even close to the attitudes and buy in from the manufacturer that you demonstrate.

These images are stunning and really begin to show what the models will look like. THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU

I can look forward to the rest of the cars being shown in life detail patiently now. seeing how great this one looks in these images and knowing that the others are coming is enough for me. awesome stuff!

PS Jims desing IMO is the number 3 or 4 at this point still favouring Xabiers and Rodneys as builds...

check out this 3D rendering below by Rodney that shows his car with adjusted rear width and front end. You will need to download a javascript thingy but it only takes a minute and looks AMAZING :D
http://www.unoverse.com/factoryfive/venom/

Keep up the incredible and ground breaking work Dave and the team! You guys are blowing my mind here!

[Stickshift84]

I have remained mostly silent even if I was one of the few that attended last Saturdays open house. I have been completely blown away by the entire process and I know that whatever the final first design will be, will be nothing short of spectacular. That being said I beilieve each design has its strong suits and I do have my favorite or atleast I thought I did. Seeing these pictures really helps to get a better perspective of this particular car. Here are my thoughts.

Rear End: This design is absolutely perfect when viewing the full size mock-up. I believe that some of the character is lost in the 1/4 scale model. I did notice in one of the earlier spy shots that the right rear had a slightly different design to it and was wondering if changes were in the works? Even if they are unnecessary.

Profile: I believe this is where the design is a little lost for me. I feel as though the car loses some of its cohesion in this area. I did a quick paint edit to showcase my thoughts on how to make the profile more dramatic and cohesive. In the picture attached I roughed out connecting the body lines at the top of the door leading into the scoop and I also lowered the bottom of the scoop to tie into the original lower line. I also adjusted the lines for the fender to light; by making the light narrower I feel as though the car will look a lot more aggressive. What are everyone elses thoughts on these ideas?

Front End: This is my least favorite aspect. I think it just needs to be simplified. Narrower lights, maybe carrying the lower body lines of the profile into the front bumper and not having such a curved rise at the back of the bumper. Also possiblty shrinking the grill openings maybe.

I hope that this sort of feedback is what is desired. I hope nobody takes this the wrong way.

Keep up the Great work Dave and everyone else at FFR, I look forward to continuing to watch the progress.

The only questions I have and I hope maybe someone on here can answer are:
1. How would the chassis roll structure be incorporated into a design like this for a street version?
2. What is the functional aspect of having the back of the front fender open ?

5570

[kach22i]

I like the rear, and hate the front.

The front quarter panel being popped out like the GTM over the leading edge of the door does not bother me anymore. Might be the additional articulation balancing it.

[thebeerbaron]

2. What is the functional aspect of having the back of the front fender open ?
5570

From my discussion with Jim at the reveal, it likely has to do with door alignment and the no-paint panels. This is my interpretation of Jim's description to me, so do not take it as gospel.

No paint-panels cannot be trimmed or else they start to need paint. In order to get something like the door to line up without trimming panels, you've got to have some un-aligned gap somewhere. Here it's at the front of the door, hidden behind the fender.

Another way to look at it is you line up the gap at the rear edge of the door and the gap at the bottom of the door. Your gap at the front of the door is therefore off (and would ordinarily be fixed via trimming), but it gets hidden behind the front fender.

Make sense?

[PhyrraM]

From my discussion with Jim at the reveal, it likely has to do with door alignment and the no-paint panels. This is my interpretation of Jim's description to me, so do not take it as gospel.

No paint-panels cannot be trimmed or else they start to need paint. In order to get something like the door to line up without trimming panels, you've got to have some un-aligned gap somewhere. Here it's at the front of the door, hidden behind the fender.

Another way to look at it is you line up the gap at the rear edge of the door and the gap at the bottom of the door. Your gap at the front of the door is therefore off (and would ordinarily be fixed via trimming), but it gets hidden behind the front fender.

Make sense?

That makes sense, but it leaves me wondering about quality control on the panels. Not neccisarily a knock on FFR, but what makes the tolerances of the process so much different than a stamped panel? Seems the molds should be accurate enough to hold a good panel tolerance.

[Steve91T]

That makes sense, but it leaves me wondering about quality control on the panels. Not neccisarily a knock on FFR, but what makes the tolerances of the process so much different than a stamped panel? Seems the molds should be accurate enough to hold a good panel tolerance.

I've heard doors are the hardest part to get right. What Beer said makes a lot of sense.

[onyx_riddle]

That makes sense, but it leaves me wondering about quality control on the panels. Not neccisarily a knock on FFR, but what makes the tolerances of the process so much different than a stamped panel? Seems the molds should be accurate enough to hold a good panel tolerance.

I certainly do not mean any form of insult here, but i feel I can somewhat answer this. Stamping a panel and shaping it is so very different than laying a fiber panel and trimming it. I'm going to assume this "no-paint" procedure leaves little to zero room for touching up imperfections or trimming, which is standard with all fiberglass work. Take my input with a grain of salt, as I have little experience hands-on in comparison to some of the veterans on here. But I know just enough about fiberglass and metal to know that if you want a fiberglass panel to leave the mold ready to be mounted, you had better make room for compromise. As for the gap in the front fender, I assumed it was intentional ala" Carerra GT
5571

[olpro]

Let’s keep it real here.
Not everyone is cut out to be a body designer. I am sure that Jim is a really nice person and a great chassis engineer but this design is really sad.

This model-4 is a hodgepodge of familiar and borrowed elements tossed together. There is no sense of integration or flow, no grace or beauty – it is just a mess. The struggle to get that crease line to work from the front fender peak through the door and line up with the scoop has resulted in some of the most tortured surfacing I have ever seen since the original Tiberon. The door is based on the GTM idea and doesn’t work any better here than it did there.
The rear is boring and lacking of any originality. The front is worse - a fishlike version of the Joker, with his carved in ‘smile’.
The modeling itself is a mess. Pouring paint over the clay, immortalizing the horrible highlights and proportional errors is not making the bad surfacing any better. The sill panel looks like it was modeled with chewing gum. The more detail (and realism) you add just reveals how crude this design is. Are we supposed to be impressed and thankful that you added a few hours to this model to apply details that should have been there before you even started to run the cell phone camera?

Maybe I am misreading this effort and it is a really clever method to make the other models look good?

[Rockraven]

Great job, Jim. You have a winner... except for that front end. Way to busy, too polarizing in a love it or hate it kind of way. I think the winning formula is to take the attractive simplicity of the front end of Vman7's design, and marry it to this car.

[bromikl]

Thanks, olpro. Always a ray of sunshine, you are. It really is possible to be honest and tactful at the same time. Maybe you could try it some time.

I want to second what Oppenheimer said, that it would be easier to take a HoF design and teach it to fit the frame, than to take this design and teach it to set fires.

Maybe if we knew what the production constraints were, we could find some solutions.

[SccrMan13]

This model-4 is a hodgepodge of familiar and borrowed elements tossed together. There is no sense of integration or flow, no grace or beauty – it is just a mess.

I agree. That being said i am not a big fan of the gtm's proportions either.

Vmans design might be a little too much like a porsche 918, but both vman and shawns designs have good clean classy lines instrad of no continuity and more vents than a nopi event.

[Best of the best]

I have been following this for a long time and holding back. Olpro just took the words out of my mouth. Well done. Jim's designs is like...trying put lipstick on a pig. No matter how much glamour you put on it, it gets uglier. I'm just amazed that Dave did not choose one of the top 3 winners for the full scaled model. If you want to explored, explored on those. If the full sized looks that good on Jim's design, just imagine how great it would look on the Nouphone OR Xaiber's model in full scaled. I don't think anyone would pay much attention to Jim's design if that is the case.

[bbjones121]

It really is possible to be honest and tactful at the same time

Haha...not with this one.
Most are born with it, one was not.

The more I look at the design, I tend to agree with Olpro about the tossed together look. I think the back end is terribly plain and the opening in the front is too big. The opening in the front should have a straight top or a curved down, not a puckered-lip look. I love the rear quarter panel with the side and top vents. There is obviously a huge difference from this and the first pictures that were shown, so I can't wait to see the others.

[Inthenameofweez]

Dave, THIS HELPS SO MUCH. I cannot wait to see the other 3 models with the same treatment.

I think the radiator opening needs to be just a bit wider. And the brake ducts can disappear for the street version and reappear for the track version. I'm not as worried about the fenders as I was, as the arches look MUCH better. I agree that the front overhang is still a bit excessive, but this can be fixed. The headlights would look better as a narrow almost "slit" that goes up the fender. Otherwise, I LOVE IT.
EDIT: I want headlights and high fender arches (low hood) like this: 5572


Now show me the black and red models with the same gusto.

Oh, and the blue one too. :-P

Thank you Dave.

[NicksPapaw]

Hey Dave, I am sending you a big bag of cash that I have apparently inherited from a king in Africa. :D (Just got the E-mail yesterday) That way, you can make hundreds of molds for us to look at and then I am sure we can pick 1 of our favorites out.

[NicksPapaw]

WOW, I just realized that last post was my 99th. So, here's to post 100 !!! As you can tell, it is mostly filled with worthless ramblings from my hollow head. :)

[AVIONX]

Dave, I meant no disrespect. Everyhting you did to Jim's design is EXACTLY what we have been asking for you to do. I knew there would be lots of hard work, man hours, and $ needed to do it. The fact that you did it for us means you totlally get it. What I don't get is why you chose to do exactly what we wanted, to the car we like the very least out of every option there is? I just think that all that effort would have been better spent on a model that was actually popular and most desired by your customers.


SUMMARY: You did everything we begged you to do to the model we begged you not to do it to :)

[AVIONX]

to do as you guys asked and show pictures with better detail. If the better photos/detail was helpful, it was my intention to do more. My simple goal and about 25 man hours went into this request, to put more details on and ask sensible questions about the process in a respectful way. :)
DAVE. Want to make sure you hear me. Everything you did to Jim's car is awesome. You totally tuaght us how much a car can be improved by what Lexus calls "noodling" Mission accomplished. Now, if you fell like it, since this is your company and let us not forget that, and as time and funds allow of course just do it to the models your customers love so we can get that nasty burning hair smell going :)

[Jeff Collins]

For what it is worth. I showed the new pics to one of the guys in the machine shop. He is not a car guy, he said "that car is awesome, where can I get one" Then when I told him about it and the price point and he is ready to buy. Again this guy proudly drives a mini van. I don't think he was the demographic you were after but he is a fan! Nice work with this project.

[AVIONX]

Final feedback on Jim's design and I feel it is important. The front fenders being open at their trailing edge and the horrible "fake" door curve trying to hide the real straight line at the top of the door glass are the only reasons I don't have a GTM sitting in my driveway right now. I built a Cobra becuase when I was done, there was no evidence that it was a kit car. It just looked like I built an awesome car all by myself. Everywhere I went, like Dave said, I would just sit and stare at it's timeless beauty. My eyes going all over the car and loving every inch, just like a ferarri or lambo. On the GTM, and I'm not BS'ing here. All I see when I look at it is that glaring flaw where the top of the door glass meets the roof. The drop dead gorgeous rest of the car just don;t matter if all I'm seeing is that collision of straight lines and curves trying to hide a design flaw. I care way more about the car not having any "kit car" ishness about it than I do about which one of the 100s of sweet looking HOF models that the design contest produced.

[onyx_riddle]

5573
Final feedback on Jim's design and I feel it is important. The front fenders being open at their trailing edge and the horrible "fake" door curve trying to hide the real straight line at the top of the door glass are the only reasons I don't have a GTM sitting in my driveway right now. I built a Cobra becuase when I was done, there was no evidence that it was a kit car. It just looked like I built an awesome car all by myself. Everywhere I went, like Dave said, I would just sit and stare at it's timeless beauty. My eyes going all over the car and loving every inch, just like a ferarri or lambo. On the GTM, and I'm not BS'ing here. All I see when I look at it is that glaring flaw where the top of the door glass meets the roof. The drop dead gorgeous rest of the car just don;t matter if all I'm seeing is that collision of straight lines and curves trying to hide a design flaw. I care way more about the car not having any "kit car" ishness about it than I do about which one of the 100s of sweet looking HOF models that the design contest produced.

I couldn't disagree more. The car is a healthy mash up of beautiful design cues. I think its one of the better auto ideas of the last 20yrs... But I guess if we all liked it there would be less to talk about.

[Dave Smith]

Jim's eye twitch is fading a bit and he is walking around with this big "I told you so" grin on his face. Here are some answers to your questions.

The silver car was picked to do the details simply because it was the only scale model that had good paint (and we didnt have time to re-paint) and could be done quickly. I said I would do the others after SEMA. I may not need to do that based on the feedback difference between the presentation and the details of model 4.

I put the presentation together in 2 days to give you guys an update on the program before SEMA since many people cannot attend the show and we were planning on doing some of this at the show. The feedback here helped refine the SEMA presentation and re-consider our project development path for sure. I didn't imagine a Saturday morning (free) webcast could generate insults!. "Are we supposed to be impressed that you..."

The level of detail of the models is a simple factor of time. We could add interiors, real light fixtures, and much more. I took a model and added detail and took detailed photos to show better the shapes and cause you guys asked. For me, it helped see the degree to which details change my perception of a shape in 1/4 scale. The extrapolation to full size, I think, will be equally significant.

Thanks for the professional feedback to all. I take issue with some of the communications that were not respectful. "Keeping it real" is fine, but when insults are added, they cloud the "real" feedback. Olpro: As a Professional designer, I am sure you are aware that your great ideas will be lost if you communictae in a manner inconsistent with a professional. All of us are obligated to be polite and respectful while disagreeing, otherwise less mature and patient people will not hear your valued ideas past the interference of the insults. I carefully read what you wrote because my ego has nothing to do with the car and everything to do with it's success. I have no pride in the process, but am a zealot to ensure the finished car sets the friggin world on fire. I was here at FFR when Chris Theodore (designed/directed Ford GT program) marveled at the GTM and what we accomplished. Steve Saleen couldnt leave the GTM at SEMA, shaking his head and asking us how we did this!

I KNOW what this team can accomplish. This car will launch soon and the body shape will be a jaw-dropper. Thanks to all for helping us along the way this past year. I'll update you more as we return from SEMA after next week.

[kach22i]

This model-4 is a hodgepodge of familiar and borrowed elements tossed together. There is no sense of integration or flow, no grace or beauty – it is just a mess.
The beauty of age is that you really speak your mind and no longer care what other people think.:D

You are 100% correct in my opinion.

More than enough people have candy coated their responses, no need for you to do it as well.

[BipDBo]

Dave, just for the record, the GTM is a beautiful machine, IMO. It's not a Ferrarri, but it's better looking than a Corvette or anything close to is price range. I wouldn't call Jim's car a complete mess, but it's just not nearly as fluid as the GTM. You have some models that, I think, leave the GTM behind. This may be good or bad news, because with a similar power to weight ratio, you just may kill your own market for the GTM. The GTM may become like Chloe Kardashian, a gorgeous woman, but only because of her family, is seen as the ugly stepsister. (In most people's eyes. For the record, I think she's the best looking Kardashian.)

[Dave Smith]

With age I've found the just the opposite.

It's not that I no longer care what others think, it's that I understand far better than when I was a rash young man, that the words I choose affect others and I CARE not to hurt them needlessly.. Polite, Professional and Honest are unrealted to candy coating.

[Steve91T]

Sometimes I really feel bad for Dave. This company is doing something that I've never seen before. They are releasing pictures of the design process. The reason companies don't do that is because people can see a possible design (that's not complete), and form opinions that it's not going to be what they want, so it turns them away. Instead we get to see a design, and offer ideas that may make it better. The majority of the people here can see that the car is close, and with some more tweaks, even small ones, it'll make a world of a difference. A small change to the air inlets, different headlights and a different grill opening and it won't even look like the same car anymore.

I'm personally extremely impressed that Dave and his company are so willing to open the doors and allow us to follow the design process. We're going to see what designs are going to make it, and look amazing, and we're probably also going to see some designs not make it and be tossed.

I just hope the few people on here who are not respectful don't ruin it for the rest of us.

Steve

[onyx_riddle]

Dave, just for the record, the GTM is a beautiful machine, IMO. It's not a Ferrarri, but it's better looking than a Corvette or anything close to is price range. I wouldn't call Jim's car a complete mess, but it's just not nearly as fluid as the GTM. You have some models that, I think, leave the GTM behind. This may be good or bad news, because with a similar power to weight ratio, you just may kill your own market for the GTM. The GTM may become like Chloe Kardashian, a gorgeous woman, but only because of her family, is seen as the ugly stepsister. (In most people's eyes. For the record, I think she's the best looking Kardashian.)

While I do somewhat agree, I must say that the GTM will probably not outsell the 818 in the long run but I doubt anyone looking to spend $60k on an Enzo killer will be swayed by the upcomming 818. Like it or not, its now the "poor man's FFR". Maybe not to everyone, but to many it will be. The Boxter outsells the GT3, sure. But not because of any shortcommings from the GT3. I, for one always thought I would be 40yrs old before I could afford an FFR. That's the beauty of this project.

[Steve91T]

While I do somewhat agree, I must say that the GTM will probably not outsell the 818 in the long run but I doubt anyone looking to spend $60k on an Enzo killer will be swayed by the upcomming 818. Like it or not, its now the "poor man's FFR". The Boxter outsells the GT3, sure. But not because of any shortcommings from the GT3. I, for one always thought I would be 40yrs old before I could afford an FFR. That's the beauty of this project.

I'm in the same situation. I've wanted to build an FFR for years, but I thought it'd be many more until I was able to. But, just because I'm able to build an 818 now doesn't mean that someday, when I'm 40, I'm not going to build a GTM! My garage is going to be pretty awesome with an 818 sitting next to a GTM...someday.

[onyx_riddle]

I'm in the same situation. I've wanted to build an FFR for years, but I thought it'd be many more until I was able to. But, just because I'm able to build an 818 now doesn't mean that someday, when I'm 40, I'm not going to build a GTM! My garage is going to be pretty awesome with an 818 sitting next to a GTM...someday.

Wow. We think alike ;).

[Dave Smith]

Don't feel too bad for me! I'm having the most fun in my entrie professional life. I run a super cool car company and I work with the best group of people you could ever imagine. I get to do TV shows and drive any one of 10 serious fast cool looking cars any day weather permitting. I am super appreciative of the feedback because I can see this process from 30,000 feet up and I already see the car and it's effect on the world. I may not like the feedback all the time, but I am in LOVE with the process and community. Thick skin comes with the job. MY JOB is to ensure the car delivers on the promises irrespective of the difficulty getting there. None of you will ever know how grateful I am to have the opportunity to do this. I have GOT to get off the 'puter and get some stuff done for SEMA... just found out our Mk4 will be headliner at main entrance... cool job.

[aschermann]

Dave,

while I know that you are totally focused on making the decision as to which model to implement, I think that most of us are delighted with all of the
models that have been presented. Yes it must have "hair-on-fire", and we all trust you will make such a decision. In viewing the video from last week,
I found it difficult to fairly define the differences between the models because in part the colors were different. The red model showed its details
well, as did the grey (Jim's). The black model and the dark blue model features were more difficult to see from the video's perspective at least.

chiming in on your other question (which baseline to build) - my preference would be the street model. While the high-mileage model would be
fun and get you publicity, most of us are not intending to use the 818 for long mileage (especally if it lacks a proper top)... and frankly, I'd buy a
Prius for high mileage. Most of us are not racers, though I admit that racing gets you additional publicity. Most of us are just nuts about
cars and want an exciting, fun, easily built car that is different from the world of pre-packaged models and exceptionally fun to drive. So, while
I know you'd get to the street model soon enough (and maybe creating the racing model first allows the interior department to have more time
to work) but for those of us following this program... we'd like something we can build.... now would be great.

Nice work and thanks. Great to see your dedication to creative vehicles. We'll keep following the 818 program.

[kitcarj]

I think part of the problem is we all imagined these cars looking the way we would each get most excited about them and figured at least 1 or 2 of the winners would fully live up to our ideal (short of having your own design picked if you thought yours was best). I am very impressed with how Dave has taken the comments but some of them cross the line from brutally helpful to mean spirited. Looking at the comments for the cars I don't like and the ones I do, it strikes me how different our tastes can be. The design I like you hate and vice versa. One guy wants it simple and flowing "too much going on" and another thinks add hood scoops vents and a huge tail! I would rather have a stock Mitsubishi Lancer Evo then the black car but some people love it? I don't find the blue car appealing at all except the rear stance but some love it. The red and silver cars don't make my HoF but I do like them, but many people can't stand them?

[Oppenheimer]

Lets head Dave's comments and keep our emotions in check. This car has already rooted in our hearts, and evoked our passions. We all want it to succeed, and we all want it to be the best it can be. We just have differeing idreas of what that means. Earlier on it was arguing if it should be a minimalist track weapon, or a daily driver. Now we find out its both, and more, and those comments have all but disappered. Do we think FFR is going to drop the ball now on the body design? Remember there will be more than one. If you don't like one, there will be others to choose from.

Lets keep being critical, FFR needs that, lets just keep it respectful. We are being given a unique opportunity here to participate. Lets not abuse it. It shouldn't take Dave stepping in to discipline us like we're his kids. we should be policing ourselves better. If someone makes an inappropriate comment, we should respectfully correct them. Perhaps a PM would be best, to avoid flame wars.

This is Dave's company, his car, his investment, his future. Yet he is able to keep his ego in check, and keep it all about the car and its success. Someone calls his baby ugly, yet he keeps it respectful. Can't we all do the same?

[adesilva]

Couldnt agree more. I am a designer (and business owner) myself and I know how difficult it can be to deal with some criticism with a smiling face but Dave has done an amazing job. It is difficult when some people may attack a product instantly and have no idea the hours and work that may have gone into it. In the end we are all given an opportunity to see this design process the entire way through and that will just make our builds that much cooler. We can sit back with our finished car and remember what it looked like from the beginning and how far it has come.

I know i certainly appreciate the opportunity to view and hopefully help this project come along (as little help that we may provide)

[AVIONX]

I am finding one thing about FFR very encouraging. Those of you that followed the last design by the other Smith brother will remember this. The closer it got to production, the uglier and "kittier" it got. Right off the bat, Dave, Jim, and the FFR team make every design look better every step they take closer to production. And they did that with the design that was the least liked by the Forum voters. Imagine what they can do starting with our favorite design. BRAVO!

[onyx_riddle]

I am finding one thing about FFR very encouraging. Those of you that followed the last design by the other Smith brother will remember this. The closer it got to production, the uglier and "kittier" it got. Right off the bat, Dave, Jim, and the FFR team make every design look better every step they take closer to production. And they did that with the design that was the least liked by the Forum voters. Imagine what they can do starting with our favorite design. BRAVO!.

Okay I've never actually seen his efforts. Where might i research this?

[Silvertop]

WOW, I just realized that last post was my 99th. So, here's to post 100 !!! As you can tell, it is mostly filled with worthless ramblings from my hollow head. :)

Good job, Senior Member Nick's PaPaw. Your "worthless ramblings" will now generate immediate respect and awe. :)

[DrieStone]

I've been lurking for a while, but I thought I'd put my 2 cents in. My daily driver is an '05 WRX, so I'm pretty much sold on this project (I love my car). Additionally I have an '83 Lotus Esprit sitting in the garage, which in my mind is one of the best looking exotics on the planet (beside maybe the Lancia Stratos).

I'm a little concerned for two reasons. First I feel like design #4 is an attempt to appease everyone by taking some of the elements from the other designs. I can say that I really don't feel like the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. I get the distinct feeling that the FF team is trying to justify this design a bit too much.

This really can't be designed by committee, it will end up watered down and uninspired. You're not going to appeal to everyone. It doesn't matter what the end product is, there is going to be a significant portion of those here on the message board who dislike the design. If there isn't a design that makes Dave & Co say "We HAVE to build this car", then perhaps we need to take a step back.

This car needs to be bold and inspired, and I don't see that in #4, but there are hints of it in the #1 and #2 designs.

[2KWIK4U]

If this was the final design, I would buy it. At first I didn't like it as much as the others but I am starting to get the "warm head feeling" too. I can't catch my hair on fire because I don't have any hair!! :)

The only thing I am still looking for is a targa top to go on it. Well done Dave and Jim

[Oppenheimer]

Many of the contest submissions were vetted on here first. People would wiegh in on what they liked, and didn't. The designer would make some changes, repost, and so on. That worked pretty well. The designer was free to ignore feedback that they felt would not be useful, and to interpret feedback they did find useful in their own way.

I think that same process can work on the final models. But someone has to be in charge. I think that has to be Dave and Jim.

[kach22i]

I tried my hand at taming this beast, felt like it was grinning at me like the Chesire cat for a moment.
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/cheshire_cat_tenniel.jpg

Okay, being silly, here is the original unmolested model.
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/Jim4c.jpg
Modified a bit.
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/Modified-jim41c-kach22i.jpg

I'm not happy with it, just gave it a go.

Somebody else give it a try. It's not lighting my hair on fire.

EDIT-1:
Tried my photo program to return to my mark-up concept of 09/23/11
http://s184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/Modified-jim4-alternate-kach22i.jpg

EDIT-2: 10/28/11...........going lower per comments, more of a GTM influence shown.
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/Mod-jim4-alt3-kach22i.jpg

[RM1SepEx]

It has to have some sort of a top capability... look what happened to FFR's last no top model. (Just as I was about to buy one)Targa, soft vinyl, anything or it will have severe volume sales issues. I fully plan on driving it on nice days just like my 325IC or one of my kid's or wife's Miatas... but forecasts are not reliable and taking a couple minutes to put up something to keep the leather seats dry is mandatory

Dave's doing an excellent job taking what he/they can to fine tune a truely beautiful beast, I can't wait to build mine.

I want classy and curvy but not cartoonish...

[Doc_FFR]

I like the rear, and hate the front. Ditto. And that's LIKE the rear, not LOVE.

The model looks much better now the details are added, but I would only get behind this model if I knew someone was selling a body kit to make it look better.

The thing that scares me the most is that Dave said that Jim was in charge of choosing the final design... Why would he pick any other than his own?

You put us in a difficult position Dave. Everyone wants to express their honest opinion and help out with the design process. It's hard to do that and not hurt the feelings of someone who put a lot of effort into something.


This model-4 is a hodgepodge of familiar and borrowed elements tossed together. There is no sense of integration or flow, no grace or beauty – it is just a mess.
It may be a kick to the penis, but no one has said it more accurately than olpro. I wish it weren't so, but there it is.

[BrandonDrums]

"fem looking catfish" "Hodge podge design" . Hmm. I havent elevated any design, simply picked one for reasons of time and guys, to do as you guys asked and show pictures with better detail. If the better photos/detail was helpful, it was my intention to do more. Still, bridging the gap seems pretty unlikely here and it may be that we strike out in a new direction altogether. My simple goal and about 25 man hours went into this request, to put more details on and ask sensible questions about the process in a respectful way. I am welcome to all points of view. The design goals set forth a year ago, the chassis work, running gear slection, body design competition, presentation of project status, expertise of suppliers, efforts of super-talented people, and even the present shape of one of four designs in scale form (which admitedly lacks clear translation to full-size ergo Barbie syndrome), made worse by the KNOWN translational differences between print and real space... All of them beg for some constructive criticism and a bit of lattitude. No-one here wants a bunch of "yes" men... still, I would buy this car for $9,900 and build it under $15K as it is right now. My goals are just much higher. I think I have thick enough skin because I've done this five times before in differing degrees. Thaks for the candor though, it helps us tremendously as I would rather not go to market with a fem catfish car. :)

Thanks for adding the detailed pics of Jim's car, I certainly like the design better with the details added in. However, if you look at the poll, most people seem to like Xabier's car far and above the Silver example and I don't think the added detail above is swaying that opinion. It's a beautiful design and if it's built, I don't think it would prevent sales at all

Respectfully, I think if the GTM went through the same process that FFR is going through right now with the 818, I bet it would look quite different than it does or perhaps it might not have gotten launched. We had a design competition and we have the cars in front of us that were chosen and the polls and discussion suggest that Xabier's design has won even though it's not by the margin it seems Dave and the team want to see to fully back any one design over another.

My point is though, I think with any car design, there are few in history that all viewers agree on and the 3 design competition winners we have before us are rarities in the fact that the qualms we have with them seem so limited.

To continue my point, I love the Ferrari Italia but I actually don't care for the rear end as much as the old F430, I never liked the Enzo, I liked the 'Racoon" looks of the Nissan GT-R pre-pro concept more than the original as much as I actually enjoy the "catfish" look of Xabier's design and the "cartoon" looks of Olmos' design
5579.

Essentially, there is never going to be a car that 100% of the market agrees is perfect and that's okay. It's simply not worth going down a "new direction all together" at this point to chase such an elusive flying magical liger/unicorn/holy grail of a design. As a pending consumer of this vehicle, I'm a little confused that an all new design that hasn't captured many followers seems to have all the focus within FFR after so much has been invested in sourcing a design externally. I think it has confused many of us on what the last 6 months of design discussion and polling and public competitions have been about. I know that Dave isn't trying to elevate the FFR house design over the others but it's mere existence I think is a little distracting and untimely when taking the discussion and competition over the last 7 or 8 months into account.

As much as I know why FFR built the above design and despite how much I enjoy it..respectfully I think that presenting the internal design even if it were a clearly superior one has the effect of going through a season of American Idol, getting down to the top 3 contestants then throwing in Steven Tylers previously estranged son as a 4th contestant in the 2nd to last episode. Even if the kid was better than the rest, it kinda makes the whole show pointless and will make a good many folks, contestants and viewers feel a little disappointed and cheated after so much hard work and emotional involvement.

If we want publicity with this car then there's as much to the story behind the design as there is with the design itself. The story that was chosen from the beginning was to have a design competition. The right thing to do is to make this car with a design that came from that long long long process. That story makes headlines more than any replacement design ever could, even if it was better, easier to produce or cheaper to make. I think the time and money spent on developing another design now would probably cost a good bit more than using one of the designs already sitting in front of us. Even more could have been saved if those designs were just the top 3.

Forgive me for my frankness, I hope I don't offend anyone as that wasn't my intent.

Choose the true winner, you can find out who that is here http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/showthread.php?3918-Lets-poll-this-the-forum-for-dave

[Dave Smith]

There was more than one question and it got lost in the discussion of the 4th car, that was made to show more details. The question I was VERY interested in answering was WHICH MODEL first? The consensus seems to be affordable roadster launch, followed by track model as a derivative/similar body and hyper mpg with alt body/coupe shape. I have sorta decided that we will launch the affordable roadster model first and perhaps involve a few race teams/race builders to explore concurrently the R version, then go to the build-your-own hyper mpg car. Some other questions:

Top: I think any roadster will no doubt have a soft top. I won't repeat the Spyder GT and we have Dave Draper who designs some of the best rod tops around and is dying to get his hands on the car once a body shape is finalized.

Jim: Ultimately Jim picks the design because that's his job. I've seen the result of crowd sourcing where the crowd made the call 100% and I'm not interested. The real genius of the process is balancing the do-ables with the dreams and the determining factor is whether people buy it. An early indication of this is strong HoF reactions.

Feedback: Keep the honest feedback coming and please don't hold back for fear of hurting someone's feelings... Still I think we can disagree on shapes and ideas without calling someones work a joke or a mess as that does make folks feel bad and community exists for building not breaking relationships.

There are tons of designs from the competition that lie unused and unexplored, and many of them are in CAD format. The four cars we did in scale model have gotten us to a point where we've learned solid modeling and shaping pretty well and can turn out manufacturable versions fairly quickly and without too much coin. ALL of these considerations will have to wait til SEMA is over as we have much more than the 818 Chassis (and one model the silver one ugh) going for huge honors and press.

[BrandonDrums]

There was more than one question and it got lost in the discussion of the 4th car, that was made to show more details. The question I was VERY interested in answering was WHICH MODEL first? The consensus seems to be affordable roadster launch, followed by track model as a derivative/similar body and hyper mpg with alt body/coupe shape. I have sorta decided that we will launch the affordable roadster model first and perhaps involve a few race teams/race builders to explore concurrently the R version, then go to the build-your-own hyper mpg car. Some other questions:

Top: I think any roadster will no doubt have a soft top. I won't repeat the Spyder GT and we have Dave Draper who designs some of the best rod tops around and is dying to get his hands on the car once a body shape is finalized.

Jim: Ultimately Jim picks the design because that's his job. I've seen the result of crowd sourcing where the crowd made the call 100% and I'm not interested. The real genius of the process is balancing the do-ables with the dreams and the determining factor is whether people buy it. An early indication of this is strong HoF reactions.

Feedback: Keep the honest feedback coming and please don't hold back for fear of hurting someone's feelings... Still I think we can disagree on shapes and ideas without calling someones work a joke or a mess as that does make folks feel bad and community exists for building not breaking relationships.

There are tons of designs from the competition that lie unused and unexplored, and many of them are in CAD format. The four cars we did in scale model have gotten us to a point where we've learned solid modeling and shaping pretty well and can turn out manufacturable versions fairly quickly and without too much coin. ALL of these considerations will have to wait til SEMA is over as we have much more than the 818 Chassis (and one model the silver one ugh) going for huge honors and press.

I have a couple co-workers going to SEMA for business, I'm going to try to send them your way and hopefully skype me in or something :-)

If I were a betting man, I'd say the Red car will win a similar % of favorable comments on the open crowd as they do in our little community among the others being presented. However, it would be cool to perhaps have a little slideshow of other top designs not presented in scale form.

Would you be open to that and perhaps figure out a way to get open crowd feedback regarding additional designs vs. the 4 scale models? One of the other threads has some folks discussing some of the more popular design submissions that didn't make it to the cad/scale model level already in progress...

[kach22i]

5579.
Not to derail, but I saw an GM/Opel Amperage in person Tuesday evening and it had some details you might be interested in.


5587
Yes, it's just a Chevy Volt for Europe. I was told about the Australian Vauxhall model, but forget the nameplate on that one.

[vozproto]

ALL of these considerations will have to wait til SEMA is over as we have much more than the 818 Chassis (and one model the silver one ugh) going for huge honors and press.

I have seen very few concept cars that were 100% manufacturable and set my hair on fire.
It's almost always a "I love it, but whats with (insert car part here"

Or just completely outlandish and ridiculous to prove an artists vision.

What I am tryin to say is... be proud of where we are now.
Are we at a final product? No.

But there is no reason to down-play or have any regrets in which car you built 1:1 first. It is an iterative process for sure.

And look how far you have brought this community in the design of a soon to be 'vette and elise killer in both looks AND performance.
Where was the 818 a year ago?

[D2W]

Dave I have to say you're doing a great job of taking input, and staying the course. I don't believe that anybody is trying to hurt anyone's feelings with their comments. Some people just are a lot more brutally honest in how they express themselves.

To a guy that's on the outside it does appear that you are trying to elevate Jim's design above the others. You have to remember that we don't know all the reasons behind your decisions so we fill in the gaps. Thanks for explaining why you are taking Jim's design to SEMA. It wasn't obvious to someone who hasn't seen the models in person.

I have to say that I think Jim has an awesome job, but I would not want it right now. I don't care how many people say it doesn't matter what the car looks like as long as it performs. If the car goes like stink, and looks like a turd it won't be a big seller. I could build a tube frame monster that blows all others in the ditch, but if the body is made by draping a blue tarp from Harbor Freight over it nobody is going to give it a second look. Lets look at it another way to show how tough Jim's job is. The GTM is a good looking car and has sold reasonably well (about 300 cars in 10 years, guesses). It has in my opinion some shortcoming's in the design. It is not a Mclaren F1 or a Lamborghini Muira (which I consider timeless designs). Do you ever wonder how many GTM's would have been sold if it looked less like the VBM 4000 gtc and a lot more like a GT40. Hard to say but it makes you think.

[DragonXtreme]

New to the forums but I do have a vested interest in the outcome of this project. There was one thing that was bugging me after reading so many post on the 818 project, I kept running across the word HOF and for the life of me I couldn't figure it out until tonight.

Then I remember seeing this awhile back.

5589

But this isn't what you guys really mean by "Hair on Fire" :)

I have enjoyed reading the process you guys have gone through to get to this point.

Good luck at SEMA Dave and Crew, look forward to hearing the comments after the show.

[GS guy]

Not go get off-topic - but I keep wondering why this car didn't get more attention? It pushes all the right buttons for me - hair a flam'in! I just couldn't find any other views (maybe that's why it didn't make it to the finals?). Definitely has the right low-slung side view - not mass-market looking.

5592

[bromikl]

I was thinking of how to give Jim's design a soul. The design (I'm sure) is technically excellent. But we all know intuitively that air flows past a car, and that air NEVER flows in straight lines. But there are so many straight lines on Jim's design!

I think I know what needs to be done, but I have no idea how to do it: If we could take a digital 3D model of Jim's design and put it into SolidWorks and maximize it for desired airflow (low CoD and high flow through vents) - I think we'd have a winner. On the other hand, it may be ugly as sin. It's worth a shot. As is, the design is DOA.

[vozproto]

Not go get off-topic - but I keep wondering why this car didn't get more attention? It pushes all the right buttons for me - hair a flam'in! I just couldn't find any other views (maybe that's why it didn't make it to the finals?). Definitely has the right low-slung side view - not mass-market looking.

5592

To me it just looks like a hybrid of the type '65 Spyder and GTM
It is a good looking and safe design. But a safe design isn't gonna win this one though.

[kach22i]

Not go get off-topic - but I keep wondering why this car didn't get more attention? It pushes all the right buttons for me - hair a flam'in! I just couldn't find any other views (maybe that's why it didn't make it to the finals?). Definitely has the right low-slung side view - not mass-market looking.

5592
I liked this judges pick a lot. A little retro, but nicely done. It was not too flashy, and maybe a bit too classic for the Internet crowd here, but I liked it a lot myself. It would be easy to convert this into a targa or put a windshield on it, I gave it a half hearted shot, I trust Anthony would not mind.

http://s184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/overlay-AnthonySamboer.jpg

Just a suggestion, but if Jim's silver car went more in this direction it would make me a happy camper. I think the tail already has something in common with Jim's. And the front has something in common with my mark-up's of Jim's design.

[kach22i]

put it into SolidWorks and maximize it for desired airflow
It might already be in Solidworks, so not a bad idea.

From what I know about car aerodynamics, it's mostly the area aft of the windshield top (high point on a convertible) which determines "drag". Of course low frontal area is important in the overall Cd, but beyond rounded corners at the front, there is not as much importance on it.

This is the template which most people agree is the idea shape (green template):
http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthread.php/aerodynamic-streamlining-template-part-c-9287-9.html

[BrandonDrums]

I liked this judges pick a lot. A little retro, but nicely done. It was not too flashy, and maybe a bit too classic for the Internet crowd here, but I liked it a lot myself. It would be easy to convert this into a targa or put a windshield on it, I gave it a half hearted shot, I trust Anthony would not mind.


I would have loved to seen a retro inspired design make it to the finals. No one does modern tech with a retro twist like FFR, thought it just made sense.

With all the talk of a "Swatch Watch" chassis and multiple bodies etc., it seems the multiples FFR are talking about are just the chassis variants themselves and not design variants for the same application of the chassis. We have the MPG, Race and Street car but I would have loved to have multiple body designs for the primary kit i.e. a few different choices for the street version of the car, at one point I believe that was something Dave was hinting at.

I know it's been discussed before but I'm getting the feeling that idea has been put to bed somewhat and now the focus is on the 3 models that will have static design options. I think that's raised the bar perhaps in deciding this intial design because that design might be it for the street version aside from targa or hard top options....

We shall see, let's get this initial design picked out and get this car released, my WAF is growing as we get closer, I don't want to spin out and end up having to wait a decade to regain it!

[Someday I Suppose]

I am truly blown away by some of the comments in this thread, the negativity on being invited to be part of the design process just baffles me. That said, Dave has addressed it far better then I ever could.

On the other side of blown away, I came to Factory Five because I had a dream since I was a kid to build a cobra, owning an original was pretty much something I knew was not going to be in the plans. Building that car opened me up to a community beyond what I ever imagined, and taken me to a place where I know the roadster won't be my only car build.

The 818 blows me away from the whole concept, a car you can build for less the $15K, a car that won't need to be painted, will kill on the autoX track, and will make an amazing track toy as well. Add in the stuff with the high mileage and integration of multiple bodies and the project is just crazy cool. I have so much respect for the project and how important it has been to Dave to make us a part of it is amazing. I have a huge amount of respect for everyone involved in the project, and certainly everyone who created and shared their designs with us.

I am confident that this car is going to be amazing, and am enjoying seeing it develop. For now that is enough for me, but I'm pretty sure in the not so distant future I'll be asking my self which one do I want to build, and that is going to be a very difficult decision.

-Scott

[Draco-REX]

The added details really help this car and it looks good. If this ends up being the 818, I'd still buy it...

But..

To sum it up simply: This car looks conventional. Conventional doesn't set my hair on fire.

[BipDBo]

There seems to be a consensus that the back of the car is alright, but it's front that people don't like. How about going to a front end more like the GTM. That would give some consitant design language. If you want it to be slightly edgier, you could do something like the front end of this car, the recently unveiled Varley evR450. Just stretch the front wheels forward a bit for a speeper angle over the headlights.
5615
My submission had something very similar in concept. It only requires that the radiator be tilted forward at a greater angle.

[skullandbones]

I like what kach22i did with the two edits. It points out that there is hope for the frontend. It took me from "I don't like it" to more of a neutral stance. Subtle changes make a huge difference. Why not go with a little more of the GTM influence as suggested by the last post? That would be worth a look see, at least. WEK.

[mattster03]

I'm in the same boat as a lot of the opinions in this thread... this design does not do a whole lot for me. I also will re-state what many have said, that although not intentional, I feel like we are being 'forced' to appreciate the silver Jim car. Let's be fair to all of the time and effort put into the winning designs as a whole and not on a model that seems to be pieced together from a dozen different designs. It should be obvious by now that the design team/forum favorites are the Xabier & Rodney , I can't wait to see what they look like detailed out in a similar fashion.

[David]

Not go get off-topic - but I keep wondering why this car didn't get more attention? It pushes all the right buttons for me - hair a flam'in! I just couldn't find any other views (maybe that's why it didn't make it to the finals?). Definitely has the right low-slung side view - not mass-market looking.

5592

That side view is really well proportioned! I like it.

[kach22i]

How about going to a front end more like the GTM. That would give some consitant design language.

Good suggestion, see post #99 a half dozen posts above, I added another scheme, a dash of GTM in it.

It's looking a little 4th generation Camaro or Mitsubishi Eclipse 3rd generation to me for some curious reason.

In my heart, I don't think any 4-cylinder car no matter how light should come off too aggressive looking. I'm not into posers or show offs. This might explain why I keep blanding or tempering the wilder aspects of some of the top designs. They are just too over the top, except for maybe Nouphone Bansasi's design. It's taken me years to get used to the Elise, still a bit edgier than I really like.

I like a car that makes me moan, not set my hair on fire, that would just make me scream in pain.

[Flamshackle]

In my heart, I don't think any 4-cylinder car no matter how light should come off too aggressive looking. I'm not into posers or show offs. This might explain why I keep blanding or tempering the wilder aspects of some of the top designs. They are just too over the top, except for maybe Nouphone Bansasi's design. It's taken me years to get used to the Elise, still a bit edgier than I really like.

I like a car that makes me moan, not set my hair on fire, that would just make me scream in pain.

Then buy something else because clearly Dave Smith and FFR are going hard in the 'hair on fire' direction.

Have you ever owned a 2.5 liter 4 cylinder turbo? Cos 3-400HP at 1800 pounds WILL NEVER be accused of "posing" or "showing off" no matter how wild it ends up looking. After 10 years experience in building Subaru powered race cars I can assure you that my 818 will be daily driven and 420HP. At 1800 pounds (mine will be less if poss) it will make a mockery of 99% of "powerful" road cars and eat a few supercars while it's at it!

From everything Dave Smith has stated we are going to recieve a flaming hot design that will devide people's tastes. Luckily for you and others the "swatch watch" 818 will have other more tame options for the body as time goes by.

So just wait a little and your light weight Subaru powered MR2 will be here soon enough:D

[Steve91T]

Good suggestion, see post #99 a half dozen posts above, I added another scheme, a dash of GTM in it.

It's looking a little 4th generation Camaro or Mitsubishi Eclipse 3rd generation to me for some curious reason.

In my heart, I don't think any 4-cylinder car no matter how light should come off too aggressive looking. I'm not into posers or show offs. This might explain why I keep blanding or tempering the wilder aspects of some of the top designs. They are just too over the top, except for maybe Nouphone Bansasi's design. It's taken me years to get used to the Elise, still a bit edgier than I really like.

I like a car that makes me moan, not set my hair on fire, that would just make me scream in pain.


I am often left scratching my head after reading some of your comments.

[onyx_riddle]

I am often left scratching my head after reading some of your comments.

I concur. The fact is, if you can't relate to HoF, then following the 818 is just going to be a disappointment. There are all kinds of people in this world and opinions are like *********s. But the entire scope and focus of this project has been made very clear. If you don't want HoF, this isn't for you.

Also, torque or no torque, a powerful car is just simply a powerful car. If it can pull it's weight and be fun to drive, I say make it as aggressive as sanity will allow. No love for the Tesla? it's several cylinders short of a v8...

[Gary in NJ]

In my heart, I don't think any 4-cylinder car no matter how light should come off too aggressive looking.

Do you drink while you type? Of all of the absurd posts I've read regarding the 818 (and there are MANY) this one just sets my "hair on fire".

I'm starting to think that Dave should close the public comment process and just present a final product when it is complete.

[kach22i]

From what I've seen so far, "Hair On Fire" is being translated into flashy overachieving kit car trash with borrowed parts from production cars.

I think this is the wrong direction if you want to be taken serious as a boutique auto manufacturer.

Let me put this into terms with graphic and historic examples. Compare the South African Noble to an American kit car from the 1970's, the worst example (in my opinion) being the Laser 917. I'm sure the designer of the Laser tried very hard to light people's hair on fire. Too hard in fact and ended up failing in a legacy type of way.

All I'm saying is that you can try too hard, and FFR is in danger of repeating history if they don't tone it down a little.

Noble:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noble_Automotive

Once the body shell is completed, it is sent to the Noble factory where the engines, transmissions, etc. are added.

Laser 917:......post 17 says it for me.
http://forums.triplezoom.com/showthread.php?5231962-Porsche-917-Replica.....Fail

The beauty of most small 4-cylinder sports cars is that they are fun to drive and considered "cute" by the females. I understand not wanting to drive a "cute" car, but it should at least be able to appeal to middle aged buyers/builders and not just 12 year old boys seeking a new "Hot Wheels" car for their collection.

[unclebigbad]

Okay, I went back and read all the posts on this thread. Dave has the coolest job on the planet. You can't please everyone, and that design DOES look like a fish ready to give me a kiss. I'm sorry but it does. Just the front though, I really like the rest of it though, fixing the front end to look more like the design I submitted would go a long way. I'm just sayin'.

All jokes aside, this whole thing is fantastic, I'm in my 40's and the 818 is just right for me and my 6 boys. I'm working on something else now, but the boys finally understand what Dad can & really does, and WANT TO PARTICIPATE. I think that's what this community is: taking on new challenges, finding solutions and going a s fast as I possibly can.

[onyx_riddle]

From what I've seen so far, "Hair On Fire" is being translated into flashy overachieving kit car trash with borrowed parts from production cars.

I think this is the wrong direction if you want to be taken serious as a boutique auto manufacturer.

Let me put this into terms with graphic and historic examples. Compare the South African Noble to an American kit car from the 1970's, the worst example (in my opinion) being the Laser 917. I'm sure the designer of the Laser tried very hard to light people's hair on fire. Too hard in fact and ended up failing in a legacy type of way.

All I'm saying is that you can try too hard, and FFR is in danger of repeating history if they don't tone it down a little.

Noble:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noble_Automotive


Laser 917:......post 17 says it for me.
http://forums.triplezoom.com/showthread.php?5231962-Porsche-917-Replica.....Fail

The beauty of most small 4-cylinder sports cars is that they are fun to drive and considered "cute" by the females. I understand not wanting to drive a "cute" car, but it should at least be able to appeal to middle aged buyers/builders and not just 12 year old boys seeking a new "Hot Wheels" car for their collection.

This is why his job is so hard. We need a unique and agressive looking lightweight car with a cheap drivetrain. The general consensus is that we agree. There are some who don't. But there are also 2 other models coming out. The fact is, if you want to cater to old farts (you called the young ones 12yr olds, I'm just trying to keep up), then you build THEIR dream car.. which... They have. The 65 and cobra are more than enough of a great and rewarding project for those who have "older" tastes.

The fact is, if they set out to build a bland car, they will. But they haven't, so they won't. :). The bar was raised years ago by Lotus and even those wacky lines or anti-lines of the Tiburon. There's no room for a ground-breaking half-a$$ed kit car. This car has the potential to be a huge hit with MULTIPLE demographics. I accept that I won't like all 3. Everyone else should too.

[Nelff]

I just went back and looked at these pics again. I still dislike the front, sorry. But the rear is good. Fender flares over the rear wheels are good. Scoop in front of the rear wheels needs to be full length. I wonder where the air is going to come from for the intercooler. Sides do have some rake to them. The rear wheels need to be bigger/wider. I really like the front fender treatment where it blends to the door. I've always loved venting air there. Plus it helps with the manufacture and assembly with the kit. Headrest aren't too big and they have a nice shape. Another thing about shape. I really like the way that the front and rear vents along with the headrests' are shaped. I really am starting to think that I saw the nose/mouth hated it and was turned off to the rest of the body.

Here's my idea. Take a long look at the way that the scoops and headrests flow. Then look at other areas of the body and use the lines from the vents/headrest for inspiration. With nose, set the length (not too long) put the lights as far up in the fender as can (visibility for others), and use the scoops and GTM as inspiration. This might be the body that we all really want....

[Steve91T]

From what I've seen so far, "Hair On Fire" is being translated into flashy overachieving kit car trash with borrowed parts from production cars.

I think this is the wrong direction if you want to be taken serious as a boutique auto manufacturer.

Let me put this into terms with graphic and historic examples. Compare the South African Noble to an American kit car from the 1970's, the worst example (in my opinion) being the Laser 917. I'm sure the designer of the Laser tried very hard to light people's hair on fire. Too hard in fact and ended up failing in a legacy type of way.

All I'm saying is that you can try too hard, and FFR is in danger of repeating history if they don't tone it down a little.

Noble:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noble_Automotive


Laser 917:......post 17 says it for me.
http://forums.triplezoom.com/showthread.php?5231962-Porsche-917-Replica.....Fail

The beauty of most small 4-cylinder sports cars is that they are fun to drive and considered "cute" by the females. I understand not wanting to drive a "cute" car, but it should at least be able to appeal to middle aged buyers/builders and not just 12 year old boys seeking a new "Hot Wheels" car for their collection.


Once again, I'm scratching my head. If you think that 4 bangers are for kids only, then please, do us all a favor and stop posting here. You are on the wrong forum.

So please tell me then, what do you think about the Elise? 190 hp...soccer moms have more power in their minivans. Must be a ricer then.

I just wish you could be more respectful with your opinions. I feel you are saying some of these things just to cause a stir, and that's not right.


Have you driven an Elise? I've been on the track with one several times. One of the most capable, fastest cars I've driven. And I drive a track prepared, 380 rwhp Camaro. You know what's cool about the 818? It's going to be even faster than the Elise! The 818 is hardly going to be for kids looking for their "hot wheels". i also see nothing wrong with FFR designing a car that appeals to a younger crowd. Right now they have cars that appeal to an older age group. The GRM appeals to younger guys, but only old men can afford it. The 818 will allow the young, and old, who want an affordable super car killer.

[vnmsss]

Love the discourse here....It certainly takes some thick skin to "ask" for feedback.....Ask me how I know....

After multiple successes in this industry though, the team at Factory Five has had the opportunity many times to put their feet up on the post at the end of the day and say, "There's nothin' like bringin' in a herd....." I feel confident that the 818 will live up (and far exceed) its promise......See you guys at SEMA! (I'll pack the Band-Aides and Iodine).......Karen

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pk7yqlTMvp8

[VTX]

I guess I'm scratching my head as well. I don't see where anyone is getting the idea that a car that "lights your hair on fire" means it has to look like a overdone kit car. I think it's pretty obvious that the HoF phrase means that it has to actually look really good to most people. I think FFR will get it right.

[kach22i]

A picture is worth a thousand words, this should help those who lack understanding of what I said I feel in my heart. Why anyone would attack me for what I feel is unknown to me, I'll let you sort that out with your professional health care providers.

Attached Photo Below:
In the foreground, a Tesla, based on a 4-cylinder Elise, middle a K1-Attack typically with a 6-cylinder engine, and lastly a FFR GTM, typically with a V8. As you can see, design aggressiveness is built into all of them, but just from a glance you can just guess which one has the larger engine, and you would have guessed correctly.

http://www.acuransxbroker.com/cars/04/k1-attack-for-sale-rare-turbo-super-car.htm

Do you get it now?

Please note that the images in and from the link are stretched in the vertical a little making the cars look taller and shorter than they really are. However, it is the relation to one another which makes this a good reference photo.

The natural order of expressing the performance though design should be respected in my opinion. If FFR made the 818 even sleeker than the K1 Attack, something would be amiss. As it is, the 818 so far is taller than the K1, has smaller side intakes (in all versions under consideration), therefore what I've advocated is true so far, no matter how cartoon-like some of the other aspects of the cars are (fish faces etc....).

The various attempts to make the designs appear aggressive (HoF) with nonsensical and unnecessary extra front intakes, exaggerated non-aerodynamic curves, low headroom and other elements just makes me queasy.

It would be nice to be able to talk about design without the rash personal comments and bashing, it only serves to distract.

[kach22i]

Have you ever owned a 2.5 liter 4 cylinder turbo? Cos 3-400HP at 1800 pounds .................
Most of these cars will have 170 hp. I know this is not your personal plan, just telling you like it is.

http://www.edmunds.com/subaru/legacy/

[Twinspool]

Most of these cars will have 170 hp. I know this is not your personal plan, just telling you like it is.
...
This might explain why I keep blanding or tempering the wilder aspects of some of the top designs. They are just too over the top, except for maybe Nouphone Bansasi's design. It's taken me years to get used to the Elise, still a bit edgier than I really like.

Your opinions seem to lie outside the normal distribution range.

[Ryno]

Dave -

I agree that you got a lot of things right with this design and that the details pop out on the full size mock-up. While I know each full size mock-up is additional expense, I really think you hit the nail on the head with how different an impression the full size makes compared to the 1/4 scale model. Makes me wondel how some of the other designs would ranslate to full size.

I really like most of the car from the windshield back, and also like the profile. The grill opening and some front end details don't quite seem to have the same elegance as the rest of the car. I think the grill opening is a bit too small, and the rise at the center of the opening detracts from the cleanliness of the design from my perspective. Perhaps something that blends the fron end of Xabier's design with this one would work - maybe smaller openings than Xabier's, larger than Jim's. Toss-up between the fairings behind the head and the roll hoop of Xabier's design. The hood vents could go either way - as is, they don't seem to either really add or detract a lot from the design, in my view. I'm thinking that a thinner central rib and a deeper depression for each vent might work from a design perspective - not sure if there's frame or equipment interference below.

Thanks for involving us in the process!

Dave

[picaman]

Totally the wrong direction. I can hear it now, "Oh what is that the new MR2?"

[Flamshackle]

From what I've seen so far, "Hair On Fire" is being translated into flashy overachieving kit car trash with borrowed parts from production cars.
The beauty of most small 4-cylinder sports cars is that they are fun to drive and considered "cute" by the females. I understand not wanting to drive a "cute" car, but it should at least be able to appeal to middle aged buyers/builders and not just 12 year old boys seeking a new "Hot Wheels" car for their collection.

You seriously have a VERY different way of looking at this project than most. I don't think many are going to see eye to eye on much of what you have said so far. It's just to ambiguous/stirring and left field.

Comparing it to a 1970's kit car?
12 years olds?
"cute" by girls standards?

I just have no idea where this point of view is coming from??? I appreciate that these are your feelings on it but they don't reflect the general thoughts on it so is why people are "scratching their heads" at what you are saying.

Most will be 220HP standard. Not 170. In general with Subaru turbo's you get a good increase in HP with a free flowing exhaust (which will be compulsory since we care reuse donor parts here) so MOST will be over 220HP.

[BrandonDrums]

Do you drink while you type? Of all of the absurd posts I've read regarding the 818 (and there are MANY) this one just sets my "hair on fire".

I'm starting to think that Dave should close the public comment process and just present a final product when it is complete.

I'm right there with you. We've gotten pretty far and have 4 really good designs that any of them I would buy in a heartbeat. Even Jim's Silver car is a winner and I'm 100% confident that FFR, with the input and designs they have on hand can close off discussion and thumb through the archives of comments to derive an appropriate final model.

Crowd-sourcing is great to "Ouija Board" a general consensus of appropriate design and architecture elements but when it comes to singling out a final production version an executive decision will need to be made SOMEWHERE. I thought the Design Competition was a huge success in terms of getting publicity and solid, produce-able designs and design ideas even if some of the winners I would have picked didn't make the cut.

Regardless, the top 3 designs are great and so is the FFR house design. The challenge is producing those designs to final production versions so FFR has some pretty good data on which designs people want overall out of the 4 choices. Beyond that, it's FFR's responsibility to produce the one that makes the most business sense which ultimately means picking a design that will A: sell and B: be produce-able.

As of now, I just want to see the final version and hear the release date because I wouldn't be disappointed with ANY of the presented designs. If we were ignorant of the other choices, any single one of these would gather our full attention and envy. So if FFR picks a different one, it will probably be because it's even better. Who can argue with that?

Cheers,
B

[BrandonDrums]

From what I've seen so far, "Hair On Fire" is being translated into flashy overachieving kit car trash with borrowed parts from production cars.

I think this is the wrong direction if you want to be taken serious as a boutique auto manufacturer.

Let me put this into terms with graphic and historic examples. Compare the South African Noble to an American kit car from the 1970's, the worst example (in my opinion) being the Laser 917. I'm sure the designer of the Laser tried very hard to light people's hair on fire. Too hard in fact and ended up failing in a legacy type of way.

All I'm saying is that you can try too hard, and FFR is in danger of repeating history if they don't tone it down a little.

Noble:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noble_Automotive


Laser 917:......post 17 says it for me.
http://forums.triplezoom.com/showthread.php?5231962-Porsche-917-Replica.....Fail

The beauty of most small 4-cylinder sports cars is that they are fun to drive and considered "cute" by the females. I understand not wanting to drive a "cute" car, but it should at least be able to appeal to middle aged buyers/builders and not just 12 year old boys seeking a new "Hot Wheels" car for their collection.

I think when Dave says "Light your hair on fire" he doesn't mean going overboard with the design. He means making a world-class design that looks much more expensive than it is and I think he understands that wings, vents, flares etc. etc. are threats to the design because he wants a kit car that doesn't look like a kit car.

I think the only risk here is over-thinking the design and delaying the project and loosing out on the fantastic support the existing designs already have. The design competition is one of the better ideas for getting publicity and buzz going I've ever witnessed for any car model development including the upcoming Subie/Toyota FR-S. If Dave backs out and tries to get another design or make one from scratch, all that publicity turns negative even if the car design is better than what's in front of us today.

In consideration of the car being the best it can be, FFR will make the right decision in the end. If they feel strongly that there is a better design out there worth ditching the contest winners, all that publicity and all this discussion over, then I feel confident that the car would be awesome by all measures.

My thoughts are that FFR would be hard pressed to find something that's enough of an improvement over the current choices to justify making that leap but I absolutely don't think they are at risk of making an ugly car as a result.

[Steve91T]

Totally the wrong direction. I can hear it now, "Oh what is that the new MR2?"

A simple change of the rear air inlet will fix that. But I do agree that as it sits now, it still reminds me of the 3rd gen MR2. Changing the intake will fix that.

[BrandonDrums]

A simple change of the rear air inlet will fix that. But I do agree that as it sits now, it still reminds me of the 3rd gen MR2. Changing the intake will fix that.

And the wheels will make a big difference too.

[PhyrraM]

Gentlemen, keep in mind that, yes, the 818 will draw a younger crowd than FFRs traditional products. But for reasons such as housing, location, income and security, only slightly younger on average. FFR knows this, I'm sure.

This has to appeal to both the younger crowd and the traditional FFR guys. The slant is definately towards the older guys though. If you think otherwise, I bet your in for a suprise once the kits are on the street.

[adesilva]

I think it would be interesting to see the average age of posters on this forum.

I would guess that most people are 30+ or maybe even 35+

I am 23 and have a feeling I am an outlier to the average age bracket.

I have looked into the Mk4 roadster multiple times and the soft top is hideous and thats mainly why i haven't pursued it before. The GTM is a dream car but sadly way out of my price range. I have always had cars in the 20-30k range because it seemed like the most bang for your buck and if the 818 means I can have an 818 and a car thats around 10k I would be very happy with that :)

[Nelff]

I'm guessing that there are a lot more 45 to 55 yr olds who purchase the high end Porsche, Lambo, Ferrari type cars. I have NOT heard Dave lean towards rice in shape or form. What I keep hearing from Dave is that he wants to produce a car that can pull up next to an exotic and give them a run for their money in looks and in performance. THAT will set everyone's hair on fire, not rice.

[Best of the best]

Just stick with the original winning design and FFR can't go wrong. Enough with this exploration and study! In general the winning design represents a world car and much appreciated by professionalsl and alike. I want people to come up to me and gets their H.O.F. when they found out it's a kit car! :eek:

[onyx_riddle]

I think it would be interesting to see the average age of posters on this forum.

I would guess that most people are 30+ or maybe even 35+

I am 23 and have a feeling I am an outlier to the average age bracket.

I have looked into the Mk4 roadster multiple times and the soft top is hideous and thats mainly why i haven't pursued it before. The GTM is a dream car but sadly way out of my price range. I have always had cars in the 20-30k range because it seemed like the most bang for your buck and if the 818 means I can have an 818 and a car thats around 10k I would be very happy with that :)


Don't feel isolated, January 6 1988 was a very important day for this world ;)

[Flamshackle]

I think it would be interesting to see the average age of posters on this forum. I would guess that most people are 30+ or maybe even 35+

33 here and still playing top division sports:D

Iv spent much of my adult life modifying and building race Subaru's... Sick to death of the impreza body so the eight eighteen is a dream come true for me!

I spent ooooodles of time and money trying to get my impreza coupe on a diet and now the eight eighteen will laugh at it in every which way!

Have i mentioned that im a little excited about this whole project ;)

[ScottKoschwitz]

I would guess that most people are 30+ or maybe even 35+

I have looked into the Mk4 roadster multiple times and the soft top is hideous and thats mainly why i haven't pursued it before. The GTM is a dream car but sadly way out of my price range. I have always had cars in the 20-30k range because it seemed like the most bang for your buck and if the 818 means I can have an 818 and a car thats around 10k I would be very happy with that :)

Yikes, I must be the outlier at the other end of the spectrum: 44.

The Roadster is cool, but the lack of a just-in-case top kills it for me. (I've watched the YouTube video of the softtop installation, and a top that requires about 40 minutes to install (after practice) is not my definition of a just-in-case top.) I'm also not a muscle car guy. I like designs where form follows function; I think I would be bothered building such an unaerodynamic car in 2012, ignoring everything we've learned about aerodynamics in the last 50 years.

For me, the 818 would be an alternative to the Elise or a turbocharged Miata.

[Kalstar]

Still in my 30's barely.

[Gary in NJ]

Wow, this thread is gone off the tracks.

[Silvertop]

Yikes, I must be the outlier at the other end of the spectrum: 44.

Nah. Plenty of guys older than you. I'm 62........ And there are others.

[Horhay]

My understanding of HoF is a car like the Attack, Elise, or a Lamborghini. If that's the case, I'm likely not a customer as I'm FAR more interested in a Cayman or 360 Modena type of car. Good lines and understated styling trump flashiness and "look at me" any day.

I hope I'm wrong.

[Flamshackle]

My understanding of HoF is a car like the Attack, Elise, or a Lamborghini. If that's the case, I'm likely not a customer as I'm FAR more interested in a Cayman or 360 Modena type of car. Good lines and understated styling trump flashiness and "look at me" any day.

I hope I'm wrong.

I think that "Flashy/look at me" is all good when your car can thump some of the most expensive and exotic cars in the world...

In saying really of the 4 entries only Rodneys is being accused of being over the top or as extreme in styling as any of the cars you mentioned so I dont really think you have to worry :)

[spaceywilly]

Sorry, but I'm still not a fan. My initial impression is a body kitted "ricer" to me, especially the front. I also don't like those headlights at all.

I hope this isn't offensive, but I just wanted to give my honest opinion.

My thoughts exactly. This design screams "I built this in my garage" where the other designs on display at the open house were all great. This design has no flow and the proportions are way off. The back wheels look lost in that huge ridiculously wide rear end. It is even worse if you look at the life sized one in the video. I also think the bumper makes it look like a badger with buck teeth. There is definitely a very specific cartoon character face it reminds me of but I can't quite put my finger on it. Oh well... I guess I'll just have to hope they go a different direction for the other models and come up with something better.

[balddog818]

i think Dave knows what hes doing, you obviously don't know how hard they have worked to get you the life sized model, constructive criticism is ok but you don't have to insult his hard work...

[bbjones121]

I agree, after seeing the details put into one of the models, the other three will change a lot when we see them again. I can't wait. Until then, we really should not criticize them as we have nothing to criticize except for picture quality. FFR knows what they are doing, look what they have accomplished as a company. I am optimistic that they will get it right in the end.

[Horhay]

I think that "Flashy/look at me" is all good when your car can thump some of the most expensive and exotic cars in the world...

In saying really of the 4 entries only Rodneys is being accused of being over the top or as extreme in styling as any of the cars you mentioned so I dont really think you have to worry :)

I think 2 of the 4 are excessively flashy/over the top. Unneeded vents, scoops or other boy racer add ons fit the "flashy/look at me" style. I've outgrown the big hood scoop/rally wing style of my STi and would like to get either an 818 or a 996. I've held off on the 911 because of the 818 so far.

[kach22i]

There is definitely a very specific cartoon character face it reminds me of but I can't quite put my finger on it.

http://www.sonicthehedgehoggame.org/
5693

http://www.aceshowbiz.com/news/view/00017341.html
5694

It's a mystery.:o

[BipDBo]

From what I've seen so far, "Hair On Fire" is being translated into flashy overachieving kit car trash with borrowed parts from production cars.

I think this is the wrong direction if you want to be taken serious as a boutique auto manufacturer.

I very much agree with you, but not because of the number of cylinders. The first thing I want from the car body is performance. Secondarily, I want it to be sexy, elegant in a timeless fashion, rather than being aggressive or showy. Personally, I find the K1 Attack and Lamborghinis kind of tacky looking. I like Aston Martins and Alfa Romeos. For muscle, I like older Corvettes, Camaros, and the Miura (just from the front wheel to the back). I am therfore most attracted to the Nouphone design, and would like it to take the name "Fortissimo." I would like it to give an impressive of sophistication, and a surprise of brutal performance. What lights my hair on fire is the thought of driving this with my beautiful wife in the passenger seat (I'm not being sexist here, she won't drive stick.) flying through the curves of a winding country road to the finale of Tchaikovsy's 1812 overture.

[Vman7]

I have a feeling that this is going to be the design, mostly due to the fact that Dave has said Jim has the last say.

[mekeys]

If that was my company I would have the last say about which design to go with..

Mel

[AVIONX]

If that was my company I would have the last say about which design to go with..

Mel
LOL. Yes. There is a big gap between empowering your employees and handing them the keys to the Kingdom :)

[jimgood]

I hope FFR doesn't give in to the flash-o-phobes posting about big wings and air scoops. This design doesn't even have any "wings". It looks to me like a form that follows function. I wouldn't change anything unless I found that one of the air inlets or exits doesn't function as needed. I would rather have air inlets that I can use if I want to rather than trying to fabricate something after the fact when I find out my brakes won't cool down or something.

I think my only gripe about this design is that integrating rollover protection is going to be tricky. The only thing that would look right is dual hoops. And then they have to be high enough to actually afford protection and meet with the typical autocross rules.

[keys2heaven]

I will stand firm on my opinion that either Xavier or Rodney's entries would make for one heck of a roadster build! Rodney's has that "wow" factor that I so desire, but Xavier's would translate from roadster to track version pretty seamlessly.

No offense to Jim and I understand what he is trying to do, but I just don't see the magic in this design. It doesn't wow me and elicits "this is a kit car" when I see it.

But, I have faith in FFR and what they will ultimately choose. I know it will be a winner!

[scartaan]

My $0.02's worth- Consider adding more "character" to #4. Some on this forum consider character = cartoon, but I disagree. Rodney's blue car has essentially "shrink wrapped" the body more tightly around the chassis. This has added character and reduced weight. He has raised the fenders over the wheels, brought the waist in more tightly to reduce the appearance of weight .,and shortened the nose. So, by shrink wrapping the #4 design, it might appeal to more of us in the Rodney camp.

[jimgood]

No offense to Jim and I understand what he is trying to do, but I just don't see the magic in this design. It doesn't wow me and elicits "this is a kit car" when I see it.


It looks like a production car to me. Ain't that somethin'?

[BipDBo]

While I've been driving latel, I've been looking at the other cars and asking myself, "If I apply the same critical eye to these production cars that I have been applying to these models, what would I think?" I have a ton of criticism for these production cars. I conclude that when any of these 818 bodies are seen on the road, they will turn heads.

[kach22i]

I have done overlays of Shawn/SW1 and David/Vantage side elevations with according to at least one poll the most popular design which I call "X" (red car). Some curious observations came out of this exercise, so I thought why not have more fun?

I do not have a true elevation of Jim's design, you have to use your imagination to edit out the perspective information above the profile line.

http://s184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/Overlay-jim-3b.jpg

My biggest headache using the FFR template was the rear overhang, it just drove me crazy. I've guessed that the rear transaxle/transmission stuck out at least 5" too much. I don't have any actual measurements from the buck.

I realize that the camera induced perspective can lengthen or foreshorten depending on viewing point distances and angles, but this overlay still has me scratching my head.

What do you see?

[BipDBo]

If you could correct for perspective, I think that you'd find them to be almost identical, except for the rear overhang. Perhaps Jim knows something that confirms your suspiscions about this. I'm don't think that a little extra distance off the back of the tarnsaxle os a bad thing. I want something on the back of the other than the transaxle, maybe a foam bumper or just a curve piece of tube steel to absorb a little bump. On my submssion, I added about 4" past the back of the tempate.

[kach22i]

5728

This view makes it look like it's just a few inches shorter to match the buck, perspective can be a funny thing.

[Eclipsor00]

I have a feeling that this is going to be the design, mostly due to the fact that Dave has said Jim has the last say.

Shame, all 3 other models are much better looking. Jim's design looks like a ricer body kit front. The people have spoken but their moving ahead, interesting concept, especially considering they said this car was extremely important to their future. There is not a cold day in hell I would buy the 818 if its Jim's concept, it turns heads the wrong way. Of course, im only one person, but it doesnt seem like many people liked Jim's car.

[adesilva]

Dave has stated that he is still not even really a fan of the design himself so I think it has a long way to go.

I think that jims design may be the one they go with but it will look drastically different from what we see now. I think that they are trying to take the things that people like in a lot of the designs and incorporate as much as they can into jims design.. only time will tell if it actually works

[JRL]

Let’s keep it real here.
Not everyone is cut out to be a body designer. I am sure that Jim is a really nice person and a great chassis engineer but this design is really sad.

This model-4 is a hodgepodge of familiar and borrowed elements tossed together. There is no sense of integration or flow, no grace or beauty – it is just a mess. The struggle to get that crease line to work from the front fender peak through the door and line up with the scoop has resulted in some of the most tortured surfacing I have ever seen since the original Tiberon. The door is based on the GTM idea and doesn’t work any better here than it did there.
The rear is boring and lacking of any originality. The front is worse - a fishlike version of the Joker, with his carved in ‘smile’.
The modeling itself is a mess. Pouring paint over the clay, immortalizing the horrible highlights and proportional errors is not making the bad surfacing any better. The sill panel looks like it was modeled with chewing gum. The more detail (and realism) you add just reveals how crude this design is. Are we supposed to be impressed and thankful that you added a few hours to this model to apply details that should have been there before you even started to run the cell phone camera?

Maybe I am misreading this effort and it is a really clever method to make the other models look good?

I could not agree more................thank you!

[bbjones121]

I think Jim's looks better with details added, but I don't like it more than the others. Details added to the other models may strength my feelings or change them. We won't know until time is spent cleaning the other three up. It looks like a lot of elements were just thrown together with Jim's.

[mekeys]

If they were going to use Jim's design why in the world did that sponsor a design contest..???.....His does look better with more details added but wouldn't the others also look better with added detail.??.Now that I have seen 539 designs submitted I have seen others that I like a lot better than the four winning designs..

Mel

[Oppenheimer]

Guys, they are busy with SEMA now. They have said all along they are gong to refine whatever design(s) they go with using feedback from the forum (as they see fit, not just take every suggestion and create a monster). Lets give them time to get back from SEMA, then get on with their plans for the initial 818 design.

Also, don't just be critical of Jim's design without some useful feedback. They know most of us don't like it as is, no need to beat that drum any further. Offer suggestions, or keep silent, for now. Let them start making changes before you weigh in further on like or dislike.

A lot of the contest design submissions were vetted here first. People commented, kept it productive, the designers listened, and improved their entry. I thought this worked pretty well. No reason that can't work equally well with Jim's design. Lets just give them time to get that going.

[crackedcornish]

Guys, they are busy with SEMA now. They have said all along they are gong to refine whatever design(s) they go with using feedback from the forum (as they see fit, not just take every suggestion and create a monster). Lets give them time to get back from SEMA, then get on with their plans for the initial 818 design.

Also, don't just be critical of Jim's design without some useful feedback. They know most of us don't like it as is, no need to beat that drum any further. Offer suggestions, or keep silent, for now. Let them start making changes before you weigh in further on like or dislike.

A lot of the contest design submissions were vetted here first. People commented, kept it productive, the designers listened, and improved their entry. I thought this worked pretty well. No reason that can't work equally well with Jim's design. Lets just give them time to get that going.

just hate to see them pouring time and effort into a plain design when there were so many good ones submitted. Honestly, if Jim's design had been anonymously submitted during the contest to the judges do you think it would have been picked??

I mean even he picked a wild one like this
http://www.factoryfive.com/whatsnew/update/nextcar/images/thumbs/jeffteague.jpg

[onyx_riddle]

Dave himself said something to the tune of " all we have to take to SEMA is the gray 1/4 model, ugh." Guys, absolutely nothing is set in stone yet, he just said that a few days ago. And ill say it again. It WILL have HoF properties. If you don't like that, then this project just isn't for you. Stay excited, not skeptical. This is FFR we're talking about. :)

[2KWIK4U]

Because Jim is an employee he was not eligible to enter. Also if he took the best design elements from a couple of cars, that was also stated in the contest rules. all designs are now property of FFR and they can tweak them any way they wish.

As stated before we have to understand that the final design will not appeal to everyone. I just can't wait to see what they come up with after the show!

[crackedcornish]

Because Jim is an employee he was not eligible to enter. Also if he took the best design elements from a couple of cars, that was also stated in the contest rules. all designs are now property of FFR and they can tweak them any way they wish.

As stated before we have to understand that the final design will not appeal to everyone. I just can't wait to see what they come up with after the show!

Yeah, I do realize the fact that Jim is an FFR employee. Which would have made the anonymity part of my hypothetical question the important word to comprehend ;)

and if you look at the polls being taken, #4 will appeal to about a half dozen people, unless it gets a radical redesign after SEMA (like to the point that it looks like one of the more popular non-winning designs)

[2KWIK4U]

I understood the anonymity part but as others had pointed out they don't know why some of the others won based on their designs either. My point was they will all be changed before the final design, just look what has happened to Rodney's design. At first I was not too fond of it but after the few changes he made, my head is starting to get warm :)

[Best of the best]

Is Jim a trained professional car designer? From his work it sure doesn't look like it. I think Nouphone is a car professional designer. I google his named.

[Psay]

Is Jim a trained professional car designer? From his work it sure doesn't look like it. I think Nouphone is a car professional designer. I google his named.

If he is a 'professional car designer' he must be freelance as his company will state in his contract that any design work even outside of his job belong to them.

I have worked for some of the big names and all of my contracts had that clause in there.

[bbjones121]

Is Jim a trained professional car designer? From his work it sure doesn't look like it. I think Nouphone is a car professional designer. I google his named.

Come on, be respectful. It is FFR's car and they make the final decision. Piss them of with useless posts like that and they will stop taking comments.

[wjfawb0]

My only comment about the design is make it functional. Now I'll go back to lurking until we see some cars being built.

[Oppenheimer]

I was just thinking, a lot of people, my self included, did not like the Rodney design at all. I never thought some minor teaks could sway me. But that is what happened. Its still not my first choice, but now I like it enough to buy it and be proud driving it.

It worked for Rodney. Lets give Jim that same chance as well.

[adesilva]

I was just thinking, a lot of people, my self included, did not like the Rodney design at all. I never thought some minor teaks could sway me. But that is what happened. Its still not my first choice, but now I like it enough to buy it and be proud driving it.

It worked for Rodney. Lets give Jim that same chance as well.

Agreed, I am still amazed at the difference Rodneys changes made

[crackedcornish]

just posted this over in one of the poll threads, but it belongs here too!


I know I don't mean to be disrespectful towards Jim. I just hope ego's won't get in the way of us getting the best looking car possible...and if Jim can revamp his design to better those submitted by Rodney, Vman, or Xabier more power to him!

But, unfortunately for Jim, I must say that each revision of the design submitted by Rodney just keeps setting the bar higher and higher. Rodney's original design wasn't even in my top 5 picks. But he has picked it up considerably with just a few tweaks, and now it may even top Xabier's as my first choice of the cars being considered by FFR. So maybe all is not totally lost in Jim's design...we'll just have to wait and see

[kitcarj]

Does anyone know why it looks like the doors are sprung out of alignment on both sides?

[Oppenheimer]

You mean how the front edge of the door does not line up with the trailing edge of the fender? That was deliberate. Its a styling excercise that makes the no-paint manufacturing plausible. Fiberglass door panels need to be trimmed to fit the opening.

Normally on an FFR kit that is just a bodywork excercise as part of the build. Trim the door as needed, on whichever edge, bodywork, paint. But with no paint, gelcoat finish, trim to fit would leave exposed, unfinished fiberglass. Having the fender hide the front door edge allows the trim to fit to all occur at the door leading edge, but not be seen on the assembled vehicle.

[BipDBo]

But why doesn't the door line up on the back seam?

[Psay]

You mean how the front edge of the door does not line up with the trailing edge of the fender? That was deliberate. Its a styling excercise that makes the no-paint manufacturing plausible. Fiberglass door panels need to be trimmed to fit the opening.

Normally on an FFR kit that is just a bodywork excercise as part of the build. Trim the door as needed, on whichever edge, bodywork, paint. But with no paint, gelcoat finish, trim to fit would leave exposed, unfinished fiberglass. Having the fender hide the front door edge allows the trim to fit to all occur at the door leading edge, but not be seen on the assembled vehicle.

I personally don't have any experience working with GRP, however I find it hard to believe that FFR can't build accurate panels that don't need this front fender treatment.

Take the Ultima GTR. This has a gelcoat grp body and the shut lines are excellent. Agreed the body alone for this car is £4,165, however it can be done.

5785

[olpro]

It is an issue that is certainly more difficult when the raw edge of a panel must be dealt with – and the gel-coat process necessitates this.
The type of panel hinging has a bearing on the solution (either fancy hinges or exposed ones can help). Ironically the old style gooseneck hinges might work well, especially compared to modern pin style hinges. The type of doors (conventional, gull-wing, etc.) affects this too. The overall build concept and how the panels are divided up is a big factor.
The line at the front door to front fender interface is probably the hardest with a conventional front hinged door. The fender side of this parting line is probably more of a problem than the door side.
Modern cars have gaps that vary from 3mm to 6 or 7, depending on the specific location on the body. We have become spoiled by modern production methods. In the old days, the gaps were bigger and varied more too.
The bottom line for a gel-coat finish may well require larger gaps. If a builder is willing to paint, the gaps can be reduced.

EDIT: I didn’t explain this well. If you look at the typical modern car’s front door cut where a pin type hinge is used, the front edge of the door swings inward and forward for much of its height. This causes the need for the fender side flange to be spanked back at an acute angle to avoid a clearance problem. The acute angle creates a problem to get the gel coat material into that tight corner.
A gooseneck hinged door doesn’t swing inward at all so the fender can have a 90% flange, which is easier for the gel coat.
So the type of hinge affects the door swing geometry which affects the panel edge construction.

[BrandonDrums]

I have done overlays of Shawn/SW1 and David/Vantage side elevations with according to at least one poll the most popular design which I call "X" (red car). Some curious observations came out of this exercise, so I thought why not have more fun?

I do not have a true elevation of Jim's design, you have to use your imagination to edit out the perspective information above the profile line.

http://s184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile/Overlay-jim-3b.jpg

My biggest headache using the FFR template was the rear overhang, it just drove me crazy. I've guessed that the rear transaxle/transmission stuck out at least 5" too much. I don't have any actual measurements from the buck.

I realize that the camera induced perspective can lengthen or foreshorten depending on viewing point distances and angles, but this overlay still has me scratching my head.

What do you see?

The overhang might be just a perspective thing as you point out in post 171. However, I think there's something else going on here, if you go up to the top of this thread where Dave posts the new detailed pictures, he places a good bit of emphasis on the wide rear-end. The template shows the rear being more narrow than the front due to the Subaru running gear being that way. However, Jim's design doesn't use crazy offset wheels (i know it's a scale model though) and there's certainly a wider track out back on his design, at least proportionally if not mathematically. Perhaps there's been some developments on the chassis, it has been awfully quiet on that topic...

Anyone else notice this?

[kach22i]

................ and there's certainly a wider track out back on his design
I thought the contest templates had the front and rear track widths lining up, but you are right about the rear track now looking a little wider than the front. I noticed this on my first trace over of the magazine spy shot of the full life sized body buck, but made no note of it. It just seemed like it was an optical illusion at the time, but can now be seen as a change (for the better).

This (see below) is a pretty horrible rendition, I should have just took some pen and paper out, of which I'm much better at. However, as a graphic to illustrate what an influence the X, O and Vantage designs might have on Jim's design - it is a "starting point" from which future efforts can be bounced off of. No where to go but up from here, right?

http://s184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Industrial%20Design/
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Industrial%20Design/Modified-jim4-alt5-kach22i.jpg

I don't know how "O" gets his great "stance" from, I trust it is not trickery of viewing angle because the model looks quite dynamic as well. This crude illustration has the front flattened out much more than I would like. I do not think the Vantage would look this flat even though it currently lacks a 3D view. The "X" car has never been thought of as being with a mushed nose either, this angle does not help, but something is off.

[Niburu]

Open Request:
Could our top fav designers (Vmann, Olmos, Whetstone, and Xabier/or anyone else really) take a crack at cleaning up the design?
My only real issue with the car is the front fascia, everything else I could live with.
ok maybe not the door vent either

[kach22i]

Open Request:
Could our top fav designers (Vmann, Olmos, Whetstone, and Xabier/or anyone else really) take a crack at cleaning up the design?
My only real issue with the car is the front fascia, everything else I could live with.
ok maybe not the door vent either
Great idea, but a few issues we could talk about and hopefully come to agreement on.

There are issues with grafting on somebody else's front to Jim's car (besides the possibly mis-matched results).

First of all, no roll bar or targa on Jim's so I don't see how a top can be fitted (EDIT;with side windows), let alone a wind buffeting shield behind the passenger/driver's heads.

I'm sure there are other issues, but these functional ones come before the aesthetics in my opinion.

[Niburu]

Great idea, but a few issues we could talk about and hopefully come to agreement on.
There are issues with grafting on somebody else's front to Jim's car (besides the possibly mis-matched results).

I didn't mean that, my fault I realize I wasn't specific, I meant to just clean up whats there and maybe use their style sensibilities to fix it


First of all, no roll bar or targa on Jim's so I don't see how a top can be fitted, let alone a wind buffeting shield behind the passenger/driver's heads.

My Miata has neither of these, yet I have a hardtop for it.
I've seen them on S2000's too.

[BipDBo]

Great idea, but a few issues we could talk about and hopefully come to agreement on.

There are issues with grafting on somebody else's front to Jim's car (besides the possibly mis-matched results).

First of all, no roll bar or targa on Jim's so I don't see how a top can be fitted, let alone a wind buffeting shield behind the passenger/driver's heads.

I'm sure there are other issues, but these functional ones come before the aesthetics in my opinion.

I don't think that he's talking about grafting on the other designs. He's talking about giving them good photos and maybe CAD files for them to tweek the design. You've already made sketches over photos of Jim's design, and anyone can mess with these in photoshop, but the 3d fileswould be more useful. Why limit it to just these guys, though? Why couldn't FFR post CAD files for anyone to tinker with?

[BrandonDrums]

Open Request:
Could our top fav designers (Vmann, Olmos, Whetstone, and Xabier/or anyone else really) take a crack at cleaning up the design?
My only real issue with the car is the front fascia, everything else I could live with.
ok maybe not the door vent either

I think that would be fantastic to see, just to open some discussion weather it's heeded or not, I'd love to see some tweaks from the top designers here.

[kach22i]

I didn't mean that, my fault I realize I wasn't specific, I meant to just clean up whats there and maybe use their style sensibilities to fix it.
Just my opinion, it needs more than a few tweaks to make it "popular", although I do think the earlier magazine spy shot needed less fixing. The front end just got way overworked, it's a total redo now.


My Miata has neither of these, yet I have a hardtop for it.
I've seen them on S2000's too.
You can add the Boxster and the reto T-Bird to the list, but all of those cars also have real convertible tops and roll up windows to go with it. I don't see FFR going this route, although it is a remote possibility.

[Oppenheimer]

open-source body design? I like it. Look how well things went with the Rodney design. People would photoshop their ideas, then Rodney would pick the good ones, clean them up, and render them into his 3D image.

If the FFR design 3D files were open, published, then people without 3D rendering apps (or skills) could still do the photoshop thing to get their crude idea out there, then guys like Rodney (and even Jim himself) could take these ideas, as inspiration or verbatim, and render out 3D versions for the group to collaborate on.

Yes, there would need to be someone that makes the final call, to make sure we don't get Camel = Horse designed by committee syndrome. It worked well for Venom (with Rodney as the final say).

[Dave Smith]

In the 4th design, Jim is making some changes, BUT this is a good idea. I recently spoke to Rodney about merging chasiss and CAD body files so there's no reason to think we can tdo this with Jim's shape. Lets see where Rodneys shape goes and start after that.

[Ophitoxaemia]

I like the way that design is headed. After viewing the webcast comparing the 1/4 scale and full size mockups, I think I have a better idea of how to translate between a model and full size. (BTW, back in the 70's when I was interested in model railroading, there were some photographic techniques that helped trick the eye into seeing tiny models as full size trains- something to do with the focal length and depth of field?)

I first heard about Factory Five Racing in 1999. It was seeing a picture of their frame design that instantly struck me as 'something different' happening. So I'm not looking for the 818 to be a car like or unlike some other car, but a car that continues to reveal that 'something different' in classic FFR style, after 12 years of success and with a 'world' flavor.

Looking forward to the final result.

Thanks,

James

[Dan Frederiksen]

Hi Dave Smith
I'm new here but I really like the 818 idea of a lean racer. I don't however like this socalled 4th design though and the main reason is aerodynamics.
even at 100km/h a typical car might waste 80% of its power going through the air because no thought was given to aerodynamics. when you lighten the car but stick with the same aerodynamic ignorance it might be 90%. at 200km/h it might be 97%. it represents a phenomenal failure of design to be that careless with aerodynamics.
I know the air looks like it isn't there but it really really matters.

and I'm guessing you haven't given aerodynamics any thought at all with the 4th design? that's why you have to have to go back to the drawing board. something like the Whetstone targa is much better and with a few tweaks could be really good, both aerodynamics wise but also in elegance.

I wrote a quick introduction to aerodynamics yesterday http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/showthread.php?2659-818-Project-Updates-From-Dave&p=41242#post41242
I cannot stress how important a complete change in mentality is in this regard. cars in USA have for far too long been low brow poser vehicles. dukes of hazzard and gangbangers in moneytrucks should not be ideals but profoundly offensive.

the 818 could be really great but you have to appreciate at least the two key car design elements, aero and weight.

[Niburu]

Dan please read through the forum thoroughly, by that I mean go back and read not just this page of threads but back through all of them - there are gems of info everywhere.
I assure FFR is taking aerodynamics into account, you are aware they are doing flow modeling with the 3D CADD files right?

[bromikl]

I'm guessing you haven't given aerodynamics any thought at all with the 4th design?

Dan, your knowledge of aerodynamics is impressive, but your approach is appalling. How 'bout if you stick around a while and learn what the 818 is intended to be before offering your very valuable advice?

A car that looks like a Prius won't sell to people who want a sports car. (Believe it or not, Dave sells cars - kits, anyway. The 818 isn't a science experiment to find the lowest CoD.)

Yes, there will be the unique person or two who want to maximize their track vehicle for aero - and they will have that option when the high MPG body comes out. The roadster is a bare-bones low cost design (no roof = less weight.) The targa street version *should be* the most stylish of the three, and the MPG body is where aero has more importance than aesthetics.

[Dan Frederiksen]

here's a bit more info on aerodynamics: http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/aerodynamics/q0231.shtml

notice that a linear wedge (which the windshield is an approximation of) can have a Cd of up to 2.3. not 0.23 but 2.3. I cannot stress enough how important it is that you don't trust your intuition of what a sporty car looks like.

there is a reason that airbrakes on aircraft are exactly linear wedges.

bromikl, it is a very ignorant and obtuse premise that an aerodynamic car can't look good. a super aerodynamic car can look absolutely awesome. that's why it would be a tragedy if the 818 becomes yet another terrible design like the ac cobra.
the Wheststone targa for instance 6215 looks very good and with a few tweaks could have quite good aerodynamics. lean back the windshield and curve it such that you leave the air flowing as horizontal as possible and then have a neck/back to catch the airflow again after the opening and guide it smoothly down to the ground. it makes all the difference.

I know that noone has firmly told you this before so many of you think this can't be true after decades of ignorance. but it is. what can I say. I don't mean to be mean but I have to be firm because the world needs a significant change in this area.
at 200km/h, the difference between a Cd of 0.6 and 0.2 is around 130 horsepower, wasted on poor design just maintaining the speed. another way to look at it is that the highway mileage becomes 3 times worse. not 3%. not 30%. 300%.
in a race you can't afford to be 1% worse. so should you perhaps agree that we shouldn't be 200% worse for no good reason..

trust the math, people. reality isn't a tea party when truth is decided by zombie rantings. physics is without mercy for the ignorant.

[vozproto]

Dan,

Your gusto is on one hand commendable and your delivery on the other is ... well... condescending at best.

I can't peg it yet, but whether you are:

- Super-sensitive to efficiency and lives breaths eats "green." Drive a prius, ride a bicycle and live in an south-facing earth ship home with fully sustainable home and composting your feces kinda guy.

- An aerodynamics engineer that REALLY understands his field and has that as his one and only focus but doesn't get the big picture

They are both positions that I can understand WHY you take the stance that you do.

But I don't believe you to be either. Regardless of the design, the car will likely be below 0.30 Cd
Here is a list of comparables. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile_drag_coefficient

0.09 Bub Seven - http://www.wired.com/autopia/2009/09/denis-manning/
0.195 - GM EV1
0.25 Prius
0.26 Nissan GTR
0.29 Nissan 350z
0.6 Hummer H2

Fashion always follows function (edit - for properly designed products that is). It seems you have not learned this or have simply fogotten.

"lean back the windshield and curve it such that you leave the air flowing as horizontal as possible and then have a neck/back to catch the airflow again after the opening and guide it smoothly down to the ground. it makes all the difference."

Sounds like you intend to drive a car laying prone and with an engine about the size of a toaster.
Remember. Its a mid-engine rear wheel drive car.

[Niburu]

my Miata and Forester have the same drag coefficient - LOL

[vozproto]

Open top cars will always have worse Cd than their counterparts.
But Miata vs Forester... thats just funny.

[BipDBo]

my Miata and Forester have the same drag coefficient - LOL

But they have very different frontal area.

[Niburu]

I'm pretty sure my 2011 Forester has a much more aerodynamic front end than my 90 Miata, probably with a good airdam and the Autokonexion fastback the drag coe. would drop signifigantly.

[DrieStone]

Dan,
0.09 Bub Seven - http://www.wired.com/autopia/2009/09/denis-manning/
0.195 - GM EV1
0.25 Prius
0.26 Nissan GTR
0.29 Nissan 350z
0.6 Hummer H2


2004/05 WRX is 0.33

IMHO, I don't care. I have a hard time believing the car would be less than 0.25 Cd, and unlikely that it's less aerodynamic than the WRX (0.33). Sure, at 100MPH the difference between 0.25 and 0.33 is probably 10-12HP (pure guess), but I'm not concerned about my 100-120MPH performance, but my 0-60 performance.

I don't know the physics behind it, but there was a Mythbusters episode a year or two back where they dimpled a car (like a golf ball), and saw a significant reduction in MPG. I'm not interested in driving around in a dimpled car.

[Hiryu]

IMHO, I don't care. I have a hard time believing the car would be less than 0.25 Cd, and unlikely that it's less aerodynamic than the WRX (0.33). Sure, at 100MPH the difference between 0.25 and 0.33 is probably 10-12HP (pure guess), but I'm not concerned about my 100-120MPH performance, but my 0-60 performance.

I don't know the physics behind it, but there was a Mythbusters episode a year or two back where they dimpled a car (like a golf ball), and saw a significant reduction in MPG. I'm not interested in driving around in a dimpled car.

I agree--It's not a big deal for this car (at least the roadster/track versions). The car is not being built as a top-speed beast; it's a four-banger after all. I've gone 150+ mph in the brick-like STi, and that's fine by me...I don't think I even want to go much faster in a lightweight, short wheelbase car...at least not without a lot of down force...which in turn creates more drag...etc. etc. For the speeds and performance targets the 818 is aiming for, it'd be a waste to design solely for low drag--especially since air drag grows exponentially and shouldn't become that much of an issue at said speeds (at least with the engines that the 818 will use).

Give me the looks and track performance!

OK, I have to go put ointment on my scraped-up knuckles now.

Mike

[BipDBo]

The drag coefficient is defined as:
Cd = (2 * Fd) / (p * V^2 * A)

where:
Fd is the drag force, which is by definition the force component in the direction of the flow velocity,[6]
p is the mass density of the fluid
V is the speed of the object relative to the fluid, and
A is the reference area.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drag_coefficient

Therefore the force of drag is:
Fd = 0.5 * Cd * p * V^2 * A

As you can see, aerodynamic drag is just as much of a function of frontal area as it is the drag coefficient. If the 818 has a Cd of 0.3, which typical of modern production cars and is realistic, it will have very low drag because of the low frontal area. It's also notable that when you scale down an object, the drag does not scale down linearly with the area. The drag coefficient tends to creep up. Therefore, achieving a low Cd is more difficult on a smaller car, than a larger car, but to compare the two is apples vs. oranges. The boxer engine will have an easier time pushing the 818 through the air than the car it came out of. I'd bet that top speed will be limited by gearing if the ratios are not modified.

[Dan Frederiksen]

Driestone, it'll be a miracle if it's 0.25. it's more likely to be 0.5
remember a smooth 911 is around 0.28. a prius has to lie to get to 0.25
no way that a freestanding straight windshield will get 0.25. it wont be .33 either

a miata claims 0.38 and that's probably with the hood

[bbjones121]

You don't always want a low Cd. Dan, I think you are obviously forgetting why you may actually want a higher Cd on this type of vehicle.

[DrieStone]

Driestone, it'll be a miracle if it's 0.25. it's more likely to be 0.5
remember a smooth 911 is around 0.28. a prius has to lie to get to 0.25
no way that a freestanding straight windshield will get 0.25. it wont be .33 either

a miata claims 0.38 and that's probably with the hood

Then I'll restate my comment that it really doesn't matter to me. I'd rather drive a Miata than a Prius (regardless of performance). When we get around to talking about the green, high MPG car then I think it's a valuable discussion. Not that aerodynamics aren't important, but its low on my priority list (personally).

[BipDBo]

You don't always want a low Cd. Dan, I think you are obviously forgetting why you may actually want a higher Cd on this type of vehicle.

I don't think that a high Cd would ever be desirable. That just simply mean more drag. Sometimes a high Cd is just an unwanted side effect of high downforce.

[Niburu]

I don't think that a high Cd would ever be desirable. That just simply mean more drag. Sometimes a high Cd is just an unwanted side effect of high downforce.
I believe that's what Drie was implying.
Also someone needs to explain why a performance/racing car needs fairly wide tires to Dan.
I know it has something to do with both for straight acceleration and lateral grip in the turns.
I don't have any physics formulas popping out of my head to explain the desired sizes and ratios right now.
Hopefully we can all get along because I think he'll have some very helpful input when it does come time for the hi-mileage builds.

[bbjones121]

I don't think that a high Cd would ever be desirable. That just simply mean more drag. Sometimes a high Cd is just an unwanted side effect of high downforce.

Agreed. My point is, they are tied together by physics. In a track car that you want high grip and handling, you need a great amount of downforce which means higher Cd than your average high mileage car on the road. If the 818 has the Cd of a toyota prius, than it is probably failing at producing an appropriate amount of downforce. So a higher Cd may not be a bad "sign"

[bromikl]

Hopefully we can all get along because I think he'll have some very helpful input when it does come time for the hi-mileage builds.

Perfectly said. Thanks, Niburu.

[Dan Frederiksen]

sigh, intelligent design should not be limited to high mileage design. many of you will say anything to make it go away. why not be better minds and think about it.
it's not limited to prius looking small slow cars. that's ignorant prejudice.
an intelligent car design involves significant aerodynamic considerations and it does of course not mean it has to look boring or ugly. they spend a lot of effort on aerodynamics in formula 1 cars. do they look like a prius?
would it kill you to learn something new..

[RonSchofield]

sigh, intelligent design should not be limited to high mileage design. many of you will say anything to make it go away. why not be better minds and think about it.
it's not limited to prius looking small slow cars. that's ignorant prejudice.
an intelligent car design involves significant aerodynamic considerations and it does of course not mean it has to look boring or ugly. they spend a lot of effort on aerodynamics in formula 1 cars. do they look like a prius?
would it kill you to learn something new..

Dan,

You sure aren't going to make any friends or change bad minds by name calling. An F1 car doesn't look like a prius, but you can't drive a F1 around town getting groceries. There are many reasons why people buy cars, looks are a big one and you need to have a good looking car that you can drive around town doing errands. There is function, looks, power and aerodynamics.

Why don't you give examples of cars that have the aerodynamics you like and are functional and. stop name calling people who don't agree with you.

[SkiRideDrive]

Just something to consider when discussing cd... it is only a coefficient, you need to incorporate frontal area to understand the drag force on the car. Cd is not the end all determination of how aerodynamically efficient a car is, the 818 will likely have quite a small frontal area which will aid in the ultimate amount of drag force on the car. Either way I'm not too worried about it, the budget of this project does not allow for extensive cfd and wind tunnel testing like production cars allow.

[thothtp]

sigh, intelligent design should not be limited to high mileage design. many of you will say anything to make it go away. why not be better minds and think about it.
it's not limited to prius looking small slow cars. that's ignorant prejudice.
an intelligent car design involves significant aerodynamic considerations and it does of course not mean it has to look boring or ugly. they spend a lot of effort on aerodynamics in formula 1 cars. do they look like a prius?
would it kill you to learn something new..

Just an fyi, f1 cars have a cd of between .7 and 1.1, depending on downforce settings. not exactly an example of extreme efficiency :-)

[Movieman]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)

[Xusia]

Dan, speaking only for myself, I understand what you are saying. I don't like how you are saying it, but I understand your message: Lower drag is better, and doesn't mean an ugly car. I got it. And I totally agree with that as a theory. Put into practice, however, there are real world considerations, and I'm fairly sure you aren't understanding that despite the many comments by others.

Put another way, I'm all for the lowest drag FFR can achieve--provided:
1. It does not significantly increase the cost of the car. Wind tunnel testing costs money and increases R&D costs.
2. It does not result in an ugly car. Aerodynamic design doesn't have to be ugly--again, I get that--but at some point a curve I might attractive, or another aesthetic element I like may have to go in order to achieve what you are talking about. I'm not part of the design team, so I won't have the opportunity to see these choices or provide feedback, but I sure want the FFR team to keep good looks in mind and balance it with good aerodynamics. The key word here is balance. It's not aerodynamics above all else.

Also, there comes a point at which there isn't a return on the investment for greater aerodynamics. Do you understand this (I'm being serious here, and I ask because I haven't yet seen any posts that indicate you do). To use a ridiculous example, it would be unintelligent (from a business perspective) to add $5000 to price of the car to cover the R&D necessary to increase aerodynamic efficiency by an amount that would save 0.5 MPG at 55 (or allow the car to go 1 MPH faster wi the same HP). Conversely, if that were a race car that regularly hit 150 MPH where the increase aerodynamics would have a much greater impact, it might well be worth it. I'm being serious when I say these are the real world considerations I'm talking about and that I haven't see you acknowledge.

I understand your message. Do you understand mine?

[Rockraven]

Just an fyi, f1 cars have a cd of between .7 and 1.1, depending on downforce settings. not exactly an example of extreme efficiency :-)

No kidding. Could there be other performance considerations at play?

[GUNS]

I just want lots of downforce, ie exige.

[scott hall]

I just want lots of downforce, ie exige.

Me too.

[Dan Frederiksen]

Xusia, yes I easily understand your message but you are wrong. aerodynamics costs next to nothing. do you understand that? it can be as simple as choosing the Whetstone targa. and listen to knowledge which I don't charge for.
and aerodynamics simulation can be quite cheap. I have done quite a bit of it over the last couple of days.
it would take much less energy than what you all have spent on making the truth go away.

it's super obvious that I am right. you wouldn't put a sail on it because you can understand that's bad aerodynamics and wasteful. you wouldn't have it drag an anchor for the same reason. what you don't understand is that if it looks sporty it isn't necessarily aerodynamic. and you refuse to understand this with the same zeal as if I proposed to pour gasoline on you and light you on fire.
your thinking is that if noone told you this in all these years then surely I can't be right now. and that is a very foolish heuristic. that's guaranteed stagnation.

[Niburu]

it's super obvious that I am right.
sadly no it's not, you just won't shut up about it after you've made the point over and over and over and over

[Oppenheimer]

Dan, can you promise to tone down your retoric if we promise to make an attempt to hear what you are trying to tell us? Are you capable of that?

We may not be getting your message, but you certainly aren't getting ours. You gotta find a way to convince others that doesn't involve insulting them or in being dogmatic. That will never work, as I'm sure it hasn't for you up to this point.

That we don't see what you see in this one area does not make us stupid. Please don't treat us like we are. We are willing to hear you, but you gotta tell us in a way that we are both able to understand, and willing to listen to. That is your challenge. Explain your POV in a way that we can all understand, and that is respectful. If you are unable to do that, all your good ideas will be for naught. Are you willing to try?

[bbjones121]

These discussions are becoming way too ignorant of FFR's own aerodynamic testing.

[vozproto]

Dan,

If you have enough wisdom and knowledge to warrant your tone-
Although I would claim that nobody has THAT amount of knowledge

-please start a thread on Aerodynamic design and provide images of what you think the car design should look like.

That could be in the form of your own sketches, or it could be of existing cars.
If you just flat out prefer Whetstone's design to the rest, then you can vote for it and be done.

And if you have the know-how that you claim to have, you may have something to contribute after-all.
But regardless of how much you may know (or think you know), nobody is going to listen worth a damn if you constantly belittle, insult and speak condescendingly to the rest of the folks in this community.

[Niburu]

These discussions are becoming way too ignorant of FFR's own aerodynamic testing.
Yeah I had pointed out in post #207 that FFR was doing flow modelling with the 3D CADD models, somehow that got conveniently ignored.

[Exidous]

Yeah I had pointed out in post #207 that FFR was doing flow modelling with the 3D CADD models, somehow that got conveniently ignored.

What got ignored? :-p jk the bantering is annoying and cluttering up the useful information. WTB mod cleanup on isle 3.

[Dan Frederiksen]

oppenheimer, truth is not a democracy. I don't have to accept your view for mine to be right.
and I have already given ample opportunity to understand yet now you pretend I have to do more before you even begin to listen. that's of course a false premise as well.

yes I sacrificed a few sacred cows. how dare I suggest that the cobra is an unintelligent design. I dare because it is the truth. same with the lotus 7. and the ariel atom for that matter.
I tell you the truth because the truth has value. that you choose to see the truth as offensive is not a failing of mine.

try to have real appreciation for truth. you spend so much time being offended that you fail to hear the truth. the truth is a better way. you may have to give up loving the cobra but what you get instead is so much better. be mobile.

[David Hodgkins]

I'm going to give you one post to prove to you that Factory Five takes areodynamics seriously, and then I'd like to see this thread revert back to it's original topic:
http://www.factoryfive.com/table/ffrkits/GTM/aerodynamicstest.html

GTM Aerodynamic Testing

November 9, 2005

http://www.factoryfive.com/table/ffrkits/GTM/images/windtunnel/thumbs/windtunnel5_small.jpg



Langley Air Force Base, Virginia:

With three years of work behind us, the Factory Five engineering and GTM development team traveled to Langley Air Force base in Virginia to perform aerodynamic testing and analysis on the GTM using the Langley Full Scale Tunnel (LFST). The culmination of our design work in-house and our best race experience would mean nothing without verifying the design in real life, at speed in the tunnel.



The wind tunnel at Langley is MASSIVE. It is the largest currently operating wind tunnel in the world and has been used to test a wide range of racecars from NASCAR stock cars to Grand AM and ALMS prototypes.

http://www.factoryfive.com/table/ffrkits/GTM/images/windtunnel/thumbs/windtunnel4_small.jpg



Since the test platform is located two floors above the ground level (!) the car was hoisted up to this raised surface. After securing the car to the platform it was time to make an initial run.



Team members Jim Schenck, Mike Pisani, and Eric Jacobs assisted the staff at the facility in preparing the test car. The car we used was prototype #3 that had just returned from the SEMA show earlier in the week. Baseline data was taken on the car in a pure street configuration at 4-1/2” of ride height.



With the initial run complete, testing began on a variety of configurations involving changing the

functional parts of the car (front splitters, hood cutout shapes, rear diffuser angles, rear wings, internal ducting changes and small ride height alterations).



Following that data we observed air flow patterns over the contours of the body and internal ducting using a white smoke trail generated inside the funnel.

http://www.factoryfive.com/table/ffrkits/GTM/images/windtunnel/thumbs/windtunnel2_small.jpg http://www.factoryfive.com/table/ffrkits/GTM/images/windtunnel/thumbs/windtunnel3_small.jpg


The results were exciting as they showed that the car performed the way we hoped it would. The car has a very good aerodynamic balance and no changes to the body shape are necessary (Thankfully since we all love the current shape).



We decided on a final rear diffuser angle that optimized downforce, f/r balance and drag. A significant change was seen by moderating the size of the apertures on the front hood.



We know we can generate better numbers by lowering the ride height to a race set-up and using radically different front splitter and rear wing configurations, but we wanted to optimize the street configuration first.

http://www.factoryfive.com/table/ffrkits/GTM/images/windtunnel/thumbs/windtunnel1_small.jpg



The most important fact that we established was that the GTM shape nets a safe aerodynamic profile, capable of running high speeds and staying firmly planted to the road.



Special thanks to Eric Koster and his LFST team of engineers who advised us in our testing, and for giving us the opportunity to use their awesome facility.



Comparison data (source Road & Track Magazine):



2004 Porsche GT 343 lbs. DOWNFORCE @ 150 mph

1999 Ferrari 360 Modena 294 lbs. DOWNFORCE @ 150 mph

2005 Factory Five GTM 333 lbs. DOWNFORCE @ 150 mph



Note: Almost all production cars on the road today produce lift.

[Dan Frederiksen]

btw, as for side windows in a targa, I'm all for fixed windows. roll down is just not that important and if glued on the car shape can be much smoother anyway. no rubber seal ridges. all flush.
butterfly doors could be good for drive throughs but it wont kill you to open the door anyway.

[305mouse]

Are you serious? Fixed windows on a targa? I don't know why you single out Oppenheimer above, everyone has pretty much stated the same thing. Everyone wants an aerodynamic car and this will not be a flying brick. Look what was just posted above about what FFR did with the GTM. They will test out the car through the software program as well. To quote you "yes I sacrificed a few sacred cows. how dare I suggest that the cobra is an unintelligent design. I dare because it is the truth. same with the lotus 7. and the ariel atom for that matter." Those cars are sexy as hell. Almost everyone would give a little to have a car as sexy as those. If you've spent the last few days doing research, let's see it in a seperate thread. Back it up with designs and data. Will the Vantage and the Olmos have the CD of a mack truck? I highly doubt it. Probably better than a lot of cars on the road today. Look what FFR said above, Note: Almost all production cars on the road today produce lift. It's time to get this back on track about Model #4.

[bbjones121]

You forget that Dan doesn't listen or read what others post. I have to hand it to Oppenheimer, as he was able to get Dan to read his comments. The truth is, some people just like to hear their own words rather than others. Moving along, I wish we would get some threads started for the other Models soon.

[kach22i]

btw, as for side windows in a targa, I'm all for fixed windows. roll down is just not that important and if glued on the car shape can be much smoother anyway. no rubber seal ridges. all flush.
butterfly doors could be good for drive throughs but it wont kill you to open the door anyway.
I think fixed windows in a targa of all things is really messed up. However, windows up in a targa and going 140 mph with the sound of a freight train overhead from the wind noise (passing over a captured pocket of cabin air) and the optical fluid in your eyeballs giggling about blurring your vision is something I can tell you about.

This thread is for Jim's design, right?

Pick out a smaller leaner headlight, and make the front as simple as possible with as few creases as possible and see how that turns out.

[Rockraven]

You forget that Dan doesn't listen or read what others post. I have to hand it to Oppenheimer, as he was able to get Dan to read his comments. The truth is, some people just like to hear their own words rather than others. Moving along, I wish we would get some threads started for the other Models soon.

Yes. Let's stop feeding the troll.

[FFR-ADV]

700970077008


http://www.factoryfive.com/818/images/4b.jpg
This is a great shot of the rear clip that shows how much detail is really in the shape.

http://www.factoryfive.com/818/images/4c.jpg
This photo shows how dramatic the rear radius are in the fender. Previous photos don't really show the rear clip well.

http://www.factoryfive.com/818/images/4d.jpg
From this angle, the flair is lost a bit, but the width of the rear end comes through better. The car really does have a wide rear end that communicates a mini-supercar feel.

http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=5451&d=1319303460
Image from Saturday's 818 Project Update shows very little detail.

[FFR-ADV]

Hi Dave,

Jims Front + Vman's Car Rear = Nuclear Hot FFR & Unique


I asked John (who is our master shaper) to put a bit of detail into one of the models. I picked Jim's model because I was considering taking it to SEMA and wanted to see it a bit more refined than last Saturday. John added some minor details and we took some better quality pictures. I think the difference is quite dramatic and feel like the top of my head is getting warmer (higher HoF quotient).

You guys asked for some better images and if your feedback here matches how I'm feeling, we might go further with the models (the SEMA truck left this morning so to get all 4 models to a higher level of detail will have to wait until after SEMA). I think the difference is dramatic, but you guys should be the judges.

http://www.factoryfive.com/818/images/1c.jpg
This photo shows how the rear end doesn't really get proper notice.

http://www.factoryfive.com/818/images/4a.jpg
Here's a rear quarter elevation shot.

[QUOTE=Dave Smith;38075]http://www.factoryfive.com/818/images/4b.jpg
This is a great shot of the rear clip that shows how much detail is really in the shape.

http://www.factoryfive.com/818/images/4c.jpg
This photo shows how dramatic the rear radius are in the fender. Previous photos don't really show the rear clip well.

http://www.factoryfive.com/818/images/4d.jpg
From this angle, the flair is lost a bit, but the width of the rear end comes through better. The car really does have a wide rear end that communicates a mini-supercar feel.

several photos were removed to meet limit of 7 images. (sorry, not my intent to redact you Dave)


701070117012

I would love to see the designs of these two great car designers combined! Thank you for your work! I see the possability for EPIC Synergy!!! Very cool... :cool:

Keep up the great work! ( after the holidays :D )

Everyone Have a Happy Holiday!

[FFR-ADV]

I intended to include these quotes in the posting above. :o

Many see the benefit of merging these designs!



I definitely see the value in tweaking Jim's car for the following reasons:
- We have already loudly voiced our concerns about the design. Why toss out all that valuable focus group research?
- It is already in 3D and designed to fit the chassis. All he is changing is skin profiles now.
- It will give us something to compare any other selected models to it

^ For these reasons I can't see why Dave would decide NOT to make these changes to Jim's design.
If all the feedback is heeded and Jim has no ego between his seat and keyboard, this could very well grow into a dark-horse candidate.



Same here for the bottom rendering. The top pic is what I chose to like.


That's what got me working on the Vantage again. I suggested putting the Vantage front and rear on Jim's design, and if you look close at Jim's design the side view is pretty close to the vantage, at least in the door area.

EPIC Synergy! :D