1 2 3 4 5
92CelicaHalfTrac
92CelicaHalfTrac MegaDork
6/6/12 9:37 a.m.

That's not the winning design, is it?

JoeyM
JoeyM SuperDork
6/6/12 10:00 a.m.
kreb wrote: Now if I had my druthers, it'd look like the Mazda Furai....

not my cup of tea

kreb
kreb GRM+ Memberand SuperDork
6/6/12 10:11 a.m.
JoeyM wrote:
kreb wrote: Now if I had my druthers, it'd look like the Mazda Furai....
not my cup of tea

Well that's my point. If FF did something like the Furai or a Bangle design, there'd be fanbois like me jizzing all over ourselves, while an entire other set of folks would break out the pitchforks. Whereas a "safe" but not real inspired design like the current one will raise less overall passion either way.

Look at the FF GTM. It's visually more boring than the 818, but it still spanks Ferraris, which is exactly what it's designed to do. Someone above said that the 818 looked like a Boxter. True, but no Boxter will have the 818s overall feature set, and the 818 will dominate at the track.

Sultan
Sultan HalfDork
6/6/12 10:12 a.m.

When the Scion FR-S showed up online I thought it was kind of ugly. Then a few days ago I saw it in person and it was awesome. On the same note when I saw the Sonic sedan online I thought it looked good for what it is. In person it looks awkward.

I think FFR is a great company and applaud them for winning in their tough industry.

What I find strange in this thread is some people seem to present themselves as victims. "If they would have done (insert complaint) then I would have been happy. It is so easy to criticized from the sidelines.

kreb
kreb GRM+ Memberand SuperDork
6/6/12 10:17 a.m.

Notice how 818 isn't that far from 949? Coincidence? I don't think so. Emelio's evil hand is clearly at work here!

bravenrace
bravenrace PowerDork
6/6/12 10:19 a.m.
Sultan wrote: When the Scion FR-S showed up online I thought it was kind of ugly. Then a few days ago I saw it in person and it was awesome. On the same note when I saw the Sonic sedan online I thought it looked good for what it is. In person it looks awkward. I think FFR is a great company and applaud them for winning in their tough industry. What I find strange in this thread is some people seem to present themselves as victims. "If they would have done (insert complaint) then I would have been happy. It is so easy to criticized from the sidelines.

On the other hand, this is a message board where people express their opinions, often times in very different ways. That shouldn't surprise anyone.

Keith
Keith GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
6/6/12 10:19 a.m.
PHeller wrote: I don't get it. You attach a hot Subaru engine and AWD to a lighter more enthusiast oriented package, but yet you make it into something that is aesthetically bland, and doesn't even look like it could go offroad?

It's a RWD car, and I don't think it's meant to go offroad. Rally isn't a big thing in the US, high performance street cars are. Look at how many hot Subarus and Mitsubishis are immediately lowered by their owners.

I don't think it looks like a Boxster. Sure, there's a vent of a different shape in front of the rear wheels - but when faced with the same design considerations, you're going to see similar solutions.

I would not expect the body to change significantly between now and SEMA. Small detail tweaks, maybe. But it's getting too close to the release for major changes.

ScottyB
ScottyB New Reader
6/6/12 10:44 a.m.
92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: That's not the winning design, is it?

i think FF expressed that they were going to build the final design off of an amalgamation of the top 3 designs, but also noted they might take small design cues from any design submitted. i understood it to mean that the #1 design would be the overall look with characteristics from the 2nd and 3rd placers. seems that may not be the case here...i'm looking hard but not really seeing too many characteristics from the winning designs.

i'm all kinds of biased since i competed, but i don't think the design so far is particularly noteworthy, although its not bad or anything. i just thought they had some great stuff to draw from but didn't really take advantage of it.

however, i completely understand the limitations of what can be produced in the body molds within the cost limitations of the kit. there's always compromises to be made, and if i had to choose where, it would be on the body panels and not the chassis!

bravenrace
bravenrace PowerDork
6/6/12 11:04 a.m.
ScottyB wrote:
92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: That's not the winning design, is it?
however, i completely understand the limitations of what can be produced in the body molds within the cost limitations of the kit. there's always compromises to be made, and if i had to choose where, it would be on the body panels and not the chassis!

Couldn't/shouldn't that have been taken into account when picking a winner?

Capt Slow
Capt Slow Dork
6/6/12 12:19 p.m.
JKleiner wrote: Jeff

I love it. I wish this was out 6 years ago when I wrecked my WRX

4cylndrfury
4cylndrfury UltimaDork
6/6/12 12:21 p.m.
ScottyB wrote: i completely understand the limitations of what can be produced in the body molds within the cost limitations of the kit. there's always compromises to be made, and if i had to choose where, it would be on the body panels and not the chassis!

well said

Ian F
Ian F UberDork
6/6/12 12:49 p.m.
bravenrace wrote: Couldn't/shouldn't that have been taken into account when picking a winner?

I'm not sure it was. Part of the reason I lost interest in the contest was so many of the designs that were being praised didn't compute in my mind as being even remotely practical for production. Then when the majority of entries were roadster and/or had minimal consideration towards a roof, I stopped watching the thread.

Anti-stance
Anti-stance HalfDork
6/6/12 12:51 p.m.

I have no idea what the submitted designs looked like and had no clue what this car was until clicking on this thread. To me, the car looks great and has an interesting drive train. That part of it seems good to me.

As far as a contest to pick a winning design, thats crappy if they did not follow through with the process initially put forth. As stated before, if there would have been a problem in manufacturing with a design, it should not have been picked as one of the 3 to pull design ideas from.

But as I stated, not knowing any of the background and just seeing the drive train and body design, it looks great to me.

jmc14
jmc14 New Reader
6/6/12 12:59 p.m.

For me, the whole purpose of building a kit or building a car of my own design is to be different. I want fantastic performance and I suspect this car will have it. But, I also want a body that turns heads and has people wondering "What is that?" Design is subjective. I think the shape is OK. But, it doesn't have the WOW factor for me.

This is not to knock FF. It's a tremendous undertaking to create a new car from scratch.

jmc14
jmc14 New Reader
6/6/12 1:06 p.m.

By the way. I am not claiming that my designs are great or for everyone. Cars are a hobby for me. I do them my way and for fun. I know that they won't appeal to everyone. I am OK with that.

dculberson
dculberson Dork
6/6/12 3:20 p.m.
Ian F wrote: I'm not sure it was. Part of the reason I lost interest in the contest was so many of the designs that were being praised didn't compute in my mind as being even remotely practical for production. Then when the majority of entries were roadster and/or had minimal consideration towards a roof, I stopped watching the thread.

I agree that not having a roof severely limits the practicality of the finished car, but they made it clear pretty early on in the contest that the base car likely wouldn't have a roof due to cost and complexity. (For example, having operable side glass, weather sealing mating up with the door frame, etc.) That's when I started tuning out. Well, that and when it became more commentary than design concepts, but that has more to do with the participants than the car itself.

I'm super excited to see the finished kit and will make my personal evaluation then.

olpro
olpro New Reader
6/6/12 5:13 p.m.
wearymicrobe wrote: Not to be completely rude to a new guy around here but there is a major difference between whats possible in render software and whats actually possible to produce in fiberglass. Heck some of those designs had negative mold space, non single piece mold plausibility and flat out weird geometry. I will take it all back, and you can complain here, when you actually build a car instead of talking about it on the internet then add in production and cost implementation. Its not like they paid you for your design work. Rant off.

(I thank Peter for already addressing this post but thought I should do so personally as well) Frankly you shouldn't make it so easy to put you in your place. As a designer/design manager/college Trans teacher with over 40 years in the industry, including many many projects managing designs forward to production for GM and Nissan, I do have tons of experience and know-how in exactly this area. The point is that FFR does not have this as a legitimate excuse. Interpreting designs within the limitations of production is no mystery (well maybe to them). However one has to be serious about the attempt, not simply gaming the audience with a so-called design contest, lying to everyone about the process. I understand that the ultimate look for this kind of vehicle/kit car may not matter to many as long as the performance expectations are met. That is totally cool. On the other hand, they didn't have to repeatedly misrepresent the process and act like they were serious about the contest input... but they did.

93EXCivic
93EXCivic UltimaDork
6/6/12 5:24 p.m.

It looks better then 90% of what is on the market for kit cars and it isn't another Cobra or 7 clone. Works for me.

NOHOME
NOHOME HalfDork
6/6/12 5:28 p.m.

Bravo!

The car is everything it should be for the stated price and function niche.

The individualist here have plenty of canvas to modify the looks to their taste.

dyintorace
dyintorace GRM+ Memberand UltraDork
6/6/12 6:51 p.m.

To make this thread a little more uplifting, here is a related video I happened across today (what til the end for the related material).

http://autos.yahoo.com/blogs/motoramic/mclaren-mp4-12c-vs-factory-five-gtm-motoramic-153949165.html

kreb
kreb GRM+ Memberand SuperDork
6/6/12 7:00 p.m.

Another thought: A body shell just isn't that hard if you take out roofs, doors and what not. I don't see why a popular kit car couldn't be available in three different styles. I know of at least one American manufacturer who does that, and some of the UK companies have full-body versions of their sevenesques.

In other words, if you think that you can design and build something better, do it. You can either sell it as a rebody, or if it's genuinely excellent, FF might want to buy the rights off of you. A friend an I are working on exactly this idea right now. Not relative to a FF, but another kit car that doesn't ring our stylistic bell in stock form.

Sultan
Sultan HalfDork
6/6/12 7:36 p.m.

There will be future bodies. As Dave said many times it will be like a Swatch watch. Same frame and different bodies.

Hasbro
Hasbro Dork
6/6/12 10:10 p.m.

I felt there were better looking designs but the more I look at it the better it gets. I could very well handle a black one. It's just great that it's out. Well done.

Needs more tire.

JoeyM
JoeyM SuperDork
6/7/12 4:37 a.m.
Sultan wrote: There will be future bodies. As Dave said many times it will be like a Swatch watch. Same frame and different bodies.

Multiple body styles? They need at least one that is playful/silly...something that pulls design cues from one of the following:
autodacia
yugo
trabant
gogomobile
wartburg
2CV
GAZ
the goal is to have something that will make a mustang owner laugh....until you put your foot down.

dean1484
dean1484 GRM+ Memberand UltraDork
6/7/12 6:58 a.m.

Is the thread still around that had all the design ideas drawings?

1 2 3 4 5

You'll need to log in to post.

Our Preferred Partners
viZ7Izuvv6hPXQ8WPFYRjJ25TrvITivr1qe30tsiy6ACvTFXBEIsH2bm7hPyA9NV