How would you go about designing a new car / motor vehicle that exactly fits your needs?
There must be at least a thousand different ways to start the design.

mollwollfumble said:

How would you go about designing a new car / motor vehicle that exactly fits your needs?
There must be at least a thousand different ways to start the design.

Start from the ground up, literally.
Find a tyre suitable for what you intend the car to be used for and that will be available for some time to come.
Copy the suspension from a similar car that works really well, no need to innovate or re-invent the wheel (no pun intended) here.
Design a chassis that connects up all the suspension points rigidly (30,000 nm/degree or better is good) and also has the holes you need for doors, windows, pipes, etc.

I can go into as much detail as you like, and there’s lot more.

stumpy_seahorse said:

mollwollfumble said:

How would you go about designing a new car / motor vehicle that exactly fits your needs?
There must be at least a thousand different ways to start the design.

!http://www.wired.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/the-homer-inline4.jpg

Ha.

any new car needs to be able to be assembled quickly , cheap to produce, energy efficient and only last 5 years AND it needs to be built to be disassembled for recycling

you need throw away cars as the older the car the more problems that occur with it

throwaway cars are always fitted with the latest in driver safety, older cars lead to more accidents and pollution as they are usually less energy efficient.

the car needs to weigh much less, a heap of energy is used to push/ pull heavy cats around the place

with these new cars in mind, because everyone needs to buy a new car every 5 years there will be a steady market for cars made over here, more energy efficient to not ship cars about the place.

new cars should be able to be bought from super markets NOT car dealers, you pick up your new car with your groceries

get lighter cats and remove the pot plants wookie.

one thing i think we’ll be losing in australia now is a car designed and tested in our conditions.
cars will become a generic ‘it’ll do’ for all conditions so it can be sold everywhere

I would ask myself what I want the car to do. Then I would need to frame some sort of purchase/market price which would tell me my R&D costs and materials/manufacturing limits.

Then I would get the crayons out.

stumpy_seahorse said:

one thing i think we’ll be losing in australia now is a car designed and tested in our conditions.
cars will become a generic ‘it’ll do’ for all conditions so it can be sold everywhere

Noticed this while OS, most models/makes are the same btw countries now anyway.

I expect at an early stage you would have to research and assign legislated hard points, ie bumper and light heights, indicators and such.

mollwollfumble said:

How would you go about designing a new car / motor vehicle that exactly fits your needs?
There must be at least a thousand different ways to start the design.

the process of design is reasonably simple…

1. define the problem
2. define the design criteria
3. undertake any research or analysis required
4. evaluate the options and select the appropriate solution
5. optimise the solution
6. implementation of the design
7. evaluate the effectiveness of the design and make changes where necessary

Who likes driving?
Would you prefer the human component of driving the car is mostly or completely removed and an onboard computer controls the car with the human as an emergency backup. Should cars that run on petrol be completely phased out and they all become electric. Perhaps such things as community cars exist and you book it when required and it drives itself to your house and when you are done it goes to another job, it would be similar to a taxi but it doesn’t take the long route or ask you how to get your destination and it doesn’t have John Laws playing on the radio.

Cymek said:

Who likes driving?
Would you prefer the human component of driving the car is mostly or completely removed and an onboard computer controls the car with the human as an emergency backup. Should cars that run on petrol be completely phased out and they all become electric. Perhaps such things as community cars exist and you book it when required and it drives itself to your house and when you are done it goes to another job, it would be similar to a taxi but it doesn’t take the long route or ask you how to get your destination and it doesn’t have John Laws playing on the radio.

I enjoy driving

diddly-squat said:

I enjoy driving

+1

poikilotherm said:

get lighter cats and remove the pot plants wookie.

you should see the size of some of those cats

this new car needs disc brakes , ceramic

more effective

most people are driving to and from work so electric is for the most part viable

if you make the car lighter then all the better

my favourite vehicle for its size and versatility is the VW kombi

take out the engine

drop a bit of weight by making all the doors carbon fibre and it would be a very useful vehicle to get people from A to B. you’d find that more car pooling would happen if they had up dated VW kombis on the road

diddly-squat said:

the process of design is reasonably simple…

1. define the problem
2. define the design criteria
3. undertake any research or analysis required
4. evaluate the options and select the appropriate solution
5. optimise the solution
6. implementation of the design
7. evaluate the effectiveness of the design and make changes where necessary

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You’ve left out management input!

sibeen said:

diddly-squat said:

the process of design is reasonably simple…

1. define the problem
2. define the design criteria
3. undertake any research or analysis required
4. evaluate the options and select the appropriate solution
5. optimise the solution
6. implementation of the design
7. evaluate the effectiveness of the design and make changes where necessary

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You’ve left out management input!

that’s covered under the ‘optimise’ step

diddly-squat said:

sibeen said:

diddly-squat said:

the process of design is reasonably simple…

1. define the problem
2. define the design criteria
3. undertake any research or analysis required
4. evaluate the options and select the appropriate solution
5. optimise the solution
6. implementation of the design
7. evaluate the effectiveness of the design and make changes where necessary

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You’ve left out management input!

that’s covered under the ‘optimise’ step

Can never have enough management input.

poikilotherm said:

diddly-squat said:

sibeen said:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You’ve left out management input!

that’s covered under the ‘optimise’ step

Can never have enough management input.

it’s the equivalent of replacing the engine oil with grease and throwing dirt into it for good measure

wookiemeister said:

poikilotherm said:

diddly-squat said:

that’s covered under the ‘optimise’ step

Can never have enough management input.

it’s the equivalent of replacing the engine oil with grease and throwing dirt into it for good measure

Management, the only way to get things done.

Looks like they’re keeping Bubblecar in the watch house for another 24 hours.

diddly-squat said:

sibeen said:

diddly-squat said:

the process of design is reasonably simple…

1. define the problem
2. define the design criteria
3. undertake any research or analysis required
4. evaluate the options and select the appropriate solution
5. optimise the solution
6. implementation of the design
7. evaluate the effectiveness of the design and make changes where necessary

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You’ve left out management input!

that’s covered under the ‘optimise’ step

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

buffy said:

diddly-squat said:

sibeen said:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You’ve left out management input!

that’s covered under the ‘optimise’ step

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

in fairness… I think the generalised hate towards management as not providing value is a little cliched

buffy said:

diddly-squat said:

sibeen said:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You’ve left out management input!

that’s covered under the ‘optimise’ step

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Oh dear :/ the world might be ending. buffy’s lost the plot!

diddly-squat said:

buffy said:

diddly-squat said:

that’s covered under the ‘optimise’ step

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

in fairness… I think the generalised hate towards management as not providing value is a little cliched

In the public service it seems to be more about weak managers and team leaders who let certain subordinates dictate terms when they should be saying no do as I tell you or face a reprimand

diddly-squat said:

buffy said:

diddly-squat said:

that’s covered under the ‘optimise’ step

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

in fairness… I think the generalised hate towards management as not providing value is a little cliched

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

Good one, diddly.

Cymek said:

diddly-squat said:

buffy said:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

in fairness… I think the generalised hate towards management as not providing value is a little cliched

In the public service it seems to be more about weak managers and team leaders who let certain subordinates dictate terms when they should be saying no do as I tell you or face a reprimand

I think it goes both ways…

My experience of the public service is that there are a lot of individuals that exhibit a level of entitlement that makes management of their day-to-day activities really hard. They don’t take instruction particularly well and feel that workplaces are a democracies.

but yes, management is difficult to do well.

sibeen said:

diddly-squat said:

buffy said:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

in fairness… I think the generalised hate towards management as not providing value is a little cliched

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

Good one, diddly.

I said cliched, not completely unfounded.

diddly-squat said:

Cymek said:

diddly-squat said:

in fairness… I think the generalised hate towards management as not providing value is a little cliched

In the public service it seems to be more about weak managers and team leaders who let certain subordinates dictate terms when they should be saying no do as I tell you or face a reprimand

I think it goes both ways…

My experience of the public service is that there are a lot of individuals that exhibit a level of entitlement that makes management of their day-to-day activities really hard. They don’t take instruction particularly well and feel that workplaces are a democracies.

but yes, management is difficult to do well.

The best manager we had was a women who tried to make people more accountable, certain branches pretty much run without a manager and they send the not so good managers there. They need them to sign off for finance but aren’t needed to actually run the office as they have a team leader for that

diddly-squat said:

Cymek said:

diddly-squat said:

in fairness… I think the generalised hate towards management as not providing value is a little cliched

In the public service it seems to be more about weak managers and team leaders who let certain subordinates dictate terms when they should be saying no do as I tell you or face a reprimand

I think it goes both ways…

My experience of the public service is that there are a lot of individuals that exhibit a level of entitlement that makes management of their day-to-day activities really hard. They don’t take instruction particularly well and feel that workplaces are a democracies.

but yes, management is difficult to do well.

Yea, when you’ve got workers that expect their spectacles to be covered by you, you’ve got issues…

poikilotherm said:

diddly-squat said:

Cymek said:

In the public service it seems to be more about weak managers and team leaders who let certain subordinates dictate terms when they should be saying no do as I tell you or face a reprimand

I think it goes both ways…

My experience of the public service is that there are a lot of individuals that exhibit a level of entitlement that makes management of their day-to-day activities really hard. They don’t take instruction particularly well and feel that workplaces are a democracies.

but yes, management is difficult to do well.

Yea, when you’ve got workers that expect their spectacles to be covered by you, you’ve got issues…

That’s a legitimate claim outlined in policy, I’m talking about people who outrightly refuse to do tasks ordered by management because they don’t want

Cymek said:

poikilotherm said:

diddly-squat said:

I think it goes both ways…

My experience of the public service is that there are a lot of individuals that exhibit a level of entitlement that makes management of their day-to-day activities really hard. They don’t take instruction particularly well and feel that workplaces are a democracies.

but yes, management is difficult to do well.

Yea, when you’ve got workers that expect their spectacles to be covered by you, you’ve got issues…

That’s a legitimate claim outlined in policy, I’m talking about people who outrightly refuse to do tasks ordered by management because they don’t want

heh

Cymek said:

poikilotherm said:

diddly-squat said:

I think it goes both ways…

My experience of the public service is that there are a lot of individuals that exhibit a level of entitlement that makes management of their day-to-day activities really hard. They don’t take instruction particularly well and feel that workplaces are a democracies.

but yes, management is difficult to do well.

Yea, when you’ve got workers that expect their spectacles to be covered by you, you’ve got issues…

That’s a legitimate claim outlined in policy, I’m talking about people who outrightly refuse to do tasks ordered by management because they don’t want

are the glasses only required for you to do your job, or are they required outside the workplace as well… because if the latter, the policy sucks balls and should be changed.

Start with a BOTE sketch? BOTE = back of the envelope.

You wouldn’t download a car!

Why reinvent the wheel?

All my current car needs is a 2” suspension lift, snorkel, bull bar and diff locks.

All of which are available after market.

Dropbear said:

You wouldn’t download a car!

Well, you could try…

Spiny Norman said:

Start from the ground up, literally.
Find a tyre suitable for what you intend the car to be used for and that will be available for some time to come.
Copy the suspension from a similar car that works really well, no need to innovate or re-invent the wheel (no pun intended) here.
Design a chassis that connects up all the suspension points rigidly (30,000 nm/degree or better is good) and also has the holes you need for doors, windows, pipes, etc.

I can go into as much detail as you like, and there’s lot more.

Yes please Spiny Norman, as much detail as you can.
(I’ll get back to the rest of you later).

the car should be made from aluminium

doesn’t rust

can be easily recycled using less energy

lighter than steel, car is more efficient

a lighter car could be slightly bigger / longer and still be more efficient than an equivalent steel car

the wheels should be “mags” or anything lighter than your standard steel wheel

the bonnet should be plastic and designed to flex (when you hit a pedestrian you need to do less damage)

the car should be designed to reduce pedestrian damage on strike

the car should be made from aluminium

doesn’t rust

can be easily recycled using less energy

lighter than steel, car is more efficient

a lighter car could be slightly bigger / longer and still be more efficient than an equivalent steel car

the wheels should be “mags” or anything lighter than your standard steel wheel

the bonnet should be plastic and designed to flex (when you hit a pedestrian you need to do less damage)

the car should be designed to reduce pedestrian damage on strike

wookiemeister said:

the car should be made from aluminium

doesn’t rust

plastic doesn’t rust

and plastics, and glue, are the way they are going.

Arts said:

wookiemeister said:

the car should be made from aluminium

doesn’t rust

plastic doesn’t rust

but it might not have the same strength or ability to be recycled back into a car

in a crash it react in a totally different way

you could have the front of the car plastic though – again for pedestrian strike, you want it to deform

the underlying cage could be aluminium

maybe something like extra dense memory foam that holds it’s shape, but on impact will cushion… for the bumper

Arts said:

maybe something like extra dense memory foam that holds it’s shape, but on impact will cushion… for the bumper

sounds good

it could have an eggshell thin plastic face to it that cracks on impact

Have now copied out all you answers for off-line study.

> Simpsons car
That’s a valid starting point. There have been cars built based on those in cartoons, a famous one being the Batmobile. But others based on Flintstones and Wacky Races for example.

> Start from the ground up, literally. Find a tyre suitable for what you intend the car to be used for and that will be available for some time to come.
Wouldn’t you need to estimate vehicle weight and wheelbase first, possibly even anticipated vehicle cost? I’ve heard that tread design is mostly for show, not for performance.

> I can go into as much detail as you like, and there’s lot more.
Please do.

> any new car needs to be able to be assembled quickly, cheap to produce, energy efficient and only last 5 years AND it needs to be built to be disassembled for recycling

> any new car needs to be able to be assembled quickly, cheap to produce,
Assembled quickly and cheap to produce means high volume production doesn’t it, large sales figure.

> energy efficient and the car needs to weigh much less, a heap of energy is used to push/ pull heavy cars around the place. more energy efficient to not ship cars about the place. New cars should be able to be bought from super markets, you pick up your new car with your groceries
I totally agree, except possibly with the last suggestion. Nearly every car maker’s first car is like this, an extreme example is the Peel P50, which weighs in at 59 kg, which is less than the weight of a Vespa Scooter. All these cars (those smaller than the 2CV) run into problems because they doesn’t sell, at least not without massive government protection.

> only last 5 years and needs to be built to be disassembled for recycling
Huh?

> A car designed and tested in Australian conditions.
By that do you mean for good roads (no 4WD) and low speed limit (no sports cars)? Or TIC by Australian conditions do you mean for drivers with more money than sense? Many cars sold in Australia won’t fit an Australian inside it. Another Australian condition is long distances in hot weather. We don’t have many blizzards.

> I would ask myself what I want the car to do. Then I would need to frame some sort of purchase/market price which would tell me my R&D costs and materials/manufacturing limits. Then I would get the crayons out.
Purpose first. Good start. That may be how the major car manufacturers do it, certainly they do the crayons bit, after the crayons they play with clay. What do you want your car to do?

> I expect at an early stage you would have to research and assign legislated hard points, ie bumper and light heights, indicators and such.
You’re right. Also check legislation on windscreen wipers, airbags, seatbelts, crash test, etc. PS. I happen to hate car seat belts (I think every car should have 4 Point Racing Seat Belts) and windscreen wipers (Every car needs a style that wipes all of the window and creates no air drag).

> define the problem, define the design criteria, undertake any research or analysis required, evaluate the options and select the appropriate solution…
That’s sensible. At least some cars have started almost this way with a “design brief”. Ford used to use that system and perhaps still does.

> You’ve left out management input!
For Ford in the old days, the most important management input was in the “define the problem” phase. That still applies because these days the management is the problem.

> onboard computer controls the car with the human as an emergency backup … all become electric … community cars you book when required … doesn’t have John Laws
All good ideas.

> my favourite vehicle for its size and versatility is the VW kombi, take out the engine, drop a bit of weight …
That solves the puzzle of the current third top selling motor vehicle worldwide, which fits this description perfectly. It’s the Wuling Sunshine which is sold both as a van and as a people mover.

> All my current car needs is a 2” suspension lift, snorkel, bull bar and diff locks.
Flooding a problem where you live?

> You wouldn’t download a car! Well, you could try…
That’s the third stage that all successful car manufacturers went through. Stage 1 – “tinpot little screamers”. Stage 2 – “underpowered sports car”. Stage 3 – “replica of existing car made with abysmal build quality”.

> the car should be made from aluminium
Another advantage for aluminium is easier to bend to curved shape than steel. It can even be done reasonably easily by hand for the first prototype.

> the wheels should be “mags” or anything lighter than your standard steel wheel
And their design should be dictated by engineering optimisation rather than by blinginess.

> the bonnet should be plastic and designed to flex (when you hit a pedestrian you need to do less damage). The car should be designed to reduce pedestrian damage on strike.
Good idea.

—————
A couple of ideas haven’t yet been mentioned. Perhaps the most important utopian design aspect not mentioned above is that every car should be able to withstand a 10 km/hr impact to any part of the front or rear with a repair cost of zero. To put it another way, every car should come with a “no repair speed” specified.

mollwollfumble said:

Have now copied out all you answers for off-line study.

> Simpsons car
That’s a valid starting point. There have been cars built based on those in cartoons, a famous one being the Batmobile. But others based on Flintstones and Wacky Races for example.

> Start from the ground up, literally. Find a tyre suitable for what you intend the car to be used for and that will be available for some time to come.
Wouldn’t you need to estimate vehicle weight and wheelbase first, possibly even anticipated vehicle cost? I’ve heard that tread design is mostly for show, not for performance.

> I can go into as much detail as you like, and there’s lot more.
Please do.

> any new car needs to be able to be assembled quickly, cheap to produce, energy efficient and only last 5 years AND it needs to be built to be disassembled for recycling

> any new car needs to be able to be assembled quickly, cheap to produce,
Assembled quickly and cheap to produce means high volume production doesn’t it, large sales figure.

> energy efficient and the car needs to weigh much less, a heap of energy is used to push/ pull heavy cars around the place. more energy efficient to not ship cars about the place. New cars should be able to be bought from super markets, you pick up your new car with your groceries
I totally agree, except possibly with the last suggestion. Nearly every car maker’s first car is like this, an extreme example is the Peel P50, which weighs in at 59 kg, which is less than the weight of a Vespa Scooter. All these cars (those smaller than the 2CV) run into problems because they doesn’t sell, at least not without massive government protection.

> only last 5 years and needs to be built to be disassembled for recycling
Huh?

> A car designed and tested in Australian conditions.
By that do you mean for good roads (no 4WD) and low speed limit (no sports cars)? Or TIC by Australian conditions do you mean for drivers with more money than sense? Many cars sold in Australia won’t fit an Australian inside it. Another Australian condition is long distances in hot weather. We don’t have many blizzards.

> I would ask myself what I want the car to do. Then I would need to frame some sort of purchase/market price which would tell me my R&D costs and materials/manufacturing limits. Then I would get the crayons out.
Purpose first. Good start. That may be how the major car manufacturers do it, certainly they do the crayons bit, after the crayons they play with clay. What do you want your car to do?

> I expect at an early stage you would have to research and assign legislated hard points, ie bumper and light heights, indicators and such.
You’re right. Also check legislation on windscreen wipers, airbags, seatbelts, crash test, etc. PS. I happen to hate car seat belts (I think every car should have 4 Point Racing Seat Belts) and windscreen wipers (Every car needs a style that wipes all of the window and creates no air drag).

> define the problem, define the design criteria, undertake any research or analysis required, evaluate the options and select the appropriate solution…
That’s sensible. At least some cars have started almost this way with a “design brief”. Ford used to use that system and perhaps still does.

> You’ve left out management input!
For Ford in the old days, the most important management input was in the “define the problem” phase. That still applies because these days the management is the problem.

> onboard computer controls the car with the human as an emergency backup … all become electric … community cars you book when required … doesn’t have John Laws
All good ideas.

> my favourite vehicle for its size and versatility is the VW kombi, take out the engine, drop a bit of weight …
That solves the puzzle of the current third top selling motor vehicle worldwide, which fits this description perfectly. It’s the Wuling Sunshine which is sold both as a van and as a people mover.

> All my current car needs is a 2” suspension lift, snorkel, bull bar and diff locks.
Flooding a problem where you live?

> You wouldn’t download a car! Well, you could try…
That’s the third stage that all successful car manufacturers went through. Stage 1 – “tinpot little screamers”. Stage 2 – “underpowered sports car”. Stage 3 – “replica of existing car made with abysmal build quality”.

> the car should be made from aluminium
Another advantage for aluminium is easier to bend to curved shape than steel. It can even be done reasonably easily by hand for the first prototype.

> the wheels should be “mags” or anything lighter than your standard steel wheel
And their design should be dictated by engineering optimisation rather than by blinginess.

> the bonnet should be plastic and designed to flex (when you hit a pedestrian you need to do less damage). The car should be designed to reduce pedestrian damage on strike.
Good idea.

—————
A couple of ideas haven’t yet been mentioned. Perhaps the most important utopian design aspect not mentioned above is that every car should be able to withstand a 10 km/hr impact to any part of the front or rear with a repair cost of zero. To put it another way, every car should come with a “no repair speed” specified.

> Start from the ground up, literally. Find a tyre
Let’s see if I understand this. Suppose a car weighs 1250 kg and can carry 550 kg. A quarter of that is 450 kg so a tyre load rating of 82 will suffice? Or do I need to add in weight transfer due to braking? In Victoria the speed limit is 110 km/hr and allow 20 km/hr on top of that so a tyre speed rating of M will suffice? (Note tongue in cheek here, car tyres aren’t available with that low a speed rating). What about section width, aspect ratio, wheel rim diameter? Tread?

What started me on this topic was reading the book “Total failures – 111 heroic failures of motoring”. There are some startling ideas there. A passenger car may have 2, 3, 4 or 6 wheels. The alternative arrangement with 4 wheels is 1 at the front, 1 at the back and two at the sides. Cars may seat 4 people across the front seat, or only seat 1 person, or have an engine midway between the two rear passengers. The steering wheel may be square (in F1 it’s often rectangular), or be replaced by a joystick or trackball-like device. The car body may be of steel, galvanised iron, stainless, aluminium, fibreglass, carbon fibre, polyester, or duraplast (cellulose-reinforced plastic). The car’s electric system may be 12 or 6 volts, using only 6 volts is not so daft these days when headlights only need 3 volts and car computer 5 volts. The car’s engine may be air-cooled or oil-cooled. The drivetrain may be by shaft or chain. One curious idea is a “car” that is a motorbike accessary, attaching to the front of any of a wide range of ordinary motorbikes in place of the normal front fork. The lemons included two amphibious cars and a the Moller Skycar, which is a quadcopter VTOL flying car.

At least twelve of the “total lemons” have engine capacities under 500 cc, the smallest being 49 cc. At least eight of the “total lemons” have kerb weight under 500 kg, the smallest being 59 kg. Compare with the successful Citroën 2CV (8.8 million sold) with air-cooled engine 375-602 cc and kerb weight 600 kg. The design of the 2CV began with “a market research survey. The results of the survey were used by Citroën to prepare a design brief for a low-priced, rugged ‘umbrella on four wheels’ that would enable four small farmers to drive 50 kg of farm goods to market at 50 km/hr. A design brief requirement was to be able to drive across a ploughed field while carrying eggs without breaking them.”

Then I looked at the best-selling cars right now. In the USA the top two selling vehicles are utes/pickups. In Japan, two of the three top-selling cars are alternative energy (hybrids). In the world, the third top seller is a van / people-mover.

All this got me wondering about the possibility of writing a car-design computer game. I know I never will, but it’s fun fantasising about it. It could include “crayons” for sketching, trade-offs such as weight vs fuel consumption and acceleration, dashboard design, chair design. It would have a calculator for beauty. It would include comfort testing front and back seats using a person with arm in sling, with leg in cast, a 195 cm tall man, a 145 cm tall woman, a 185 kg man. It would include commercial off-the shelf components and starting points ranging from mobility scooter to Lamborghini Sesto Elemento.

mollwollfumble said:

mollwollfumble said:

Have now copied out all you answers for off-line study.

> Simpsons car
That’s a valid starting point. There have been cars built based on those in cartoons, a famous one being the Batmobile. But others based on Flintstones and Wacky Races for example.

> Start from the ground up, literally. Find a tyre suitable for what you intend the car to be used for and that will be available for some time to come.
Wouldn’t you need to estimate vehicle weight and wheelbase first, possibly even anticipated vehicle cost? I’ve heard that tread design is mostly for show, not for performance.

> I can go into as much detail as you like, and there’s lot more.
Please do.

> any new car needs to be able to be assembled quickly, cheap to produce, energy efficient and only last 5 years AND it needs to be built to be disassembled for recycling

> any new car needs to be able to be assembled quickly, cheap to produce,
Assembled quickly and cheap to produce means high volume production doesn’t it, large sales figure.

> energy efficient and the car needs to weigh much less, a heap of energy is used to push/ pull heavy cars around the place. more energy efficient to not ship cars about the place. New cars should be able to be bought from super markets, you pick up your new car with your groceries
I totally agree, except possibly with the last suggestion. Nearly every car maker’s first car is like this, an extreme example is the Peel P50, which weighs in at 59 kg, which is less than the weight of a Vespa Scooter. All these cars (those smaller than the 2CV) run into problems because they doesn’t sell, at least not without massive government protection.

> only last 5 years and needs to be built to be disassembled for recycling
Huh?

> A car designed and tested in Australian conditions.
By that do you mean for good roads (no 4WD) and low speed limit (no sports cars)? Or TIC by Australian conditions do you mean for drivers with more money than sense? Many cars sold in Australia won’t fit an Australian inside it. Another Australian condition is long distances in hot weather. We don’t have many blizzards.

> I would ask myself what I want the car to do. Then I would need to frame some sort of purchase/market price which would tell me my R&D costs and materials/manufacturing limits. Then I would get the crayons out.
Purpose first. Good start. That may be how the major car manufacturers do it, certainly they do the crayons bit, after the crayons they play with clay. What do you want your car to do?

> I expect at an early stage you would have to research and assign legislated hard points, ie bumper and light heights, indicators and such.
You’re right. Also check legislation on windscreen wipers, airbags, seatbelts, crash test, etc. PS. I happen to hate car seat belts (I think every car should have 4 Point Racing Seat Belts) and windscreen wipers (Every car needs a style that wipes all of the window and creates no air drag).

> define the problem, define the design criteria, undertake any research or analysis required, evaluate the options and select the appropriate solution…
That’s sensible. At least some cars have started almost this way with a “design brief”. Ford used to use that system and perhaps still does.

> You’ve left out management input!
For Ford in the old days, the most important management input was in the “define the problem” phase. That still applies because these days the management is the problem.

> onboard computer controls the car with the human as an emergency backup … all become electric … community cars you book when required … doesn’t have John Laws
All good ideas.

> my favourite vehicle for its size and versatility is the VW kombi, take out the engine, drop a bit of weight …
That solves the puzzle of the current third top selling motor vehicle worldwide, which fits this description perfectly. It’s the Wuling Sunshine which is sold both as a van and as a people mover.

> All my current car needs is a 2” suspension lift, snorkel, bull bar and diff locks.
Flooding a problem where you live?

> You wouldn’t download a car! Well, you could try…
That’s the third stage that all successful car manufacturers went through. Stage 1 – “tinpot little screamers”. Stage 2 – “underpowered sports car”. Stage 3 – “replica of existing car made with abysmal build quality”.

> the car should be made from aluminium
Another advantage for aluminium is easier to bend to curved shape than steel. It can even be done reasonably easily by hand for the first prototype.

> the wheels should be “mags” or anything lighter than your standard steel wheel
And their design should be dictated by engineering optimisation rather than by blinginess.

> the bonnet should be plastic and designed to flex (when you hit a pedestrian you need to do less damage). The car should be designed to reduce pedestrian damage on strike.
Good idea.

—————
A couple of ideas haven’t yet been mentioned. Perhaps the most important utopian design aspect not mentioned above is that every car should be able to withstand a 10 km/hr impact to any part of the front or rear with a repair cost of zero. To put it another way, every car should come with a “no repair speed” specified.

> Start from the ground up, literally. Find a tyre
Let’s see if I understand this. Suppose a car weighs 1250 kg and can carry 550 kg. A quarter of that is 450 kg so a tyre load rating of 82 will suffice? Or do I need to add in weight transfer due to braking? In Victoria the speed limit is 110 km/hr and allow 20 km/hr on top of that so a tyre speed rating of M will suffice? (Note tongue in cheek here, car tyres aren’t available with that low a speed rating). What about section width, aspect ratio, wheel rim diameter? Tread?

What started me on this topic was reading the book “Total failures – 111 heroic failures of motoring”. There are some startling ideas there. A passenger car may have 2, 3, 4 or 6 wheels. The alternative arrangement with 4 wheels is 1 at the front, 1 at the back and two at the sides. Cars may seat 4 people across the front seat, or only seat 1 person, or have an engine midway between the two rear passengers. The steering wheel may be square (in F1 it’s often rectangular), or be replaced by a joystick or trackball-like device. The car body may be of steel, galvanised iron, stainless, aluminium, fibreglass, carbon fibre, polyester, or duraplast (cellulose-reinforced plastic). The car’s electric system may be 12 or 6 volts, using only 6 volts is not so daft these days when headlights only need 3 volts and car computer 5 volts. The car’s engine may be air-cooled or oil-cooled. The drivetrain may be by shaft or chain. One curious idea is a “car” that is a motorbike accessary, attaching to the front of any of a wide range of ordinary motorbikes in place of the normal front fork. The lemons included two amphibious cars and a the Moller Skycar, which is a quadcopter VTOL flying car.

At least twelve of the “total lemons” have engine capacities under 500 cc, the smallest being 49 cc. At least eight of the “total lemons” have kerb weight under 500 kg, the smallest being 59 kg. Compare with the successful Citroën 2CV (8.8 million sold) with air-cooled engine 375-602 cc and kerb weight 600 kg. The design of the 2CV began with “a market research survey. The results of the survey were used by Citroën to prepare a design brief for a low-priced, rugged ‘umbrella on four wheels’ that would enable four small farmers to drive 50 kg of farm goods to market at 50 km/hr. A design brief requirement was to be able to drive across a ploughed field while carrying eggs without breaking them.”

Then I looked at the best-selling cars right now. In the USA the top two selling vehicles are utes/pickups. In Japan, two of the three top-selling cars are alternative energy (hybrids). In the world, the third top seller is a van / people-mover.

All this got me wondering about the possibility of writing a car-design computer game. I know I never will, but it’s fun fantasising about it. It could include “crayons” for sketching, trade-offs such as weight vs fuel consumption and acceleration, dashboard design, chair design. It would have a calculator for beauty. It would include comfort testing front and back seats using a person with arm in sling, with leg in cast, a 195 cm tall man, a 145 cm tall woman, a 185 kg man. It would include commercial off-the shelf components and starting points ranging from mobility scooter to Lamborghini Sesto Elemento.

a game like that came out 3-4 months ago (the name escapes me right now) very involved down to building engines to mpg, hp targets, i’ve read some really good write ups on it, but haven’t had the time as yet to sit down and play with a trial

here it is, Automation…

http://store.steampowered.com/app/293760/

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/art/golden-age-american-car/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=pbsofficial&utm_campaign=newshour

mollwollfumble said:

> Start from the ground up, literally. Find a tyre suitable for what you intend the car to be used for and that will be available for some time to come.
Wouldn’t you need to estimate vehicle weight and wheelbase first, possibly even anticipated vehicle cost? I’ve heard that tread design is mostly for show, not for performance.

You heard wrong, very, very wrong. If it never rained then you wouldn’t need treaded tyres, aka, racing slicks, but it certainly does and the shape of the tread affects massively the way and amount of water that gets thrown out of the contact patch of the tyre. The best ones are directional tyres, a quick search shows me something like this as an example. Get the right tyre, suspension, and kinematics and you can nearly ignore the wet roads.

Yes you need to consider the weight of the car, etc, but no need to worry about the braking forces, they are only transient. For the cost, it’s only going to add a few percent to the overall cost even if you get very good tyres and they are very much worth it. They are the most important safety device on the car, full stop.

mollwollfumble said:

> the car should be made from aluminium
Another advantage for aluminium is easier to bend to curved shape than steel. It can even be done reasonably easily by hand for the first prototype.

No practical difference with working either metal with modern gear. Aluminium costs more though, and isn’t as stiff per unit volume as steel. Modern cars use many subtly different type of steel in the structure to get the crash rigidity they need and it does make them far more difficult to repair. Personally I’d like to see a very stiff core structure but with easily replaceable deformable structures. So something like a carbon fibre main body, but with bolt-on chassis structures front & rear and then progressively crushable foamed alloy spaces to take the crash forces. All quite light and reasonably cheap & easy to repair.

mollwollfumble said:

> the wheels should be “mags” or anything lighter than your standard steel wheel
And their design should be dictated by engineering optimisation rather than by blinginess.

True. Having a light wheel is quite important in terms of unsprung mass. The lighter the tyre/wheel/upright/etc assembly the easier & better the suspension works.

mollwollfumble said:

> the bonnet should be plastic and designed to flex (when you hit a pedestrian you need to do less damage). The car should be designed to reduce pedestrian damage on strike.
Good idea.

It’s an ADR requirement I think.

mollwollfumble said:

> Start from the ground up, literally. Find a tyre
Let’s see if I understand this. Suppose a car weighs 1250 kg and can carry 550 kg. A quarter of that is 450 kg so a tyre load rating of 82 will suffice? Or do I need to add in weight transfer due to braking? In Victoria the speed limit is 110 km/hr and allow 20 km/hr on top of that so a tyre speed rating of M will suffice? (Note tongue in cheek here, car tyres aren’t available with that low a speed rating). What about section width, aspect ratio, wheel rim diameter? Tread?

All that depends upon what the car is intended for.
Even though the speed limit is 110 km/h in most Australian states you must use a tyre that is capable is easily withstanding the maximum speed of the car. Speed limit aside, someone is always going to find out how fast it’ll go and they can do that in the Northern Territory as there are roads with no speed limit there.

mollwollfumble said:

All this got me wondering about the possibility of writing a car-design computer game. I know I never will, but it’s fun fantasising about it. It could include “crayons” for sketching, trade-offs such as weight vs fuel consumption and acceleration, dashboard design, chair design. It would have a calculator for beauty. It would include comfort testing front and back seats using a person with arm in sling, with leg in cast, a 195 cm tall man, a 145 cm tall woman, a 185 kg man. It would include commercial off-the shelf components and starting points ranging from mobility scooter to Lamborghini Sesto Elemento.

As mentioned a few posts ago, there is the Automation game now available.
Um …. I actually played a little part in that as the creators of the game used my website a fair bit to get ideas on how to build good engines.

Also FWIW, as a mental exercise I’m designing a supercar (Ferrari, Lamborghini, etc) and figuring out how how it would all go together. It’d be a hell of a car …. 900 hp+, good economy, lots of acceleration & top speed, etc.

another advantage of a car made from aluminium the paint doesn’t need to super amazing to protect against rust – aluminium doesn’t rust – you’d save a fortune on car paint because it doesn’t need to protect the structure from chips etc

the bottom of the car doesn’t need to be coated with anything – it will be just fine

you then save a fortune in production because it takes less time to go through the production line and less money spent on raw materials such as paint

metal prices have fallen recently and aluminium is available as recycled metal

when the car gets recycled the owner gets a credit for bringing back their car (no more dumped cars) , when you buy a car the recycling is taken into account

of course the other great thing is that countries such as Australia creating the raw product make money from selling it to china or wherever.

as I said before the number of cars being bought here every 5 slowly goes up with more population, it creates stability in the buying process

the other great beauty of having a 5 year car is that components don’t need to be built in a bullet proof way – this could mean some lighter components within the car. if you had a larger oil filter it could mean the car would never need an oil change , never need new spark plugs every year.

the whole after market thing would collapse though – most people just wouldn’t bother doing this or that to their car

after 5 years has expired the car cant be driven on the road – its defunct and uninsurable

a manufacturers guarantee covers the life of the vehicle

the average joe might only ever change tyres twice in that period

driven normally the brakes might also last 5 years

if you have a crash then at least you’ve got the scrap value of the car to bargain with

the newer the car the more safety features

you would rarely see smoking vehicles on the road

rust isn’t a problem with today’s cars.

JudgeMental said:

rust isn’t a problem with today’s cars.

Yes, the full body galvanising dip plus advances in seals has made a big difference. Probably a bit of intelligent design of drainage points as well.

Oh and on many cars the voids are now filled with soundproofing material.

wookiemeister said:

another advantage of a car made from aluminium the paint doesn’t need to super amazing to protect against rust – aluminium doesn’t rust – you’d save a fortune on car paint because it doesn’t need to protect the structure from chips etc

the bottom of the car doesn’t need to be coated with anything – it will be just fine

you then save a fortune in production because it takes less time to go through the production line and less money spent on raw materials such as paint

People like a colour choice. I am not convinced the savings of having an unpainted car will be enough to make a manufacturer who doesn’t offer paint to compete.

Which is the same issue re buying a new car every five years, that depends on how much it will cost every five years and again I cannot see that being viable. People are wary of battery replacement costs let alone the cost of replacing an entire car. Even if you make a car that has no servicing for five years that is still only a few thousand dollars saved.

How much to make an entire car?

AwesomeO said:

JudgeMental said:

rust isn’t a problem with today’s cars.

Yes, the full body galvanising dip plus advances in seals has made a big difference. Probably a bit of intelligent design of drainage points as well.

yes but with an aluminium body – no need for galv dip

AwesomeO said:

wookiemeister said:

another advantage of a car made from aluminium the paint doesn’t need to super amazing to protect against rust – aluminium doesn’t rust – you’d save a fortune on car paint because it doesn’t need to protect the structure from chips etc

the bottom of the car doesn’t need to be coated with anything – it will be just fine

you then save a fortune in production because it takes less time to go through the production line and less money spent on raw materials such as paint

People like a colour choice. I am not convinced the savings of having an unpainted car will be enough to make a manufacturer who doesn’t offer paint to compete.

Which is the same issue re buying a new car every five years, that depends on how much it will cost every five years and again I cannot see that being viable. People are wary of battery replacement costs let alone the cost of replacing an entire car. Even if you make a car that has no servicing for five years that is still only a few thousand dollars saved.

How much to make an entire car?

you can still paint the car by all means but considering its only to last 5 years, it not need as bullet proof as before or use tha same amount of paint

ali is too brittle. and too expensive.

wookiemeister said:

AwesomeO said:

JudgeMental said:

rust isn’t a problem with today’s cars.

Yes, the full body galvanising dip plus advances in seals has made a big difference. Probably a bit of intelligent design of drainage points as well.

yes but with an aluminium body – no need for galv dip

Land Rover and Jag have gone over to full aluminium I believe. Now they need to recoup billion dollar plus investmemt in new techniques and tooling.

lands used to be duralium, an alloy.

Duralumin

wookiemeister said:

AwesomeO said:

wookiemeister said:

another advantage of a car made from aluminium the paint doesn’t need to super amazing to protect against rust – aluminium doesn’t rust – you’d save a fortune on car paint because it doesn’t need to protect the structure from chips etc

the bottom of the car doesn’t need to be coated with anything – it will be just fine

you then save a fortune in production because it takes less time to go through the production line and less money spent on raw materials such as paint

People like a colour choice. I am not convinced the savings of having an unpainted car will be enough to make a manufacturer who doesn’t offer paint to compete.

Which is the same issue re buying a new car every five years, that depends on how much it will cost every five years and again I cannot see that being viable. People are wary of battery replacement costs let alone the cost of replacing an entire car. Even if you make a car that has no servicing for five years that is still only a few thousand dollars saved.

How much to make an entire car?

you can still paint the car by all means but considering its only to last 5 years, it not need as bullet proof as before or use tha same amount of paint

just don’t do a ford or mitsubishi and clear coat them to minimum tolerances…

JudgeMental said:

lands used to be duralium, an alloy.

Yeah, trap for new players, don’t try and do a presentation using one as a board using magnetic strips.

AwesomeO said:

wookiemeister said:

AwesomeO said:

Yes, the full body galvanising dip plus advances in seals has made a big difference. Probably a bit of intelligent design of drainage points as well.

yes but with an aluminium body – no need for galv dip

Land Rover and Jag have gone over to full aluminium I believe. Now they need to recoup billion dollar plus investmemt in new techniques and tooling.

but if you start with aluminium in the first place you aren’t having the expense of retrofitting the whole process

the main thing is recycling – aluminium makes sense from that perspective

who knows maybe in the future commercial airliners might only have a shelf life of 5 years?

less chances of cracking

less need for ongoing costly service

an aircraft only meant to be in service for 5 years might be a lot cheaper to build and sell

a commercial airline would only then be locked into contracts lasting 5 years

with the aircraft being replaced every 5 years it means theres newer aircraft flying around rather than older aircraft

there would be little need for the airline to pay for costly retrofits for stuff – just wait a few years and you get a brand new aircraft

actually it is brimabright, Al and Mg instead of Al and Cu

Not retrofitting, they designed a whole new process. How much do you think it takes to set up a car plant?

And aluminium scrambles ‘their’ surveillance devices.

they recycle steel cars.

maybe we need to start making more things from aluminium than plastic that requires costly and complicated reprocessing systems?

JudgeMental said:

they recycle steel cars.

you need more energy to melt steel

over the life of the vehicle a steel vehicle will require more energy to move it because its heavier

have you considered the weaker properties of ali compared to steel and therefore the thickness? steel in cars is pretty thin these days.

AwesomeO said:

Not retrofitting, they designed a whole new process. How much do you think it takes to set up a car plant?

if you were selling new cars every 5 years you’d recoup the cost fairly quickly

do it right and new models could come off the production quicker

because new models are coming off the production all the time and peoples cars would soon be replaced the whole after market thing would most likely collapse as I said – for joe average commuter cars

the market you’d aim at would be commuter cars – there are more of them doing more mileage than any other vehicle. most people using a car are doing shopping and commuting. a simple road car would be the best bet.

JudgeMental said:

have you considered the weaker properties of ali compared to steel and therefore the thickness? steel in cars is pretty thin these days.

I’m sure anyone with some training in metallurgy and engineering could create a shell from aluminium that does the same job

aircraft are traditionally made from it due its strength and lightness – the americans went to the moon on the back of aluminium -

also parts of the car body act as strengtheners. turrets are now going to boron steel cos they can go lighter but still retain the strength.

wookiemeister said:

AwesomeO said:

Not retrofitting, they designed a whole new process. How much do you think it takes to set up a car plant?

if you were selling new cars every 5 years you’d recoup the cost fairly quickly

do it right and new models could come off the production quicker

because new models are coming off the production all the time and peoples cars would soon be replaced the whole after market thing would most likely collapse as I said – for joe average commuter cars

the market you’d aim at would be commuter cars – there are more of them doing more mileage than any other vehicle. most people using a car are doing shopping and commuting. a simple road car would be the best bet.

The key question is how much do you think it would cost every five years to replace your car? You are not going to get much value in scrap from the old one so the question is how cheap can you make a car that only lasts five years?

my argument is that from a recycling perspective you need a standard material across the main parts of the car. use the same material where you can, this makes recycling easier

The other question is the buyer. That cheap indian car is not selling so well, it is a cheap budget car and aspirational people don’t like to be seen in one. A lot of psychology in car purchases. Selling the sizzle I beleive it is called.

most cars do use the same materials. steel, various alloys for different applications. plastics.

AwesomeO said:

wookiemeister said:

AwesomeO said:

Not retrofitting, they designed a whole new process. How much do you think it takes to set up a car plant?

if you were selling new cars every 5 years you’d recoup the cost fairly quickly

do it right and new models could come off the production quicker

because new models are coming off the production all the time and peoples cars would soon be replaced the whole after market thing would most likely collapse as I said – for joe average commuter cars

the market you’d aim at would be commuter cars – there are more of them doing more mileage than any other vehicle. most people using a car are doing shopping and commuting. a simple road car would be the best bet.

The key question is how much do you think it would cost every five years to replace your car? You are not going to get much value in scrap from the old one so the question is how cheap can you make a car that only lasts five years?

we need to see car ownership as it really is – you are really only renting the car

when you “buy’ the car the price you pay you divide by 5 years AND because there would be little to change including oil , unless you hit something or write the thing off the price you pay is more or less the only money you outlay

it creates peace of mind in the mind of the purchaser

JudgeMental said:

most cars do use the same materials. steel, various alloys for different applications. plastics.

they aren’t very recyclable

you need the process to take the car apart to be easier than putting it together – you reclaim the metal , melt it down and use it again and again

the brilliant thing is that you could have all kinds of fantastical looking cars very quickly

some people might not want to sell them or want to get them crushed, some of them could be put in museums (but those museums would have to big)

maybe you’d need to have 3d Al printing for some parts?

plastic is nice but it must all be easily recyclable PET for example is not easily recyclable , recycling Al I bet would be a hell of a lot easier than recycling a dozen different types of plastic

wookiemeister said:

AwesomeO said:

wookiemeister said:

if you were selling new cars every 5 years you’d recoup the cost fairly quickly

do it right and new models could come off the production quicker

because new models are coming off the production all the time and peoples cars would soon be replaced the whole after market thing would most likely collapse as I said – for joe average commuter cars

the market you’d aim at would be commuter cars – there are more of them doing more mileage than any other vehicle. most people using a car are doing shopping and commuting. a simple road car would be the best bet.

The key question is how much do you think it would cost every five years to replace your car? You are not going to get much value in scrap from the old one so the question is how cheap can you make a car that only lasts five years?

we need to see car ownership as it really is – you are really only renting the car

when you “buy’ the car the price you pay you divide by 5 years AND because there would be little to change including oil , unless you hit something or write the thing off the price you pay is more or less the only money you outlay

it creates peace of mind in the mind of the purchaser

Again cars are an emotional choice. Very few people purchase them rationally. If it was thought of rationally public transport and taxis would be cheaper albeit less convenient.

We are not at that point yet where cars are white goods on wheels. When that point happens a disposable car might be viable but again, you need to figure out a cost every five years. With the legislated crash requirements I don’t reckon you can make a car cheap enough to replace every five years. Let alone, again, that emotional aspect.

People buy four wheel drives with extra wieght and transfer cases etc they will never use cos they are buying the sizzle.

creating the press for a new car might be as expensive now

3d printing can create the mould piece to create the steel template for the Al sheet

you could bring students into the factory to design their own car, the production line being hijacked during the night perhaps to create these new designs

Or to put it another way, you are not a government department providing personal transportation, you are a company trying to sell a product for profit.

AwesomeO said:

wookiemeister said:

AwesomeO said:

The key question is how much do you think it would cost every five years to replace your car? You are not going to get much value in scrap from the old one so the question is how cheap can you make a car that only lasts five years?

we need to see car ownership as it really is – you are really only renting the car

when you “buy’ the car the price you pay you divide by 5 years AND because there would be little to change including oil , unless you hit something or write the thing off the price you pay is more or less the only money you outlay

it creates peace of mind in the mind of the purchaser

Again cars are an emotional choice. Very few people purchase them rationally. If it was thought of rationally public transport and taxis would be cheaper albeit less convenient.

We are not at that point yet where cars are white goods on wheels. When that point happens a disposable car might be viable but again, you need to figure out a cost every five years. With the legislated crash requirements I don’t reckon you can make a car cheap enough to replace every five years. Let alone, again, that emotional aspect.

People buy four wheel drives with extra wieght and transfer cases etc they will never use cos they are buying the sizzle.

for many people cars are white goods on wheels

tell someone the price of the car includes serviced for the next 5 years and their costs are more or less fixed and its a winner

you start cutting out the dodgy mechanics from the equation – few I have found can do or want to do their job

AwesomeO said:

Or to put it another way, you are not a government department providing personal transportation, you are a company trying to sell a product for profit.

wookiemeister said:

AwesomeO said:

wookiemeister said:

we need to see car ownership as it really is – you are really only renting the car

when you “buy’ the car the price you pay you divide by 5 years AND because there would be little to change including oil , unless you hit something or write the thing off the price you pay is more or less the only money you outlay

it creates peace of mind in the mind of the purchaser

Again cars are an emotional choice. Very few people purchase them rationally. If it was thought of rationally public transport and taxis would be cheaper albeit less convenient.

We are not at that point yet where cars are white goods on wheels. When that point happens a disposable car might be viable but again, you need to figure out a cost every five years. With the legislated crash requirements I don’t reckon you can make a car cheap enough to replace every five years. Let alone, again, that emotional aspect.

People buy four wheel drives with extra wieght and transfer cases etc they will never use cos they are buying the sizzle.

for many people cars are white goods on wheels

tell someone the price of the car includes serviced for the next 5 years and their costs are more or less fixed and its a winner

you start cutting out the dodgy mechanics from the equation – few I have found can do or want to do their job

No, not for many people, for hardly anyone. Tata Nano is evidence of that.

wookiemeister said:

AwesomeO said:

Or to put it another way, you are not a government department providing personal transportation, you are a company trying to sell a product for profit.

Ok, in that case first you have to build a government that will build a car.

if you want to design a car you need to consider the beginning and end of its life

the other thing is that banger races would be awesome

before you take it for recycling the cars could be entered into monster banger races

if you want to design a car you need to consider the beginning and end of its life

the other thing is that banger races would be awesome

before you take it for recycling the cars could be entered into monster banger races

Spiny Norman said:

As mentioned a few posts ago, there is the Automation game now available.
Um …. I actually played a little part in that as the creators of the game used my website a fair bit to get ideas on how to build good engines.

Also FWIW, as a mental exercise I’m designing a supercar (Ferrari, Lamborghini, etc) and figuring out how how it would all go together. It’d be a hell of a car …. 900 hp+, good economy, lots of acceleration & top speed, etc.

Wonderful. First of all, which website?

What’s the supercar like so far?

Spiny Norman said:

I don’t know if you can believe this, but that tyre has me actually drooling.

There is the Automation game now available

Am downloading Automation now. At 1.6 GB it’s not small.

mollwollfumble said:

What’s the supercar like so far?

Super!
Good turning circle (worked out a trick with how to do that but still keep wide wheels on the front), part-time 4WD, variable capacity engine that gives both good power and good economy, active ride height, central driver seating, etc.
With turbos the engine could be as much as 1600 hp. I figure that’d be enough for pretty much anyone.

Spiny Norman said:

mollwollfumble said:

What’s the supercar like so far?

Super!
Good turning circle (worked out a trick with how to do that but still keep wide wheels on the front), part-time 4WD, variable capacity engine that gives both good power and good economy, active ride height, central driver seating, etc.
With turbos the engine could be as much as 1600 hp. I figure that’d be enough for pretty much anyone.

Eagerly awaiting a full description.

http://www.uniquecarsandparts.com.au/ucap_lost_marques.htm

> I actually played a little part in that as the creators of the game used my website a fair bit to get ideas on how to build good engines.

From here?
http://www.billzilla.org/engother.htm

Toyota’s big leap to aluminium
http://www.autonews.com/article/20140922/OEM01/309229953/toyotas-big-leap-to-aluminum

The car-body constitutes the largest fraction of mass of a standard high volume car. Replacing steel by aluminium can reduce the body mass by around 40 %. There are “all-aluminium” car-bodies, such as the examples shown (Audi A8 and Jaguar XJ) and the latest development is the hybrid car-body, combining aluminium and steel, brought to market by the BMW 5 series. In many new cars of various brands, it is common the use aluminium for example for the car bonnet to lighten specifically the front of the vehicle.
http://aluminium.matter.org.uk/content/html/eng/default.asp?catid=210&pageid=2144416998

High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7c671aac-4372-11e4-be3f-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz3YNlRgqYA

The threat came into sharp focus in January when Ford announced a redesign of its F150 pick-up truck – the US’s best-selling vehicle for more than three decades – featuring an all-aluminium body. The new F150 – weighing 700lb (320kg) less than its steel-clad predecessor – will appear later this year and will be the first-ever all-aluminium body on a Ford-branded vehicle.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7c671aac-4372-11e4-be3f-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3YNlEv5PP

hood and trunk and a few closures etc. LOL. toyota.

the melting point of aluminium alloys are half that of steel meaning that recycling energy would be half of that compared to steel

if you made a standard aluminium alloy then you’d have a workable model of recycling

the mass of the battery system in this new vehicle would replace the mass lost by using aluminium instead of steel

also with the battery pack now sat low in the vehicle the centre of gravity now shifts further downwards making the vehicle more stable and the mass more spread out (you could employ a standard 4WD arrangement in this mass production car)

in the event of a war these cars instead of being taken back fro scrap could immediately provide the army with vehicles with which to take weapons to the nearest battle field (even though they are electric), they could be retrofitted with solar panels perhaps?

for the cars it might be a one way trip, the car with an anti tank missile one board is camouflaged in position and is remotely driven towards the enemy stealthily silent and then the missile fired

if the car gets destroyed then so what – it had no further value other than scrap either way

in a war these cars would also make excellent sparepart carriers for existing vehicles – as the drums of war start rolling the number of new types of vehicles becomes less and a standard model appears so that in the event of a war, you’d have millions of spare parts even though your car factories might be smoking piles

the electric vehicle could always be retrofitted with a lightweight petrol driven motor but the petrol refineries might have been attacked by then

you set up your supply lines to deal with a modern military power that can flatten your existing factories and also assume the enemy has command of your skies

by mass producing an aluminium VW kombi type vehicle this can be used to take men and machines into battle – cars just don’t have the same usefulness in war compared to a car

so I suppose you switch all production from cars to van a few years before the war – make some excuse about the car not being big enough and make them more expensive and make your vans much cheaper

your fuel source might be better being solar – no need for fuel resupply though I suppose a hybrid design could be useful or something as bizarre as a petrol motor in the front and an electric motor in the back, not that efficient but very reliable when it comes to fuel