PDA

View Full Version : The Bugatti Build Project - a design exercise


Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6

tdoty
05-02-2005, 07:31 PM
The Bugatti Build Project - a design exercise.

As a result of a recent thread, this excercise has developed.

The Rules as defined by "the creator", Wray Schelin.

ONE-- This build will be done in a fully equipped shop including CNC machining capabilities (if you are in need of a tool all you need do is ask for it and it appears). The shop is provided by the Discovery channel it was designed by them as an ideal filming environment to film the progress of the build. The shop's tool cost is not a part of the budget and not your worry.

TWO -- one person is selected to build this car he or she has a $250000.00 budget to get the job done. If you do an outstanding job you will be offered a contract to "star" in a regular series building one off cars. You can hire any help you might need for the shop requirements plus you can subcontract with any outside help. All help has to paid out of the $250000.00 budget. You have one year to build the car.

The Sultan of Brunei has agreed to purchase the car for $250000.00 and he will take the car home to Brunei with him. The car will not have to meet US crash, fuel, or any other standards. Liability is being wavied by the Sultan after he has a team of engineers inspect the car after the build. The Sultan has a lot of faith in you to get the job done right.

Remember YOU is YOU. How would YOU do it exactly step by step starting at step A working to step B all the way to step Z.

This is not a group build project this is YOU as project manager of a once in a lifetime opportunity.

The car is the Retro Bugatti design that is in two of the previous posts in this thread. I put up several pictures and Anders has put up a few more. Remember this thread will be long so you have to back up to the earlier pages to make sure you did not miss anythng.

The Retro Bugatti has been specifically picked as the car the Sultan wants. He wants the car to fit him, he's 5' 8" tall and weighs 150lbs. He also wants the car to accomodate one of his wives who is 5' 11" he didn't say her weight but she is slender. He wants the car to have 300 plus HP and he will use the car as a casual driver around his Kingdom. He is not expecting super high performance in handling or speed he just wants the car to be fun and comfortable to drive . He does not want the finished project to deviate too much from the drawings. He understands some dimensions will need tweaking but he does not want a finished project that is qute different from the drawings.

Remember also this is just an exercise devised so that we can tap our collective knowledge. If in the future we do choose to build a MetalMeet group project car we will all be on the same page or at least in the same book. We will all learn from this exercise. Scratchbuilding is where the fun and challenge is and it is the freedom that the craft of sheetmetal shaping offers. Learning about the tools and how to work metal are the elementry facets of this craft. How to scratch build using both traditional methods and today's CAD tools are where the real challenge lies. It is also something that we should all aspire to accomplish.

We will all have different perpectives, it is from this multi perspective input we will learn what we don't know.


And, here are some pics of the Retro Bugatti concept from PurSang:
http://www.pursangweb.com/images/proyectos%20especiales/auto6.jpg
http://www.pursangweb.com/images/proyectos%20especiales/auto7.jpg
http://www.pursangweb.com/images/proyectos%20especiales/auto5.jpg
http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/500/medium/Rear_Left_Side_View.jpg
http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/500/medium/Front_Left_Side_View.jpg
http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/500/medium/drawback.jpg

Come up with a plan for the chassis, a plan to get the body from a concept to a metal reality, etc. Not just a parts list, but more specifically "This is step #1, this is step #2 " ....... etc.

How would you do it?

Tim D.

Wray Schelin
05-02-2005, 07:59 PM
Hi Tim,

OK, this new thread works. I hope we can leave behind all of the objections and concentrate on building the Sultan's Retro Bugatti.

What we need now are just the first steps that must be taken.

tdoty
05-02-2005, 09:03 PM
I'll start here, at least with an outline - more will come later.

Step #1 is getting the design work finished to make the car a reality. Approaching PurSang for some support would be the obvious first step. If they weren't interested, bringing in a "name" designer - Thom Taylor being my first choice - to work out any details not in the available drawings as well as an Engineering/Design firm to do the CAD work might be a logical choice . This part of the process could easily eat up $10,000 of the budget or more. However, the basics of the chassis, body, interior, suspension and steering should be worked out by this point.

Full size plots of the CAD data would be used for making the patterns for the wireframe buck (or a CNC Plasma cut sheetmetal buck for a starting point), over which a cardboard/bondo and /or clay model would be done to get the look just right, both in size and proportion.

Concurrently, the chassis build could be started. Since blasting full speed along a curvy mountain road isn't the primary purpose of this vehicle, a Kugel independent front:
http://www.kugelkomponents.com/products/suspension/frontsusps/IFS_phase2.gif

and rear suspension:
http://www.kugelkomponents.com/products/suspension/rearsusps/rearend2.gif
attached to a 2x3 tubular frame (with integrated roll cage/reinforcements) would be the basis for a decent cruiser that ought to be able to hold it's own in terms of handling too. Big Baer brakes and "standard" Kugel steering make up the rest of the basic chassis system.

Meanwhile, a GM LS-1 V-8 crate engine would be prepped for the project.

http://www.gmpartsdepot.com/images/12568722_large.jpg

Nothing fancy, since 300hp is the goal :) . I know I started out talking about LS6 power, but the production LS1 fits the 300 hp bill just fine. Back it up with a 6-speed manual. Rock solid and durable is the key here. A Chevy Vortec I-6 might be more fitting for the theme of the car and the width as well, but the V-8 is proven at the desired power point. Besides, who would take care of the development work on the 6?

Once the model is finished, the Sultan's approval would be needed to proceed - it is his car after all. If the Sultan approves of the basic look at this time, work would begin on making a buck to build the body.

A wireform/Bondo buck like Randy Ferguson demonstrated last month would be a good staring point, though maybe not "TV elegant" :) . Flexible shape patterns would also be taken from the model.

With the completed frame in the shop, the actual build gets going, and here's where it gets fuzzy :) . I can plan with the best of them, coordinating a build up might be different :) .

The core of the body, the passenger compartment, would be the first step. Everything else builds around it, and the interior could be roughly fitted to the space while the rest of the body is being completed. Where to start? Cowl? Rocker panels up? Roof?

From here, it's almost all metalshaping for a few months. Lots of .063" aluminum sheet and time on the e-wheel.

Okay, I've way oversimplified the process of getting the car to this point. A fair amount of work was outsourced to get this far, due mostly to time constraints.

To be continued......................................... ................

Tim D.

Wray Schelin
05-03-2005, 06:40 AM
I hope we can outline some of the first steps that would be needed to make this project happen.

Neal has pionted out you would need to first make sure that the car ( the retro Bugatti Design from Pur Sang in Argentina) fits the Sultan. Since the Sultan is paying the tab that makes sense.

Tim and several others have initially opted to choose a donor chassis from a new Corvette ( can anyone find a picture of a new Corvette chassis? )

They will see if the chassis can be made to fit the body design ( Remember the Sultan only wants the Bugatti design tweaked and not reworked radically to make things fit).

Tim metioned expenditures for several items which leads us to the requirement of drawing up a budget plan so we have some idea where we will need to spend the money.

We have $250000.00 total to spend to make this project a reality. We need to know how much to spend on: ( note Discovery channel will pay you a salary while you are doing this build)


The chassis, the engine/transmission, the electronics, the tire/wheels, the interior , the wiring, the chrome, glass, engine ancillaries, paint, general materials ( metal, hardware, etc.) $________

Internal shop help cost $________

External shop help cost $________

There are two ways to do this project- the traditional way and the new way using CAD - I hope we can shed light on both ways during this exercise.

What are the first steps required if you were doing this project the traditional way?

What are the first steps required if you choose to use the modern methods with CAD ?

Both methods are valid and hopefully we can fully develop some universal formats that would help guide us so we can do a real project of this complexity in the future.

Please don't paint with a broadbrush here, we need details of the exact steps you would take. If you would hire outside help to do these steps what do you think they would do?

Mike Rouse
05-03-2005, 07:22 AM
A project of this sort can be diviede up into a couple of phases.
First the Concept stage
In this phase the design data must be gathered and defined. Materials of construction, mechanical components including drive train tires brakes must be defined.
The elements of this phase can be broken down by system on the car and a scope definition written for each element will complete the scope.
Second the Design development stage
Here the different elements of the car will be drawn and defined on paper or cad. This is where the calculations for the different components must be done. Strength of materials of consturction used must be calculated. Electrical requirements must be defined.
Third is the estimating phase
All elements of the car must be cost out. The cost of the materials and the labor manhours to fab and install the elements must be defined. This cost estimate must be broken down into the elements of the car. The cost must be within budget. This will give a starting point to start ordering materials and parts.

Fourth is the Scheduling phase
Here the cost estimate is used to schedule the work defined in the most time efficient manner. There may be some long delivery items that need to be ordered early in the project. The schedule will be used to keep the work flowing. The schedule must show the end date to complete the project. Daily updates of the schedule are needed.
Fifth is the build phase
Here the materials are ordered and work begins. Follow the schedule and keep the work within the budget.
Sixth is the Check out and turnoveer phase
The car will be put into operation and the elements will be checked to be sure they meet the original requirements.
Next give the keys to the owner and get the money.

Note The elements of a car need to be defined by systems like tires and rims , Brakes, Chassis, Engine, Transmission,
ETC.....
Breaking a large project up into its elements makes the job a whole lot easier.
Mike.....

Bambi
05-03-2005, 07:59 AM
Should I call Foul...In Wrays last post we see QUOTE: (Remember the Sultan only wants the Bugatti design tweaked and not reworked radically to make things fit).
To me this is a change of Rules.
There is no Original Car to go by, No actual dimensions, if there is Only Wray knows for sure. This in itself could cancel out many applications. Anders posted some stuff in the other thing that leads one to believe that the dimensions are similar or the same as a XJ 6 Jaguar and has posted dimensions. With his frame rail dimensions, one could actually install a Real Chrysler Hemi or Big Block Chevy.
This car is a 30's era vehicle, Anyone that has worked on some of these old vehicles knows they are very crudely made. Left side parts are many times not even a good reverse match to the right side. Frame rails were very simple, there was lots of wood used and aluminum or steel was formed over same.
This car appears to use many rivets to hold things together. Fenders to main body, the roof hence the mohawk rail. In looking at a few other Bugattis of the ear and not in these renditions the fender appear to have the mohawk look with two fender halves riveted together. These sketches show more of a beaded fender. Even that can be questioned to interpretation.
Now many of us have already figured into the Corvette scheme of things, but since I see a wrench being tossed at us, it makes me believe we are stuck with similar sized wheels and tires and possibly the use of Wire Wheels. Even with modern technology and materials Wire Wheels are a disaster.
Using Corvette sized wheels and tires would mandate quite a bit of work of the fenders, more bulbous and less MC type.
The mohawk rails as I call them were used by Bugatti, cuz they lacked the tools, technology to do it differently, they used what they had for that era, same with rivets and the wheels and tires.
Are we building an antique or a modern car? Or a modernized antique. Looking at a 1995 Chrysler Atlantic Concept Car, they modernized a similar vehicle and went with todays stuff. They took two 4 cyl Neon motors and freight trained them.
When this project started, Wray said it was YOU were chosen to build a car, you had $250,000 to play with, here is some sketches, you have a Free hand do what you want. Since there is no original car to get specs from, it becomes my interpretation of the rules, which still ain't in stone. Using todays technology, the old farm tires and wheels are gone. The rivets are gone, used only for accent.
There would be no need for CAD if we are building an old farm buggy to be period correct.
My reasoning for using a Vette was simple, people of many sizes can fit in a Vette, they have plenty of usable power, lots of good proven and usable parts. The new ones have the motor in the front as usual, but use a trans axle, leaving plenty of space for a more roomy interior. Using even the tub assembly, they so called frame rails enclosed the driver and passenger and have plenty of room underneath. I seriously doubt one could use the tub from any of the later model Vettes. Suspension components maybe, if fenders are allowed to be highly modified, we are not using 6 inch wide tire here.
So I propose we take a week off from this project, and let Wray and whomever else he has on his team, to firm up the Rules. Once the rules are in place then we can play.

Bambi

Gene_Olson
05-03-2005, 08:15 AM
Bambi,

What fun would that be?

Haven't you ever dealt with a heavy client before?

They WANT, and they may have a dream but they don't see hard edges in the dream.
Helping them to see where edges are is part of the process.

As I see it the biggest disadvantage the rest of you have is that the Sultan of Sturbridge knows too much. He's going to have to play dumb and let you help define the project.

G

anders nrgaard
05-03-2005, 08:22 AM
Gene,

You're right about the sultan of Sturbridge and the rest of us!! He wants us to "spin" our brains <LOL>

Wray (and the rest of you) I don't think that the Vette frame will do for our project. The side rails are WAY to wide to fit the Bugatti body panels!

http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/500/Corvette_C6_Chassis_Photo.jpg
Guess we'll have to make our own frame from 2x3, as Tim suggested earlier!
(more pics of the C6 in the gallery)

Jeff Parker
05-03-2005, 09:44 AM
OK, without the arguing and the "rules"

First I would scale the car to fit "the human range of ergonomics". Two simple, scaled size, jointed paper dolls representing someone 5'0" and 6'3". Overlay them on the drawing of the car. Adjust the car drawing size until they fit. Measure the axle centers from that drawing. That gives me a wheelbase, since that parameter was not established by the Sultan. Scale the drawing for element sizes. Take the revised plan, and have it plotted (at the blueprint shop) in the new actual full size, in all views.
Now that I have a wheelbase and tire size, with relative data, I can see if there is an existing (hot rod) rolling chassis already manufactured that meets the parameters. Using this chassis, I can establish ride height using "stand in" tires. I can "1" grid" the drawing, thereby giving me reference points for physical measurements. All drive train components and ancillary devices (radiator, steering, trans cooler) can be mocked up. It will be obvious from the measurements, if there is room for a SBC, or if other motors will be utilized. Since its only 300hp, a turbocharged Subaru could even be slid into place. Being a low slung car, the T-Subaru mounted transverse, looks like the candidate.
I can now "wire form" the basic design. The indivual wires can be removed, for tubes to be bent. The tubes will become the exo-skeleton, and welded to mounting plates that are bolted the chassis of the car. Reinforcing/triangulating tubing will be placed upon full "skeleton" of the body. Once satified with the structure, we will begin verifying with templates made from the drawing, and tweaking as required. Again, the skeleton would be 100% to scale prior to skinning. Windshield ,back glass, door framing, etc. would be incorporated into skeleton. Take the car to Wray for skinning, and tell him have it done in a week, or we restrict his rights to his computer....

Wray Schelin
05-03-2005, 09:58 AM
Hi Mike,

Thanks for the project planning master plan.

Now we need a format spead sheet that we can plug in all of the values for each area that Mike defined. The values will be our best estimates with a high and low figure both for cost and time expended.

Wray Schelin
05-03-2005, 10:15 AM
OK, without the arguing and the "rules"

First I would scale the car to fit "the human range of ergonomics". Two simple, scaled size, jointed paper dolls representing someone 5'0" and 6'3". Overlay them on the drawing of the car. Adjust the car drawing size until they fit. Measure the axle centers from that drawing. That gives me a wheelbase, since that parameter was not established by the Sultan. Scale the drawing for element sizes. Take the revised plan, and have it plotted (at the blueprint shop) in the new actual full size, in all views.
Now that I have a wheelbase and tire size, with relative data, I can see if there is an existing (hot rod) rolling chassis already manufactured that meets the parameters. Using this chassis, I can establish ride height using "stand in" tires. I can "1" grid" the drawing, thereby giving me reference points for physical measurements. All drive train components and ancillary devices (radiator, steering, trans cooler) can be mocked up. It will be obvious from the measurements, if there is room for a SBC, or if other motors will be utilized. Since its only 300hp, a turbocharged Subaru could even be slid into place. Being a low slung car, the T-Subaru mounted transverse, looks like the candidate.
I can now "wire form" the basic design. The indivual wires can be removed, for tubes to be bent. The tubes will become the exo-skeleton, and welded to mounting plates that are bolted the chassis of the car. Reinforcing/triangulating tubing will be placed upon full "skeleton" of the body. Once satified with the structure, we will begin verifying with templates made from the drawing, and tweaking as required. Again, the skeleton would be 100% to scale prior to skinning. Windshield ,back glass, door framing, etc. would be incorporated into skeleton. Take the car to Wray for skinning, and tell him have it done in a week, or we restrict his rights to his computer....

Hi Jeff,

YES! What you said except for the parts about the frontdrive Subaru and me skinning the car. That is the frosting on the cake it has to be done in the Discovery shop.

All dimensions are established using relationships with the base dimensions being the Sultan, his 5' 11" wife and the various engines mentioned.

Bambi that won't take a week and we don't need to call Pur Sang in Argentina. We have all of the information we need already.

The Sultan likes the wire wheels but he also has a soft spot for the special traditional Bugatti cast wheels. Either the spoke wheels or the traditional Bugatti style wheels can be outsourced and cut from a billet of aluminum. Not a problem just make sure you budget enough.

Here is a current Bugatti style wheel that VW uses on the current Bugatti Veyron 16 cylinder supercar

http://www.autosalon-singen.de/bugatti/bugatti_eb_16_4_veyron_08336_0002_10_08_07.jpg

Pedalcar
05-03-2005, 10:48 AM
Hi gang ,

because of the small width of the chassis we mite have to look at a Dax or Donkervoort kind of chassis.http://www.daxcars.co.uk/rush/images/rushkitcar.jpg

Ben

Gonejunking
05-03-2005, 11:30 AM
Hi Ben, and others

The picture you added is another Lotus 7 clone. Must be 100 suppliers for replica's of the 7. In the other string I said that I had the frame table to build this style of frame, and to make it out of tube.

I might add my 2c here, I don't like the idea of using 2 x 3 tube. Too flexable in my opinion. Would rather see it with a space frame.

Just my 2c

Mike Rouse
05-03-2005, 11:33 AM
I have a microsoft workbook I built for my real job that could be changed to reflect the build project.
I will do some work on it and put it up on the site.
May be able to do some work on it this comming week.
Mike

Jeff Parker
05-03-2005, 11:48 AM
Wray-
Didn't you hear? Discovery Channel is moving its shop to Sturbridge...or Herkimer.. Besides, I had to burn a few bucks...LOL. Rolling chassis with powertrain should fall within $35,000.00 including the some of the "best of the best" parts. The "ScoobyDoo" was "Plan B". It doesn't have to be front drive mounted. It can be mounted to a number of transmissions. Mount it 90 degrees to its normal position, hook up the trans and rear drive. Its a tiny motor, and is put in a "gokart" to start with.

I like your concept Wray. Definately stimulates the brain. You got something cooking with TDC? They've been to Vermont...

I have to admit. One of the prime reasons I visit this site is the ability of the membership to brainstorm some clever solutions to seemingly impossible tasks. I still can't figure out how someone can make an aluminum ball look so perfect without cutting it into sections........metal isn't pliable enough to shrink and stretch that far...... is it?

Wray Schelin
05-03-2005, 05:35 PM
Bambi asked about PurSang.

Here is their site.

http://www.pursangweb.com/

This is where the Sultan found the Retro Bugatti design.
This is an original design automobile that has never been built, Pur Sang has labled it a T41 Sport Carrera.
The design was done by Luis Huber of Argentina. He borrowed heavily from Bugatti themes but came up with an absolutly stunning original design.

http://www.bugattipage.com/newspics/t41spor2.jpg
http://www.bugattipage.com/newspics/t41spor3.jpg

http://www.bugattipage.com/newspics/t41sport.jpg

sollis30
05-03-2005, 05:59 PM
how aboth to make real size clay model ?
it would be better to visualize all extirior design


i am not think this front fenders gonna work not enough in side clearance to turn the wheel

http://www.bugattipage.com/newspics/t41spor2.jpg

tdoty
05-03-2005, 06:44 PM
I think the fender is less an issue than the tire. Set on a 105" wheelbase, the wheels are 22" diameter, with a rather high profile tire to boot. It'll need a bit of clearnace added for turning, as well as a smaller diameter tire to allow for full-lock turning at high speed - there is bound to be some body roll going on.

The concept looks cool, but the proportions just don't work for people. There is way too little cabin area. Making it actually "comfortable" for people is the first step here. If that cannot be done while satisfying the Sultan's taste, the project is dead in the water. Who's up for virtual engineering on this one? My outside engineering firm hasn't gotten back to me yet :) .
Looks like the cabin might accept a bit of stretch without totally destroying the design, but I think it needs to keep the big wheel look - it just works here.


Tim D.
p.s: Attached is a drawing with a basic representation of a person 5' 11 1/2" tall (have to allow a bit for hair :) )

Wray Schelin
05-03-2005, 08:44 PM
how aboth to make real size clay model ?
it would be better to visualize all extirior design


i am not think this front fenders gonna work not enough in side clearance to turn the wheel

http://www.bugattipage.com/newspics/t41spor2.jpg


Hi Sollis,

A fullsize clay model will cost quite a bit to do plus as Jeff pointed out a wireform will allow a very efficient way to check spacial requirements quickly and inexpensively. The wireform allows you to check internal as well as external spacial relationships.

To make a wireform we will need fullsize drawings of the side, top, and rear view. How can we do that accurately and inexpensively?

But before we make the fullsize drawings we should work out most of the spacial relationships (cabin size, tire size, engine size, etc.) on the computer or scaled drawings. A quick way to tweak the dimensions is to turn the jpeg drawings into a vextor file such as a DXF format.

Wray Schelin
05-03-2005, 08:55 PM
I think the fender is less an issue than the tire. Set on a 105" wheelbase, the wheels are 22" diameter, with a rather high profile tire to boot. It'll need a bit of clearnace added for turning, as well as a smaller diameter tire to allow for full-lock turning at high speed - there is bound to be some body roll going on.

The concept looks cool, but the proportions just don't work for people. There is way too little cabin area. Making it actually "comfortable" for people is the first step here. If that cannot be done while satisfying the Sultan's taste, the project is dead in the water. Who's up for virtual engineering on this one? My outside engineering firm hasn't gotten back to me yet :) .
Looks like the cabin might accept a bit of stretch without totally destroying the design, but I think it needs to keep the big wheel look - it just works here.


Tim D.
p.s: Attached is a drawing with a basic representation of a person 5' 11 1/2" tall (have to allow a bit for hair :) )

Hi Tim,

Wow, we should start keeping a log on the spreadsheet of how many times members have found problems that they believe might doom the project.

Finding design inconsistancies will be the case I bet in most of the idealized designs that are often featured in car magazines. This design is no exception to the rule. The trick is to find a way to make the design work, we can do that we just have to have lots of patience.

The build phase we are in right now- the first few steps- are the most important ones, we have to insure that we get them right.

Thanks for you contributions keep up the good work.

Anders has the night shift on this project so I'm sure we'll get some insight from him later.

Anybody else if you have some ideas about the first few steps lets hear them.

Tisdelski
05-03-2005, 09:06 PM
i think we need the sultan`s girlfriend to come to the shop for seat measurements. gary

sollis30
05-03-2005, 09:13 PM
i also think that door should be lower on the bottom , doesn't look like its gonna be fun to get in inside with small doors like that

Tony Sanchez
05-03-2005, 09:15 PM
---I like the exhaust as it is in the photo for racing, but running the exhaust out the back may be better. The door opening could be increased making easier access to the cab. Also the suicide door looks like it would open into the rear fender.
---Tony.

Tony Sanchez
05-03-2005, 09:22 PM
Gary, The sultans girlfriend probably has 15 bodyguards.

butch foster
05-03-2005, 10:09 PM
Ok Fellas - After following this thread for a few days, I'm going to try and give you my view from 20,000 feet. The cruel reallity is that any project needs structure and administration. Construction and real estate development involve very complex projects with tight schedules and budgets. Same principles apply to this project. Here are the global concepts we employ when we start a commercial real estate project whether it be $5,000,000 or $200,000,000.

You need an owner (the Sultan), you need a designer or architect (Pur Sang) and you need a contractor to build it (Metalmeet). This is the classic triangle in any project.

Mike Rouse did a nice job of outlining the steps from conceptual design through turn over. Almost identical in real estate development.

What we don't have yet is a Project Manager. This is the guy who has ultimate authority and responsibility and he usually works for the owner. He drives the project and is responsible for the 3 components of any project. Cost - Schedule - Quality.

Right now we have a bunch of guys weighing in with opinions regarding design, constructability, function, schedule, cost, etc. We need to respect the triangle (Owner, Designer, Fabricator), otherwise the project is doomed.

Among his many responsibilities, the Project Manager enforces that discipline.

First Task - Assign a Project Manager who can represent the Owner, a lead designer who represents the Designer and a Project Manager who represents the fabricator. Let's make it simple and roll the three into one for this excercise. We need one guy who can articulate the vision, assign responsibilities, monitor costs, schedule and quality and most importantly - reign with an iron fist. This is Wray's project, his vision and I've seen his hands. Close enough to an iron fist for me.

Second Task - Define the project. (1) Scope - The Retro Bugatti. The design is schematic at best, but good enough. (2) Budget - $250 large. (3) Schedule - If Wray has posted it, I missed it. Sorry. Do we have 2 months or 2 years?

Third Task - Assemble a team. The designer is Pur Sang but we need to be able to communicate with him and get answers to RFI's (Requests For Information). If Wray is the project manager - he is the guy who answers the design questions. Lets forget about giving the Owner representation for now, the Project Manager will represent his interests.

Now we need to assemble a fabrication team. Bambi should weigh in, but I would probably try to assign responsibilities based on sub-assemblies. These guys will be the sub-assmebly project managers. One guy responsible for the frame and suspension. One guy responsible for the engine, drive train, brakes and wheels. Probably need a guy responsible for wiring, plumbing and electronics. One guy responsible for the body (the design is set, but you need to make it work with the frame). One guy responsible for the interior. One guy responsible for paint and finish.

Fourth Task - Assign each sub assembly project manager the responsibility for developing a schedule and budget for his respective sub assembly. We need a line item break down for every nut and bolt and the time required to procure or fabricate it and then assemble it.

Fifth Task - Each sub-assembly project manager should then present their schedule and budget to the Project Manager. What frame - motor - trans - combination are you proposing, how much will it cost and when will you have it done?

You get the idea. Until we impose a strict discipline and process, this project is just a bunch of knuckleheads weighing in with opinions. Opinions are like ___holes - everyone has one.

Someone needs to take control and drive the process. If not, this will wander aimlessly with individuals bickering over whether the frame is made of 2" x 3" or DOM tubing. Projects fail without strong leadership. What usually happens next is the Owner stops funding the project and takes it somewhere else. We need a Project Manager, a schedule which establishes milestones and a budget for each sub-assembly.

Regards. Butch.

Tisdelski
05-03-2005, 11:15 PM
hi tony, i think we are going to have a hard enough time getting the tall girlfriend in the car without the 15 bodyguards. is that 5 11 including the heels and the hair or actual measurements? in all seriousness most race cars and sports cars aren`t easy to get in and out off. try getting in an xke coupe, i`m only 5 ft 8in and get in without to much pain but my best friend is 6ft 1 and had to literally crawl out. had to put the top down on the xke roadster or he could not have gotten in. if we have to build this car around this girl being comfortable in this small sports car we are going to have problems, if all she has to do is to be able to get in the car even though its a little cramped we`ll be fine. gary

JonD
05-04-2005, 02:00 AM
The biggest area of concern has got to be the cabin space. Not necessary the length of the cabin but the width. We want nice opulent seating ,not crampt uncomfortable racing buckets. This is a cruiser not a race car. Spending 250K we want the sultan to be able to drive the car for more than twenty minute without his bum going numb.

The height of the cabin dictates that the seats would probably have to be dropped into the floor ( see tim’s illustration ). With the short door height , this gives us the ability to use a perimeter tube chassis thus maximizing the available area for seating.

The next area of concern is the trans tunnel , we need to be able to get the pedal’s in, two would be easier than three, Is the manual trans fixed in stone ?

We need to get the prop and exhausts through also. OK we could exit the exhaust prior to the cabin as in the original design, but providing adequate silencing would be an issue. The sultan may want to actually talk to his companion while cruising.

All of the issues we face could be solved by scaling up the size of the vehicle, but we would end up with something the size of the blastolene special. ( http://www.blastolene.com ). But I don't think this is what we are trying to achieve.

Food for thought

Regards, Jon

tdoty
05-04-2005, 02:04 AM
Butch,
The purpose of this excercise seems to be putting each individual into the role of Project Manager. Each individual also takes on the role of fabricator for anything not farmed out. The time frame is one year.

Gary,
The Sultan's girlfriend sounds like my last ex-girlfriend, so I have a bit of a point of reference here - she was 5' 10 1/2" in barefeet, 118lbs. But anyway ................................ I don't think absolute long-drive comfort is the goal here, it is a sports car after all. Maybe we should contact the Sultan for clarification.

Until the proportions are right, and the Sultan is pleased with the design, the project is at a standstill waiting on the designer/engineer. Once that hurdle is crossed, work can commence.

The clay model would be rather expensive, and the wireframe can be done from the drawings - once proportions are laid out. The wireframe can, however, be skinned with bondo and/or clay to give a better feel of the finished product, as well as allowing flexible shape patterns to be combined with working from the buck - if the respective Project Manager deems it necessary.

On my end, I'm still working out the dimensional issues. Since CAD ain't my strong suit, it may take a few days. Since drawing isn't my strong suit either, the resultant "renderings" aren't likely to wow the Sultan either - hence my choice to budget at least $10k for someone more talented than I. However, I'll end up filling in for them in this excercise :) .

I'll also try to knock up a basic budget for things not reliant on the fitting of people into the car :)

Tim D.

tdoty
05-04-2005, 02:13 AM
John,

Working from the sketches Anders posted, the cabin works out to be about 46 inches across the seating area - what is that? About 1m 17? It's pretty wide already.

I've already solved the legroom issue in my head, but simply moving the engine forward does nothing for the handling - cruiser or not :) . The exhaust might not be that much of an issue, spacewise. I'm going to look into adding mufflers along the framerails, then coming up and out the sides as in the sketches. Might be a rats nest of tubing, but it shouldn't take up terribly too much space - and it'll all be hidden when the hood is closed. A more "international" powerplant might help too. I'm a GM guy, so I chose a GM LS1, but Anders' VW 6-cylinder is looking better. The only questions from my end are how hard is it to mount north/south and how much does it cost here in the States? The trans tunnel is also an issue I hadn't gotten to yet ........... maybe a rear mounted gearbox to minimize the height of the tunnel?

Tim D.

anders nrgaard
05-04-2005, 02:21 AM
Hi Tim,

This is "The Night Shift" (actually it's 11am here, right now, so I can see YOU are the night shift today)
The proportions DON'T fit the 57SC (wrote that in an earlier post in the "old" thread... sorry
I've tried to work a little with the drawings. If I look at the side view and try to scale that to the wheel base of the T57SC, the rims are 24"!! and not 18... wheel base must be shorter. Scaling the front and rear view to the side view also shows a track different from 35".... actually it's around 65"!!! Great... makes more room for a V8 or V10 <LOL>
Don't think I'm better with CAD than you are, but I'll do it for $5k

Put in the drawings later, when I know a little more.

anders nrgaard
05-04-2005, 03:00 AM
Here's a drawing that should give an idea of size of space in the cabin. These are "ordinary" 6' persons.


http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/500/medium/Body_Measures.jpg

If you can't read the figures on this one, here's a link to a larger pic

http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/500/Body_Measures.jpg

Still working on the "BLUE" prints/drawings!

anders nrgaard
05-04-2005, 03:29 AM
Hi again,

Here's a drawing with wheel base and track. The rims are still 24", so we'll have to work on that!
http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/500/medium/PROPORTIONS.jpg

todd8541
05-04-2005, 05:52 AM
Guys I wished I saw this post earlier.

Being a project engineer I would like to offer some suggestions and my help with this project. I am not experienced in metal shapping like I want to be but I know how to manage a project. I have seen alot of posts but really no action. I would love to help get this started.

Butch,
You did an outstanding job of outlining the management outline of the project.

The project must be broken down into subconstruction groups. the Then a timeline is created. This will give the managers a time goal to work towards. Then the discussion of the design comes into play. Where is the project heading is it a modern version, an exact "representation" (representation because dimensions may change) or something else. Then each group must create their own schedule to organize their tasks.

Once the design direction has been determined then the group gets together and makes the direction more detailed. From there a budget is created for each group.

From there the work starts. All of the above should take no more than a week max (being conservative) Now you have 51 weeks to get it on the road.

The most important thing to remember about the project is that it is for someone else. It is not what you want or would like to have. The design intent and goal must be maintained throughout or delays will occur.

The biggest problem I see with this project is too many people putting too many of their person into the project. Remember this is for the customer not ourselves.

As far as CAD is concerned. PRO/E has a ergonomic human model. you can input the man into the model and then model around him.

This post has gotten too long to maintain an interest in the content so i will add some later.

Todd

Wray Schelin
05-04-2005, 05:57 AM
I went to bed around 3:30 AM and the night shift was still missing except for Butch's elaboration on the cost and scheduling format that Mike had started ( thanks Butch for the excellent professional management advice which we should all heed).

Here, it is 8:30 AM and Tim, Jon, and Anders have all weighed in with excellent contributions and we're all moving along on the same page now, which is great.

Job one on the car itself has been identified as the need to insure that the passenger compartment of the vehicle fit the passengers. Gary is so right about a E type Jag, I'm 6' 3" and for me to get into a E-type I have to read a book about Houdini first. When I was 20 I had a 67 Alfa Spyder which I fit into perfectly, so you can make a small car people friendly. I also had a Renualt LeCar once for about 6 months which also had lots of room.

The drawings now have to be massaged and fine tuned. Where is Toolman Mike when we need him? If we have any other CAD proficient members now is the time to weigh in here with your help. We can use it. If you can explain the steps needed to get the job done that would be ideal.

Lets also keep in mind that all of this can also be done without CAD, using just paper and pencil. Coachbuilders from the 20s through 30s would often use a large chaulkboard to draw out full size views to make sure that spacial relationships worked.

The side exit exhaust you have to admit is a real cool feature and the Sultan likes it too. How about if we install a bypass valve so we can route the exhaust underneath as well for those times when he wants quiet.

I once read that the Sultan was visiting New York city on official business and on a lark he decided to go shopping for some new attire. Normarly he has a staff to do this for him, but he felt it would be fun to do so he dragged a few body guards in tow and off to Barney's they went. After amassing a gigantic pile of new suits and shirts on the counter for purchase he told the new young clerk that he wanted to charge it. The new clerk said that he would have to show two ID's for that to happen. Flustered the Sultan pulled out his wallet and was able to find only one ID. He couldn't believe his predicament, just then his fast thinking bodyguard wispered in his ear " show him the money" . He had forgotten that all of the paper money in his kingdom has his picture on it....

todd8541
05-04-2005, 06:05 AM
If I may I would like to suggest a subconstruction group outline. Please tell me Wray if I am being too forward with this.

Body (to include the body, lights, widows and all accessories (outside door handles etc)
Drivetrain (engine, transmission, rear end, driveshaft etc.)
Chassis (frame, suspension, brakes, steering, etc.)
interior (seating, upolstry (bad spelling) ergonomics, etc)
electrical (anything and everything that needs a wire and electricity haha)

As each group is created subgroups can be created even further to help the project along. Example: Chassis can be broken down into frame group, front suspension group, rear suspension group, and brakes. These subgroups is still managed by the main group manager. All it is doing is really assigning tasks to individuals no need for subgroup managers.

Give me till the end of the day and I will create a crud schedule in microsoft project and present it for a baseline for the project manager to approve or make changes.

Man this is too cool.

Todd

anders nrgaard
05-04-2005, 06:38 AM
Good Morning Wray,

Great joke about the sultans shopping <lol>

Todd,
Wecome "on board". Share the fun (and education)

I did a little scribing on the pics. Let's see if we can use this for anything.

http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/500/medium/Line_Drawing_with_Shadow_Frame.jpg
http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/500/Line_Drawing_with_Shadow_Frame.jpg larger pic (1:20)


http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/500/medium/Chassis_Frame.jpg

http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/500/Chassis_Frame.jpg (1:20)

todd8541
05-04-2005, 06:40 AM
Thanks Anders

I did a quick sample of the project schedule. Does anyone know how to input this file on here for everyones viewing?

Todd

Bambi
05-04-2005, 06:43 AM
There are a lot of Grey areas in this project, that is why I proposed a week off for the Sultan to get his parameters intact. Did Wray play with Sam the Sham and the Pharoahs? Maybe someone lost their Turbine.
Anyways a lot of good stuff, questions, answers etc have been brought up.
I have found for one this project is gonna be a Time Bandit to our personal time. Just the time reading the threads, thinking, doing a bit of homeworks and then replying is taking time, so for me I will have to limit myself.
Second each and everyone of us has his or her own vision and way of doing things.
Anders has been valiant in trying to give us some specs. I am grateful. I will be doing some more homework myself. Having worked on some of the old cars in minor way. Morgans, Arnolt Bristols, Allards and a few others. Some of these cars are small.
Just doing a quik scaling of the drawings that Anders supplied and going with 18" wheels, the wheel base would be around 90" and for many of this type of car of that era, this might be close plus or minus 10 inches. Looking from a frontal or rear view, the size of the tires really can't be that big. Then if you look at the other Bugatti's, they are all quite small with very narrow tires.
Again these are only assumptions, I will be doing some more of my own research. We might have to amputate them long legs or install a sunroof. Also not pictured or some of us are missing is that in any of them little cars similar to an MGB, you slid your legs down into a tunnel of sorts,
A clay model was brought up and said to be unrealistic. Probably if your gonna go for a full scaled unit at this time. But each and everyone of us can go to a hobby shop, crafts store and pick up some wheels a few pounds of clay and have at it. It don't have to be perfect, it will give a general idea of things and a 3D hands on view which one can tweak. You don't need to be an artisan to do this. If you really want to get nutz, you can buy a Barbie Doll and install her and scale around her. Don't go by 5' 11" figure on her being 6' 2", why because you will want her to have some room to move around in. Again you will have to do your own scaling.
As I said things were different back then, ladder type frames were more of the norm, horse and buggy days. With some leeway a ladder frame could be used or some kinda unibody combo or even a perimeter frame.
Now when I proposed a new Vette for drivetrain, the main reasoning was the engine in front and the transaxle, freeing up passenger compartment room. Using the tub was proposed also, hence scraped. Part of the reasoning for using a Vette is that things are modulized. With the removal of several bolts the whole front crossmember comes out with engine and suspension intact, you can roll it around in and out of the car when it gets to that stage, same with the rear with the removal of a few bolts out she comes and again roll it around. Simplifies a whole lot of things.
But this too might have to be scrapped, it depends upon the dimensions of the vehicle.
But as for a frame, one thing which I remember from the MGB's is thought they used stamped sheet metal in the engine compartment. For the Bugatti, I would use 2x3 tubing with a transition into a perimeter type frame, in similitude to the MGB's which had the outer rocker panel, an inner strengthening piece and another inner piece which the floor attached too. Here to this could be formed from sheetmetal or if one is worried about strength, get some 2x6 tubing. Though by design it is quite strong. Then back to 2x3 tubing for the rear clip.
These are off the wall thinkings, as I do some more homework and research and the Sultan puts his thinkin cap on and closes up some of the grey areas. I ain't makin any choices or decisions.
If it does have to be to scale and the wheelbase turns out to be around 90 inches, then I might think on one of them computerized Honda motors which they can shut off cylinders and change cam timing electronically. They have become popular with some of the guys building Lotus Super 7 clones.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I got mine built in my head.
Good Luck All

Bambi

anders nrgaard
05-04-2005, 06:46 AM
Hi Todd,

I don't know how to attach a file to a post... Randy Ferguson posted a MS Excel spread sheet to calculate E-wheel stifness earlier.
But if the file is text only, you can copy and paste.

davecourt
05-04-2005, 06:47 AM
hey guys,good job,
everything seems to be going smoother now,
keep up the good work
dave court

todd8541
05-04-2005, 06:51 AM
Wray

Before any CAD work can be done some basic dimensions are needed. Remember a CAD system is only a computer program. Bad information input equals bad output.

Speeking of the frame side of things only, the following can get you started.

Wheel base, Track width, Diameter and width of wheels and tires, est ground clearance of the frame. Eventually you will need fire wall location brake components dimensions etc. Alot of the dimensions for current production parts can be obtained thru reverse engineering or from the manufacturer.

This is enough to get started but will need to be adjusted as design changes are made. So who ever does the CAD model will need to model it to be easily modified. Also the frame can be FEA'd with a CAD model to ensure adequate strength is obtained if there is a concern.

Todd

todd8541
05-04-2005, 06:59 AM
Bambi and Anders great information. All of this will be important when the design phase gets started because it will allow the group to make informed decisions which will reduce the project delays.

Todd

anders nrgaard
05-04-2005, 06:59 AM
Hey Bambi,

GREAT post!!!
Let the Sultan do some thinking and let us know what he decided about wheel base, track and tires! Then we can go on

Dave,
Join us, it's FUN!

Jeff Parker
05-04-2005, 07:36 AM
While you guys were kibitzing and bemoaning the project, I have the thing being broke down for paint already...........Send the $250K to: Jeff Parker...


The wheels are the easy part. Boyd, among others, makes them every day. Name your size. A few calls to Falken or Nitto or smaller rubber companies, they will make them for the exposure. 22's are being used on SUVS every day. Jesse James just aired a show with 24's! A quick check of tire websites revealed 24's are available. More square shouldered than depicted, but...at under $300/tire and $600/wheel, its within budget.

I still maintain that there are current hot rod frames out there that will fill the parameters. Why reinvent the wheel?

anders nrgaard
05-04-2005, 08:10 AM
Back AGAIN guys,

This Bugatti is a MONSTER car. On this pic I scaled an Audi TT Coupe to 1:20 and laid it on top of the 1:20 Bugatti.
The wheel base on the Audi is 2,419 mm /around 95".

http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/3687/Monster_Bugatti_Compared_to_Audi_TT_Coupe.jpg

Wray Schelin
05-04-2005, 08:18 AM
Hey Bambi,

GREAT post!!!
Let the Sultan do some thinking and let us know what he decided about wheel base, track and tires! Then we can go on

Dave,
Join us, it's FUN!

Hi Anders,

What we need are the two potential wheelbase parameters. The smallest wheelbase that will tightly squeeze all components and passengers, and the largest wheelbase possible before the design starts to look too big. A 3/4 view vector picture set in a static street setting with other cars will give us the information we need.

I'm thinking that as this develops we can all wear the project manager hat and also be sub assembly specialists at the same time. Once we have the spread sheet format in place we can divide up tasks. This exercise is just a exercise but we can also do it for real if given enough time and promotion. What we need now is as much help as we can muster.

Maybe if we get far enough along on the project we can actually build a front fender assembly at MM05. At regional MetalMeets they can build perhaps another smaller assembly. This will be where dreams become reality, we can do it! We have the time, we have the enthusiasm, we have momentum , lets keep all pushing forward every little step counts and we all learn from each other.

todd8541
05-04-2005, 08:19 AM
Anders you are moving so fast I am surprised you dont have a prototype built yet haha.

I thought it was a big car but wasn't sure.

Has anyone heard a ford four cylinder at a dirt track. They kind of have a european sound. Plus 300 hp is very easy and the engine is very inexpensive and has plenty of aftermarket parts available. What kind of engine layouts came in those types of cars. Wasn't most of them inline engines? I am ignorant regarding those years and styles of cars.

Todd

todd8541
05-04-2005, 08:27 AM
The more I look at these pics the more I want one for myself. The only change I would make is remove the fin thing down the center of the cab. Other than that this car is beautiful.
Todd

Tisdelski
05-04-2005, 08:38 AM
hi guys, anders pic. of the bugati over the audi really helps. the audi will fit a 6 ft. person . seeing the exhuast come out the front gives more room for seating . the tub inbetween the outer framerails in the rockers and the trans. tunnel can be flat for maximum seating area. the one problem we still have not solved is the door , its going to be hard to step over a rocker sill that is high and behind the footwell while trying to bend your head down to to clear the top. my solution is to change the upper door post to include a portion of the top so as the door opens a section of the top opens with it. i think the original gt-40 racecar was this way. i know ive seen it somewhere. gary

JonD
05-04-2005, 09:12 AM
I'll echo what gary said, thanks ander, in my mind i had the car a lot smaller.

Interesting point made by Wray, re wheelbase, do we want a fullsize monster tourer or a scaled down sporty number.

Either way imho the passenger compartment is key.

Gary's point re the doors, if we go for a perimeter stye chassis without a large compromise on the doors, the thickness of the rocker assembly must be kept to a minimum. Stepping into the car is one thing, but stepping into and over an 8inch plus rocker assemble would be a PITA.

Does the sultan's wife's were short skirts, if she does then how does she enter the car and keep some modesty ......umm would make an interesting photo, but out of the 250k we may be able to supply her with some trousers LOL

another day over for the nightshift, catch you all later

Jon

anders nrgaard
05-04-2005, 09:15 AM
Hi All,

Great info Wray. And great idea, making the car as a parted project. Some parts on MM05 and some other parts at regional meets. Maybe we could even give some persons "home work" <LOL>

This thread is really dragging peoples attention... I was in to see, who was online... there were 16 members on line and 9 of them were viewing this thread!!

Todd,
Haven't built the prototype yet... spent to much time thinking, drawing and posting <LOL>
4 cylinder ford?... Naaah... most of these cars had 6 or 8 cylinder straights. (Maserati even made a 3.5 ltr 16 cylinder straight, late 50'es and early 60'es)

Gary,
Thanks!
Instead of including a larger part of the top (small part is already included) then maybe we could design the body with gull-wing doors with electro mechanich closing!? Lower the top of the rocker sill a little bit, to make it easier to enter the passengers compartment (wouldn't tear the sultans tight dress too!! <LOL>

Jon,
Your post came in, just ahead of mine.
Great suggestions!
I think we should go for the smaller sporty


Later Guys

Wray Schelin
05-04-2005, 09:29 AM
The more I look at these pics the more I want one for myself. The only change I would make is remove the fin thing down the center of the cab. Other than that this car is beautiful.
Todd

Hi Todd,

The "fins" on the roof and the tops of the fenders are the riveted joining seam. When Bugatti built the 1936 Atlantic model they planned to use magnesium sheet instead of aluminum and rivet it togther because at that time they couldn't weld magnesium.

On the Sultan's car the seams are used as design markers
but they will also be fuctional. They make the body a lot easier to make as well. I love the look of the rivets but the painter will loathe them. They are a bear to paint properly.

todd8541
05-04-2005, 10:05 AM
Wray

Thanks for explaining the history of the making of the car. I like the rivets especially the flush mounted ones like in airplanes. It seems to give it character. I just dont like the fin on top that is what I would remove if I was building the car for myself.

Todd

Wray Schelin
05-04-2005, 02:31 PM
Bambi e-mailed me and suggested that we should have a separate catergory in the gallery to collect all of the pictures that go with this thread. I just created the gallery, it is one from the bottom in applications and I called it MetalMeet Group Projects (the Bugatti T41 Sport Carrera build)

Please try to upload all pictures for this thread to that gallery from this point on. It makes archiving sense to have all of the pictures in one album. We can fix the early parts of this thread later by moving all pictures to that gallery. If you do move them you have to make sure you correct the address or they won't show in the thread.

Thanks Bambi for a good idea.

ralph
05-04-2005, 02:41 PM
I played around with the design a little to address some of the concerns about tire size and roof height. Wider tires and fenders give it a steroid look I'm not sure I like. Reminds me too much of what happened to the 427 Cobra. It looked more muscular, but not as pretty. Anyway, here are comparison pictures. In the fron and rear views are the design as it was done, then wide fenders, then fenders and a raised roof. The side view just shows the raised roof.

http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/3204/medium/fronts_copy1.jpg

http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/3204/medium/rears_copy.jpg

http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/3204/sides_copy.jpg

tdoty
05-04-2005, 04:07 PM
Haven't gotten around to figuring out the tire issue yet, but I did work on adding cabin space without totally screwing things up.

Here is my initial proposal to the Sultan, sitting on a 105" wheelbase with 22" wheels. The narrowest 22 I can find is a 245/30-22 Pirelli P-zero Nero. Havent worked up the design with these tires yet, just did a bit of searching. The tire in question has a 10" section width, but only a 27.9" o.d. .

Anyway, here is the proposal for the cabin:
http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/3687/medium/Image3.jpg

Without fully modeling it, just based on my initial model, it should fit a 6'+ person and also allow them to get in and out. I did change the door to a conventional opening instead of suicide style, as it should allow easier entry and egress. It will also keep the door off of the rear fender.

I like the look of Ralph's wide tire version from the rear, but it does need to stay a bit narrow up front, in my opinion. The Sultan gets the final call there too.

More soon.....................

Tim D.

ep-98-z
05-04-2005, 07:42 PM
O.K., I already have more projects than I can finish in my lifetime, but this is way too cool not to jump in on.

I uploaded a quick CAD drawing to the new gallery showing some overall dimensions based on a 95” wheelbase “traced” over the illustration. The CAD software I use has a free-style sketch tracer that was created for the purpose of starting a design based on a stylist’s sketch.

http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/3687/Side_View.jpg

I would say all design work for this project should be done with CAD to the point of actually creating surface models that you could check for surface continuity. Once you think the surface is correct, a scale model could be generated from the CAD data. In the world of big engineering budgets, these could be made using a rapid prototyping method like sterolithography (SLA). For large scale models, high-density foam blocks are 5-axis N/C machined. The model would then be finished to a high gloss to look for any surface problems. If required, the CAD model can then be tweaked. A lower cost but more labor intensive method would be to LASER, water-jet etc., aluminum templates from the CAD model filling between with foam and hand shaping between the templates.

As a group project CAD is the way to exchange information. Most CAD systems today allow you several options for exchanging data. In the many industries the big companies tell all the suppliers what CAD software they will use so data exchange is not an issue, but smaller operations all know ways of exchanging information.

tdoty
05-04-2005, 08:04 PM
Trust me, if i could do it in 3D CAD, it would have been done by now :) . I fell in love with this design when Wray showed it last year. Glad to have someone onboard who can do it!

Tim D.

butch foster
05-04-2005, 09:41 PM
Thought about the project on the way in to work and back.

Tim - If the excercise intends for us all to be project managers, so be it. I misunderstood and thought the excercise was intended to simulate what would happen if the group was asked to actually build this thing. Sorry if I got it wrong. You now have unleashed the project manager in me and its going to get ugly. I do this for a living and its an uncontrollable monster.

If I'm the project manager - this is how I would do it.

As we can all see, everyone is weighing in on what they think is important. No good. Some guys are off worrying about wheel dimensions, others the interior dimensions, still others on the chassis and drive train. This thing is crying for some organization.

Todd - I'm sure you spent a fair bit of time on the schedule, but we can't see it. You and I are on the same wavelength. Break the project into sub-assemblies, assign a project manager for each sub-assembly, let them break off into groups and come back with the spec's, schedule and cost for each sub-assembly.

No one has taken a crack at dividing up the $250 large. How much is to be allocated to each sub-assembly? Which sub-assembly needs to be completed first in order to support the schedule for the next sub-assembly?

I can fit what I know about putting a car together on my thumbnail, but here is an example of how I would go about organizing the build.

Buckle up. Here we go.

We have 12 months and $250,000. Let's work backwards from delivery at the end of month 12 and it will help us define the parameters for each sub-assembly. Weigh in if I've allocated too little or too much time for each component. This is going to be rough - so don't get excited if I miss something. This is a first pass draft to give you an idea of how to think about this. This format will also not allow for activities that can run concurrent, but bear with me, I'm focussing only on the subassemblies that are on the critical path (the next one can't start until the previous one is completed). This also assumes that part procurement happens well enough in advance so that the parts are there when needed.

Delivery: 52 weeks (wks).
Break In, Tune Up, Shake Down: 1 wk. 51 wks left.
Install Interior (upholstery,seats,wiring,instruments): 2 wks. 49 wks left.
Paint, Glass and Trim: 1 wk. 48 wks left. If no paint, you still need a wk.
Body Fabrication (this is a WAG (Wild Ass Guess)): 8 months (32 wks). 16 wks left.
Plumbing, Fuel Lines, Electric: 2 wks. 14 wks left.
Frame, Drive Line and Wheels (rolling chassis with a running motor): 4 weeks. 10 weeks left. In my build, the body guys need this sub-assembly in their shop in order to fabricate the sheet metal to the chassis. They can't start until this sub-assembly is in their shop. If this activity only has 4 weeks, no time to fabricate a frame. Look for a rolling chassis off the shelf with a crate motor, trans and rear end. Don't care if its Chevy, Ford or mongrel. Make it reliable, road worthy and something the Sultan's shop can maintain (readily available parts). With delivery required in week 10, we need to order this stuff week 1. Decission made.
Sultan's Approval of Shop Drawings and Parts List: 1 wk. 9 wks left.
Shop Drawings and Parts Lists: 4 weeks. 5 wks left.
Sultan's Approval of Final Design: 1 wk. 4 wks left.
Final Design: 2 weeks. 2 wks left.
Design Development: 2 wks. 0 wks left. Pencils down. Quiz over.

Clearly we have a problem Houston. We can't order the rolling chassis without the Sultan's approval, yet that has to happen in week one in order to get delivery in week 10. Did I allow too much time for body fabrication?

On to the next problem. How do I divy up the $250 large?

Profit: 10% or $25,000. $225,000 left.
Design, Project Management and Overhead: 15% or $37,500. $187,500 left.
Shipping: I don't know. Say $5,000. $182,500 left.
Interior: $35,000. $147,500 left.
Paint, Glass & Trim: $15,000. $132,500 left.
Body Fabrication: Say 2 guys, 40 hours/wk @ $30/hr x 32 wks = $76,800 (ouch) or $55,700 left.
Plumbing, Fuel Lines, Electric: $5,000. $50,700 left.
Frame, Drive Line, Wheels, Brakes: $35,000. $15,700 left.
All The Stuff I Forgot: $15,700.

If I've done the math right, there's the first pass at a budget.

Now I need a team. I don't know enough about everyone here, so apologies if I miss someone. I'll try to call out the guys that are active on this thread and others who I know from other posts. I'm going to leave some sub-assembly project management positions open, so call out if you want in.

Project Management: Todd, you're with me. I need help. I need a critical path schedule with milestones, a line item budget and start thinking about documenting the build so she's legal at the end. Talk to the Sultan's people and figure out how they are going to make a down payment and follow up progress payments. We'll requisition them on a monthly basis and expect payment within 10 days. I want 25% down wired into the project account within 2 weeks. You have 1 week for the schedule and budget. You also need to develop a process for coordinating the build and start working on a list of long lead items. I also want you to start pulling together a contact list of all the team members and get it distributed ASAP.

Design and Client Interface Project Manager: Anders. You clearly have a handle on the design elements and are geographically closer to the Sultan than anyone else. I need final design in 4 weeks and we're already behind schedule. Talk to the Sultan and get his final wish list, document it and distribute it to the team. Then - Start drawing.

Rolling Chassis and Drive Line Project Manager: Bambi - You're the man. Talk to Anders and give him two options for a complete rolling chassis with motor that he can run by the Sultan within the week. Confirm back that I've allocated enough cake. I'm looking for savings because I have a bad feeling we're going to be short. Pick a team.

Body Fabrication Project Manager: Wray. I'm going to be a bit of hard ass here. I want Randy Ferguson with you. Pick up a couple of other guys to help out, look for a space to rent where you can put this thing together (12 month lease max. - 6 months if you can get it). You have a little time, but talk to Anders and figure out what the skin material is. I'm assuming aluminum, but you make the call. Once you decide order it up so we're not waiting for it. Once you sign the lease on the space, start moving you're equipment over. You need to stay very close to Anders and Bambi. Once Bambi makes the call on the chassis, get the spec's on the frame and start thinking about whether we have time to build a buck. Confirm back on whether I've given you too much time. I've given you 32 wks, but I'd be happier if you could finish in 28.

I still need a couple very good mechanics - John (Boogiemanz) and Ken Close (sp?) come to mind. Are you guys available? I also need recommendations on a paint guy or two, an interiors team and a bunch of goffers. Dutch, if you're available I want you on board as lead foreman. I need someone with a ton of experience, grey hair and perspective on this build and I can't think of anyone better. Pack your bags because you're going to be doing some travelling.

Ok. The monster is back in the cage. I've purposely crafted this thread as stream of conscience so you can get inside my thought process. As you start to define some of the critical dates and budgets, other decisions become self evident. I don't have time to consider whether the frame is hand fabricated or who will do it. It has to be off the shelf. I also don't have time to listen to 20 guys debate about wire rims vs. billet. Anders and Bambi will discuss the issue based on what the Sultan wants and decide. If I want Wray, he needs to find a place to make the beast. I've been to his shop, and he doesn't have the room. He needs to go out and rent space.

There are a thousand decisions and activities that need to be defined, communicated and executed. If MM was ever asked to execute a build like this, it would need structure. As soon as you lay out the schedule and budget, everything else starts to fall into place. The key to any succesfull project is to put it on rails at the start. If its not on rails at the start, you end up throwing a lot of money in overtime at the end in order to meet the deadline. Get the design in place, order your long lead items, set the budget and schedule and then manage the snot out of it. Regards. Butch.

bear193442
05-05-2005, 12:46 AM
Ive been here lurking and learning enjoying this site emencely ! I very seldom post anything, actually just learned how to post pics a couple months ago to my personal alblum :-). Last night while lurking couldn't sleep actully , found the thread about building the Bugatti or Bug as I call them, and read it in it's entireity and found it very interesting as iam interested in clasic cars ,historic racecars and such. Iam currently modifying a 1967 MGB GT to look somewhat like the Bug you guys are currently planning . I'd put in a couple pics here if i knew how LOL.
One thought that i have since i see a lot of problems with suspension tire clearances on rebound lock to lock steering ect, as i've run into this through the years myself is ,someone needs to gather all the pics , drawings , ect. that the group has come up with and get with the Sultan and nail down the type of wheels and tires he wants , which is the first step in figuring out ride hieght suspension travel which will dictate size of fenders .
As a sheetmetal group working with metal and wanting to learn a lot from this prodject a MONOQUE FRAME might be in order . It's just bent sheet metal LOL right up our alley . The MGB GT frame is a example of a production sports car that used just such a frame ,very light and and rigid with lots of bead rolling , and bending of metal .
One person I would propose to the group as a hired consultant would be Carrol Shelby as he has already done what the group is planing , over 45 years ago with great success My $.02 worth Bear :-)))))

sollis30
05-05-2005, 12:51 AM
Back AGAIN guys,

This Bugatti is a MONSTER car. On this pic I scaled an Audi TT Coupe to 1:20 and laid it on top of the 1:20 Bugatti.
The wheel base on the Audi is 2,419 mm /around 95".

http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/500/Monster_Bugatti_Compared_to_Audi_TT_Coupe.jpg


audi TT using WV bug base just like PT cruiser using dodge neon base

todd8541
05-05-2005, 05:52 AM
Butch
It would be an honor to be your compadre.

Good layout but I would only make a couple of changes. One get with the sultan and ask what specifics about the car are absolutely necessary and which ones he doesn't care either way. This will give us a clearer path to what the car has to be and what it doesn't. Got to know where we are going before we can get there.

I would then get all the managers together and nail down some specifics. There is alot of cross over stuff that groups will have to be aware of and take into account in the design and construction phase . An example being engine choice. If the engine is too wide for the frame it will have to sit higher. This could lead to requiring a change in the hood shape and design to cover the engine. Some of the basics need to be nailed down and the groups have to maintain communication.

Another thing about the construction. Is the sultan only looking for the look and doesn't care what is under the skin. Then I would do a monoque design because it is alot easier to design, and fab. Monoque designs can save alot of space for components and passengers.

I have pro/e @ home and work. I am more than willing to work with other cad operators to do this. Hell even if the car isn't built I think it would be a cool addition to the website.

Todd

If anyone can help I have a sample schedule in Microsft Project but can't figure out how to post it.

anders nrgaard
05-05-2005, 06:02 AM
Butch,

Thanks, it would be an honor. Let's hear what the sultan has to say!

Todd,
Send Jack a PM. I'm sure he knows how to post the MS Project... and if he doesn't, I'm sure he'll find out!

todd8541
05-05-2005, 06:04 AM
Thinking of the monoque chassis it would showcase what can really be done with just sheetmetal which is what this site is all about. You can make a chassis considerably stronger with a monoque than with tubing with less weight. In fact if we take it further part of the chassis can be the body. This would reduce the amount of time for the project because we will be doing two aspects of the project at the same time. I also feel it would be cheaper with a monoque.

Wray can weigh in on this but I believe it would be easier to do the body with a monoque and body at the same time because this reduces the chances of misalignment of panels. Further time and money savings can be accomplished because it would be easier to mount the body panels to a monoque than a frame made of tubing. Wray what is your opinion of this. What has your experience shown you in the past.

While Im not a rich man I would be willing to donate at least two sheets of material. And would love to go to the metal meets and help as much as I can.


Todd

todd8541
05-05-2005, 06:05 AM
anders
which Jack there are a few of them on here. And thanks for the help


Todd

anders nrgaard
05-05-2005, 06:10 AM
Todd,

This Jack: metal*admin He is our excelent webmaster

anders nrgaard
05-05-2005, 06:21 AM
Todd,

I just did a search on attach file in FAQs. If you can save the MS Project as one of the "allowed" file formats, it shouldn't be a problem to post it!

Hope this will help. If it doesn't, you just mail the file to me and I'll try to post it!

mail to: ann@semler.dk (ann@semler.dk)

Wray Schelin
05-05-2005, 06:46 AM
Right now we are all in the process of collectively solving the puzzle of how to make a design proposal for a automobile body shape a real complete functioning entity.
To do it correctly takes a lot of time and commitment. We have learned in the past when organizing something like this on the internet, that we need to draw out from everyone as much knowledge as possible to insure the success of the design and overall project. Sometimes it gets messy. We could hire a professional to do all the hard parts but that wouldn't help us learn anything.

If this was a professional effort ( for actual compensation) we would organize exactly like Butch, Todd, Mike, and a few others have suggested.

This is not a professional ( meaning for pay, it is in every other way though) exercise, it is a volunteer exercise. That does not mean we won't need organizational structure to develop this -we do.

A spread sheet as Mike suggested will allow us to document, compare, and define costs, schedules, tasks, etc. Mike promised to deliver this weekend a format we can use.

In the mean time we do need to keep brainstorming so that we can arrive at a viable adaptation of as many off the shelf components as possible to make this design functional and economical ( realitively in both time and costs).

We also need Jack to help provide us with an offsite upload site for CAD drawings which we can exchange.
This forum software does not have the capability of exchanging the formats that we will be using.

I think our short term goals should be to further define the project ( we need the spreadsheet format for that to happen ), to keep brainstorming about what the wheelbase will be and the general overall dimensions will be.

Long term our goal should be make this project happen but only after we develop the plan as a piecemeal effort, lets not digest more than we can. I would be very happy to see us get to a stage of development by October that would allow us to make a buck for the front fender. That implies that we also have the whole design worked out including powertrain choice, chassis design, and all dimensions.

With a good buck we can make a fender no problem at MM05 in October. We must insure that the fender fits the whole project that is why we are starting to define now spacial relationships of all of the components and most importantly the driver and passenger ( " our client" the Sultan).

The main point of this exercise is learning new knowledge through a volunteer collective effort.

That new knowledge includes project organizational structure, design process, build process, business process, material strengths, and most important group dynamics.

It is from the last we will learn how organized cooperation can yield results that we can only dream about....

todd8541
05-05-2005, 06:48 AM
http://superstockforum.com/showthread.php?threadid=8094

Hey anders on this page is a few pics of a 68 vette. Do you think you can transpose it with the buggati like you did with the audi to see if it would work.

If it does then all that have to be done is put a body on it and some wire wheels haha.

I will shoot you the email and see. When i tried to save it none of the options listed matched any on the web page.

Todd

anders nrgaard
05-05-2005, 06:49 AM
This is a test to see if I can Zip and attach.
Jack/Wray/Randy
Please delete it!

Bambi
05-05-2005, 06:53 AM
With Butch's Project, 4 weeks is very feasable for building a chassis, if all materials and supplies are in place, many time in the build of a car there is a waiting game. We had to wait once for a windshield and we were installing it as it was going in the trailer. It was a site.
I am very familiar with Bears comments about the MGB's the tub is similar to that of the Vettes. So something could be built along those lines, 2x3 or 2x4 tubing, making a transition in the firewall area outboard like the Vette, MGB to sheet metal fab'd or 2x6 2x8 rails along the perimeter, with a transistion to the back of the passenger compartment, back to the smaller tubing.
There would be a need for someone to come up with dimensions for the firewall area as wall as the rear of the passenger compartment and rocke panel areas. The stub fronts and rears would allow bolt on of Corvette suspension components as a module. Radiator and other periphreals would be dictated by the body shape and size.
As Corvette components are fixed location, a large tunnel for the driveshaft is unnecessary, freeing up valuable space. I would also suggest steel as materials for these things. I also would leave the roll bar out until the body has been completed. Then fit the bar nice and tight.
I would suggest two sheet metal teams, the artsy ewheel folks and guys that can build floors, fire walls, bulkheads etc.
Someone mentioned changes to the doors, I don't really see no problems, you would get in like you would a Vette or many sports cars, sorta like puttin on the Vette in stead of a pair of pants.
I would also allow time for disassembly of the car after testing, to paint things, painting as you go really doesn't work, it always happens if you paint the tub assembly when completed, somewheres down the road, someone is in there welding, drilling installing something or modifiying something, touch ups don't cut it with me.
For sure there will be body modifications, as the car sits and doesn't move fenders and wheel wells can probably fit the pics, but when suspension travel is induced, gee we didn't think the wheel would hit the fender or a brakeline needs to be moved, or a bump or notch needs to be made cuz an A arm hits it while in travel.
As there would be two sheet metal groups, one group would have to work with the chassis group, the guage group. The upholstery group should be approached as soon as the primary tub is completed. Good shops are booked sometime up to a year or more. If your using expensive leathers and exotic materials there is no room for any errors.
I would be focusing my efforts on the main tub area, rocker panels, roof etc. everything else is almost bolt ons.
Where in the pics it shows the exhaust comin out the side thru a couple of small pipes, this could be detrimental to performance, plus produces a lot of heat. I would run the exhaust underneath. I would use that area on the car to add some vents to remove excess heat from the engine compartment, you could even use those dummy pipes to give the look if desired.
Since no dimensions of the body have been established, no one knows for sure if a Vette tub can be used. If an altered Vette tub can be used, working with a modified body, I would go that route, especially if the wheelbase and track is close, no sense in tryin to reinvent the wheels and GM and others have all done the engineering. This would allow the purchase of a new Vette and parts can be sold at a profit. Wiring was mentioned, many of us have done wiring and hate it and if you worked with any computer type cars your in for a nightmare. Using the wiring harnesses from a donor car makes for a life worth living.
Now if its determined that the Bug is not a monster car and smaller in size, a Mazda Miata might be a good donor, just pop in a Rotary motor and go.
I have to add this as metalshapers we tend to think that our work is our showcase and it is, but in a project like this, the finished product is the showpiece, it encompasses more than the sheetmetal work. People look at the finish of the paint, which can enhance the metalwork. A fully polished body is not always the way to go. People will look at the lines, how they blend into eachother. They look for fit and finish, inside outside underneath etc. They will look at the whole package. Every detail needs to work. Superior metal work, with other areas under par, negates the metal work.
I thought that each man was buildin his own imaginary car. So I gotta find time to work on mine.
Good Luck Butch, I hear that the Sultan is also givin a two weeks in Disneyland for the winner and Wrays is paying for it, the Sultan didn't tell him that.

Bambi

Wray Schelin
05-05-2005, 06:56 AM
Hi Anders,

It worked, so maybe we can attach CAD files here if we zip them. If that is the case we will not need a offsite upload of CAD files.

I removed your test file as requested.

anders nrgaard
05-05-2005, 07:11 AM
Thanks Wray,

I just got the sheet from Todd. Will try to save as pdf, zip and post!

Todd,
I don't have a program/filter that is able to open the file format! Could you save it as a pdf and mail it again, please?

anders nrgaard
05-05-2005, 07:37 AM
Hey Todd,

Thanks, I think I did it!?
Was able to open the pdf. Had to to zip it before attaching!

Gene_Olson
05-05-2005, 07:48 AM
Wiring was mentioned, many of us have done wiring and hate it and if you worked with any computer type cars your in for a nightmare. Using the wiring harnesses from a donor car makes for a life worth living.

Bambi,

You could have the harness from a Maserati I helped on once. The guy assembling ran out of blue wire in the middle of the harness spliced on a brown one, ran it to the end and then wrapped the harness.
Sure made life interesting as we tried to find an electrical problem.

Gene

admin
05-05-2005, 08:01 AM
Ok, you guys are WAY over my head..so I will stick to what i can do. what type files do you want posted on here....what extension for viewing? I'll do my little part!!!
jack

anders nrgaard
05-05-2005, 08:04 AM
Hey Jack,

I don't know any CAD programs... I use MS Word.

You are doing GREAT, thanks!!!

Just found a site that shows and explains construction of a monocoque for a Porsche 962!

http://www3.telus.net/962/p2.html (http://www3.telus.net/962/p2.html )

admin
05-05-2005, 08:16 AM
Ok, i will work on that along with CAD files ( i do them here at work....sorta ) so i know most of the extensions.....ok, you all can go back to talking over my head
jack


...ok...added, .xls, .doc and .dwg files

Wray Schelin
05-05-2005, 09:46 AM
This whole exercise is like a Jazz riff that keeps building.

Where can it go?

We can build a cybercar or we can build a real car the choice is ours.

We need to plan more and explore all that is possible.

What is possible?

We can build the body and the bucks providing we can put a complete information package together with all of the real world spatial relationships fully worked out for the complete design.

Building the body and generating the total information package are not a problem and the actual cost will be very low if done with volunteer labor at MM05 and beyond.

Funds for all materials to build bucks and the metals needed are available from the entrance fee for MM05.

We will need funds for the frame, motor,transmission,glass, interior components, tires/wheels and front suspension and rearend assemblies.

A lot of the small ancillary bits that can be made from billet or fabricated can made by donations from various members of their time and materials. First we need to identify what will be needed.

How can we fund this project?

We can do it ourselves from several years gate reciepts or we can choose to promote the hell out of this effort and see if we can find some outside sponsors that will provide us with freebies in return for mention. We have a story here that is BIG , HUGE. We also will need a publicist to help get our story out.

We could also finance this project from the sale of videos showing the build if we are not succesful in finding sponsors. I am sure either way we can make this project real.

After it is done we could sell the car at auction in Scottsdale,AZ with most of the funds going to a charity and some going to seed our next project. We could even ask the Sultan if he would consider bidding on it.

The end goal will be to teach ourselves through group effort but we will also show the feasibility of small shops and individuals cooperating to make large projects possible in reasonable times through cooperation, to grow the craft, create opputunities, and high quality jobs.

todd8541
05-05-2005, 10:36 AM
Wray

I think it is feasible to build this. Marketing is going to be very important for funding. Some companies like edelbrock and some machine shops might donate parts and time for recognizition for their involvement.

I would however recommend it be done in CAD as much as possible. This will allow the work to be divided up among people in different areas instead of only working at certain events. If we do too little at a time it will be forever.

Alot of it can be divided up and the poeple doing some of the work can donate those components. For example a couple of brackets. Blueprints can be provided from the cad system and someone can make them most likely out of scrap and donate them to the project.

Some parts of the car will have to be done at shows because enough cad data wont be available. Example transmission measurements. The trans tunnel might not be able to be accurately drawn. So that portion could be done at one of the shows.

I think it could be done. Is it going to be expensive (depends on components and design), hard (yes but fun), frustrating at time (yes but alot of knowledge will be gain by those involved). ALOT OF FUN OH YES.

Todd

Pedalcar
05-05-2005, 10:49 AM
Hi Gang ,

maybe this is a good starting point.

The chassis from my Sabre Wheelbase is 2.70 m about 107 inch.
.Its a big car also for a 2 seater.http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/3664/s.jpg
Ben

anders nrgaard
05-05-2005, 11:09 AM
Hi All,

Nice car Ben!!
I can see from the wheel base, track and height on the pic in Tim's last post, that he is relying on a Vette... he also earlier stated that he's a Chevy guy.

I found some other Vette specs.
Legroom 43" (110 cm)
Headroom 37.8" (96 cm)
Shoulderroom 53" (135 cm)
This should give us an idea about cabin size
Wray, as I'm sure you know, Volkswagen are the owners of Bugatti too. I work for the Volkswagen importer in Denmark... maybe if I could find the name of the right person in Germany, I could tell him/her about our project and maybe talk them into donating stuff for the car? "genuine" Bugatti parts!

Boogiemanz1
05-05-2005, 11:14 AM
Yes, I would be very interested in wrenching on this cyber or real vehicle. I see some problems in the timetable and will try to make some suggestions later.

As far as the wiring, I can do it all, or the kits form several street rod mfg. are color coded,available for any engine management system, available off the shelf, and cheap.

I suggest a map of members. This would help greatly in the event that something like this ever came to life.

I think if we can get this planned, drawn, and mapped out prior to MM05; this would allow us to make some parts for it there and shoot some video as well as still photos. The video would be used to approach companies and suppliers for materials to complete the real car.

Of course if we had a polished presentation we could pitch the media as well.

We need for some of the engineers on this site to weigh in.

Also, I think the video, t-shirts, etc will work for cash if the major components could be aquired..........Would the media be able to ignore it if we pulled it off? ....john

Pedalcar
05-05-2005, 11:15 AM
Hi Gang,

don't you think if you build the body only you will find sponsors for the rest.

I think they realy want to show of with such a coach.

Ben

Gonejunking
05-05-2005, 11:34 AM
Since no one has stepped up for this, I'll take it.

I'm building my 3rd Lotus 7 clone, so I've wired a few car's, and have fixed many screwup's from the shadetree guy's.

You may need to add a few day's to the schedule, to dissassemble the car and reassemble it. On the 7's, I complete the build, test drive it, fix it, test drive it again, fix it, test drive, then dissassemble, paint the chassis, fix the bugs, then reassemble it.

Even with fuel injection, the wiring is not that bad. Taking the donor car's harness wouldn't gain you that much. You would just be using the computer for the engine, the rest of it would be junk. You need to look at wiring from the completion backwards. This car's era had machanical gauges, most newer cars have digital. You don't want a 30's style car with digital gauges, do you?

As for the fuel injection, most car makers sell aftermarket computers for their engine's, so you don't have the problem of all that extra wiring that is on a stock harness. Another problem with stock harness is feedback. One sensor talks to another, and if it dosen't get it's message, it dosen't work, then you get the domino effect. Lastly, some of the Vette's had a problem with voltage. If the battery was below 13 volts the computer didn't work!

Again, this is just my 2c

Jeff Parker
05-05-2005, 12:39 PM
Hmmm

Sell "instructional metalworking DVD's" to raise cash for this?

I agree on the aftermarket wiring. All labeled. Too easy. I still think that there are existing companies that make the frame we want. Let me know what wheelbase/track we finally arrive at, and I can give you a few sources. Why reinvent the invented?

Gene_Olson
05-05-2005, 12:51 PM
Perhaps if the specs changed to meet US code and the car went on charity auction for the Public Broadcasting entity that is documenting and partially bankrolling . . . ?

G.

anders nrgaard
05-05-2005, 01:17 PM
Richard,

Your qeustion isn't silly at all!
But I think that when we alter the design to a shorter wheelbase, wider track and redesign the front fenders to make room for turning the wheels... it won't be "somebody else's" design any longer. So I don't think we'll get into trouble!

Sam Lee
05-05-2005, 03:04 PM
RodDoc raises a valid point.
Someone owns the rights to that design.

Even making small changes to an existing design would
be considered "creating a derivitive work",
which would fall under the copyrights of the original design.

tdoty
05-05-2005, 03:36 PM
Actually, I was thinking 105" wheelbase because it seems to fit the spatial relationship requirements for the car and is actually inspired by my Monte Carlo and not the 'vette. The track and height dimensions are simply a function of scaling the wheelbase. The mods to the doors were done for entry and egress - with the original door design it wouldn't be like "putting on the car", it'd be more like sliding into a cannon barrel. Face it, those doors were small and the suicide opening didn't help. No word from the Sultan as to his acceptance of the design changes though.

The engine choice is a matter of reliability while meeting the HP requirements out-of-the-box. As well, there is sufficient aftermarket and factory support in the way of parts and wiring harnesses to make it easily adaptable. Besides, the production replacement LS1 comes with a price tag around $5000. Or as a replacement with ECM, injectors and everything else for $6090 - http://www.gmpartsdepot.com/store/product1.aspx?SID=2&Product_ID=464&Category_ID=63 .

The suspension components I have in mind are "custom" off-the-shelf pieces with no need to cut and paste to fit the design - give them the dimensions and they'll send a package deal.

Wiring and such hadn't even been considered yet, since a Painless or Ron Francis' WireWorks kit makes this falling-down simple. As an industrial electrician, a 12 volt system isn't even complicated enough to get my heart beating, though.

The side exiting exhaust is not an issue in my proposal either, as they will be present on both sides, with a muffler/expansion chamber along the framerails handling silencing and forward exiting exhaust headers eliminating the rat's nest effect.

Interior appointments are simple too - analog gauges, wood dash and trim, leather seating and door panels, etc.

Since I've apparently been relegated to the position of spectator here, I'll take the role of a competitor instead.

More to come ...........................................

Tim D.

Gene_Olson
05-05-2005, 04:05 PM
RodDoc raises a valid point.
Someone owns the rights to that design.

Even making small changes to an existing design would
be considered "creating a derivitive work",
which would fall under the copyrights of the original design.

Question,
The design in question was derived from prior Bugatti work.
It has been mentioned that the design as drawn is inconsistant and unworkable as is.
Can you design a new car with the original inspiration seeds or do you need the bridge that pursang has drawn?

G

danz
05-05-2005, 04:14 PM
Uhh... excuse me. Could someone please give a link to the thread that came prior to this one? It was mentioned several times, and I'd like to look at it, too. I think I may have missed it/lost it during the recent blackout period. I just went to the forum list and didn't see anything that might be it. TIA...

danz

tdoty
05-05-2005, 05:25 PM
Sure can Danz - you didn't miss it because of the server change thing, it's fairly new.

http://www.metalmeet.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2841

That's a link to the thread that seems to have started all of this, and I see you found the thread where Wray introduced the design last year :)

Tim D.

Wray Schelin
05-05-2005, 06:37 PM
Seems that some members have percieved a pot hole that threatens the project....

I found the picture of the retro Bugatti design concept on the net last year.

The design concept was penned by a Mr Huber from Argentina. Pur Sang a coachbuilder in Argentina has the picture on their website as a possible build subject sometime in the future. The design is a concept only with no dimensions. They state that they would like to use an original style Bugatti frame, motor, suspension, and other Bugatti derived bits in it.

Pur Sang makes copies of Bugatti designed cars and parts. They also make copies of a vintage Aston Martin racer as a kids car and others. There are hundreds of companies around the world that make copies of car designs.

We are not making an exact copy of a car or of a concept drawing. We are making a new design for a complete automobile through a collaborative world wide effort.

We will be more than happy to give ample credit to Mr Huber and PurSang as the inspiration more so Bugatti because they are the true source of all of the design themes present, that is what makes it so appealing.

If anyone thinks that we will face a potential lawsuit because of this then I think you are mistaken.

Imagine a plaintive going to a lawyer and saying " a group of hundreds of cooperating individuals from about seven countries are violating my rights to a Bugatti derived design concept drawing that I posted on the internet.

I think the lawyers first words would be "How much money are you williing to spend on this"....

I designed my first e-wheel in 1987, it was a design derivation I came up after seeing a fabricated tube e-wheel in Ron Fournier's first book. I posted pictures of it in the Artmetal Chats that I did in 1998. A Chinese company ( Foundertop) now makes an e-wheel that is obviously a derivative design of my design derivation. I have seen someone selling copies on Ebay. What possibly could I do? The answer is nothing.

If anyone wants to continue this design rights issue I please ask you to start a new thread to do so.

Lets continue with our project. We are past this percieved pothole.

Wray Schelin
05-05-2005, 06:40 PM
Seems that some members have percieved a pot hole that threatens the project....

I found the picture of the retro Bugatti design concept on the net last year.

The design concept was penned by a Mr Huber from Argentina. Pur Sang a coachbuilder in Argentina has the picture on their website as a possible build subject sometime in the future. The design is a concept only with no dimensions. They state that they would like to use an original style Bugatti frame, motor, suspension, and other Bugatti derived bits in it.

Pur Sang makes copies of Bugatti designed cars and parts. They also make copies of a vintage Aston Martin racer as a kids car and others. There are hundreds of companies around the world that make copies of car designs.

We are not making an exact copy of a car or of a concept drawing. We are making a new design for a complete automobile through a collaborative world wide effort.

We will be more than happy to give ample credit to Mr Huber and PurSang as the inspiration more so Bugatti because they are the true source of all of the design themes present, that is what makes it so appealing.

If anyone thinks that we will face a potential lawsuit because of this then I think you are mistaken.

Imagine a plaintive going to a lawyer and saying " a group of hundreds of cooperating individuals from about seven countries are violating my rights to a Bugatti derived design concept drawing that I posted on the internet".

I think the lawyers first words would be "How much money are you williing to spend on this"....

I designed my first e-wheel in 1987, it was a design derivation I came up after seeing a fabricated tube e-wheel in Ron Fournier's first book. I posted pictures of it on the Artmetal Chats that I did in 1998. A Chinese company ( Foundertop) now makes an e-wheel that is obviously a derivative design of my design derivation. I have seen someone selling copies on Ebay. What possibly could I do? The answer is nothing.

If anyone wants to continue this design rights issue I please ask you to start a new thread to do so.

Lets continue with our project. We are past this percieved pothole.

ep-98-z
05-05-2005, 06:49 PM
The Human Factors Group has been reviewing the preliminary designs....
Comparison of a 95 " wheelbase to a 105" wheelbase with a 50th percentile male (approx. 5'-9").

Wray Schelin
05-05-2005, 06:52 PM
Everyone must remember this is a collabrative effort and to have collaboration you have to have some give and take.
Not every idea offered will be used, only the best and the ones that we can achieve.

Right now we are structureless as Butch pointed out last night. Once we get a format spreadsheet in place we will have structure and we will then start building this project's schedule, costs, division of tasks, etc.
Right now we are in the brainstorming phase of how to adapt a design concept with as many off the shelf components as possible and to define spacial relationships.

To get this project started we first had to get over a slew of subjective percieved problems. There was quite a list of them and they will continue to pop up as we progress.

In order for this to happen we must not look for percieved subjective potholes we must concentrate our energies on
making this group effort happen. It won't be easy, the hardest part will be the group dynamics, not building the car...

Wray Schelin
05-05-2005, 07:05 PM
Hi John,

Thanks for the great Solid Works drawings! It looks to me that 105" is the way to go to insure ample room.

A 3/4 view with several known sized cars in a street scene nearby to compare with would provide the aesthetic insurance that we are not "too big" This could be done with photoshop. Anybody out there good with photoshop?

danz
05-05-2005, 08:26 PM
Sure can Danz - you didn't miss it because of the server change thing, it's fairly new.

http://www.metalmeet.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2841

That's a link to the thread that seems to have started all of this, and I see you found the thread where Wray introduced the design last year :)

Tim D.


Thanks, Tim. Indeed I did find the thread from which this one sprung/sprang/emerged.

I put a copy of your dreams/experience, experienced dreams quote in my file for such things. Thanks.

Not sure I know what thread from last year you are talking about.

Something that tugged at my mind strings, through both the early and later threads concerns the 'look' that happened in days of yore based on the way they did things then. Specifically, it seems that many front axles were located near the front of the car, with only some frame horns sticking forward as places to anchor the front of the leaf springs. How important is it to the Sultan to achieve that kind of 'look', if the Huber concept doesn't quite capture it?

Why can't we find some 6, or preferably 8 cylinder inline engine to more accurately reflect the slender hood lines? I heard a recent Ford turbodiesel goes like hell. I don't know if it's an in line 6 or not, but the common rail turbo diesels are pretty repectable these days.

This thread has been an amazing thing to read. My Hat's off to all you guys--and the Sultan of Sturbridge--who have made it so.

danz

Bambi
05-05-2005, 08:30 PM
Originally the Bug Project concieved by Wray the Pharoah and his sidekick the Sultan. If I remember correctly that each and everyone of us was approached by the Discovery Channel to build a Concept car for the Sultan, we, I should say each one of us had one year and access to a complete shop with everything known to man, CNC, CAD, tools gallore, everything including a hot tub. We were also given a check for $250,000 to spend as we wanted to build this car. Those were the rules in this Imaginary venture.
Seems all of us go over anxious, and we all started submitting ideas on the premise that it was a group adventure, some believing that we were really gonna build this thing. Even Wray the Pharoah got into the fray. Rules were changed. So now, the Sultan and the Pharoah, decides to change the Concept Vehicle to the Bug Project. Ideas started to pour in, some good. Now this is what the Sultan wants. NO set rules, there comes discussion again as to drivetrain, sizing of parts, everyone has some great ideas. The call is for some irrevocable rules. Again the Pharoah steps in and the Sultan wants this and doesn't want that. A Contract of sorts has been agreed upon, (Remember Rules), rules can't be changed anytime someone wants to, it wastes time, money, effort, etc.
Rules or Guidelines are good. Racing organizations set forth parameters so there will be a fair playing field. Rules are set forth in the beginning and usually go for the season.
The Rules appear to be changing in here, OK I can live with the Sultans desire for the Bug, from there even Wray the Pharoah and the Sultan need to let it be.
Now in a post, number 79 by Wray the Pharoah, it appears we are headed in a different direction to becoming a Metal Meet project, with events, sponsors and with the dream of a reality in making the Bug, with maybe the real Sultan and not the imaginary one purchasing it.
I am all for fun and games and and realize that there will be some that will go to the Metal Meets to build fenders and other things, which is a good exercise. All well and good if that happens, but lets remember the Rules and the Exercise.
But really where are we going with this? I thought this was to be an exercise in thinking as a group and primarily as an individual that was chosen by the Discovery Channel, given access to a full shop, and $250,000 to build a Concept Car for the Sultan, originally the design of the player and now the Bug.
I think that some don't even know the Rules and if they are changin, we have ignition.
There should be a separate page that lists the Rules so everyone can go back from time to time and refer to them. Sorry Pharoah but interpretation of the rules as in racing is up to the individual. All rules apply except where there are no rules.
I am as guilty as Wray the Pharoah, the Sultan and any others in things goin on here.
If the Rules have changed from the original then lets start over with either the new rules or the old ones, but this time put them in writing, in stone with no deviations because of a whim, vision or whatever.
This was to be a How Would You Joe Schmoe, Build a Concept Car from beginning to end, given the Original Criteria, dictated by the Discovery Channel, it has become something else.
Alas there are NO Rules!!!
Where is this going???
Wray the Pharoah needs to tigthen his Turbine

Bambi the Beheaded

butch foster
05-05-2005, 08:41 PM
For all of you who were patient enough to wade through my post last night regarding my approach to the build - thank you. My intent was to give you all a look inside the head of a project manager who is handed a very complex problem, a budget, a tight schedule and a demanding client. All very real world stuff. The fundamental point I was trying to make was once you allocate time and costs to sub-assemblies of the project, it forces you to consider the compromises you will likely have to make. If the body is where the money shot is, and you are going to put 60% of the time and money into it, then you have to make compromises on how much time and money you can spend on other sub-assemblies. It forces you into making fundamental design decisions.

Right now almost everyone following this thread is throwing out design ideas. That's ok. You are working out the fundamental design criteria. At some point however, you need to settle it down, make some decisions and move it to the next level. If not, the project will come to a stand still and people will loose interest.

As real estate developers, the first questions we ask when considering a project are; (1) what is the intended use of the building?, (2) what is the budget? and (3) what is the schedule? We then back down off the completion date as I did last night and determine how long we have for schematic design, design development, construction drawings and construction itself.

Having a date by which you must complete the design phase in order to move into construction also forces you to make design decissions.

At this moment, the project is somewhere between conceptual and schematic design. You have a conceptual design, but you are struggling to move it to the next level (schematics). The schematic design should establish the basic shape and dimensions of the vehicle. Wheel base, overall length, wheel size, etc. I don't give a rat's behind what engine goes in it at this point or whether it has spoke wheels or billet. Settle in on the basic shape and dimensions based on the client's requirements and then we'll find or fabricate everything else around it.

Wray has suggested that we get the project to the point where a front fender buck can be made at MM05. Seems simple enough right? We have most of May, June, July, August and September or about 5 months to build a simple wood structure.

The only problem is that in order to build the buck, the entire automobile must be designed. The fender must fit the rest of the body and the body must fit the chassis. We can't start fabrication (or buck building) without a final design.

Beautiful! Now we have a time duration for design. 5 months. That means in 5 months time we need to have defined dang near every dimension and shape, spec'd out the components and documented it in a fashion that can be communicated to those interested in participating in the build.

Now that we have a dead line, the next step is to establish some milestone dates and define what portions of the design need to be completed between now and the end of September in order to be ready to build a buck in October.

You get the idea.

I, like many others are of the opinion that this car can be built by this group. I also believe that there are enough resources available to fund the project one way or another. Wray's suggestion to build a buck, transitions the project from a cyber build to a real world build.

Let's establish a short term, achievable goal and start from there. Working drawings in 5 months.

Butch.

galloway
05-05-2005, 08:58 PM
Hi John,

Thanks for the great Solid Works drawings! It looks to me that 105" is the way to go to insure ample room.

A 3/4 view with several known sized cars in a street scene nearby to compare with would provide the aesthetic insurance that we are not "too big" This could be done with photoshop. Anybody out there good with photoshop?

Finally, a chance to contribute! I've been siphoning knowledge off of this site for months and would be honored to help out in the area of graphics, imagery, illustrations, etc. Photoshop is no problem. 3D renderings might be a bit of a stretch, but I'm a fast learner; I currently play with 3DSMax and Blender.

Let me know if I can be of assistance.

Kevin G.

anders nrgaard
05-05-2005, 10:31 PM
Actually, I was thinking 105" wheelbase because it seems to fit the spatial relationship requirements for the car and is actually inspired by my Monte Carlo and not the 'vette. The track and height dimensions are simply a function of scaling the wheelbase. The mods to the doors were done for entry and egress - with the original door design it wouldn't be like "putting on the car", it'd be more like sliding into a cannon barrel. Face it, those doors were small and the suicide opening didn't help. No word from the Sultan as to his acceptance of the design changes though.

The engine choice is a matter of reliability while meeting the HP requirements out-of-the-box. As well, there is sufficient aftermarket and factory support in the way of parts and wiring harnesses to make it easily adaptable. Besides, the production replacement LS1 comes with a price tag around $5000. Or as a replacement with ECM, injectors and everything else for $6090 - http://www.gmpartsdepot.com/store/product1.aspx?SID=2&Product_ID=464&Category_ID=63 .

The suspension components I have in mind are "custom" off-the-shelf pieces with no need to cut and paste to fit the design - give them the dimensions and they'll send a package deal.

Wiring and such hadn't even been considered yet, since a Painless or Ron Francis' WireWorks kit makes this falling-down simple. As an industrial electrician, a 12 volt system isn't even complicated enough to get my heart beating, though.

The side exiting exhaust is not an issue in my proposal either, as they will be present on both sides, with a muffler/expansion chamber along the framerails handling silencing and forward exiting exhaust headers eliminating the rat's nest effect.

Interior appointments are simple too - analog gauges, wood dash and trim, leather seating and door panels, etc.

Since I've apparently been relegated to the position of spectator here, I'll take the role of a competitor instead.

More to come ...........................................

Tim D.

Tim,

Didn't mean to offend you in ANY way!!!



Referring to your post was simply a “short cut” for my own benefit! Someone (I think it was Todd) asked me to scale a pic of a ‘vette, comparing it to the size of the “original” design, as I did with the Audi TT Coupe. Easy to do with a line drawing… much harder with an attached photo that isn’t a “clean” side view!



Didn’t mean to step on your toes… and NEVER did!!! SORRY!!!



With a 105” wheelbase, 61” track and 49” height, we have almost the exact size of a ‘vette. This sure would give us an idea of real size to compare to. Thanks!



If we could now consult the sultan of Sturbridge to have him accept these specs, we could go on drawing/designing.



12volt system isn’t even com… DITTO!



Interior appoint… DITTO”



I don’t know, who relegated anybody!! Nothing’s been decided yet and everybody is entitled to make suggestions! You’d be on my team anytime!

tdoty
05-06-2005, 01:53 AM
Anders, Relax man. I sent you a PM.

I never even noticed any relationship to the Vette measurements :) .

Yep, I'm waiting on the Sultan's approval of my mods as well :) . Gonna try to knock up some more drawings too, see if I can change some more stuff :)

Tim D.

tdoty
05-06-2005, 02:47 AM
Anders,

Here's a line drawing of a 2005 'vette - it's the newest I can find. This might help in making a comparison like you did with the Audi.

Oh, yeah, if it helps anyone else, that's cool too :)

Tim D.

anders nrgaard
05-06-2005, 02:48 AM
Thanks Tim,

It really helps!

tdoty
05-06-2005, 02:51 AM
And here is a cleaned up version .......

Tim D.

anders nrgaard
05-06-2005, 02:53 AM
Hey Tim,

Now it's almost to easy! <LOL>

tdoty
05-06-2005, 03:07 AM
And here is my attempt at doing an overlay with the Bugatti and the 2005 vette. The vette has a listed wheelbase of 105.7, so the Bugatti's is a bit smaller.

Tim D.

anders nrgaard
05-06-2005, 03:18 AM
Hi Tim (All)

I see that this is the "shrunk" Bugatti compared to the 'vette.
Here's the original size Bug.

http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/3687/Bugatti_Vette.jpg

tdoty
05-06-2005, 03:46 AM
Yup, it's one of the shrunk versions :)

I just kind of latched onto the 105" wheelbase and haven't let go. The 117" wheelbase makes the Bug look absolutely huge! The 105" wheelbase shows it isn't too far from the vette, dimensionally.

My comparison also incorporates the larger cabin and modified exhaust from my last proposal.

Well, I'm outta here for tonight!

More to come.........................

Tim D.

Wray Schelin
05-06-2005, 06:26 AM
Guys, great job on the size comparisons. If the original Bugatti that was the DNA for the Pur Sang/Huber design was a 117" wheelbase and the proposed 95" ( typical sports car wheelbase) are the parameters, then 105" works out to be a very good compromise.

A large wheelbase allows long flowing lines but the car can also start looking cluncky. A short wheelbase can look awesome in every way but you get into some serious packaging problems.

Lets go with the 105" wheelbase, but first lets see if Kevin can come through with some Blender or Photoshop pictures with a 105" wheelbase version of the Bugatti in a street scene with other cars all scaled appropriately.

Once we get the wheelbase set and the spreadsheet format in place we can really get working. As Butch said earlier the other stuff will start to fall in place.

The objective should be to get the design worked out totally by MM05 ( October) so we can at the very least make a front fender assembly. The buck will be reversable so potentially the two front fenders could be made.

MetalMeet will supply the aluminum and plywood for the bucks. I have recently purchased a 4' x 8' CNC wood router so I can easily cut the bucks if I have the correct files.

If we can work out the design we can make this project no problem.

JonD
05-06-2005, 07:02 AM
Thanks to the diagrams supplied it seems that we can get a person into a 105” wheelbase.

This gives the benefit of dropping the tyre diameter (and therefore the fender radius) from 35” to 31.4”.
Wheels drop from 24” to 22” so tyres should be a bit easier to find.

If they are available perhaps 235/45/22 (30.3 radius, 9.25” width) for the fronts and 275/45/22 for the rear (31.7” radius, 10.8” width). This would somewhat maintain the fender radius.

Scaling the front view with a ruler gives a fender width of 9.4” (front) and 11.3 (rear).

The axle centreline is approx 15”, combined with a ground clearance of 5 inches mean that the prop tunnel will invade into the cabin approx 12” (3” prop with a bit of clearance.

The cabin width is 43” externally, reducing to 36.5” from the hood line upwards; this may make the cabin a real snug fit. If the occupants shoulders can be placed below the taper this may alleviate some of the issues.

Does anyone know the width of the corvette rear gearbox/transaxle as this may be an issue with seating.

All these measurements have been taken from a b&w printout of the 117.3 wheelbase rendering and scaled down so a large margin of error may be present, this could be checked when we have the overhead view in the cad software.

Hope this helps,

Jon

anders nrgaard
05-06-2005, 07:20 AM
Wray,
Thanks for the praising words, really motivates the employees to work harder <LOL>.


I don’t know if the Pur Sang/Huber design has a 117” wheelbase, but the T57SC has!


105” wheelbase
App. 61” traction
App. 49” height.


Let’s go on with these figures!


Making the design for the “main body” shouldn’t be to hard, as it’s practically a “boat hull shape”

I got a roll of 4’ wide paper and I’d love to spend some time drawing a “half” model of the top view.


We should be able to have the design phase completed before October… I really MUST talk my boss into letting me go to IL!!


What kind of file format do you need for the CNC?


Jon,
Great you’re working on it too!
Do you have any pics/drawings?

Wray Schelin
05-06-2005, 08:37 AM
Wray,
Thanks for the praising words, really motivates the employees to work harder <LOL>.


I don’t know if the Pur Sang/Huber design has a 117” wheelbase, but the T57SC has!


105” wheelbase
App. 61” traction
App. 49” height.


Let’s go on with these figures!


Making the design for the “main body” shouldn’t be to hard, as it’s practically a “boat hull shape”

I got a roll of 4’ wide paper and I’d love to spend some time drawing a “half” model of the top view.


We should be able to have the design phase completed before October… I really MUST talk my boss into letting me go to IL!!


What kind of file format do you need for the CNC?

Jon,
Great you’re working on it too!
Do you have any pics/drawings?

Hi Anders,

The Huber design is based on I believe as you pointed out earlier on the T57 Bugatti chassis.

If the cabin proves to be too tight it will need to gain a little girth maybe an inch or two.

My Cnc router can use IGES files or DXF.

Anders consider tagging along with Ben and Emile, they fly out of Amsterdam and they have a knack for finding inexpensive flights. OK you might be strapped to a wing but the ride is quick. <grin>

anders nrgaard
05-06-2005, 10:15 AM
Hi Wray,

Girth... now we're building boats!.... is there anything that you don't know something about? (impressed, wink)

Yeah, you mentioned in a post on the old site, that Ben and Emile spent less $ on flying from Amsterdam, roundtrip, than you and Durch spent on gas driving from upstate New York to Randy's. Sure would be fun to go with those two great guys too!!!!
Strapped to a wing... maybe I should add some "water line" to the Boeing <LOL>

Later!

JD in SoCal
05-06-2005, 10:41 AM
Nice job on this thread, guys. Lots of excitement already.

While I've checked in on this site quite a few times previously, this project really caught my attention and I have to jump in and say hello.

At the risk of talking too much for a new guy, I have one thought to throw in on this. I think the decisions so far have been great, very consistent with what I would choose. The Corvette chassis seems to be a great starting point for reference, and possibly a good source for a little or a lot of the chassis and drive train. If you do pursue the Vette chassis as a starting point, you might want to avoid the C6 (rear) transaxle configuration due to packaging, as it limits how far to the rear that the cabin/seating can be positioned. The look of this project car is very dependent on the long hood/short rear deck proportions, which would be easier to achieve with a conventional transmission layout.

Feel free to ignore this post if everyone else already noticed this.

This is a very interesting project and I'm looking forward to seeing it evolve.

Jeff

Wray Schelin
05-06-2005, 11:46 AM
Hi Jeff,

Glad you jumped in, we can use all the help we can get.

Drivetrain ideas are being suggested but no final choices can be made until we determine how much room we have to work with using a 105'' wheelbase. We also have to decide on a total width and cabin width.

With these primary spaces and relationships set then we can figure out how much room there is under the bonnet/hood, under the passenger compartment, and in the rear of the body. I think fitted luggage is out of the question. <grin>

Once we know our size restrictions then driveline choices will be made. We will consider all and choose the best that fits budget and the Sultan's design requests.

The top seven contributors to this thread will vote for the final driveline chassis choices to be made when the time comes.

Gonejunking
05-06-2005, 11:52 AM
Hi Jeff
Welcome to Metalmeet!

Anders;
Do you want my security # so you can change Boeing drawings?
You'll have to get used to wl, lbl, rbl, and a few other abbreviations that can mean up to 30 things, depending on where you are! Boeing has a 100 page book on what they mean, depending on where you are and what program your talking about.


On my 7, the seats are 17" wide, so you are shoulder to shoulder with the passenger. Think about an airplane seat, 18" wide! Now look at the size of all of us. Driving my 7, one arm is out in the wind most of the time, the other sharing the space over the tunnel with my passenger.
Just my 2c

anders nrgaard
05-06-2005, 12:13 PM
Jeff,

Wecome and thanks for your input!

Jeffrey,
Ummm.. I think I'll stick with cars, boats and houses... might crash if I started redesigning a Boeing <LOL>

18" foran airplane seat. That's 36". 53" total shoulder room - 36" leaves 19" divided by 4... ummm that's app. 5" free space to each side of the seats.
As Wray mentioned, we may have to add an" or 2 of extra girth to make it work! <grin>

Later guys

Hi Jeff
Welcome to Metalmeet!

Anders;
Do you want my security # so you can change Boeing drawings?
You'll have to get used to wl, lbl, rbl, and a few other abbreviations that can mean up to 30 things, depending on where you are! Boeing has a 100 page book on what they mean, depending on where you are and what program your talking about.


On my 7, the seats are 17" wide, so you are shoulder to shoulder with the passenger. Think about an airplane seat, 18" wide! Now look at the size of all of us. Driving my 7, one arm is out in the wind most of the time, the other sharing the space over the tunnel with my passenger.
Just my 2c

Boogiemanz1
05-06-2005, 03:00 PM
Do we have a dimension for the width of the corvette chassis, passenger compartment dimension? Chassis width at that area of the car is the easiest adjusted. Body width is another matter...........john

anders nrgaard
05-06-2005, 03:09 PM
John,

I'm not sure that I completely understand your question (sorry if I don't!)
Inside cabin width is 53"
Legroom is 43"
Headroom is 37.8"

What do you mean would be the problem of changing body width?

Boogiemanz1
05-06-2005, 04:21 PM
I was wondering if the chassis on the corvette is wide enough or too wide for our use. If it is too wide it would be fairly easy to decrease the width of the chassis at that point , easier than making the body wider to fit the chassis and still retain the lines of the bug........OK..............john

Kerry Pinkerton
05-06-2005, 04:57 PM
Guys, if we are going with the taller wheels then it might make more sense to custom build the chassis using Corvette components. If we just stick the large wheels on the corvette chassis it's going to raise it about 3" more in the air. Not that there is anything wrong with 9 inches of ground clearance... :) Given the bulge that I expect the corvette has to meet side crash test requirements, I'm doubting it will work with what is basically a Model A roadster style body with pontoon fenders. yeah yeah I know it's not anywhere near a model A but it's not a Corvette either.

Bambi
05-06-2005, 05:39 PM
Things that are hidden from many of the group. Corvettes and other still use Driveshafts of sorts, they can be shortened or lengthened as needed. Yep it changes the wheelbase. Track stays the same. I wouldn't be going off the deep end and changing Track to suit the body.
Adjust the body to fit the chassis and drivetrain. As it stands you will have to widen the fenders.
Time will not allow me to play with this project, plus the inability of the Sultan to Control the Pharoah in maintaining either the original Rules of Play or at least not make changes every few days. Rules need to be in Stone.
If someone needs to contact me for whatever Reason they can send me a Private Message, I will help them as best I can. I desire No recognition for any ideas.
Good Luck Guyz

Bambi

tdoty
05-06-2005, 06:28 PM
Bambi, I think you meant it changes with the wheelbase. Shortening a driveshaft without moving things around leaves it disconnected :) <hahahaha

Anyway, from the drawings I've done so far, yes, the fenders need to be wider and I think the whole car might need to be wider in the rear, or at least slightly adjusted.

Without getting too wide on the tires, it looks like a 245/30-22 will do the job up front. One thing to remember with tires is that treadwidth and section width are 2 entirely different entities, and section width isn't part of the nomenclature, since the 245 ends up with a section width (sidewall to sidewall) of around 10.25". The outside diameter ends up being 27.9" (28, just to make it easy and even :) ), so it's a bit smaller than the ones in the concept drawing. I think something along the lines of a 275 on the rear will work, not too wide, but meaty enough to handle the power and look muscular. Then again, I'm not a vintage sportscar kinda guy anyway :) .

Anyhoooo - is this still a "virtual build" that will end up giving us all the info we need, or are we designing this to build it? For the virtual build, I am steadfastly against just rebodying a Corvette. For a real world build, it might help keep it more affordable - since the parts I have in mind are more expensive than a used 'vette ................ maybe more expensive than a new 'vette :) . Add to that the fact that most cars are worth more as parts than whole, and it looks better, budgetwise.

I think a 2x4 chassis will do the job, and can be built just about as easily as chopping up a 'vette. I also like the idea of thicker rails in the mid-section.

As it stands though, we're getting ahead of ourselves by jumping to the drivetrain at this point. Since my CAD skills are non-existant, it looks like I'll have to do my drawings the old fashioned way and then scan them and work from there.

Still awaiting design approval from the Sultan, before I change everything in my proposal again by laying out the top view and considering fitting the drivetrain into the car :) .

Tim D.

Wray Schelin
05-06-2005, 06:45 PM
Using an off the shelf frame certainly makes sense if it is possible. The question is: Is it possible? At this point in the development of the project we do not have enough information to answer that question. Why ? Because we have not yet determined how much space we have to work with.

We can't get to step L without taking step A, B, C, D, E, F,

Once we know all we need to know about step A it makes solving the problems of step B easier. Step A is determining the wheelbase and assembling proposal drawings that will relate to that wheelbase.

Bambi for some inexplicable reason thinks there is a master plan for this exercise. There are no plans written in stone about how to build a whole car on the internet using the talents of hundreds of people from many points on the globe...

This is a Jazz riff that we are improvising as we go along, with each player adding their solo when the right time comes. The starting point of this riff is the design concept drawings of the Reto Bugatti. We are expanding it from that point on.

We as a group if we want this project to move forward have to look always for the right notes to fit into our Jazz riff.

With symphony music there is a written score and a conductor with each musician playing his part under the fine direction of the conductor. We don't have a score or a conductor.... We will, but only after we complete the total information package needed to complete this project. It won't be a score though, it will be a collection of digital files that we have collectively assembled. Those digital files will be the score for our project. They are the information package that we will need to develop before we can build this car.

Our main goal is to make a collection of digital files that add up to a car that we can deliver to the Sultan.

Lets get the files written first then we can build the car.

Without the files we are just whistling Dixie.

Boogiemanz1
05-06-2005, 08:55 PM
Doing a re-body on an existing platform is appealing in that the factory has already done a LOT of engineering in the drivetrain, and the little things like pedals, linkages, radiators, resevours, boosters, exhaust, steering, suspension geometry and hundreds of little systems have all been worked out.

That said, the aftermarket is ready and willing to work on "out of the ordinary" projects. That is what spawned the aftermarket. The frame rails can be built from cad files, even mandrel bent. Most suspension companies have setups for numerous applications. They will mix/match crossmembers and steering/suspension components.

Sometimes it is just cost effective, convenient, and a lot easier to start with a clean sheet of paper and go from there. Build the chassis to fit the body....After the body is finalized.

Putting the passenger compartment into the overlay of the body will go a long way in determining the steering and engine/drivetrain placement. Once the top view is accomplished, I think the passenger compartment should be next then the drivetrain...........john

Oh and making room for big boys would be a priority for me........

Tony Sanchez
05-06-2005, 09:51 PM
---I agree with John. I had a frame for a 34 two door made out of 2x4 square tube. The frame was mandrel bent, the rear was squeezed for a pro street look, and IFS front suspension installed. The cost was about the same as boxing and squeezing a stock frame, and purchasing and installing an IFS unit.
---Tony.

butch foster
05-06-2005, 10:00 PM
Ok - now you guys are firing on all 8. You are getting close to nailing down some critical dimensions. Well done.

It is tempting to sit the bug on a Vette chassis. As John points out, Detroit has already done all the heavy lifting. If you go with a ground up build for the chassis, you will need to come to grips with a nearly limitless number of engineering problems. Hashing through that will take time and keep you from getting to the point where you are actually shaping metal. Don't loose sight of the fact that MM is about shaping metal, not building cars. The rolling chassis needs to be functional, fast and reliable, but at the end of the day no one will see it as its rolling down the road. Don't get sucked into the notion that this has to be a ground up build to have street cred.

I'm assuming that once the spreadsheet format for the build has been worked out, it will include a spec sheet listing dimensional information. Given the number of posts and the speed this thing is moving, we are going to need a place to go to see what build information has been decided upon and what is still under discussion.

You guys are doing good. Keep it up.

Regards. Butch.

anders nrgaard
05-07-2005, 12:32 AM
Guys

As someone mentioned earlier, rebuilding an existing frame will take just as long as building a new one that’ll fit our body.

I vote for constructing our own frame. Less work and the rules aren’t so strict in the Sultans country as they are in US (and a LOT less strict that they are in Denmark… Uhhh!)

Another important issue, changing an existing frame is steering angles!!!

In the drawing below, I’ve tried to explain a little bit about steering geometry. In the top view you see that the virtual extension of the steering arms are crossing the centerline exactly on the rear axle center point. That dimension is important to prevent the “inner” wheel on a curve to slide side wards and cause excessive wear of the tire! Changing wheelbase and/or track will move this point!

On the left side in the drawing, you see a front view of the front wheels. This part of the pic should show the center point of the wheel in relation to the virtual extension of the “spindle”. (couldn’t find the English word for it. In German it’s called Lenkrollradius and in Danish it’s styrerulleradius. Maybe Gene can help us on that one?) If the extension of the “spindle” “hits the road” 5/16 – 5/8 outside the center of the tire, it’s good. If it hits on the inside, IT’S DANGEROUS!!. If those two point are in the same place, the steering will feel “heavy” and it may cause shimmy, as the wheel is not “in tension” and won’t know if it should go left or right! Changing rims and tire diameter will influence this “angle”! The side view of the front wheel shows the Castor angle. The point of the virtual line of the spindle “touching” the road is the point that leads the wheel. This angle/distance between vertical center of the wheel and the extension line of the spindle affects “dynamic self alignment” (don’t know if that word makes sense in English, couldn’t find it in my dictionary). If it’s to small, the driver has to be very focused on holding the car on track. If it’s too large, the steering will be heavy and the vehicle will be sensitive to side winds!

Those were just a few of the steering angles. We also have to consider Toe and Camber, which also has an influence on security, handling and thread wear. Locating the rack-and-pinion on the vertical plane also affects the handling of the car during accelerating and decelerating! Oh, this is a very interesting subject to me, and I could keep babbling about it for a long time, but facing that a lot of people would loose interest in reading a post MUCH to long, I think I’ll stop for now. If anyone has any questions, please ask and I’ll try to explain.

http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/3687/Suspension_Steering_Geometri.jpg

Wray Schelin
05-07-2005, 07:20 AM
Hi Anders,

Great post ! I think as this exercise develops it will become an inescapable conclusion that a custom built frame will be needed to fit the body design's requirements rather than the other way around.

MetalMeet members and all contributors to this thread must remember also that this is just an exercise, a collective knowledge exchange, and most importantly a lesson for all bringing light to material that is not available anywhere in such a comprehensive way.

This isn't just about building a retro Bugatti, it is universal information showing everyone through a collective effort how to build a scratchbuilt automobile starting from a design sketch, collecting the needed information and then building the project with assurance that it will look and perform to expectations.

We must remember the project cannot become a reality partial or whole until we first collect and create all of the information needed.

A contribution to this thread is any post that adds another piece of information in the order that it is needed.

If we are to move this project forward we must overcome many roadblocks, most of them imagined rather than real.
We must not let our feathers get ruffled if one of "our" ideas about this component or that component is not adopted.

This isn't a exercise where someone projects their automotive likes and dislikes, it is an exercise where you objectively look at the problem and solve the issues that arise in a logical and technically correct manner.

Anders please keep up the good work!! Thanks!!!

Now we need some street scene photoshop pictures showing our project with other common known cars all in scale. This will insure that our selection of a 105" wheelbase "looks right". We will also still need to determine if the passenger compartment will be large enough to accomodate the Sultan and his wife.

We also need some CAD drawings showing an overhead view with a 105" wheelbase. That information will allow us to test and approve or disapprove the 105" wheelbase choice.

Where is Toolman Mike, he offered in the past to help us out with any Solidworks drawing that we might need.

Can we identify our CAD team ?

We have John in CT

We have J in NJ

We have Ben in Holland

Mike is in OK ( hope we can get him interested, maybe someone can e-mail him)

Who am I missing ? The more CAD proficient members that we have will lighter the load on each.

If we get the promised spreadsheet format this weekend we can start putting together a division of tasks and a schedule so that everyone is on the same page.

anders nrgaard
05-07-2005, 07:41 AM
Hi Wray,

Thanks!! Which spread sheet are we talking about? Todd sent me a pdf file that I zipped and attached to a post on page 8 in this thread.
You're right, we should have as many CAD guys on board as possible!

What distance between stations on a buck would you consider the best (1')?

Wray Schelin
05-07-2005, 08:19 AM
Hi Wray,

Thanks!! Which spread sheet are we talking about? Todd sent me a pdf file that I zipped and attached to a post on page 8 in this thread.
You're right, we should have as many CAD guys on board as possible!

What distance between stations on a buck would you consider the best (1')?

Hi Anders,

Mike Rouse promised one, lets see what he comes up with. He said he had one that he used recently on a specific job that will fit our needs, he just had to modify it some.

Buck station spacing is determined by the amount of shape that is present in the panel you are making. We will get to that later.

As I mentioned earlier in this thread the traditional coachbuilders way to develop this project (before CAD) would be to make fullscale drawings, sometimes on a chaulkboard. A fullscale drawing will allow an accurate wireform to be made as well as checking spatial relationships in fullscale. A drawing can be easily expanded to any scale using a scaled X Y grid and then connecting the plotted points.

With the side view drawing that we currently have scaled to a 105" wheelbase you can also use a common photocopier and tile the drawing to fullscale. It would be best to turn the drawing first into a black and white line drawing to save on the ink. Once you have it all printed out you would need to assemble the tile mosiac on several sheets of plywood or on a wall.

With a fullscale drawing you really get the feel of what the finished project looks like. If you create a wireform you have an actual 3 D space simulation of the project, which provides quite a bit more information than just the drawing.

Using CAD methods does not design the project as Bambi mentioned earlier, what CAD does is allow an easy division of tasks and easy communication.

galloway
05-07-2005, 09:30 AM
Now we need some street scene photoshop pictures showing our project with other common known cars all in scale. This will insure that our selection of a 105" wheelbase "looks right". We will also still need to determine if the passenger compartment will be large enough to accomodate the Sultan and his wife.

We also need some CAD drawings showing an overhead view with a 105" wheelbase. That information will allow us to test and approve or disapprove the 105" wheelbase choice.


I began working on this yesterday and was able to create side-by-side comparisons using the front and side views (no big miracle, that's essentially already been done in this thread). The 3/4 views are more problematic in that the perspective is already built in to the drawing, making it difficult to obtain a reference measurement to use for equalizing the scale between the Bugatti drawings and the real-life comparison cars. I'm chipping away at it, however.

In tandem, I'm working up a simplified 3d model to which I'll apply an image map of the drawing. Not yet sure how useful this will be for a realistic image, but it may help verify my photoshop manipulations and for generating additional views.

Thanks for your patience; more to come...

Kevin G.

tdoty
05-07-2005, 01:46 PM
Whatever the chassis decision ends up being, it needs to be a cohesive part of the package.

For the 'vette rebody guys, some questions:

1) Will the rebody affect the Corvette's active suspension system? What are the chances of getting that reworked? Can it be disabled? Can more conventional shocks and such be retrofitted?

2) Sure, GM has done a lot of the development, and, in the case of the Corvette, that development can be very specific. Specific to their package and requirements may not make it overly useful for our purposes.

3)The "tub" is just plain too wide without moving other things around to fit the proportions. Here's where compromises and trade-offs come into play. Can the design be suitably modified to basically lose the fenders in order to gain the 'vette tub?

Yeah, I know we're still jumping ahead by discussing the chassis, but it is all part of the cohesive design. Sure, we can design the body and then just design a chassis to stick under it. We can redesign the body to fit whatever chassis we want. Both of those solutions represent serious compromise.


Below is a pic of the 'vette without the tub.

Tim D.

Wray Schelin
05-07-2005, 02:07 PM
Tim wrote:

Yeah, I know we're still jumping ahead by discussing the chassis, but it is all part of the cohesive design. Sure, we can design the body and then just design a chassis to stick under it. We can redesign the body to fit whatever chassis we want. Both of those solutions represent serious compromise.


Hi Tim,

We can consider any off the shelf chassis after we determine how much space we have after we get scaled drawings with a 105" wheelbase. If we are lucky and find one that works with minimum modifications of either the body/fenders or the chassis then we would be nuts not to use it.

If we are not able to find an off the shelf chassis that will fit the body without radical redesign then we will have to plan for a custom chassis. That is not a big deal.

Some might argue that an off the shelf chassis will have better engineering present. Maybe in some cases, but maybe not in all. How can anyone predoom a custom chassis that hasn't even been designed never mind built? Is it a problem having a custom chassis built?
No, and it is well in the budget and very possible.

A spreadsheet defining the tasks, estimated cost, schedule, and the needed 105" wheelbase drawings are the next step, without them we are stalled. We can muse about details but they will be just musings until we finalize the size of the car in all respects.

kenklose
05-07-2005, 02:53 PM
1. I am enjoying this thread immensly and learning alot.
2. I'm concerned that the shape of the proposed body will generate lift like the Audi TT did before they added that ugly rear spoiler. Will it become unstable at speed.
3. Would we better served as metal shapers in picking a chassis and then finding/designing a body that fit that chassis? While I like the design Wray found alot it seems that we might end up spending more energy on the car stuff than on the metal shaping stuff. Maybe we could table the Bugatti for now and come back to it as a 2nd project while we concentrate efforts on a project that involves mostly just metal shaping.

ep-98-z
05-07-2005, 03:34 PM
I agree with the comments that we need to establish a list of design parameters that, after we all review, get set as standards to move forward. A list maintained by Wray would probably be the best way.



As far a CAD work is concerned, we need to create a control model. As Jeff will tell you from his Boeing experience, you need to establish WL, BL, STA (waterline, butt-line, station-line) references. This is the standard for boats, planes, helicopters, or cars. It creates the datums required for X.Y,Z values for any point on the car.



It looks like we have a preliminary wheelbase and track width to work with. The next step is to develop a BCL (basic contour line) model for the main body. This would be a lofted shape without any details like flanges, window opening etc. but serves as the master contour allowing communication between all the CAD guys.



A final thought, I know it would be great if we can work around an existing chassis, but I would prefer that we design a beautiful body first and see what fits later.

Boogiemanz1
05-07-2005, 03:36 PM
Hi Ken. This design is different enough to attract attention, and it's all about learning isn't it? Problems crop up in every car build no matter how simple.

All we have to do now is design the envelope and then push it........john

Wray Schelin
05-07-2005, 04:11 PM
Hi Ken,

This thread started out as this question. &quot;Why is there so little support for scratch built cars when there is so much support for scratch built motorcycles&quot;?

Some argued that the motorcycles aren't really scratch built, that they are really a collection of off the shelf parts.

You can make the same statement about a lot of the 32 Ford hot rods that populate shows. Almost all of their components including the body came off of a shelf.

During the classic period of world coachbuilding in the late 1920s through through 1939 and then again from 1946 through the late 60s in most cases just the body was built, with the chassis being supplied by the manufacturer.

The situation now is the only off the shelf chassis that are available are produced by specialists that make them mostly for various hot rod applications. There are also many small kit car makers that make their own frames but use donor car suspension bits. Ben's Sabre is one of them.

Building and designing a frame is not a big deal, it is not rocket science. Don't trip over the fact that maybe a donor or a off the shelf frame/ chassis might not be available.

Why do the retro Bugatti? Because it will pay off the best in publicity garnered plus we will learn more from the exercise.

If we did a slam dunk project what would we learn?

I'm hoping that members that read this will come to the conclusion that you can build a one off car and make a success of it. The lesson of how to do it will be right here.

Magazines, that write articles for their readers tend to want to simplify projects that they propose, they also tie in advertisers with the projects. That is in fact the primary reason why the magazines even exist, to help move their advertisers products not to educate their readers.

The car build formats that the hot rod magazines constantly write about eventually imprint in their readers minds. They are then accepted as gospel. Most of those builds are designed to sell products.

This exercise is about scratchbuilding and what you need to do to make it happen. The fact that we are working on a retro Bugatti design means nothing. It is the process that is most important here. Lets see where it will take us.

To build a scratch built original design body you need to assemble the information package that defines the surface of the body. That must be done if the project is a fairly simple project or a complicated project. Without the surface information of the body shape you can't accurately or efficiently build anything no matter how skilled you are or what tools you have.

I could start later today and make a buck for the Bugatti's front fender, that is not a big deal. Once I had the buck I could make the fender, that would not be a problem. Unfortunately, my new fender wouldn't fit anything because I designed the fender buck as a seperate entity ignoring all of it's spacial and fitting realtionships. It would be pretty junk nothing more.

dauer
05-07-2005, 04:39 PM
Hey,

I have had 2 C-4 Corvette's on a frame machine at work, they are a hydroformed light guage steel that uses the tub of the car body for a great deal of it's strengt and ridgidity. The body tub is glued right to the chassis as are the rockers. The engineering and design of the Vette is awesome but I'm affraid it will be hard to adapt to a different body, the mechanicals however might be ideal as the transaxle would free up a lot of room in the interior as it did in the Vette....


Dave

Kerry Pinkerton
05-07-2005, 06:31 PM
Guys, let me state this again. The stock Corvette chassis AINT gonna work with the large diameter tires! The frame rails, drivetrain, and running gear will be 12" off the ground! The center of gravity would be surrounded by a huge low pressure area. (sucks) We can use the suspension components but the frame is going to have to be build around desired ground clearance and center of gravity.

Any of the 'off the shelf' frames will have the same problem because nothing uses wheels and tires like the retro bug. Since we're going to have to build a custom chassis anyway, I don't understand why we don't just define the track/wheelbase we want/need, CAD the chassis, CAD in the engine/drivetrain/running gear, and get on with designing and modeling the body.

WHEN we get the body built, we can built the chassis to fit under it. If we want a rolling chassis moving forward we easily build a quickie chassis to hang the sheetmetal upon.

kenklose
05-07-2005, 08:50 PM
All I know about building cars I learnt from watching Boyd Coddington :-! Based on that, these are the steps for building a car:1. Poof! Frame appears (sometimes already on jack stands).
2. Poof! Body appears. (occasionally work must be done to extract it from crate)
3. Lots of work is done getting everything else and mating it to the body and frame.
Two big steps of the process are reduced to a phone call and purchase order, and it STILL manages to be an enormous task. I don't think I'm proposing to make this a slam dunk. I'm proposing to make step 2 where most of the work happens and step 3 as magical as possible.

I think taking an existing car and fabricating a radically new body for it through the Internet is:1. Quite a challenge in and of itself.
2. Worthy of much notoriety and attention.
3. Will teach a great many of us a great deal.

Problems crop up in every car build no matter how simple.Agreed. Which is why I'm worried we might be stacking the deck against us by setting the bar so high for our collective first jump.

That said, John, Wray I totally respect the judgement of you and the other expert members here and am grateful that I have the opportunity to be included in this adventure.

Ken

Boogiemanz1
05-07-2005, 09:35 PM
Hi Ken, including people in this adventure is what we want to do. Everyone should watch and participate in this tread if for no other reason than to learn what NOT to do........`cause I'm sure we will do some of that.

An automobile is rarely designed, built with all one-off stuff, painted, upholstered, wired, and fired by one person. everyone in this kind of business has a ring or community of contacts they use to accomplish their goals.

We have people here that possess most of the skills needed to accomplish this build. If we were to do this, we would also be showcasing a lot of member talents, as well as exposing people that want to aquire that talent to a way to learn.

I can't wait to see the next drawings!

anders nrgaard
05-08-2005, 12:14 AM
Hi Guys,

Lots of great posts since I was here last!
Tried to make some space in the cabin... looks like we need a design that is quite a bit more plumb than the original design!

http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/3687/Image1Over_Head_View_1_20.jpg
Any comments?

Dick Bear
05-08-2005, 12:46 AM
Hey gang,

May I suggest, as several others have already, that we first design the shape at whatever scale is needed to comfortably accomodate the Sultan and his wives while keeping with the proportions and visual appeal of the original vehicle intact.

Once those decisions are made we can then simply build the platform on which to carry our design.

Chassis and suspensions are not deep-dark-secrets held by only a few.

Consider this, I saw the race at Darlington last night. There were 43 scratch-built chassis on the track (at the start) and they all ran pretty well.

I fear that if we try to conform to what is "available" as a donor chassis the result will end-up being a cartoon rendition of the classic design.

Dick Bear

ralph
05-08-2005, 04:29 AM
Hi guys,
Been sitting here absorbing and watching.

I think Anders last post may have hit the nail on the head. Look at how fat the passenger compartment just got in relation to the rest of the car. Maybe that's the place to start. Set up the passenger parameters. Widths at points like shoulder and seat, seating height, Height above the seat, Head height for vision, leg exstension at seating height to name a few. I think the cockpit is going to tell us how big the rest of the car has to be to maintain proportions.

To some extent that will also determine the driveline. I'm personally worried the rear transmission may intrude into the seat backs in this design, but a front transmission is going to give us footroom problems. We won't know where we are til the sultan is comfortably seated in car. One of Ford's little tricks is to offset the driveline to create driver legroom. That's why the Ford rears aren't centered. Wonder if off center is possible on the Vette unit.

BTW A company around Columbus, Ohio does a lot of work with older vette suspension and hints on there site they are developing chassis for the C5. I'll keep an eye on there site and see if my Columbus racer friends have an in there we can pump for info. Site is
Progressive Automotive (http://www.progressiveautomotive.com/default.htm)

toolmanMike
05-08-2005, 07:53 AM
Where is Toolman Mike, he offered in the past to help us out with any Solidworks drawing that we might need....

I'm here.


WHEN we get the body built, we can built the chassis to fit under it. If we want a rolling chassis moving forward we easily build a quickie chassis to hang the sheetmetal upon.

Yes. If it is the "look" we're after then we start with that. Perhaps we'll find that minor tweaks make it fit the 'vette chassis but probably not. At that point, expecting to have to grow the 'vette chassis to fit the Bugatti, perhaps we plan to cut the 'vette chassis into five separate subassemblies and modify to-suit.

As far as fitting the driver/passenger, the easiest thing to do would be to scale the initial model electronically to fit the ergo models.

I'm not clear on several details. Has the particular Bugatti model been selected? If we're not going to laser scan a model of this car to get the surface data, do we at least know of a scale model that several of us could buy as a common reference? Do we have accurate orthographic drawings of side, front, back, and top (we have to have all four)? Is there a Bugatti in a museum some place where we could take pictures?

Mike

anders nrgaard
05-08-2005, 08:09 AM
I'm here.



Yes. If it is the "look" we're after then we start with that. Perhaps we'll find that minor tweaks make it fit the 'vette chassis but probably not. At that point, expecting to have to grow the 'vette chassis to fit the Bugatti, perhaps we plan to cut the 'vette chassis into five separate subassemblies and modify to-suit.

As far as fitting the driver/passenger, the easiest thing to do would be to scale the initial model electronically to fit the ergo models.

I'm not clear on several details. Has the particular Bugatti model been selected? If we're not going to laser scan a model of this car to get the surface data, do we at least know of a scale model that several of us could buy as a common reference? Do we have accurate orthographic drawings of side, front, back, and top (we have to have all four)? Is there a Bugatti in a museum some place where we could take pictures?

Mike
Hi Mike,
This Bugatti has never been built before. We can't buy a scale model anywhere and it is not in a museum!
The only pics we have are here in this thread. Side view, front- and rear view, front left side view and rear left side view... that's all we've got.
Right from the beginning of this thread, I think this has been the car, we're going to build.

Kerry Pinkerton
05-08-2005, 08:31 AM
Let's think about this too. The Pur Sang design study was after a "LOOK" not necessarily a production machine with all the safety bells and whisles. I don't know that we need or should have the same cabin width that exists in Corvettes. First of all it KILLS the LOOK.

What is the cabin size of a typical two seater like the Miata or even a lotus seven. Comfort is one thing but this car will never be a highway cruizer. It's modeled to be a brute force sports car with retro styling. Creature comforts, reclining buckets, 38 speaker stereos, seem out of place. Our doors will not be 6" thick or have to have side impact beams. Let's keep it lean and long. IMHO creature comforts (including a spacious cabin) are a distant third behind looks and performance.

toolmanMike
05-08-2005, 08:44 AM
The only pics we have are here in this thread. Side view, front- and rear view, front left side view and rear left side view... that's all we've got.

So, where'd these drawings come from?

Mike

anders nrgaard
05-08-2005, 08:52 AM
Hi Guys,

Kerry,
I agree. The fat look kills the car!!

Mike,
The drawings come from Pur Sang Argentina's web site.

I just found some other pics from Bugatti Revue

http://www.bugattirevue.com/revue21/retro.htm (http://www.bugattirevue.com/revue21/retro.htm)

Looks like Pur Sang actually built a car that has some resemblance to the car we are going to build..
This one has a 16 cyl. Caddy engine
http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/3687/Retro_Bugatti_Rear_Right.jpg

http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/3687/Retro_Bugatti_Front_Left.jpg

In these pics there are persons and we can compare size!

Dick Bear
05-08-2005, 09:08 AM
Hey,

Anders' last sketch proves the point of ending up with a cartoon rendition of the real thing. Fitting the body to an existing frame is, it seems, a waste of both time and energy at this point.

If we were to cut-up an existing frame into several pieces and then "refabricate" those components to fit, I fear we'll end up with a platform having less structural integrity than we could achieve if we simply design-built the chassis from scratch based upon our body configuration.

Dick Bear

Wray Schelin
05-08-2005, 09:08 AM
Hi Anders,

I would say that PurSang missed the mark on their interpretation of Mr Huber's retro Bugatti design concept.

That thing is plan ugly.....

We can do a lot better! We will do a lot better!!

anders nrgaard
05-08-2005, 09:15 AM
Dick and Wray,

You're both right in your last posts!!!

Actually I was "happy" when I found the pics of the ugly thing above, cause they do show, that a car can be built with the propotions from the T41. We'll just have to do like Ralph said: No reason to have the same cabin width as in a vette. Or... was it Kerry? (emb):)
Yes it was! SORRY Mr.P

toolmanMike
05-08-2005, 09:46 AM
If we were to cut-up an existing frame into several pieces and then "refabricate" those components to fit, I fear we'll end up with a platform having less structural integrity than we could achieve if we simply design-built the chassis from scratch based upon our body configuration.

I was more suggesting that a single 'vette chassis would be the place to get all the components. As part of the the design process, I can see placing all the salvaged subassemblies in there the appropriate positions in space in the modeler and filling-in with the frame. Buy what you can and build what you have to tie it all together...

The chassis will turn-out to be the easy part when compared to getting the body designed and built.

Mike

Wray Schelin
05-08-2005, 09:54 AM
Hey,

Anders' last sketch proves the point of ending up with a cartoon rendition of the real thing. Fitting the body to an existing frame is, it seems, a waste of both time and energy at this point.

If we were to cut-up an existing frame into several pieces and then "refabricate" those components to fit, I fear we'll end up with a platform having less structural integrity than we could achieve if we simply design-built the chassis from scratch based upon our body configuration.

Dick Bear

Hi Dick,

I've been waiting for someone to point out the obvious. <grin> Now you can take the slings and arrows of the chassisitas. <grin>

The chances of finding an existing chassis to fit the retro Bugatti design concept drawing and not ruin the intent of the design is a one in a million shot.

All of the suggestions for using an off the shelf chassis were offered with good intent to help speed up the process but all of the ramifications were not considered.

This has proven to be a great lesson for all to learn.
We can't expect to make a Princess by making the shoe first....

anders nrgaard
05-08-2005, 10:06 AM
Yeah, and using a chassis off the shelf, we will have a set of springs that are designed to a certain load... maybe we can't use them for our car! We could either buy a-arms or make them ourselves. Buy a rack-and-pinion and some spindles that fit the wheelbase and track. That would be a good start.

Just measured the cabin of a Honda Civic... 51" wide in shoulderheight... plenty of room for 2 guys my size (5'10")... could be just 46" no problem!

anders nrgaard
05-08-2005, 10:20 AM
Hi Guys,

Just did some "rearranging" of the "bulk carrier".
Think this looks a lot more like it!

The 46" is to the inside of cabin. Allowed fo dor thickness around 2-1/2"
http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/3687/Over_Head_View_1_20_Narrow.jpg

Kerry Pinkerton
05-08-2005, 10:29 AM
Not only is it butt ugly but almost like a 30's car. Underslung leaf springs in the rear!

anders nrgaard
05-08-2005, 10:41 AM
Wow Kerry,

Wouldn't even think of making the suspension that way!

Independent suspension with wisbones/A-arms and coil springs would be my choice.

If anyone should be interested in reading a bit of suspension and steering, I can recommend a book written by Allan Staniforth, published by Haynes: "Competition Car Suspension, Design, Construction, Tuning" ISBN 0 85429 956 4

The ugly car in the pics... don't even like the colour <LOL>

Kerry Pinkerton
05-08-2005, 11:10 AM
Yeah Anders and the sheetmetal is rough also, judging from the reflections from the flouresent lights. Looks like a backyard project.

The windows don't roll down. They appear to be plexiglas and the front half slides backward.

I wonder if the engine is one of the original Caddy flathead V16s. It would fit the theme.

They could have at least washed the tires.....

anders nrgaard
05-08-2005, 11:40 AM
Hi Kerry,

Text below the pics on bugattirevue says it's the Caddy V16 Sports

toolmanMike
05-08-2005, 12:25 PM
If the wheels are 20" dia and the tires are 28" dia then the wheelbase is 94", the track width is 56", the overall length is 138", the overall width is 68" (drawing has typo), and the overall height is 44".

Can anyone say what the wheel and tire diameters most likely are for sure?

Mike
http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/3406/medium/basic_dim.jpg

Wray Schelin
05-08-2005, 01:00 PM
Hi Mike,

The original Bugatti T 57 model has a 117" wheelbase. It is the DNA for the retro Bugatti concept drawing from Mr. Huber that we are working from.

We have detrmined a 95" wheelbase as too small and 117" as too large. We are tentatively working with a 105" wheelbase.

John has done these drawings already comparing a 95" with a 105"

The 95" wheelbase

http://206.125.208.236/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=225 (http://206.125.208.236/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=225)

The 105" wheelbase

http://206.125.208.236/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=226 (http://206.125.208.236/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=226)

toolmanMike
05-08-2005, 01:18 PM
The Bugatti T 57 model which is the DNA for the retro Bugatti concept drawing from Mr. Huber that we are working from. The T 57 has a 117" wheelbase.

Wray,

Do you also know what the wheel and tire diameters would've been or perhaps it's been decided what the wheel and tire diameters realistically will be? These proportions are important to the look, independant of the wheelbase. Also, is it planned that the tires are going to be skinny like the ones in the drawings or are they likely going to be on the same order as the 'vette? This detail drastically effects the sheet metal contours.

Thanks,
Mike

Wray Schelin
05-08-2005, 01:32 PM
Wray,

Do you also know what the wheel and tire diameters would've been or perhaps it's been decided what the wheel and tire diameters realistically will be? These proportions are important to the look, independant of the wheelbase. Also, is it planned that the tires are going to be skinny like the ones in the drawings or are they likely going to be on the same order as the 'vette? This detail drastically effects the sheet metal contours.

Thanks,
Mike

Hi Mike,

The questons you are asking now about tire size, track etc. have already been discussed earlier in the thread.
To insure against duplication of effort you should read carefully the whole thread plus we need to collect all of the drawings in one spot with measurements. We can do that in another thread. We are still waiting on Mike Rouse for a promised spreadsheet which will help organize us better. It's a messy process, but we're all learning as we go along.<grin> I hope everyone remains patient. There will be confusion, and misunderstandings that is a given.

Thanks for your help it will make a big difference.

anders nrgaard
05-08-2005, 01:53 PM
Hi Guys,

Here's a pic with the shrunk over head view on top of the T57, to compare size. The red car has a 105" wheelbase and 61" track. Didn't change the prportions on the T57, just scaled to fit the wheelbase. Don't know if you can use that info for anything, Mike?

http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/3687/Narrowed_Over_Head_View_on_Top_of_T57.jpg

toolmanMike
05-08-2005, 02:15 PM
Here's a pic with the shrunk over head view on top of the T57, to compare size. The red car has a 105" wheelbase and 61" track. Didn't change the prportions on the T57, just scaled to fit the wheelbase. Don't know if you can use that info for anything, Mike?

My next question was going to be if there were any gifted graphic artists that would be able to create a top view from the views we have. We do need an accepted top view that corresponds in detail to the front, side, and rear that we already have.

I think I'll wait for the spreadsheet. Hopefully, it'll have links to accepted drawings, certain feature dimensions, etc.

Thanks,
Mike

Wray Schelin
05-08-2005, 06:03 PM
I just found these drawings done by Oscar in the gallery. They are just what we need. Oscar,what program are you using to do the drawings? It looks like our proposal for 105" will not work unless the car will be driven exclusively by two super models.

Oscar Wrote: 117" Bugatti on top of 105" Vette. This is done as close as I can, from the pictures that I had.
http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/500/Bugatti_line_117_2.jpg

Oscar Wrote: 117" Bugatti wheelbase
http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/500/Bugatti_line_117.jpg

Oscar Wrote:105" wb. Bugatti on top of 105" Vette
http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/500/Bugatti_line_105_2.jpg


Oscar Wrote:105" wb. Bugatti
http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/500/Bugatti_line_105.jpg

butch foster
05-08-2005, 09:45 PM
Oscar - Nice work. Just what we needed. Any chance you can overlay a line drawing of the 117" bug over the 105" bug? I'm scrolling back and forth, but can't get a good read on it.

I was initially in the camp that was in favor of stuffing the bug onto a vette chassis, but I'm pulling a Benedict Arnold. Ander's pics of the brown bug have convinced me of just how wrong things can go. Keep true to the original body design and fab a chassis and drive train to fit. If we're going to do it, let's do it right.

Let's try and get the wheel base and chassis fabrication vs. off-the-shelf decision behind us guys. We need to move on in order to keep this thing on track.

Wray - At some point someone needs to make the call on design decisions. There's going to be a thousand of them and we should probably think about how these are going to be made. In our projects, there is always an Owner who is footing the bill. Sometimes that's me, other times its someone I'm working for. In any design meeting, after everyone has made their case for one design vs. another, there comes a time when all eyes turn to the Owner for the final decision. As an Owner, you consider what you want in terms of design, what you can afford and whether it can be done within the schedule constraints.

I don't have an opinion on how the decisions get made, but we really need a process to finalize decisions. We are struggling a bit because there is no Owner and no Designer. MM is the fabricator and as a group, we are collectively playing the roles of Owner and Designer. Design by committee works up to a point, but someone needs to take a leadership role and assume command. I'm not trying to be harsh, just offering some cautious advice.

Everyone should consider how decisions get made and we should at least agree on a process that we all can live with.

I can't help with the technical stuff, but I'm going to try and help you stay on point and offer some management support and perspective as we go.

You guys are doing good.

Butch.

Boogiemanz1
05-08-2005, 09:59 PM
Wray, what was the interior width of the `30's Jaguars?

The body can have a curve in the side from top to rocker panel. The area from the seat to the window opening would need to be the widest.

I think we would be fooling ourselves to go much less than 50" in that area of the interior. A manual transmission would require a taste more room than an auto to enable the driver to shift.

Maybe consider moving the wheelbase to 110 and or widening the body slightly. A V8 engine could always use a hair more room for acessories and exhaust. Of course slightly widening the track will also result in more interior space.

Tim, Oscar, Anders and others have done a wonderful job with overlays, but weren't these cars fairly tall? I looked at an Auburn Boattail Speedster once and it looked like a truck! It definatly did not compare to a Vette. It was much longer and taller.

Artists concepts like the one we are working from can be as much wishful thinking as accurate when dealing with anything except a side and front view.

Using the Pur Sang drawing, how much interior room would it have as drawn? We may need to prove out their drawing before using it as a basis for our concept. There may be a reason that this car wasn't built.

Guys I'm sorry but I'm a "build it and then draw it" kind of guy.

If we can get it scaled and drawn, maybe we could get some light plywood and make a rough 2d model of it at Kerry's Meet.................john

Wray Schelin
05-08-2005, 10:03 PM
Hi Butch,

Excellent advise, Thanks! I wrote in a earlier post that the final decisions will be made by a vote of the top seven contributors that have added something substantial and have continued to push this project forward.

I have played the roll of thread starter and guide I don't want to be the final word on the choices. I think if we offer a vote we will have more consensus and support. There are hazards with both methods but I think the project will be better served if we allow participation of the heavy lifters in the decision process.

Mike Rouse e-mailed me tonight the promised Excel spreadsheet format( thanks Mike!). I hope to have Jack set up a separate web page for the spreadsheet. He can allow two voulunteers that know how to use Excel plug in the numbers as we develop them. Everyone can refer to the numbers by clicking the page.

Wray Schelin
05-08-2005, 10:24 PM
Wray, what was the interior width of the `30's Jaguars?

The body can have a curve in the side from top to rocker panel. The area from the seat to the window opening would need to be the widest.

I think we would be fooling ourselves to go much less than 50" in that area of the interior. A manual transmission would require a taste more room than an auto to enable the driver to shift.

Maybe consider moving the wheelbase to 110 and or widening the body slightly. A V8 engine could always use a hair more room for acessories and exhaust. Of course slightly widening the track will also result in more interior space.

Tim, Oscar, Anders and others have done a wonderful job with overlays, but weren't these cars fairly tall? I looked at an Auburn Boattail Speedster once and it looked like a truck! It definatly did not compare to a Vette. It was much longer and taller.

Artists concepts like the one we are working from can be as much wishful thinking as accurate when dealing with anything except a side and front view.

Using the Pur Sang drawing, how much interior room would it have as drawn? We may need to prove out their drawing before using it as a basis for our concept. There may be a reason that this car wasn't built.

Guys I'm sorry but I'm a "build it and then draw it" kind of guy.

If we can get it scaled and drawn, maybe we could get some light plywood and make a rough 2d model of it at Kerry's Meet.................john

Hi John,

Most of the 30s cars are surprisingly tight in the front seat and tall . Even a J Duesenberg Phaeton with a 150 " wheelbase has tight front seat quarters.

A lot of the Classics from the 1930s had great proportions, long flowing fenders and hoods and they did that trick with long wheelbases. The real trick in design is to make a short wheelbase car driveable. Knowing that gives you a new sense of appreciation for how good a job some of the contempory designers are doing.

Sports cars generally have wheelbases of less than 100" , we will not fit into the Sports car definition with this retro Bugatti. We are making a Sport Boulevard Cruiser-or SBC. <grin>

Jeff ( gonejunking) pointed out that airplane seats are 18" wide which gives us 36" in a plane. Oscar has us at
36" for the 105" wheelbase and 40.5 " for the 117" wheelbase. We might be able to massage the lines a little more to shoe horn two people in. Supersized folks just won't fit in this one if we want to make the project pretty.

Pretty is more important than practical 9 times out 10 in the car world.

Pedalcar
05-08-2005, 10:36 PM
Hi Gang,

just to let you know my Sabre has 46 " at sholder hight between the
door panels.

It is not a lot bu tit is ok.Even have stick shift,

Ben

anders nrgaard
05-08-2005, 11:17 PM
Wauw,

Great stuff came in while I was asleep!!!
Nice drawings Oscar!! There are some minor details that I don't think are quite as they are on the "original", but nice stuff.

One thing we have to consider: The wheels on the 105 version are big... the ones on the 117 are going to be HUGE if they have to fit proportions!

If you think I'll be quiet for a couple of days from now and wonder what happened, it's just because I have to go to work some place else and won't have access to the software on my own computer <LOL>
See you later guys.

Wray Schelin
05-08-2005, 11:36 PM
Hi Anders,

We can have custom wheels any size made from billet and we can find tires to match. If we continue to do this project right maybe as donations, either way I think we can get over any hurdle that we face.

Oscar's drawings have pushed us forward in the right direction. That is all that is important, every day we need to try and make a few baby steps in the right direction. We're doing it!

Some of the members interest will taper off at times and then return after a time on the sidelines, new members and lurkers will jump in and surprize us with fresh insight. Anyone that wants to contribute, can. We are all learning a ton of information that isn't available anywhere else especially for free.

anders nrgaard
05-08-2005, 11:55 PM
Hi WrayHi Anders,

We can have custom wheels any size made from billet and we can find tires to match. If we continue to do this project right maybe as donations, either way I think we can get over any hurdle that we face.

Oscar's drawings have pushed us forward in the right direction. That is all that is important, every day we need to try and make a few baby steps in the right direction. We're doing it!

Some of the members interest will taper off at times and then return after a time on the sidelines, new members and lurkers will jump in and surprize us with fresh insight. Anyone that wants to contribute, can. We are all learning a ton of information that isn't available anywhere else especially for free.

Sure would look the nicest if we could keep things to proportions!
The excel spread sheet... is that for the measures (sp) of the body or is it the "production plan"? If it's the measures, I'd be willing to plot in the #. Done that a lot of times, constructing boats.

About the lurkers: I like the feature of beeing able to see "Who's Online". This thread is always being followed by a big percentage... members and guests... Many of these guys didn't step forward yet. Lots of people are interested but don't say much/anything. Would be great to have participation from some of the quiet guys. Sure they have usefull info too!

Oscar
05-09-2005, 03:24 AM
Thank you guys for your kind words. The graphic program that I am using is just a 2-D program. My thoughts about the project are as follows. Has anyone contacted PurSang in Argentina, the owners of the design, and asked them for permission to use the design and even pitch in with components to make the project. They might even have a frame, engine, wheels and drive train to make a semi-true Bugatti but not something that is dressed up to look a Bugatti.


My two cents worth,
Oscar

Wray Schelin
05-09-2005, 06:38 AM
Thank you guys for your kind words. The graphic program that I am using is just a 2-D program. My thoughts about the project are as follows. Has anyone contacted PurSang in Argentina, the owners of the design, and asked them for permission to use the design and even pitch in with components to make the project. They might even have a frame, engine, wheels and drive train to make a semi-true Bugatti but not something that is dressed up to look a Bugatti.


My two cents worth,
Oscar

Hi Oscar,

The point of this exercise is to generate the information needed to make a scratch built car. We're doing that through a cooperative world wide effort. It is through the collection of the information that we all get a chance to contribute where we can, in the process everyone learns.

Once we have the information needed we can make the body and a lot of the little bits needed. Some if not all of the major components I believe we will be able to procure as freebies.

We are not attemping to recreate an original Bugatti with a Bugatti drivetrain, we are building an original design retro Bugatti with all of today's modern features that we can adapt or fit into the design. Pur Sang's business is mostly about recreating original designs.

The design that we will eventually will evolve through our cooperative efforts will share the DNA of Mr. Huber's concept drawings just like his does with original Bugatti designs.

His concept drawings are just that concept drawings not a plan to build an automobile. Nobody is stealing his design to make a commercial venture out of it. He will be fully credited as the inspiration for our efforts.

If we were a high tech discussion forum and we started a thread about how to hand make an Apple I pod, going on nothing but a picture of a I pod. Do you think we would need Apple's approval? Keep in mind, the outside design of the webbuilt I pod's look would have to be changed because the inside componentry would be completely different than Apple's I pod.

This retro Bugatti project is a non commercial educational exercise.

anders nrgaard
05-09-2005, 07:19 AM
Hi Guys,

Just got an idea!
As many of you know I'm dealing with training and education in my everyday life.
I'll try to take a projector and put some of the pics on a white wall (the inside of my garage) Scale the pic so that I have a view that is 1:1 (wheelbase 105"/117") Let my wife stand in the pic (she's 6'1"). Maybe we'll get an idea of actual size of the car. Can't do it untill wedensday.
What do you think of my idea?

Kerry Pinkerton
05-09-2005, 07:38 AM
I agree with Wray. Permission is not needed and why would we want to potentially muddy the waters by asking. It would be like if Wray designed a car, posted some images of his sketches on the internet, and some internet group decided to build it. Wray would have no recourse. He might not like it but there isn't anything he could do.

In this case WE will be developing all the surface information to build the car. It will be available to Mr Huber and/or PurSang via the internet if they want it.

It's a non issue.

Boogiemanz1
05-09-2005, 09:01 AM
Anders, any visual reference will be helpful..................john

Wray Schelin
05-09-2005, 09:05 AM
Hi Guys,

Just got an idea!
As many of you know I'm dealing with training and education in my everyday life.
I'll try to take a projector and put some of the pics on a white wall (the inside of my garage) Scale the pic so that I have a view that is 1:1 (wheelbase 105"/117") Let my wife stand in the pic (she's 6'1"). Maybe we'll get an idea of actual size of the car. Can't do it untill wedensday.
What do you think of my idea?

Hi Anders,

Using Oscar's side and top view drawings you can also scale them up in Photoshop to fullscale and print them out on a ordinary printer as a tile format. Anybody participating in this thread can do that.

Gonejunking
05-09-2005, 09:46 AM
Hi gang

Gee 4 more pages on this thread since I last looked at it.

Now I'll throw my 2c in again.

An automatic trans does not give you more leg room! If you look at them, they stay fat for most of there length, befor tapering to the tail shaft.
A stick, gets narrow after the bellhousing. On my Lotus 7, the bell is in the engine compartment, and the trans is in the tunnel.

The Vette drivetrain is not a good choice either. That transaxle will be taking up to much cabin room!

I would rather see an inline 6 banger for the engine. We're only talking about 300 hp here. It's much easier to work around a 6 then a V8 when it comes to body design.

One thing that I haven't seen yet, is what does this bug weigh? You have to ballpark it, so you can design spring rates, and suspension travel, body roll.
Don't want the tires hitting the body. So you have to get a ball park on weight, then suspension travel, then steering lock to lock, so you know where the tires will be, so the body can be tweeked to miss them.
I like the concept, I like the look. I would like everyone to look at this Talbo Lago, same era, different builder, but real!!
http://www.ktsmotorsportsgarage.com/rodeo98/pages/talbot.html
You put this car on!
And I'm been told, it weigh's 3200#.

From what I've seen on this thread, "OUR" bug will weigh in between 2800-3200#.

Given that ballpark, you must figure at least 4" of travel for each wheel, up and down. (2" up, and 2" down, from resting centerline)

Again, Just my 2c

Wray Schelin
05-09-2005, 10:00 AM
I think that we will have to redraw the body top view. make it wider and leave the fenders in place. use the 105 wheel base. The car really does not need to be longer. The almost 72 inch outside rear fender width is already wide enough. This drawing is just waisting to much space in the width of the rear fenders. Just scaleing the car bigger will make it to wide. I measured the 57 chevy in my shop. It is 71 inches wide at the rear fender openings. It has a 116 inch wheel base. Big car. Wouldn't think this car should be any wider then a 57 chevy. My opinion is we should keep the 105 wheel base and justs draw the main body wider leaving the fender outer edges where they are. I added a line on one side where it might go in this drawing.

I put two gals that are drawn to scale in the car drawings. I made them 6 foot tall and they are 19 inches across the shoulders. (narrower then most guys) I also noticed that the rear tires and wheels in the drawing are smaller then the front ones so I made them the same as the front ones. I would say the interior width should not be any less then 46 inches and you should be able to redraw to get it that wide ok. As I said before my sprite is 49 inches inside and it's tight with two in the car. hard to close the door.
maybe oscar can draw the top view for us makeing it with 46 inch wide interior.

Hi Richard,

I like your thinking, I think you are on the right track.

Keeping the 105" wheelbase will create tight space issues, but moving to a longer wheelbase to increase space can create new problems with the look and feel of the design.

As Anders pointed out a fullscale drawing will help us nail the ultimate dimensions down so that we create the best look and still retain as much space as we can.

A wireform or clay model would help even more but they both will take more effort than can be expected by any one volunteer. We might be able to do a fullscale wireform as a regional MetalMeet if we nail the dimensions down with CAD first.

Thanks for you contributions! What Cad program are you using? I think it would be a good idea for everyone to state in any of their posts that have drawings to identify the CAD program they used.

Kerry Pinkerton
05-09-2005, 10:17 AM
Sports cars of that era were much bigger than todays. I'd rather go longer wheelbase if it means a better cabin size.

anders nrgaard
05-09-2005, 11:47 AM
Hi Guys,

I vote for Richard's suggestion. Just make the cabin a little bit wider... not so much that the design would look to fat.

Going longer wheelbase wil make it harder cornering.
The frontwheels will will have to be able to turn longer left and right (might be a problem with the fender design)
And another thing that hasn't been considered yet: Going longer wheelbase means bigger wheels to keep proportions right... Wray says: "No problem we can buy wheels the size we want them!" Yes... but bigger wheels calls for another ratio in the differential not to have the car run 8o mph in the first gear or not be able to "pull it away" in the high gear!?

Boogiemanz1
05-09-2005, 01:14 PM
Jeffery if you are referring to my comment about the manual transmission requiring more interior space, the space is required by the driver to make shifting easier. If two people are jammed together with a shifter sticking up between them it's a little tough to shift. Automatics can get by with a little less because you put it in gear and go...........

Richard's drawing seems to make a lot of room without ruining the lines.

I think tire sizes should be limited to available sizes, I think Tim had some dimensions in an earlier post. If we can use a smaller tire and retain the look, it would be much more cost effective..................john

Gonejunking
05-09-2005, 02:55 PM
John
I was being general and not trying slam your post. I was thinking of my 7, and how it would be with an auto trans.

What I'm looking at is the tunnel, from all the posted drawings and sketches, there is going to be a tunnel, so to make the tunnel smaller use a stick shift. The shifter on my 7 is on top of the tunnel, linkage is internal to the trans.

You could make an auto trans work, still need some kind of linkage.

The bug is big, compared to a 7. I'll try to upload some sketches of the 7, so you can see what all we will have to think about on this car.

Sorry if this is a little erratic, to many interuptions.

Jeff Parker
05-10-2005, 06:17 AM
Regarding the auto/standard debate:
Stick cars require more floor space. Clutch pedal.

The bell housing is approximately the same size regardless of auto/stick. Adding in the clutch pedal will make the difference.

But do we really want an automatic in a sports car? Sounds like blasphemy to me.


Wray-
Once parameters, such as wheelbase, are set, can we get a separate thread listing what is "cast in stone"? One that only you can post to, so we don't have it dilluted with other posts? It will make the spreadsheet more accurate.

Perhaps even post a "poll", if you feel uncomfortable making the "final decision" regarding specific issues, such as wheelbase, tire size, body changes?

anders nrgaard
05-10-2005, 06:54 AM
Hi Guys,

I think we can stop "wheeping" about wheelbase. In this pic you see the Oscar design 105" wheelbase compared to a BMW Z4 Roadster, wheelbase 98.5" The Z4 Alpina has a 300 hp 6 cylinder straight and a 6 speed manual trans. Plenty of room in the cabin... We can make it with the 105" wheelbase!

http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/3687/Bug_v_BMW_Z4.jpg

Wray Schelin
05-10-2005, 07:13 AM
Regarding the auto/standard debate:
Stick cars require more floor space. Clutch pedal.

The bell housing is approximately the same size regardless of auto/stick. Adding in the clutch pedal will make the difference.

But do we really want an automatic in a sports car? Sounds like blasphemy to me.


Wray-
Once parameters, such as wheelbase, are set, can we get a separate thread listing what is "cast in stone"? One that only you can post to, so we don't have it dilluted with other posts? It will make the spreadsheet more accurate.

Perhaps even post a "poll", if you feel uncomfortable making the "final decision" regarding specific issues, such as wheelbase, tire size, body changes?

Hi Jeff,

The Sultan has decreed that it will be a standard shift, so we have to find the room in the design parameters to make the space for all components.

Yes, once we settle on a design decision it will be entered into the spread sheet and we can have it also in a locked forum for easy access by all.

The design decisions that we make will be made by the top 7 seven heavy lifters that have contributed to this thread. A majority vote from the seven will insure objectivity. The subjective element is always trying to project onto this project.<grin> This project is about the design requirements set down by the customer- the Sultan.

What we are doing now in this thread is making the first step required to insure the success of this project . We are figuring out what will be the ideal overall measurements so that we have room for all of the components and the driver and passenger, plus we want to insure that the car does not look awkward or too big or out of proportion in any way. To make a shape look good from many angles if not all and make everything fit is not an easy job.

I do believe we can get it done, but it will not be a quick process. Once we get the general size nailed then the CAD work can be divided up to as many volunteers as we can muster. The CAD work is absolutely critical on this project, without it we are dead in the water. CAD allows the easy information exchange and also a division of labor so many can work on the project at once. If we were doing this project the traditional way we could not do it online.

Once we arrive at a project shape size that works and we have drawings then we can start fitting components to see what will work. Will there be adjustments? Yep!

Jeff Parker
05-10-2005, 08:27 AM
Okey Doke!

Now, the last of my questions


What file format are the sketches? I assume .JPG?

Can they be converted over to a universal .DXF format?

If they were .dxf, it would be MUCH easier to superimpose /layer a structure on top of it, then separate the layer. That would leave the "wire frame", which could be printed full size.

Kerry Pinkerton
05-10-2005, 08:51 AM
I was also thinking that the car might look a lot better with a smaller radius for the fender openings. If anyone likes it, it might be a good idea to redraw Oscars drawing before someone goes to all the work of a full size drawing. Just an idea. I know that cars that have to big of opening look bad at an angle looking down the side of the car. Can see to much of the under fender area. I think maybe making the fender radius 1/2 to 1 inch smaller then the tire radius would look great. here is two pics, one like it was drawn and one with the openings slightly smaller then the tires in oscars drawing.

Richard I like the look of the tighter wheel openings also but we have to make sure the tires can turn while the suspension moves. On a lot of older cars, they got around this by centering the tire in a large fender which made the fenders look huge and the car with a much narrower track than the body width.

There is a compromise but we have to be able to go across a speed bump or whatever while at full steering lock without having the tire rub on the fender.

v2cad
05-10-2005, 10:09 AM
Jeff asked about file format. I'm sure we can convert whatever we get into the need formats. I was able to take Oscar's jpg's and use them for a background. Now the trick is to trace them and try to use that info to make a surface model. It seems what little I knew about surface modeling last year is slow in coming back. I think it's old timers desease. <G> I started working on this last week and restarted when Oscar submitted the newer sketches.
(much easier with the top view, thanks Oscar).

J. Clear

http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/3687/b1.jpg

toolmanMike
05-10-2005, 01:54 PM
Jeff asked about file format. I'm sure we can convert whatever we get into the need formats. I was able to take Oscar's jpg's and use them for a background. Now the trick is to trace them and try to use that info to make a surface model.

Hopefully, Oscar can supply DWG or DXF files so they can be imported as actual line work.

Mike

ralph
05-10-2005, 02:33 PM
V2CAD WROTE:
" Now the trick is to trace them and try to use that info to make a surface model. It seems what little I knew about surface modeling last year is slow in coming back."

I have both of the view traced into .dwg files already if you would like them. Did them from the Rod docs post. Interesting, but without surface data I have no idea how to 3d them. The files are available to anyone else too. Believe I can save in a couple other formats too. I'm limping along on Autocad 14.

galloway
05-10-2005, 03:20 PM
V2CAD WROTE:
" Now the trick is to trace them and try to use that info to make a surface model. It seems what little I knew about surface modeling last year is slow in coming back."

I have both of the view traced into .dwg files already if you would like them. Did them from the Rod docs post. Interesting, but without surface data I have no idea how to 3d them. The files are available to anyone else too. Believe I can save in a couple other formats too. I'm limping along on Autocad 14.

Ralph;
I'd like to take a crack at the 3d model if you don't mind sending.

thx
Kevin G.

ralph
05-10-2005, 04:44 PM
I can send these files IF I have e-mail addresses. Some of the profiles don't have e=mail addresses entered or activated. You can get mine by clicking in my postname and the send e-mail option.

Wray Schelin
05-10-2005, 06:42 PM
Hi Richard,

You have been working overtime! Great work on the surfacing and design tweaking. This thread is really taking off now, I hope your drawings inspire still more.

Thanks!

What program do you use?

ralph
05-10-2005, 07:37 PM
Nice Job Richard

When I did my autocad tracings I noticed some minor discrepancies in wheel placement between the top and side views of the original.

When you get half the car drawn will you be able to mirror the other side?

Wow, I'm impressed by the progress. Warm up the router Wray. Ken will be sending you section data next! :-P

Wray Schelin
05-10-2005, 10:29 PM
I just bumped the Zip file size limit from 100k to 200k for attachments.

This should help us communicate better.

Richard do you have any objections to posting your unzipped files in the special photo archive in the gallery?

If you don't have the time to do it either a volunteer or myself might be able to do it for you.

I'm thinking that a separate thread with nothing but drawings and very short text descriptions above them giving credit to the creator of the drawings and what it is trying to show will make a great eyeball magnet for this Bugatti build project. We want to try and draw in as many members as we can to help. The more help we get the more assurance that we will complete this project and we'll all learn more.

sollis30
05-10-2005, 11:06 PM
sorry if some one mention this
but how abouth using plowlrs chassie
i am not sure if this thing is have unibody or frame body?

Wray Schelin
05-10-2005, 11:34 PM
Hi Sollis,

This project will require a custom tube chassis. The chassis might be made from square tube or round tube or a combination of both that will be discussed later when the drawings are more fully developed.

Several donor chassis have been mentioned already but they all fail to intergrate with the retro Bugatti design concept without making very radical changes.

anders nrgaard
05-11-2005, 04:11 AM
Hi Richard,



I just bumped the Zip file size limit from 100k to 200k for attachments.

This should help us communicate better.

Richard do you have any objections to posting your unzipped files in the special photo archive in the gallery?

If you don't have the time to do it either a volunteer or myself might be able to do it for you.

I'm thinking that a separate thread with nothing but drawings and very short text descriptions above them giving credit to the creator of the drawings and what it is trying to show will make a great eyeball magnet for this Bugatti build project. We want to try and draw in as many members as we can to help. The more help we get the more assurance that we will complete this project and we'll all learn more.

If you don't have the time,just let me know and I'll do it! GREAT stuff!!!

I'll try to project the original drawing, wheelbase 105", scaled 1:1 on a wall tonight (then it'll be around lunch time on the east cost) put a person in the pic to give an idea of real size.

Also found a 3.3 ltr. straight 6 330 hp.
http://www.actionsalvage.com/bmwengines.asp
specs: http://www.bmwworld.com/models/m3h1.htm

ep-98-z
05-11-2005, 07:08 AM
Richard,

Nice work on the models. What program are you using, Rhino???
I am going to start some basic surface modeling of the main body based on the 105" wheelbase in CATIA V5. I can create IGES files fro anyone who can read them, as well as STEP files for any 3D solid parts or assemblies.

Wray Schelin
05-11-2005, 09:19 PM
Hi Richard,

That worked great, and the fenders look excellent.

The motion combined with the 3D image conveys the look very well.

How long did it take for you to learn blender?

Thanks!

Peter Miles
05-11-2005, 10:25 PM
Very Impressive, Richard.

How long did it take to render the movie?

Peter

anders nrgaard
05-12-2005, 02:53 AM
Hi Guys,

Very impressive Richard!
Here's a link, in case anybody should be interested in downloading Blender v2.36 free!!
http://www.blender3d.com/cms/Blender.31.0.html

anders nrgaard
05-12-2005, 07:00 AM
Richard,
Thanks!
I have a question: Where did you place the center that the wheel turns around? Viewing the video, it seems to me that it is plaved in the bottom center of the wheel!? If the center of turning is placed outside the center of the wheel, the wheel will actually turn backwards and out instead of forwards and in, leaving more space in front of the wheel. I'll try to draw something, that might explain this better!

anders nrgaard
05-12-2005, 07:14 AM
Thanks Richard,

But that's REALLY dangerous!!!!! The pivot point should be slightly OUTSIDE the center of the wheel!
I'm working on a drawing, comes up shortly!

Wray Schelin
05-12-2005, 07:26 AM
Hi Richard,

I thought it looked tight when I watched your movie. Can the front fender line be tweaked forward a bit? A longer fender is not a bad thing. Maybe a combination of less rearward reverse depression in the shape and a little growth in length of the bulbous front section.

I e-mailed Jack asking him to set up a separate ftp location for large uploads. Good idea! I can't see any problem to get that done.

Thanks again for all that you are doing to help move this design and project along.

anders nrgaard
05-12-2005, 07:52 AM
Here's the drawing:
Hope this explains something about construction of suspension and steering. Anything not clear, please ask!
http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/3687/Explain_Steering.jpg

anders nrgaard
05-12-2005, 01:39 PM
Hi guys,

Richard started a new thread regarding suspension and steering. We're having a great discussion on that subject.

http://206.125.208.236/forum/showthread.php?t=2888

Oscar
05-13-2005, 09:35 AM
One of those 4 letter words has been bothering me for awhile – WORK, and long days, therefore have not been able to post anything. I will post front and rear view line drawings of the Bugatti pictures. The original is drawn in perspective view therefore the wheel placement is an issue (Spindle). I can save the drawings in the following formats, ai – avi – bmp – cal – cgm – dcx – drw – dxf – emf – eps – gif – hpgl – html – ico – iff – igs – jpeg – pcx – pdf – png – psd/pdd – svg – swf –tga – tif – wmf – wpg. If you want me to send you my drawings send me an E-mail and I will try to respond a.s.a.p.
My E-mail is:

DesignByOscar@aol.com

anders nrgaard
05-13-2005, 09:48 AM
Hi Oscar,
Great pics!
Found them in the gallery and put them in here.

http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/500/Bugatti_front.jpg

http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/500/Bugatti_rear.jpg

Boogiemanz1
05-14-2005, 07:19 AM
You guys are doing a great job in the drawing/design department. I know it is a lot of time and effort, but I think it will be the make or break point of this project. Thanks.....john

anders nrgaard
05-14-2005, 11:32 AM
Hi Guys,

Lookin' gooood Richard.
Found a pic of a Morris Minor in an old Body repair book.
Spent some time "cuttin' and stretchin'" while I was waiting for something to happen here <grin>

Couldn't resist!

http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/3687/Morris_Minor_Cut_and_Stretch.jpg

jvo
05-14-2005, 11:40 AM
Okay, I have to admit when I first started reading this, I was skeptical. Kept thinking it was a lot of arguing, and sort of lost interest. One of my pet peeves in life is that I perceive that people that have strong personalities get ahead in life, and get noticed, get promotions, etc.etc. I don't have that competitive spirit, and when in a group situation, the most verbal and most agressive people will win their way. In matters that really matter to me, I will argue and fight to the death, otherwise I'll just sit back and let the others run things.

I'm beginning to get excited about this project. You guys have fought your way through this, and its really starting to take shape. I don't have any interest in the computer end of the design process, but those of you that do, are doing a hell of a job. You are making progress. I have been a lurker, and will give my right hand, and arm, ( left one, too), to become part of this project, once the design is completed, and the build begins. I don't like the computer end of it, but I do understand the design process. I understand chassis dynamics, and have read extensively on that topic. Keep up the good work. Get the design work done, I'll volunteer to work under someone's supervision at MM05 to help build it in any capacity they choose. John V.O.

Kerry Pinkerton
05-14-2005, 12:14 PM
Anyone got any idea what the 'tubes' that come out of the rear of the top and blend into the decklid are? IMHO, they don't fit the 'look' and I don't know of a reason they have to be there.

I wish I knew more about the cad/design part of this so I could help. You guys are doing awesome work. Awesome!

Wray Schelin
05-14-2005, 12:34 PM
Hi Kerry,

I love those nacelles, I figure they house the roll bar/frame structure. Those little details add character to the design!!

The project is moving along great and everyone is learning by the process. That is the most important thing. It appears that a few have dropped out , but I suspect they will be back right in time when their help is needed. Right now the CAD guys are on center stage, our job is to facilitate the project in any way we can.

The members that are not reading this thread because they might not think they are capable of scratchbuilding or they don't like Bugatti's are missing the boat bigtime.

This exercise is not about building a Bugatti, it's about tapping the collective talent of the membership to show how a project can be developed. It's about learning new skills to realize the full potential of the craft of sheetmetal shaping.

If we are successful with this project there will be a long list of others that we can do .

Steve Hamilton
05-14-2005, 03:20 PM
I have been lurking and have read every post. You hit the nail on the head Wray!!!! this is a * GREAT * learning experience!!!!!!!!

I would have posted a couple different times but these guys are so fast that by the time I get to read the days post I see that someone has already stated what I was planning to say.

Keep up the great CAD work and planning, I'll be lurking, and if fast enough I get in apost now and then...

I also will be ready to help with the build process when that gets started

Steve Hamilton

Randy Ferguson
05-14-2005, 08:47 PM
I can only echo what Steve has said. It's a great learning experience and those of you fortunate enough to know CAD programming are doing a phenominal job!! Thanks to all who have participated in this thread thus far. We will all benefit in one way or another.
I wish I had more time to be involved, but unfortunately, I have too many deadlines to meet.

Kerry Pinkerton
05-15-2005, 07:32 AM
Here is my dream for this project. I'd like to see the CAD data progress to the point that it can be posted. Then we can have bucks made on CNC Routers. Those that want to work on a panel, group of panels, whole car, etc can have the bucks made and work on them in mini MetalMeets.

I don't harbor any illusions that I can build the whole car but I'd like to try and make a couple of the fenders. It would be a great learning experience and I expect that quite a few of the local metalshapers would want to join in.

We could bring our bucks and panels to the International MetalMeet and compare/combine into the final project.

Obviously, there would be some expense involved with routing the bucks and shipping etc but I believe it would be well worth it.

Realizing that I know NOTHING about CNC routers, is this something that we can have done in pieces around the country and expect them to be the same when we bring them together? Or should we have everything done by one place and just ship them? In theory, I expect we could have them done around the country but, in practice, my 20 years of project management tells me we would be safer having them all done in the same shop.

briggsy97
05-15-2005, 09:32 AM
There is a chance that I can have some of the buck parts run on a CNC router. I work for a company that has one that only runs one shift in a 2 shift 7 day a week facility. This would be one of the largest "government" jobs we've done, but my boss is a car nut (aren't we all). When there are more details on how much material, run time, and complexity I can tell you weather I can do it or not. We would only have to buy the wood, and possibly a cutting tool.

toolmanMike
05-15-2005, 12:56 PM
Realizing that I know NOTHING about CNC routers, is this something that we can have done in pieces around the country and expect them to be the same when we bring them together?

Yes, if the CNC shops are provided with numerically perfect models that they can import into there CAM software. The hard part is generating the solid model of the car from freehand CAD sketches. The solid model of the sheet metal car will be used to drive the design of the buck. That will require considerable computer power. I guess we'll find out if we have enough.

I'm still trying to come up with a design approach in SolidWorks. This isn't the kind of thing we usually would do. I'm not saying it can't be done...I'm saying I haven't figured it out yet.

Mike

Pedalcar
05-15-2005, 02:36 PM
Hi Mike and Gang,

that's where i am now also try to make a solid model in Solid Works.

My work that i have been doing with Solid Works since 1999 did not include solid modelling.

Now i arranged a simenar about using sweeps, lofts, surfaces and all that is needed to make a solid model work. It should happen in a couple of weeks.

It is a whole different world and approache then the regular stuff so it will take me some time to get it right.

But if you know how to do it it is a very very strong method to make bucks.

Hope i will learn it fast because it would be a great way to build pedalcars
as well.

Ben

Oscar
05-15-2005, 03:34 PM
I just posted a ¾ front view line drawing from the Buggati picture in the Metalmeet group projects. I hope this will help you guys that are doing the 3-D drawings. There is a lot less room for steering in this one than the one I made of the top view. Note that the fender almost wraps around the front tire and it doesn’t allow for hardly any steering. I hope this will help you guys.

toolmanMike
05-15-2005, 04:02 PM
I hope this will help you guys that are doing the 3-D drawings. There is a lot less room for steering in this one than the one I made of the top view. Note that the fender almost wraps around the front tire and it doesn’t allow for hardly any steering.

I think most, if not all, the major design decisions can be made using accurate 2D layouts and that will be important because making major changes to the 3D model can be tough. Better to get the basic outline nailed-down in 2D.

A model done with SolidWorks would be based on those sketches. The completed 3D model isn't essential until we get close to the point we want to parse out the sheetmetal work around the country. Hopefully, by the time we need it somebody will have the modeling aspect figured out...

Mike

todd8541
05-16-2005, 10:21 AM
Holy crap I start a new job and in just one week there has been this many posts. Sorry I haven't been able to add any input it is going to take me a few days to read this. I finally got some time to check back and can't believe the progress of this thread. Hopefully I can read it all this weekend.

Todd

Gonejunking
05-16-2005, 12:28 PM
Hi Gang

This thread is getting Toooooo Loooooong!!!

I think now is the time to start some more sub threads. Like Drivetrain, Electrical, Interior, Lighting, Dash layout, etc......

The CAD guy's are having fun, and doing a great job, but now we need to look at the whole picture! Without considering all the other components, and their requirment's, we are painting ourselves into a corner. What engine we choose, will have an effect on how the hood will be shaped, and how much room you have for the front suspension. Transmission selection will also have an effect on the seating, tunnel, and dash.

Let's have a few more parameters defined, so we can all add more to this project.

Are we going with live axle's?
V-8, I-6, V-6, V-10, V-12, V-16????

Air conditioning?

GPS?

Stereo, CD, Shake the neighborhood!!!?

What fuel? Gas, Diesel, Propane, LPG, Hydrogen?

Proposed weight? I already said it would be in the 2800-3200# range. Is that OK with everyone?

Electric door lock's?

Electric windows?

Cowl vent?

Retractable hard top? Removable hardtop?

Outside mirrors? or just interior mirror?

Knockoff's, or lugnut's?

Proposed top speed? This is a big item to think about in my book! The car is getting that Airfoil shape, and at some speed (about 150 I think, haven't run the numbers yet) it WILL fly!!! I don't want to be around, when it BLOWS OVER!! I will say from expereance, it's not fun!

I posted a wiring diagram of a Lotus 7 wiring harness in my gallery. The Bug's wiring will not be that much different, except for the computer, and any sound system.

Like alway's
This is just my 2c

Boogiemanz1
05-16-2005, 07:51 PM
Jeffrey, until we get a workable 2d drawing to compare the chassis to we would be shooting in the dark. Once we have the drawing, then the chassis specs, any alterations can be made before 3d modeling.


Richard, your drawing looks great, but it doesn't look like the tires can turn. Are the cutouts that you mentioned somewhere that they can be worked into the design or will we need a different fender apron to give us this room?

A lot of people out there are trying to be patient, I know lots of folks are ready to beat shape and weld, so am I. I think time spent here will enable us to go forward in a more orderly manner....maybe save some wasted motion............this ain't discovery channel, the only deadlines we have are ours..........john

Wray Schelin
05-16-2005, 07:57 PM
Hi Gang

This thread is getting Toooooo Loooooong!!!

I think now is the time to start some more sub threads. Like Drivetrain, Electrical, Interior, Lighting, Dash layout, etc......

The CAD guy's are having fun, and doing a great job, but now we need to look at the whole picture! Without considering all the other components, and their requirment's, we are painting ourselves into a corner. What engine we choose, will have an effect on how the hood will be shaped, and how much room you have for the front suspension. Transmission selection will also have an effect on the seating, tunnel, and dash.

Let's have a few more parameters defined, so we can all add more to this project.

Are we going with live axle's?
V-8, I-6, V-6, V-10, V-12, V-16????

Air conditioning?

GPS?

Stereo, CD, Shake the neighborhood!!!?

What fuel? Gas, Diesel, Propane, LPG, Hydrogen?

Proposed weight? I already said it would be in the 2800-3200# range. Is that OK with everyone?

Electric door lock's?

Electric windows?

Cowl vent?

Retractable hard top? Removable hardtop?

Outside mirrors? or just interior mirror?

Knockoff's, or lugnut's?

Proposed top speed? This is a big item to think about in my book! The car is getting that Airfoil shape, and at some speed (about 150 I think, haven't run the numbers yet) it WILL fly!!! I don't want to be around, when it BLOWS OVER!! I will say from expereance, it's not fun!

I posted a wiring diagram of a Lotus 7 wiring harness in my gallery. The Bug's wiring will not be that much different, except for the computer, and any sound system.

Like alway's
This is just my 2c

Hi Jeff,

All good points, but if we don't know how much room we have to work with how can we make final choices? It is premature to fit components into a envelope design before we know how big the envelope is.

Most cars and products like toasters, refrigerators, houses, etc., are designed from concept drawings first. That is what we are doing. After the shape is worked out then the inner elements are figured out. That does not mean we forget that a toaster has to hold at least two slices of toast. In this case we know the passenger compartment has to hold two people and under the hood we have to fit an engine , etc.

We will get there.

This subject: designing a scratchbuilt car from a concept drawing is a very complicated problem, it will take many many pages to figure out every step.

We have to take step A then step B, we are doing that.

This is a design exercise for learning through a collective effort, it will only go live if we first succeed here.

Wray Schelin
05-16-2005, 08:21 PM
Hi Richard,

The nose drawing looks great but it has wandered considerably from the concept drawing.The signature Bugatti grille look is missing.

I'm not sure if you have the 3/4 front concept drawing view so I'll post it again. Looks like you will need to cut away the fender to allow turning clearance. Also the shape of the inner section of the front fenders is a simple roll in the concept drawing and you have it as a severe reverse shape.

Richard wrote:

I notice that there is a strip of sheetmetal under the hood edge and above the fender in side view. Any opinions of how this might be made?
Is it just a narrow strip of metal attached to the fender?
In the drawing there is no seam at the rear lower edge of the hood where this strip meets the body. Or should the hood sides be lowered down to the fender tops?

I'm not sure what part you are referring to. I see a four piece hood ( two top sections louvered, and two cutout screened side sections ) Three piano style hinges are used. I also see an external hood lock and hood holdown leather strap .

Thanks again, I hope you don't mind the requests for tweaking. <grin>
http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/3687/medium/bughoodnose2.jpg


http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/3687/medium/t41spor2.jpg


http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/3687/medium/Image3.jpg

butch foster
05-16-2005, 08:51 PM
Jeff - You're thinking about this correctly, just a little too soon. The basic design steps of any construction project I've ever been involved with are; Conceptual design, schematic design (SD's), design development (DD's) and construction drawings (CD's). The professional car and aircraft guys may have different terms for these phases, but I think we can all generally agree on the fact that the design process is iterative.

Wray correctly notes that the project is in the conceptual design phase and although this post is now a fair number of pages, the project is early in the conceptual design phase.

Others should comment, but conceptual design is really just a rendering which depicts the general design intent. Richard is doing a beautiful job, but we may be slowing him down by pointing out design flaws as he goes. We need to let the design team finish the concept design before we pick it apart. Let him get the raw shape into the computer. Don't get too bound up about the details, even whether the wheels will turn. We can deal with it at the schematic design stage. I would suggest that once he gets the complete car loaded in and there is general agreement regarding how the thing looks relative to the original drawings (if that is the criteria), we call this the end of conceptual design. Richard should not be trying to solve the myriad of technical problems inherent in a complex design at the conceptual design phase.

The next design phase is schematic design. Here is where we get to start thinking about some of the basic dimensions and whether there is enough room to allow the wheels to turn. We should also start to define chassis configuration, wheel size, engine and trans and rough cockpit dimensions. This will provide the feed back to start modifying the body design in order to make it work. At the end of SDs, we should have the thing dimensioned and some idea about a rolling chassis, motor and trans.

At the design development phase, we take the schematics and further refine them to work with real world components. Define the cross sectional dimensions (how thick are the doors?). How are the body panels attached. What is the inner structure? What are the accessories we want to include? Rough out the plumbing and electrics. There will continue to be body modifications as we go in order to fit some of the parameters as we define them. Don't worry. Design is iterative.

Finally, we need to produce construction or working drawings. These are the documents we build from. Every piece is designed and all components defined.

The point in all this is that the design process has defined phases and during each phase the design is refined to accomodate priorities that are defined in the previous phase. Many times you need to go back and re-think earlier decisions if you find yourself straying too far from the conceptual design. Other times subsequent decisions result in unintended consequences that acutally improve the original concept.

I'm not smart enough about a car build to know what the specifics are, but if you are disciplined enough to assign phases to the design process and define the things you expect to complete at the end of each phase, then the design team will understand what the expectations are and those following along won't be tempted to weigh in on what kind of leather the seats are wrapped in before we have a clue as to whether we can keep the shiny side up at 150 mph.

Butch.

anders nrgaard
05-17-2005, 12:00 AM
Hi Richard,

Here's a rear left view that shows the lines of the hood.
You're doing great on the 3D, wish I was able to do that too!
http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/500/Rear_Left_Side_View.jpg

Gonejunking
05-17-2005, 11:20 AM
Hi Gang

I was only trying to keep everyone thinking about the end of the tunnel, while we were digging it.

If we limit ourselves to just thinking about the outside of the Bug, then we lose time in the long run. I think some more threads are needed to get others (non cad guys) thinking about possible other features of the car.

Why do we need to wait until the car body is totaly drawn, before we look at the rest of the project?

In all the design programs that I have worked on, you start with the basic concept. One group starts it, and when they get to where they think they have a basic concept drawn, then they ask for possible features that will work with their outline.

I think this is where we're at.

I feel some of us should be looking at other areas of this project, to see what might work for our application.

We have some great guy's doing the cad work right now, they are defining the exterior shape and style, so let them continue, and the rest of us start looking at what else lays between here and the end of the tunnel.

Again
just my 2c

tdoty
05-18-2005, 08:34 PM
Wow, a whole day with no posts on this subject?

I have to agree with Wray that we should see just how much room we'll have before we start spec'ing drivetrain parts and etc. Then again, I also think we should go with "off the shelf" stuff - crate motor with a warranty, new trans and "street rod" suspension components.

Now, if it weren't for the "used parts stigma", anything would be fine - but not for a car of this caliber. How much is a new Viper V-10? Jag V-12? BMW V-12? BMW 6? Chevy TrailBlazer 6? Hopped up 292 Chevy built with all aftermarket parts and the new aftermarket head? The LS-1, LS-6 or just plain old small block Chevy is cheap, has plenty of spares available - everywhere - and is easily adapted.

The chassis stuff, as I mentioned when I first started this thread, is available from the street rod guys. Maybe Kugel's stuff is a bit high-end, Heidt's and FatMan Fabrications have some nice, well-sorted stuff on the market too. By keeping options open and doing some research, sponsorship might be something to look into for suspension components too.

Hope the CAD and 3D guys are having fun with this one :) If RodDoc wants to share his .blend file for this, I'd love to take a look at it :)

Tim D.

toolmanMike
05-19-2005, 05:02 AM
I don't have a completed model but I'm close to having a systematic approach figured out for SolidWorks. With everything else that's going on it may be another week before I have it and a partial model ready to post.

Mike

Wray Schelin
05-19-2005, 05:37 AM
Wow, a whole day with no posts on this subject?

I have to agree with Wray that we should see just how much room we'll have before we start spec'ing drivetrain parts and etc. Then again, I also think we should go with "off the shelf" stuff - crate motor with a warranty, new trans and "street rod" suspension components.

Now, if it weren't for the "used parts stigma", anything would be fine - but not for a car of this caliber. How much is a new Viper V-10? Jag V-12? BMW V-12? BMW 6? Chevy TrailBlazer 6? Hopped up 292 Chevy built with all aftermarket parts and the new aftermarket head? The LS-1, LS-6 or just plain old small block Chevy is cheap, has plenty of spares available - everywhere - and is easily adapted.

The chassis stuff, as I mentioned when I first started this thread, is available from the street rod guys. Maybe Kugel's stuff is a bit high-end, Heidt's and FatMan Fabrications have some nice, well-sorted stuff on the market too. By keeping options open and doing some research, sponsorship might be something to look into for suspension components too.

Hope the CAD and 3D guys are having fun with this one :) If RodDoc wants to share his .blend file for this, I'd love to take a look at it :)

Tim D.

Hi Tim,

Good to see you back! I looked at your Chevy crate motor choice when you first mentioned it and it is very appealing because it comes with a computer and it is a rock solid design. It also meets the Sultan's power requirements. The actual choice of the components used will be made by the "the heavy lifters" on this thread. When the time comes ( after we figure out how much room we have) everything possible to use will be considered and then "THL's" will make the final decision.

I also agree that we should use off the shelf suspension bits. For the frame I think we should consider Richard Pauza who is very well versed in sosphisticated tube frame construction techniques and his shop is in IL close to Robinson/Oblong. He isn't a member of our group yet, maybe someone that knows him could ask him to take a look at what we want to do.

Thanks Tim for your many contributions on this thread and your help in moving it forward.


Mike wrote:

I don't have a completed model but I'm close to having a systematic approach figured out for SolidWorks. With everything else that's going on it may be another week before I have it and a partial model ready to post.


Mike

Hi Mike,

That sounds excellent! I can't wait to see what you come up with!

Thanks!

I wonder if Anders was successful with his attempt to project a fullscale image on a wall and photograph the result yet?

Kerry Pinkerton
05-19-2005, 07:00 AM
If we run into space considerations in the engine compartment, a small block ford is a considerably smaller engine and can easily make the HP desired. Don't know about the new 4.6L engines but the 302's are considerably narrower than a SB Chevy.

If we really want the look, we could put a front mounted crankshaft mounted blower (Potvin??) under that LOONG hood.

Gonejunking
05-19-2005, 11:47 AM
Hi Richard
I have a file with most all engine size's in it. I will try to upload it as soon as I find it. I know I put it somewhere where I could find it!

I number of years ago, I had a car that I wanted to build. It was like the Bug, I started with a design, then tried to build it. It was a cross between a Fraizer-Nash and a MG-TC. I built the frame and body, then tried to fit the engine-trans-radiator. Nothing fit! When I got done modding the design to fit the engine that I wanted, it now looked like a T bucket on a bad hair day!

One of the things that I look at, is the whole picture. My 2c say's that we should be looking at a I-6 for an engine. The reason that I say this, is because of my own experiance from building Lotus 7 clone's and a few other cars. With a I-6, you only have to worry about one footwell getting hot, the steering is on the side away from the exhaust, they are narrow, this free's up more room for a narrow hood, they will make 300 hp. There are others, but this is enough.

As you mentioned, things are getting tight under the hood.

As alway's
This is just my 2c
and that is all it's worth.

anders nrgaard
05-19-2005, 12:52 PM
Wray wrote:

I wonder if Anders was successful with his attempt to project a fullscale image on a wall and photograph the result yet?

I tried to project the Bug on the wall in my garage. Oops, the garage wasn't wide enough to have a full scale side view! This is a front view showing track at 61". I'm 5'10" and the measuring device in my hand is 2 meters (78.74"). The Bug is only 117 cm high (46"). I think we have to make the roof taller if it should fit a 6' person. Not to mention seeing anything through the small windows!

Sorry the projection isn't very sharp/clear, but I think you should be able to see that the top of the roof is at app. same height as my elbow.

I also think we have to go for a I-6... not sure there'll be room for a V.

http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/3687/medium/Anders1.jpg

Gonejunking
05-19-2005, 01:10 PM
Anders

Please tell me you moved everything out to take that picture, and don't really have that much free space to work in!!!!!!!!

anders nrgaard
05-19-2005, 01:20 PM
Anders

Please tell me you moved everything out to take that picture, and don't really have that much free space to work in!!!!!!!!

Hi Buddy,
Sorry I didn't sweep the floor, before my wife took the pic <LOL>.
It's a 2 car garage (21' x x26') and there's almost never anything in it, except from my golf clubs, a little garden tools, some of the kids' toys... and leaves on the floor <grin> didn't move anything out. There's a basement below the garage.... LOTS of stuff down there!!!
I also have a little shop (14' x 30') below the house (direct entrance from the garden, no stairs) There I got my wood working machinery and my E-hammer plus my helve and E-wheel in progress... DA**, work takes up alot of one's good free time.

Wray Schelin
05-19-2005, 01:43 PM
I played with the picture a little.

The first is Anders original photo although cropped.

The second version I tried to scale more appropriately.

We will need to scale the Sultan down if Anders version is correct! Scaling a Sultan can be tougher to do than scaling a car. <grin>

http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/3687/medium/Anders1.jpg


http://www.metalmeet.com/photopost/data/3687/medium/Anders2.jpg

anders nrgaard
05-19-2005, 02:03 PM
Hi Guys,
Yeah, but if we have to scale to proportions, we're definitely having to use truck wheels! <grin>
Wray, editing the pic, you could have cleaned the floor! <LOL>

Wray Schelin
05-19-2005, 02:19 PM
Hi Anders,

This is a perfect example of why fullscale drawings, clay models, and wireforms are so important. We won't be able to do the fullscale clay, or the wireform, but we will be able to do the fullsize drawings.

Scaled drawings can have a million problems hidden in them...

Tall tires are not a problem and I think to keep the design theme intact we will need them. How tall is still the question. The most important element right now is determining the size of the cockpit. We have agreed on a 48" interior width but we need to insure that you can get in and out of the car without a trip to a chiropractor. <grin> I think the door which is a great design and has a killer look (airplane like) will be a major problem. We might need to cheat by making a fold down or receding lower body section allowing your feet easier access.
When you open the door automatically the area below it will get out of the way. The same might need to happen with the roof allowing less ducking by the passengers.