View Poll Results: Which lay-out to use ?

Voters
46. You may not vote on this poll
  • BMW M5. Front engine,RWD

    12 26.09%
  • Porsche 911 Carrera 4(s). Rear engine, RWD

    1 2.17%
  • Lotus Elise. Mid-engine,RWD

    25 54.35%
  • Bugatti Veyron. Mid-engine, 4WD

    5 10.87%
  • Audi TT. Front-engine, FWD

    0 0%
  • Subaru Impreza. Front engine, 4WD

    3 6.52%
Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 61

Thread: UCP Supercar II: the basic lay-out

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Eindhoven, The Netherlands
    Posts
    7,827

    UCP Supercar II: the basic lay-out

    Option 1:

    Front engine, RWD, using the Holden Monaro / BMW M5 lay-out.

    Option 2:

    Engine in the rear, 4WD, similar to the 911 Carerra 4(s)

    Option 3:

    Mid-engined, RWD, Lotus Elise-layout

    Option 4:

    Mid-engined, 4WD, Bugatti Veyron lay-out.

    Option 5:

    Front engined, FWD, Audi TT- like

    Option 6:

    Front engine, 4WD, Subaru Impreza lay-out


    Please vote what you would like to work on most.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,200
    I voted for Mid engine AWD as it would be the best for a good GT. The final decision is linked to what sort of car we are creating...

    AWD is a little heavy for a light track car....
    Power, whether measured as HP, PS, or KW is what accelerates cars and gets it up to top speed. Power also determines how far you take a wall when you hit it
    Engine torque is an illusion.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    St Marys Western Sydney
    Posts
    20,953
    For a GT, i think front engined looks best. AWD would be safer and put the power down better
    I am the Stig

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,200
    Actually front engine AWD works very well with a GT but I think that it would be an interesting challenge to make it mid engine for somewhat improved steering response and handling. Plus without having to make soo much room for the engine in the front, very interesting and functional front ends are possible.
    Power, whether measured as HP, PS, or KW is what accelerates cars and gets it up to top speed. Power also determines how far you take a wall when you hit it
    Engine torque is an illusion.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    1,991
    Personally I think that front engine + RWD is the way to go or maybe mid engine. AWD is waaaay overrated and mostly unnecessary IMHO.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,200
    Quote Originally Posted by Lagonda
    Personally I think that front engine + RWD is the way to go or maybe mid engine. AWD is waaaay overrated and mostly unnecessary IMHO.
    Not if you are driving an expensive GT exotic car on a snowy road.

    and if you like 0-100km/h acceleration times then AWD wins again.

    Mid engine RWD is classic exotic car and front engine RWD is classic sports car. Lets try something slightly different eh?
    Power, whether measured as HP, PS, or KW is what accelerates cars and gets it up to top speed. Power also determines how far you take a wall when you hit it
    Engine torque is an illusion.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    1,991
    You don't drive your exotic GT on a snowy road. Why would you?
    AWD wins on acceleration if it has the power to compensate for the extra weight. Assuming power is the same and the chassis/tyres is able to put down the power the RWD version would be quicker.

    And it's more fun and it doesn't understeer and is probably less nose heavy.

    Or maybe some sort of compromise. An AWD system that has 100% rear bias in normal situations and 50/50 or even 100/0 bias when the computer system senses that you're going over the limit. Or AWD 50/50 enabled on request.

    4 wheel steering would a cool as well.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Tampere
    Posts
    817
    Quote Originally Posted by Lagonda
    You don't drive your exotic GT on a snowy road. Why would you?
    I would. But probably people living in areas that have a winter are a minority of "buyers" and shouldn't be conserned of.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lagonda
    Or maybe some sort of compromise. An AWD system that has 100% rear bias in normal situations and 50/50 or even 100/0 bias when the computer system senses that you're going over the limit. Or AWD 50/50 enabled on request.
    Then we'd have a normally RWD car with a weight of an AWD. Otherwise it sounds good.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen
    Posts
    2,975
    with all due respect your lumping together car example layouts that are idiosyncratic. If we want this to be original we should first consider the purpose of the car and design the technical specifications round that. Its not as bad as Bugatti saying "yes, lets have 1000hp" and then srtuggling to make the claim reality but its the same kind of error. We are choosing chassis layouts already yet have not outlined the cars target cost, audience or purpose. I'd rather come to a choice of above after seeing it in context - not by copying others. Drakkie your dexcriptions are accurate and i in no way wnat to diss the project - its just a suggestion. Happy engineering!
    autozine.org

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    1,991
    Yup, I know the weight would be an issue but then again the use of some light weight composites could offset that, no ?. It has all of the advantages of a RWD and the safety/grip advantages of AWD when necessary.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    1,991
    Quote Originally Posted by jediali
    with all due respect your lumping together car example layouts that are idiosyncratic. If we want this to be original we should first consider the purpose of the car and design the technical specifications round that. Its not as bad as Bugatti saying "yes, lets have 1000hp" and then srtuggling to make the claim reality but its the same kind of error. We are choosing chassis layouts already yet have not outlined the cars target cost, audience or purpose. I'd rather come to a choice of above after seeing it in context - not by copying others. Drakkie your dexcriptions are accurate and i in no way wnat to diss the project - its just a suggestion. Happy engineering!
    I completely agree really. Target audience, cost etc should be considerd first. Technical aspects are second.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,200
    With AWD you can drop all your power from standstill and you will just go. Do that without AWD and a good amount of power then with normal tires you are going to get some smoke.

    Ask people who own a GT and can afford to take it traveling. Most of them will have driven on wet roads, snowy roads, dirt roads, roads in poor condition. To handel the power in your present day GTs you are going to need one hell of a ETC system to keep the owner from dumping it. Or a simpler ETC system with AWD. AWD in normal cars (as opposed to race cars) almost always have the advantage in accelration and lateral acceleration limits.

    IMO an AWD should be slightly rear biased from a standstill, something like 40/60. It should feed more power to the front wheels when the rears start slipping. Also some kind of ETC system that makes turn in better by cutting down power to the front wheels when the front wheels are turned and the rear wheels can maintain traction. Obviously it should have LSDs front and back plus a driver adjustable center diff.
    Power, whether measured as HP, PS, or KW is what accelerates cars and gets it up to top speed. Power also determines how far you take a wall when you hit it
    Engine torque is an illusion.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen
    Posts
    2,975
    Quote Originally Posted by hightower99
    With AWD you can drop all your power from standstill and you will just go. Do that without AWD and a good amount of power then with normal tires you are going to get some smoke.

    Ask people who own a GT and can afford to take it traveling. Most of them will have driven on wet roads, snowy roads, dirt roads, roads in poor condition. To handel the power in your present day GTs you are going to need one hell of a ETC system to keep the owner from dumping it. Or a simpler ETC system with AWD. AWD in normal cars (as opposed to race cars) almost always have the advantage in accelration and lateral acceleration limits.

    IMO an AWD should be slightly rear biased from a standstill, something like 40/60. It should feed more power to the front wheels when the rears start slipping. Also some kind of ETC system that makes turn in better by cutting down power to the front wheels when the front wheels are turned and the rear wheels can maintain traction. Obviously it should have LSDs front and back plus a driver adjustable center diff.
    yes...i like the bmx 330xi approach where weight can be saved by using a structural sump as the front differential housing. We can save weight aslo by using engine speed rather and FI for power to reduce torque loading hence requirement for stronger parts - however AWD with its extra friction wouldnt suit low torque engine...just thinking out loud..
    autozine.org

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Perth, Australia
    Posts
    3,560
    Quote Originally Posted by hightower99
    With AWD you can drop all your power from standstill and you will just go. Do that without AWD and a good amount of power then with normal tires you are going to get some smoke.
    Drop a lot of power from stand still into a AWD car and you get a lot of smoke, just that it is clutch rather than tyres
    Chief of Secret Police and CFO - Brotherhood of Jelly
    No Mr. Craig, I expect you to die! On the inside. Of heartbreak. You emo bitch

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,200
    Quote Originally Posted by Cyco
    Drop a lot of power from stand still into a AWD car and you get a lot of smoke, just that it is clutch rather than tyres
    Only when the clutch is of the discount kind that you are used to Cyco

    Besides I am voting for a clutchless CVT...
    Power, whether measured as HP, PS, or KW is what accelerates cars and gets it up to top speed. Power also determines how far you take a wall when you hit it
    Engine torque is an illusion.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Sultan of Brunei!!
    By lfb666 in forum Miscellaneous
    Replies: 131
    Last Post: 12-11-2006, 05:58 AM
  2. Help create the UCP Supercar!
    By Egg Nog in forum Technical forums
    Replies: 296
    Last Post: 04-07-2005, 08:23 PM
  3. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-01-2005, 05:39 AM
  4. UCP Supercar Design brief
    By Matra et Alpine in forum Technical forums
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 12-13-2004, 12:20 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •