K.i.s.s.

[mackme]

Clearly there are some wonderful cars being designed but when the size of the general population, or even the membership of some of the car blogs is condidered not very many are being built. Cost and complexity are at least two reasons for this. Cost is directly related to performance so a choice might be less performance, I owned a Manx back in 1969 and it was more fun than a monkey on a hundred yards of grapevine. Was it fast? Nope, more like sprightly. It was easy to put together, drive lines were cheap and available and this guy, at 19 yrs old ,was able to afford it. Girls loved it, several of my pals wound up with similar cars and a great time was had by all. Some of you guys are very, very, talented when it comes to design ( I am not one of you) so lets see just how simple it could be to come up with an open source design, that uses a readily available, inexpensive, drive line, looks cool, is street legal, and economical for the average enthusiast to create. The idea is NOT to build a track day car. More of a sporty little hot rod. Keep it simple.

I approve of the above message and acknowledge the possibility that I am the only guy on this site that thinks this is a good idea. LOL

[Karlo]

I think its a good idea.

[Gage]

As do I. However, there is such a large investment in time and resources to build even a very simple Exocar that I don't know how this could be a simple process. Does open source mean everyone's property?

As far as what is available first I'm reminded of the close to home TR-42 Porsche powered car. How much simpler could it be? Looks great, great price, good modestly priced engine and optional engine, and with the Porsche motor it is carburated for greatly reduced tuning cost. They are figuring out all the bugs ahead of us.
Then there are some of the UK cars that use Ford, Miata, and Subaru drive lines. The Hayabusa powered Exocar that Matrix made comes to mind. You can go up in price from there. There are RCR Products, Palatov Products, Ariel Products, the Bac Mono, etc.

But if someone designs something with decent structural integrity and good looks and throws the detailed specs up here, more power to them. I'm sure all of us will chip in. We all want to see the best machine for the money.

[mackme]

It's nice to see the response. I generally only get a couple of good ideas a year and I am hoping this would be one of them. Power plant? I think practicality rules out a Busa or any other bike motors, Porshe is either hard to find or brutally expensive. I was thinking more along the line of small Toyota's, Mazda's even Fords or a Neon. 100Hp or thereabouts is plenty. Pooks cars are way slick but I think a bit much for young guys, or broke old guys, and are high performance. I am talking about something that can bounce over a speed bump without damage, that has a windshield, that uses as many low dollar components as possible. Yes, open source means free to anyone that wants to give it a try. The market for this kind of car would probably never buy an RCR or one of Danny's kits for a first venture into car building but might for a second or third. You do not need Wilwood brakes, $500 ea shocks or high buck wheels or tires. Remember how successful the fiberglass buggies were in the late 60's and 70's ( or find a geezer to tell you about it) I know about the Locost 7 movement but they are tiny fragile little buggers yet there are quite a number of them being made all over. Think FUN not high performance.

[B-T]

I like the idea, but the reality is going to be funny to see. When you get design by committee, there will be issues that people get stuck in. I am reminded of a lengthy discussion regarding a clear thing that goes in front of the driver area that you see through. I'm not going to mention it, but several people have claimed to offer them for sale, and yet, as of tomorrow I think I will be the only one with an exo kit that has actually gotten one of these DOT approved things made, and installed.

Our profit margins on the TR-42 are VERY slim, even at our new pricing (we lose a little bit on the original pricing). This pricing includes me spending about 6 months hunting down the best deals I can find on decent equipment (wiring, fenders, seats, instrumentation, etc...). If someone can show me how it can be done as well for several thousand less in cost, I'm all for it! Shocks and springs are a big hit, so is the bodywork, so are the wheels / tires... Do you want easy adjustability for the alignment / toe? Better get some heims and swedge tubes. They aren't super expensive, but they aren't free either. When you add up all the things it takes to make the car complete, the price is surprising. The list just keeps on going.

Probably the only way to make it cost feasible, is to start with a running platform, and just rebody it to look newer (like an gen2 MR2 or something). How you figure how the loads are carried I have no idea.

:)
BT

[Pagester]

the Locost 7 movement but they are tiny fragile little buggers

while that may be true in some instances - I think you'd have quite a challenge in finding a better example of an open-source car design. The Locost community took a classic design and over several years has refined/tweaked it to be just about anything, powered by just about anything.

Overall I like this idea, let's see where it goes...

:spin:

[pook]

uses a readily available, inexpensive, drive line

There is the problem IMO.

I like the idea however and even tried to start a similar discussion on LoCost some years ago but we couldn't decide the basics, front engine, rear engine, open chassis (exo) or body over square tube, etc...(proving B-T's design by committee argument):(

I always thought the key to the whole thing was/is the right donor car as uprights and A-arms will be the biggest issues. but finding an American version of anything that didn't use struts is tough! (Miata, Corvette, Solstice, etc...I know there must be more???)

You could modify the struts or even use them but then you throw "Looks cool" right out the window unless you plan to cover the ugly with a body like Factory Five will. (Sorry but there isn't anything pretty about struts)

I think it could be done with a lot of leg work and research.

PooK

[Tyrod]

This doesn't need to be a "design by committee" approach. Such as in the Locost commumity, all it takes is courageous soul with a proven home design with dimensional drawings and a parts list to post it. Also, any insights on how to make the tricky parts such as bend tubing at home without having to buy expensive machines. Then, anyone that desires to copy it, may do so at their own hearts desire and risk. By proven home design, I mean a running example. The builder would then have the option to modify the design to accomodate the engine and running gear of their choice.

No doubt, over time, the "official" design may change to make it stronger and/or lighter but at least it would be a starting point.

The manufacurers of current exos for profit may lose some sales (I kinda doubt it) but may also find an additional source of revenue by providing parts for the kiss cars. Maybe precut and/or prebent steel chassis tubes. Let the builder weld it all together. I know BT seems to be a whiz on finding parts for Matrix cars. Maybe he can find some profit as a source for "off the shelf" items needed for the kiss car.

Most folks just seem to need someplace to get started.

[Tyrod]

There is the problem IMO.

I like the idea however and even tried to start a similar discussion on LoCost some years ago but we couldn't decide the basics, front engine, rear engine, open chassis (exo) or body over square tube, etc...(proving B-T's design by committee argument):(

I always thought the key to the whole thing was/is the right donor car as uprights and A-arms will be the biggest issues. but finding an American version of anything that didn't use struts is tough! (Miata, Corvette, Solstice, etc...I know there must be more???)

You could modify the struts or even use them but then you throw "Looks cool" right out the window unless you plan to cover the ugly with a body like Factory Five will. (Sorry but there isn't anything pretty about struts)

I think it could be done with a lot of leg work and research.

PooK

To address the upright and a arms question, the ole standby for years is the Mustang II front suspension. You can find oem style exmples of this suspension on eBay all day long, as well as tubular versions of the same thing. Both available in standard, dropped and raised versions. The only real downfall of the Mustang II suspension IMHO is that it's a spindle design instead of a hub design. But, I should imagine some enterprising person might be able to overcome that issue with some forethought and a couple of dimes to rub together. Hint hint a custom upright to accomodate the MII a arms but with the appropriate holes to accomodate a Miata hub and an accessory bracket to fit 2002 Camaro brakes. The MII rack & pinion isn't a terrible thing either and it's cheap.

[B-T]

While the mid engine design looks better and offers more choices for the FWD in a mid engine configuration, it is more difficult to build IMHO, and harder to drive near the limit. The natural tendency of a front engine car is to go forward while the low polar moment of a mid engine car often leads to quick oversteer which is difficult for a novice driver (like me). The mid engine car I had was fun, but most times that I pushed it I ended up sideways or worse. The downside for the front engine design is the very limited amount of donor drivetrains to choose from. Honda S2k, Miata, Solstice, C4-C6 vette, S-10 truck, other small truck, Infiniti G35 and not much else really. Of those, only the Honda, Miata, Solstice, and some of the small trucks have somewhat appropriately sized suspension components (although lots of the trucks have a live rear axle). The Brunton Stalker is a great kit with a front engine / rear drive arrangement using a live rear axle. It is one of the fastest track cars consistently, and a relatively inexpensive kit. The only downside is that the looks aren't for everyone as it basically represents an almost 60 year old design. I would love to see that elusive curved DOT windshield adopted to some cuting edge car design. I could not figure it out, and I tried.

:)
BT

[AZDave]

I would love to see that elusive curved DOT windshield adopted to some cuting edge car design. I could not figure it out, and I tried.
BT

So I think the next design must start in the local glass shop. One can stand in the middle of all that glass and look for divine inspiration. :)

[cordycord]

KISS should be considered a principle, and not a theory. :D However, money always plays a LARGE factor. It is the rare enthusiast with an unlimited budget and a Ferrari aesthetic who would still choose to begin their build on a beetle chassis. From that perspective, I try not to define any builder choice as "right or wrong", as it's really not for me to say. The build is right for that person at that point in their life, nothing more.

Honestly, after spending SO MUCH TIME working on the Sonic 7 and customizing the build at nearly every level, I'm not even sure how long I'll hold onto the car. It's the build that is the fun for me, not necessarily the use.

BTW, did you guys know that the Pontiac Aztek was designed completely by committee and focus groups, thereby cementing itself as one of the ugliest cars in history. :)

[mackme]

LOL, Yep they are ugly as can be. Thing is I never meant design by committee . My original thought was maybe somebody with some design expertise could come up with a design that could be built by anyone with a welder, space and time. I thought that using a readily available donor (maybe a Mustang , cheap, lots around ) and using parts that are easy to find, relatively inexpensive, kind of the way Ron Champion did with the Locost7. I do not think that the kit builders would lose any business (different type of buyer) and no I am not so fogged up that I have any delusions that a home builder can make a car as slick and well designed as the guys at Matrix ( Love those) Palatov or RCR. I do think a car could be built using an old 5.0 or V6 Mustang or Camaro as a donor that would be way fun. Simple formula, Take a car with reasonable performance saw out 1500 lbs or so and yahoo. Hell maybe somebody will come up with a middy that uses something inexpensive for a drive line. Stock car parts are pretty cheap, strong and available all over the place. If it could be done it would only draw more attention to the industry. I remember standing back 30 years ago and looking at my Cascar stock car with no body on it and thinking it looked pretty cool. Not as cool as Pook's cars but cool none the less. Clear to me that there are among us men with the skills to come up with a good basic design, but will they?

[cordycord]

Clear to me that there are among us men with the skills to come up with a good basic design, but will they?

This forum is dedicated to those guys. Fran, Danny (Pook), Bill, Stuart Mills and the rest are putting their talents to their vision of not only what they want to build, but what may appeal to others. Take your pick, or add to the fray. :D

[B-T]

I think Proxi or JonW have the best open source design for a mid engine exo car. You can pretty much adapt it to whatever I4 engine choice you want. Maybe if you write to them, one would be willing to put up dimensions for their frame. OTOH, you could just go here for the dimensions:
http://www.locostusa.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=4599
JonW has an attachment of the jig / frame dimensions he used.
It's a great head start.
:)
BT

[pook]

BTW, did you guys know that the Pontiac Aztek was designed completely by committee and focus groups, thereby cementing itself as one of the ugliest cars in history. :)

LMAO!!! whats funny is that they got it past enough people who had the power to stop it and they didn't???

Some one look up what the original (not the big brake upgrade) Must II used for bolt pattern, 4X???.... if its the same as the miata then a LOT of the work is already done:thumb2:

PooK

[mackme]

This forum is dedicated to those guys. Fran, Danny (Pook), Bill, Stuart Mills and the rest are putting their talents to their vision of not only what they want to build, but what may appeal to others. Take your pick, or add to the fray. :D

Yep I get it. I thought that I had acknowledged these guys as the best and I meant them no disrespect. Thing is they are manufacturers as well as enthusiasts. I may be wrong but I got the feeling that most visitors to this site were like me, curious but not committed to writing a cheque (Canadian spelling) for a kit. I simply thought that there may be some folks that lack the design skills, that given a set of loose plans, might build something. I do not know for sure how many Exo cars are being built just now but I have a feeling that the number is far less than that of the Locost type. I think the reason for that is the average guy doesn't know where to start. I agreed that the designed by committee Pontiac was goofy looking yet they still put more of them on the road than kit cars combined because they made them available. There have been a great number of innovations in this world created by groups of people that put their heads together,committees. If I chose the wrong forum for this idea, I apologize. It seemed logical at the time and I do like the style of most of these cars. I put my first kit car on the road 42 years ago and have loosely followed the industry over the years and have noticed a few things. Most of the "enthusiasts" never get around to buying anything, lots that do don't finish them, and most manufacturers fade into memory. On the other hand Ron Champion will not be forgotten any time soon, Locost 7's are slowly being cranked out as their builders can afford them, in ever growing numbers, and there exists a cottage industry supplying odds and ends for them. The breed has been improved by the input of so many. The same system would probably work with other styles of cars. I am able to weld, I have equipment, I suck at wiring, I can bend and fit tube as well as form sheet metal, I am trying to learn metal shaping, In short I have some skills. Design is not one of them. I have visited several car building web sites where all they do is come up with renderings on the computer. Hell, I only figured out Email last year. I am not an engineer, but for the most part I can follow plans and directions (I have been married). Surely there is room in the hobby for something besides a Locost that is well designed, and build able by a hobbyist. It could even generate new revenue streams for the professional builders.

[B-T]

I don't think anyone here is offended at the idea. I just know that the discussion of our TR-42 car has been very lengthy, and it is not possible to satisfy everyone witha single design of anything. That said, I think that JonW's dimensions that I referenced earlier might be a good starting point. People can always fashion or style some bodywork that suits their taste and fit it over that chassis. At least we know that chassis design works, and accommodates a basic I-4 engine. You could probably adapt the frame to various control arms and uprights, although I don't know how that affects the ackerman, roll center, and all that jazz. Wiring seems tough, but the kit harness we have with our kits seems pretty straightforward. On the front loom I used about half of the wires, cut three wires out (A/C, fax, and one other), and the balance gets bundled with the rear loom (for engine stuff). Every wire is labelled for what it connects to, and you add a ton of grounds (or a ground bus / bar). The dash stuff should be interesting, I haven't looked at that yet.

Painless wiring is the best known brand for the style of harness we are using, although there are a few other less known, but nearly identical companies providing harnesses. You get less diagrams and support, but the product is essentially the same. The cost is substantially less than Painless.

:)
BT