Something inside me [Archive] - Factory Five Forums

Silvertop

01-18-2012, 09:34 AM

One can hope. My worry is that Rodney's design does not fit "simple inexpensive roadster" very well. I think we're going to see Xabier's or Jim's design hit the ground first, then Rodney's later.

That is possible, maybe probable, though pure speculation on our parts. We really only know that the first car built will almost certainly be the "simple inexpensive roadster". The other obvious truth is that we have not seen the final design iteration of any of these three choices, so we may discover that whichever of them is chosen to be the "first out of the box" roadster, it may possess the HoF quality we all hope for.

My one hope is that the finalized shapes of the next one or two body styles to be offered for production following release of car #1 will also be revealed early on, so that as individuals we may make our purchase choices without potential regret.

Draco-REX

01-18-2012, 09:38 AM

keys2heaven

01-18-2012, 09:54 AM

I know it probably sounds like I'm being super critical of Jim's design and I'm really not trying to come off like that. I know zilch about car design. The only thing I do know is the emotional response that I have when looking at car that I find appealing. I do not find anything appealing with Jim's initial design.

Rodney's, Xabier's and Shawn's have me very excited if these can translate into a production kit car.

Silvertop

01-18-2012, 10:01 AM

From what I understand it is getting a "do over" right now. The problem is that FFR wants to launch with a roadster so they can hit their $9K kit target but the forums are focusing on coupes/targas. Xabier's and Jim's both fit the roadster plan better than the current big 3. I'm sure Dave is looking hard at Rodney's design considering the support it's finding and the fact that the CAD files are all but done. But that is not an inexpensive body to manufacture, and the compromises that would have to be made to turn it into an inexpensive roadster would neuter the design.

We'll probably have to wait a year or so for Rodney's to hit the road once the 818 has established itself.

Don't get me wrong, I want Rodney's design above all others.

Keep in mind that Rodney also offered his design in a Roadster version. I actually prefer his Roadster design to his coupe aesthetically, even though I'd rather have a Targa Coupe. You may be right about the manufacturing cost of the body -- but that is not something I know about. But they could do Rodney's initially as a Roadster, then offer it as a Targa. The second mold (or set of molds) would then become an extension of the first, which might actually save costs in the long run.

But I think you are right. You probably WILL have to wait a while for the Rodney's to hit the road -- at least in Targa/Coupe form. While there is no guarantee that a version of this car will be produced, I'm betting that at least one will.

I like Rodney's design, though I have also been a fan of Xabier's. I may like the Xabier design even better after they tone down the front openings a bit. And who knows where the Jim design will wind up. I'm just trying to keep an open mind -- and I'm just hoping the choices will be clear sooner rather than later, independently of the order in which they are produced.

Xusia

01-18-2012, 12:07 PM

My one hope is that the finalized shapes of the next one or two body styles to be offered for production following release of car #1 will also be revealed early on, so that as individuals we may make our purchase choices without potential regret.

+1 :)

scartaan

01-18-2012, 01:57 PM

Silvertop

01-18-2012, 03:40 PM

I should think Rodney's design as a Targa with a fabric or plastic top with sliding plastic side windows that could also be removed could be classified as a roadster. This concept should not be that expensive to produce.

Could be......

Whatever is ultimately picked for the Roadster, it MUST have some sort of available top, even if extra cost, at least if FFR expects to sell a lot of them. I think the scenario you describe above is one way to do that.

Xusia

01-18-2012, 04:44 PM

Whatever is ultimately picked for the Roadster, it MUST have some sort of available top, even if extra cost...

I don't think that's true. FFR could opt to have weatherization needs met by the coupe body. Therefore, they wouldn't *need* to allow for a top on the roadster. That said, I sure hope they do have an option for a top on the roadster, as well as roll up windows. I also hope the coupe has a targa option. That would probably meet the widest range of customer desires. And make a lot of people happy!

Oppenheimer

01-18-2012, 05:15 PM

I also hope the coupe has a targa option. That would probably meet the widest range of customer desires. And make a lot of people happy!

Agree. They could make the Targa panel something that could be bonded in place, to create a Coupe. Mentioned before, if the Targa panel can't be stowable, could have an optional 'fabric' panel that could be rolled up etc.

This way, with one vehicle you accomplish:

- Open top, no Targa panels selected
- Targa, with optional stowable soft top - no worries about unexpected rain
- Targa, with optional hard panel - warm weather, hard panel stored, stowable soft top on board - cold weather, hard panel in place
- Coupe, bond the hard panel in place before FFR ships

If you really want to go all swatch-watch crazy, make the 'Targa Triangle', the portion of the body that would be the difference between a roadster and a (panel removed) Targa, make that a bondable component. FFR makes one body, the Roadster. You want a Targa, they bond that 'Triangle' piece in place, you order whichever Targa panel(s) you want (soft, hard, both, none) to go with. You want a Coupe, they bond both the Triangle and hard panel in place. You bought the Roadster, but now you want Targa, buy the Triangle, and bond it in place yourself.

'Bonding' could include not only some sort of glue, but bolted as well. Aids alignment, makes sure pieces are pressed together fully prior to curing, adds extra security to bonding agent.

Now that I think of it, bond the hard panel to the Triangle, and make a removeable hardtop. You buy the Roadster body, and this bonded hardtop combo. Switch at will (bolt hardtop on cold, remove hardtop warm, SOL rain).

The Rodney already could support this concept. The Vantage could also. The Xabier should be able to as well.

PhyrraM

01-18-2012, 06:01 PM

Outside of Coupe/Targa/Roadster differences, why would Rodney's be any more or less expensive than Xabier's or Whetstone's, or any of the other full bodied submissions?

All would/will go through a rehash phase with an eye towards produceability and costs.

The only significant cost savings would come from an exo or exo-inspired type of design, or something already designed with the (then stated) goals in mind - (like Marc Sengers designs)

bbjones121

01-19-2012, 12:02 AM

Shawn has a roadster.

Silvertop

01-19-2012, 11:03 AM

.......This way, with one vehicle you accomplish:

- Open top, no Targa panels selected
- Targa, with optional stowable soft top - no worries about unexpected rain
- Targa, with optional hard panel - warm weather, hard panel stored, stowable soft top on board - cold weather, hard panel in place
- Coupe, bond the hard panel in place before FFR ships

If you really want to go all swatch-watch crazy, make the 'Targa Triangle', the portion of the body that would be the difference between a roadster and a (panel removed) Targa, make that a bondable component. FFR makes one body, the Roadster. You want a Targa, they bond that 'Triangle' piece in place, you order whichever Targa panel(s) you want (soft, hard, both, none) to go with. You want a Coupe, they bond both the Triangle and hard panel in place. You bought the Roadster, but now you want Targa, buy the Triangle, and bond it in place yourself.

'Bonding' could include not only some sort of glue, but bolted as well. Aids alignment, makes sure pieces are pressed together fully prior to curing, adds extra security to bonding agent.

Now that I think of it, bond the hard panel to the Triangle, and make a removeable hardtop. You buy the Roadster body, and this bonded hardtop combo. Switch at will (bolt hardtop on cold, remove hardtop warm, SOL rain).

The Rodney already could support this concept. The Vantage could also. The Xabier should be able to as well.

I REALLY like this concept! Something for everybody, and probably cost effective for FFR. However, it occurs to me if the "bonding" employed was purely mechanical (bolts rather than glue), the swatch-watch components become completely and repeatedly user interchangeable, allowing even more versatility, though some rigidity and security might be lost. Glued or otherwise, though, you get to build it the way you like it.

The only downside I can see is that it could lessen FFR's motivation to produce multiple different bodies, which would be disappointing to some folks, depending on the particular shape that they favor. As for me, I think I'd build any one of the three cars you mentioned, if I could choose the configuration!

AJ Roadster NJ

01-19-2012, 12:34 PM

Reminder to self; once I get my own car company launched, DO NOT open up design questions to the general public. :rolleyes:

I cannot imagine what it is like to be Dave right now. No matter what he does, he is going to piss off about 70% or so of the crowd, many of whom -- or perhaps most of whom -- seem to think they have the "right" answer. I have quietly read these various 818 posts for months, and there seems to be an general feeling that if one person argues his case long enough and makes the case strongly enough, they will "win" the discussion. I just don't see how that can happen, nor do I see how the process will create the optimal offering from FFR.

Call me crazy, but I am concerned for FFR that the 818 may simply not sell as well as should be expected, because such a large component of the potential customer base has decided so completely, and in such detail, exactly what they want out of this car. Pleasing the majority is going to be impossible. Pleasing 30% of the crowd would, IMHO, be a huge success at this point. Pleasing 15% of the crowd is what I see coming.

Answer? Keep an open mind. The design competition component is long completed now. Given the offerings that FFR has come up with over the years, we have good reason to wait patiently and evaluate the 818 car, when it comes out, objectively. Those guys are VERY good at what they do. I have faith.

JMHO gents, please don't run me outta town...

AJ

Oppenheimer

01-19-2012, 12:55 PM

However, it occurs to me if the "bonding" employed was purely mechanical (bolts rather than glue), the swatch-watch components become completely and repeatedly user interchangeable, allowing even more versatility, though some rigidity and security might be lost. Glued or otherwise, though, you get to build it the way you like it.

Right. The concept supports buy all the pieces/parts unbonded, and mix/match bolt-on what kind of car you want to drive today. But for those that 'want a Coupe' or 'want a Targa', 'want a hardtop', those pieces get permanently bonded. For a little extra effort in design, you gain a lot of flexibility. Everybody gets the configuration option they want for each model of 818 FFR builds.

The only downside I can see is that it could lessen FFR's motivation to produce multiple different bodies, which would be disappointing to some folks, depending on the particular shape that they favor.

I think they are pretty set on the multiple bodies. I feel like this is one of the core values that Dave sees the 818 bringing to the table. I don't see them dropping that. If this swatch-watch Nth degree approach is used, then it could be applied to each body design they build (to one degree or other). So then people are picking which design they want just based on how much they like the shape, not which one supports the config they are looking for.

Oppenheimer

01-19-2012, 01:10 PM

Reminder to self; once I get my own car company launched, DO NOT open up design questions to the general public. :rolleyes:

I cannot imagine what it is like to be Dave right now. No matter what he does, he is going to piss off about 70% or so of the crowd, many of whom -- or perhaps most of whom -- seem to think they have the "right" answer.

Not seeing the downside to offering suggestions or voicing likes/dislikes, therefore more detail the better. The only thing that will prevent me elbowing for first in line to buy an 818 will be finances (and the arrival of promised roof). Meanwhile I'll take full advantage of the feedback loop we have generously been granted.

I don't think anyone that would have bought an 818 if it came out without this forums existence would now not buy one because of things that occured on the forum. I do though think there have been a lot of lurkers on the previous forums that wanted an FFR, but only if had <fill-in-the-blank> (for me its affordability and a roof). Now all those lurkers, and many 'future lurkers' are coming out of the shadows and voicing their wants. They are pinning their hopes for the car they've been wanting FFR to build on the 818, and making those hopes heard. That can only be good for FFR to have that knowledge.

Yes, some still won't be happy, and won't buy, just as always been the case with FFR. The only difference is visibilty. This time those that aren't going to buy are being heard from. Meanwhile the feedback FFR is getting here is going to allow them to minimize how many here end up in that (unfortunate) category.

Jeff Kleiner

01-19-2012, 01:27 PM

Reminder to self; once I get my own car company launched, DO NOT open up design questions to the general public. :rolleyes:

I'm right there with ya' AJ!

...I am concerned for FFR that the 818 may simply not sell as well as should be expected, because such a large component of the potential customer base has decided so completely, and in such detail, exactly what they want out of this car...

Or not. I've expressed before, and it went over like a turd in the punchbowl with a few of the more active posters then just as it will now, that perhaps some of the most vocal critics are not truly potential customers or builders but rather armchair designers (albiet very talented in some cases).

I can't help but wonder if Dave sometimes thinks that maybe they should have done this like the GTM and Hot Rod and simply shown us the prototype when it was completed. I bet they could have done that with any number of the design submissions, even, dare I say, JIM'S :p and had most of the potential customers fawning all over it.

But what the heck do I know, I'm just a guy who is more into the visceral experience and derive the most pleasure out of my cars from behind the steering wheel while they are in motion rather than looking at them stationary in the garage! :cool:

I'll shut up now and go back to watching from the sidelines...

Jeff

Xusia

01-19-2012, 01:37 PM

I'm with Opp here. Yes, we are nit picking, and discussing the virtues of various choices endlessly - even obsessively... We are impatient for the final product and have nothing else to do!! Isn't that what all borderline crazy car nuts do?!? BUT, It's all in good fun and entertainment (at least for me).

Therefore, I do not see FFR pissing off 70% of us or losing us as customers. Whether I buy or not really depends on weatherization, not the final body shape. Not whether or not the coupe has a targa option. And not whether or not the roadster has a top. Would I *prefer* those things? Of course! So, naturally I'm going to provide that feedback. But in the end, I'll most likely be happy with whatever it looks like, and at the worst I'll more than likely buy a coupe (so I can be dry and warm here in the wet PAcific NW).

So what has FFR lost? Nothing! In fact, they've gotten some good ideas and feedback, I'd bet. And in the mean time, I've made some friends, eaten some of my words, been exposed to things I otherwise wouldn't have, and passed some time until the next mout-watering update from Dave... :)

Silvertop

01-19-2012, 01:39 PM

Not seeing the downside to offering suggestions or voicing likes/dislikes, therefore more detail the better. The only thing that will prevent me elbowing for first in line to buy an 818 will be finances (and the arrival of promised roof). Meanwhile I'll take full advantage of the feedback loop we have generously been granted.

I don't think anyone that would have bought an 818 if it came out without this forums existence would now not buy one because of things that occured on the forum. I do though think there have been a lot of lurkers on the previous forums that wanted an FFR, but only if had <fill-in-the-blank> (for me its affordability and a roof). Now all those lurkers, and many 'future lurkers' are coming out of the shadows and voicing their wants. They are pinning their hopes for the car they've been wanting FFR to build on the 818, and making those hopes heard. That can only be good for FFR to have that knowledge.

Yes, some still won't be happy, and won't buy, just as always been the case with FFR. The only difference is visibilty. This time those that aren't going to buy are being heard from. Meanwhile the feedback FFR is getting here is going to allow them to minimize how many here end up in that (unfortunate) category.

AJ Roadster, not ganging up on you.... Your point is well taken. Dave Smith has in fact taken something of a risk in inviting public input on the 818 project. But I agree completely with the perspective offered by Oppenheimer above.

Ultimately, I believe FFR's decision to invite all of us to second-guess their 818 design process will wind up paying great dividends in the end. People feel (correctly, I think) like they have had an impact on the process, even if the particular suggestion / design idea doesn't get adopted. And many of the suggestions WILL get adopted.

You are right, though -- we do need to keep an open mind -- and I think most of us (or at least many of us) ARE doing just that. One of the most appealing things about the 818 Project is the simple fact that it is being presented by Factory Five. As near as I can see, these folks are probably the best on the planet at doing what they do.

AJ Roadster, we promise not to "run you outta town". I suppose we could consider exiling you to New Jersey -- but I see that you are already there! :)

Xusia

01-19-2012, 01:42 PM

Ultimately, I believe FFR's decision to invite all of us to second-guess their 818 design process will wind up paying great dividends in the end. People feel (correctly, I think) like they have had an impact on the process, even if the particular suggestion / design idea doesn't get adopted. And many of the suggestions WILL get adopted.

You are right, though -- we do need to keep an open mind -- and I think most of us (or at least many of us) ARE doing just that. One of the most appealing things about the 818 Project is the simple fact that it is being presented by Factory Five. As near as I can see, these folks are probably the best on the planet at doing what they do.

+1 on both paragraphs!

Draco-REX

01-19-2012, 01:48 PM

I want Rodney's design. No question.

But I'm not going to give up on the 818 if it launches as a topless roadster with Xabier's or Jim's design. I might just buy it anyways with the intent to sell it after it's built as long as I can recoup the kit + donor cost, and I'll write off the incidentals as the cost of learning. I'm sure there are armchair enthusiasts that would like to have an 818 but don't want to build one.

I'm sure the 818 will succeed; the numbers are there.

olpro

01-19-2012, 03:58 PM

As near as I can see, these folks are probably the best on the planet at doing what they do.
:)

….making REPLICAS of existing historic designs done by others…

Draco-REX

01-19-2012, 04:13 PM

….making REPLICAS of existing historic designs done by others…

But with modern underpinnings. The 818 takes the proven advancements they've made and puts a unique body on it, making it 100% theirs.

olpro

01-19-2012, 04:27 PM

Oppenheimer

01-19-2012, 04:58 PM

Interesting that their most popular replica is itself not an original design. An existing British sportscar was modified and a huge Detroit V8 stuffed into it.

Here is an interesting question, when the new Beetle, the new Camaro, and the new Challenger were created (all reincarnations of previous designs), was a professional designer employed in the process? Were those designers actually designing when performing their 'work'? Are they too embarrassed to let other designers know they worked on these projects, since they weren't 'creating' anything?

D2W

01-19-2012, 05:25 PM

Interesting that their most popular replica is itself not an original design. An existing British sportscar was modified and a huge Detroit V8 stuffed into it.

True enough, but the final 427SC was a long way away from the original AC Ace. Who was responsible for the 427SC body style? I don't know.

Here is an interesting question, when the new Beetle, the new Camaro, and the new Challenger were created (all reincarnations of previous designs), was a professional designer employed in the process? Were those designers actually designing when performing their 'work'? Are they too embarrassed to let other designers know they worked on these projects, since they weren't 'creating' anything?

I think comparing the new beetle, camaro, challenger, and mustang for that matter to FFR's roadster is not a comparison at all. FFR's roadster is a very faithful replica, especially the MK4 to Dick Smiths original Cobra. There is no doubt where the others got their inspiration, but they are not replicas. If I put my 67 camaro next to my dad's 2011 camaro they are similiar but definately not the same.

FFR is great at making a performance chassis and suspension for the diy'er. Now we will see if they can put a successful body of their own design on their chassis.

olpro

01-19-2012, 05:33 PM

Yes, there were staff designers working on all those projects. They were undoubtedly given the charge of creating a "retro" design. Another one of these was the Mini Cooper by the way and it is very successful and very well done.
I know some of the people who did the Beetle and considered their effort a worthy one. Their version has a modern vibe and very modern surfacing - no simple regurgitation of the old design. The Camaro is a (nearly) similarly competent translation, professionally done - the Challenger somewhat less good. Another example is Camile Pardo (I hope I have his name correct) who did the Ford GT40 redo - a very nice piece of work (just compare it to the GTM).
In most of these cases (possible exception in my opinion is the Challenger) the design team did a proud job of interpreting the history with a new fresh twist.
I have worked on similar projects at Nissan and GM. In some cases, like the Z, the decision was ultimately made to go for a new vibe rather than trying to capture the historic audience.
In a sense, all re-skins of existing cars have to acknowledge and deal with the previous visual history, as part of a branding strategy. That is just part of what design is all about in the business world.

Oppenheimer

01-19-2012, 05:48 PM

I think comparing the new beetle, camaro, challenger, and mustang for that matter to FFR's roadster is not a comparison at all. FFR's roadster is a very faithful replica...

Actually I had all the FFR models in mind, not just the Roadster (though I could see how that wasn't clear, what with me starting out making a comment about that model). Some of the other models I think its a more worthy compare.

...the decision was ultimately made to go for a new vibe rather than trying to capture the historic audience.

...and FFR chose to go the historic route, a sound business decision considering their target audience.

How would you classify the '33? Is it a replica? It may be more historic leaning than, say the Mini or even the Challenger. Is it design?

olpro

01-19-2012, 06:57 PM

I really don't know enough about old Fords or hot rods to have an informed opinion on that one.

I wouldn't call the FFR approach (on the MKs) the "historic route" but rather that of a replica, which is not the same as a retro design.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J_Mays
In answer to the question, ‘are designers embarrassed to have to do a retro car’, it is interesting that J Mays leveraged his participation in the 98 Beetle to get the chief designer position at Ford Motor! Likewise, Freeman Thomas – also one the Beetle designers – got a great position at Chrysler because of it.
In the case of the Mini Cooper, any designer would be proud to be able to claim it.
I think that, if the design management is enlightened and the design team is talented and creative, a retro project can be a rewarding challenge (to do it right) that can be a career maker, not something to hide away.
On the other hand, the Challenger seems SO derivative of the original that I have trouble spotting much difference when I see them on the road. Of course it wasn't a very interesting design to start with, unlike the others.

David Hodgkins

01-19-2012, 07:07 PM

The 33 is not even close to being a replica. It is longer, lower, wider, uses a modern suspension and drivetrain, etc. I'd call it a retro design maybe, but clearly not a replica.

Back to the topic, I hope the Rodney is getting a chance to work with FFR. The fact that they have gone dark tells me that (unlike other's interpretation) they are hard at work and that they would rather push through to their next milestone than stop and ask opinions about revisions that may be still under heavy development.

:)

kach22i

01-19-2012, 07:12 PM

I REALLY like this concept! Something for everybody, and probably cost effective for FFR. However, it occurs to me if the "bonding" employed was purely mechanical (bolts rather than glue), the swatch-watch components become completely and repeatedly user interchangeable, allowing even more versatility, though some rigidity and security might be lost. Glued or otherwise, though, you get to build it the way you like it.
I too agree with the concept, and some cars in the past have been put together with these sort of visual clues intact.

http://s184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile%202%20-%20Odds%20and%20Ends/
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/Automobile%202%20-%20Odds%20and%20Ends/2000_Mustang.jpg

Silvertop

01-20-2012, 11:15 AM

This is true, this one will be "theirs". On the other hand, to say that this kind of new effort is something they are "best on the planet..." is simply complete hyperbole. In fact, the jury is still out on whether they can achieve a successful new body program at all.
I assume they will but it is not yet a fact.

Hyperbole? Well, sure. Being "best on the planet" is pretty much subjective, and not really definable in any empirical sense. However, based on the definable fact that FFR has grown into the largest maker of kit cars in the world, they ARE arguably the most successful, and I think they achieved that status by building an outstanding product -- not just through skillful marketing.

There is no reason to expect that FFR will bring anything other than their best effort to this project even though it breaks new ground for them in that it they are not replicating an existing shape. And it is likely that they will be successful. But yeah -- that is an assumption, not a guarantee.

Oppenheimer

01-20-2012, 12:04 PM

...the Challenger seems SO derivative of the original that I have trouble spotting much difference when I see them on the road.

I believe that was their intent. Somewhat remarkable when you consider that the overall size and dimensions of the new model is very different from the old. It seems to me it takes considerable skill (though perhaps not 'design' per the definition you would use) to accomplish that. they weren't going for breaking new ground, or winning any design awards, they were trying to sell cars. Their result is aimed squarely at their target market.

It seems to me the '33 is very similar. It is difficult to tell from the original when viewing on its own, yet its size, and dimensions, are very different from original. Similar, considerable skill required to accomplish that (even if you wouldn't call it design). Similar aim, and hit, of target market.

Wise from a business standpoint, even if not pleasing to the art design crowd.

Jeff Kleiner

01-20-2012, 12:47 PM

...even though it breaks new ground for them in that it they are not replicating an existing shape.

Seems that you are forgetting about the GTM.

Jeff

Niburu

01-20-2012, 01:04 PM

Seems that you are forgetting about the GTM.

Jeff

it's a modified GT-40

Jeff Kleiner

01-20-2012, 01:30 PM

it's a modified GT-40

OK then, in that case I guess it's fair to say that the 818 isn't breaking any new ground either; it's a modified Elise or MR 2 or 918...

Jeff

Silvertop

01-20-2012, 01:34 PM

it's a modified GT-40

Or at least, that is where they drew much of the inspiration for it (the GTM).

PhyrraM

01-20-2012, 01:44 PM

When you look at a GTM, it looks like a modified or updated GT40. When you look at the current versions of the 818 candidates, they do not look like a worked over version of something that already exsists.

I beleive this is what Dave is refering to when he says that he wants a FFR original design. Even though FFR is "forced" to call the GTM original (copyrighted, sue-happy Americans), Dave know's it's really not.

Silvertop

01-20-2012, 01:53 PM

OK then, in that case I guess it's fair to say that the 818 isn't breaking any new ground either; it's a modified Elise or MR 2 or 918...

Jeff

Well, ultimately, there really isn't anything totally new under the sun. To some degree, the shape is dictated by the driveline configuration and the desired size of the vehicle. So the 818 is likely to share some shape characteristics with an Elise, or maybe a 918. But not to the extent that the resulting car might be considered a replica. And we don't really know yet what the 818 is GOING to look like.

Point taken, though. The GTM, although FFR admits to it being inspired by the GT-40, is not really a replica either. Just has a similar look.

D2W

01-20-2012, 05:09 PM

it's a modified GT-40

Actually its a modified VBM 4000 GTC (French designed racecar from 1996) that took its inspiration from a gt40. Google it, too close not to have been used.

Silvertop

01-24-2012, 05:37 PM

Actually its a modified VBM 4000 GTC (French designed racecar from 1996) that took its inspiration from a gt40. Google it, too close not to have been used.

Seems to me that Dave Smith responded to this issue on a different thread, saying that the reason the GTM and the VBM look so much alike is because BOTH were inspired by the GT-40.

However the two cars DO look incredibly similar -- nearly exactly the same at the front end, and both look more like each other than they do the GT-40-- to the point where one would think that there would have been some direct influence, The back half is different though............

Oppenheimer

01-24-2012, 06:16 PM

I know I've had plenty of really good ideas, only to find out someone else already thought of it. Sometimes down to surprisingly similar details. I imagine the same thing is possible with designing a shape, especially if you are using a common thing for inspiration.

No way for me to know if that is what actually happened in this case, just sayin' it seems plausible.

skullandbones

01-24-2012, 07:36 PM

During the Apollo program a fellow came up with his version of a lunar lander because he was interested in the real nuts and bolts aspect of the program. It turns out that he published a picture of the lander in a comic book or something like that. The FBI visited him shortly after that since the design for the lander was "classified". After an investigation, it was found that the guy had no ties to NASA and no leaks were found. It was merely a parallel design phenomenon. So I guess it's possible but it still makes you wonder when you see the similarities between the GTM and the European racer (just humn nature). WEK.

Vman7

01-24-2012, 07:42 PM

Not sure if FFR made a deal with VBM or not, but if you look at the 1st prototype FFR did, it looks almost identical to the VBM other then the rear. So for the most part can somewhat say that Jim really didn't design the GTM from scratch, but more or less started with an existing design and modified it. Now this is the 1st prototype of the GTM I am talking about not the 1st or 2nd gen ones. It was call the GTM-200 prototype #1.

You can see pictures of it here:
http://www.auto-power-girl.com/pics/photo-gallery/factory_five_racing_gtm200_concept-16469

FFR's newsletter 2002 (about half way down the page)
http://www.factoryfive.com/table/newsltr/newsltr02/newsltr02.html

I find it ironic that ppl were whining about the Vantage as being too much like a
porsche........really!....lol

Now with that being said. I don't know if Jim's 1st design (GTM-200) was all his and then later FFR sold the body/design to VBM, which very well could be.

Kalstar

01-24-2012, 08:13 PM

riptide motorsport

01-24-2012, 11:16 PM

delete

Vman7

01-25-2012, 12:45 AM

This is very very old news. F5R has stated on numerous occasions the GTM was a result of a stillborn gt40 project. The VBM was one of the major influences as was the GT40 and a few others. There are many differences but no question it is a close sibling.

I know it's old news on the GT40 stuff. I don't ever remember FFR ever talking about VBM though.

I see that the VBM 4000 GTC goes back to 1995, so I am gathering that FFR either got a hold of a VBM 4000 body or VBM sold them one or somethings along those lines.

So if that is the case, then Jim really didn't design the GTM from scratch then, just modified the VBM for the first prototype and 1st gen looked pretty close to the VBM. Now the 2nd gen, have to look pretty hard to really see any part that still looks like the VBM, so I would have to say the 2nd gen GTM is really FFR own design. The GTM evolved into it's own.

Kalstar

01-25-2012, 08:21 AM

I know it's old news on the GT40 stuff. I don't ever remember FFR ever talking about VBM though.

I see that the VBM 4000 GTC goes back to 1995, so I am gathering that FFR either got a hold of a VBM 4000 body or VBM sold them one or somethings along those lines.

So if that is the case, then Jim really didn't design the GTM from scratch then, just modified the VBM for the first prototype and 1st gen looked pretty close to the VBM. Now the 2nd gen, have to look pretty hard to really see any part that still looks like the VBM, so I would have to say the 2nd gen GTM is really FFR own design. The GTM evolved into it's own.

Here is Jims response back in Nov 2005..........

The GTM was born out of a stillborn project to do a GT40 replica, in particular we had an early chassis design and some other components done when we decided that we did want to do another replica. That left us with the question of what to do for the next project, and the eventual idea of a supercar. The VBM was definitely an inspiration, it used a GT40 hood, pillars, roof, doors, etc... but made the design modern and very attractive. Since we had the beginings of a GT40 and some ideas of where we were looking to go but not anything definitive, and we needed a body to get the project moving, the early plug borrowed a lot from other cars, GT40, VBM, and a few others. However the intention was never to use this body as the finished product and also why it does not have a very fluid design look, nor the correct wheelbase. The finished body still uses a similiar windshield to a GT40 (we ended up having to change it and make our own) along with some design cues from other cars (VBM included) but no other large surface was retained. The overall shape of the car is unique and from listening to the passers by at SEMA and hearing what manufacturer it was being mistaken as being from was very rewarding. Some people will still prefer the duck-Tail or if we had replicated the VBM, but the finished car was exactly what we were looking to do when the project began.

kach22i

01-25-2012, 08:23 AM

I find it ironic that ppl were whining about the Vantage as being too much like a
porsche........really!....lol
That fact, plus if you really look at Vman's design it comes off a little more Italian + English than German. In fact, it is such a well blended mix, which comes off as it's own, I'd have to call it American.

Niburu

01-25-2012, 09:48 AM

I love it when I'm mostly correct...it happens so rarely.

Vman7

01-25-2012, 11:15 AM

Here is Jims response back in Nov 2005..........

The GTM was born out of a stillborn project to do a GT40 replica, in particular we had an early chassis design and some other components done when we decided that we did want to do another replica. That left us with the question of what to do for the next project, and the eventual idea of a supercar. The VBM was definitely an inspiration, it used a GT40 hood, pillars, roof, doors, etc... but made the design modern and very attractive. Since we had the beginings of a GT40 and some ideas of where we were looking to go but not anything definitive, and we needed a body to get the project moving, the early plug borrowed a lot from other cars, GT40, VBM, and a few others. However the intention was never to use this body as the finished product and also why it does not have a very fluid design look, nor the correct wheelbase. The finished body still uses a similiar windshield to a GT40 (we ended up having to change it and make our own) along with some design cues from other cars (VBM included) but no other large surface was retained. The overall shape of the car is unique and from listening to the passers by at SEMA and hearing what manufacturer it was being mistaken as being from was very rewarding. Some people will still prefer the duck-Tail or if we had replicated the VBM, but the finished car was exactly what we were looking to do when the project began.

I couldn't find that anywhere, I even checked the GTM Development archives http://www.factoryfive.com/table/ffrkits/GTM/archives.html anyrate, nice to know I am not crazy.......lol