chrism
|
| posted on 29/7/13 at 05:48 PM |
|
|
Interesting Project
Found this via an advert on eBay, some company in Canada trying to gain crowd source funding for an electric kit car.
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/tomahawk-drive-the-dream-faster
The car looks ok but I'm not too sure about that chassis though.
----------------------------
A little hard work never killed anyone, but why take the risk!
-----------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
designer
|
| posted on 29/7/13 at 05:54 PM |
|
|
I think they have no chance!
And I agree, the chassis is certainly agricultural!
|
|
|
jossey
|
| posted on 29/7/13 at 06:04 PM |
|
|
A scam in the making although I bet at present even the designers think its gonna materialise
Thanks
David Johnson
Building my tiger avon slowly but surely.
|
|
|
Mr Whippy
|
| posted on 29/7/13 at 06:29 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by jossey
A scam in the making although I bet at present even the designers think its gonna materialise
My first thoughts too, yet another pipe dream car that takes people's money then vanishes
Don't they even have a single real body shell or is it all just rendered computer pictures?
[Edited on 29/7/13 by Mr Whippy]
|
|
|
chrism
|
| posted on 29/7/13 at 06:41 PM |
|
|
Im guessing they need the money to have the body made, only another $149,810 left to go in less than 2 months.
Looking at the chassis it appears to be bonded and riveted aluminium, didnt Robin Hood make a aluminium monoque seven kit for less than a grand, I
dont think that one faired to well.
----------------------------
A little hard work never killed anyone, but why take the risk!
-----------------------------
|
|
|
ReMan
|
| posted on 29/7/13 at 06:47 PM |
|
|
+1
"The car looks (very) ok but I'm not too sure about that chassis though. "
www.plusnine.co.uk
|
|
|
chrism
|
| posted on 29/7/13 at 07:04 PM |
|
|
Just had a proper read some of the claims are a bit much
"It was engineered to be the fastest, strongest and safest kit car on the market"
I hope their gonna have some roll over protection added then, and obviously they have never heard of Ultima Sports Cars.
"We understand that electric circuits are not yet available throughout the Americas and so to capture all markets we needed to make our frame
available for those who can't yet plug into the future!"
Their selling it as an eco electric supercar yet the drivetrain parts arent available everywhere in America yet.
I mean good on them for trying it, but I think they needed some more development and a chassis that doesn't look unfinished, it looks like there
should be some more structural parts at the front where the wishbones mount and there doesnt seem to be any triangulation at the top of the engine bay
area.
----------------------------
A little hard work never killed anyone, but why take the risk!
-----------------------------
|
|
|
iank
|
| posted on 29/7/13 at 07:06 PM |
|
|
Also appearing on uk ebay
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Tomahawk-Supercar-Kitcar-/251312006700
--
Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.
Anonymous
|
|
|
mcerd1
|
| posted on 30/7/13 at 07:55 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by iank
Also appearing on uk ebay
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Tomahawk-Supercar-Kitcar-/251312006700
I know thats just an add, but they listed it as a 1994 ford 1.8 escort popular limousine :lol: 
-
|
|
|
mcerd1
|
| posted on 30/7/13 at 08:00 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chrism
Looking at the chassis it appears to be bonded and riveted aluminium, didnt Robin Hood make a aluminium monoque seven kit for less than a grand, I
dont think that one faired to well.
I had a good look at one of them a while back - after less than a year on the road none of the bolt holes
in the chassis appeared to be round any more 
(just because the bolt / rivet strength is X and the alloy strength is Y doesn't mean you can make it out of 1.5mm thick sheet without allowing
for bearing failure at the mounting points!)
mind you I was even less impressed with the stainless one they did (S3 ?)
this one looks a little better thought out than that, but looks like its still missing quite alot...
also is 300lbs (136kg) really that light ?
anyone know the weight of an ultima chassis ?
my thoughs are leave the alloy chassis design to the folks with big budgets and/or lots of time for R&D - light tube steel has got to be the most
cost effective and reliable solution (even if it doesn't sound as hi-tech)
and I'm sure takes less energy to produce than alloy and is more or less just as easy to recycle 
I also spotted this: "...less weight equals more power to the wheels"
thats just not true, clearly they don't understand physics 
the power at the wheels is not affected by the weight of the car - but less weight means you can get better acceleration with the power you've
got.... but the top speed will still be limited by your areodynamics (if they want to market it as a 'super car' then top speed is going
to count)
[Edited on 30/7/2013 by mcerd1]
-
|
|
|
iank
|
| posted on 30/7/13 at 10:16 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by mcerd1
quote:
Originally posted by chrism
Looking at the chassis it appears to be bonded and riveted aluminium, didnt Robin Hood make a aluminium monoque seven kit for less than a grand, I
dont think that one faired to well.
I had a good look at one of them a while back - after less than a year on the road none of the bolt holes
in the chassis appeared to be round any more
(just because the bolt / rivet strength is X and the alloy strength is Y doesn't mean you can make it out of 1.5mm thick sheet without allowing
for bearing failure at the mounting points!)
mind you I was even less impressed with the stainless one they did (S3 ?)
this one looks a little better thought out than that, but looks like its still missing quite alot...
also is 300lbs (136kg) really that light ?
anyone know the weight of an ultima chassis ?
my thoughs are leave the alloy chassis design to the folks with big budgets and/or lots of time for R&D - light tube steel has got to be the most
cost effective and reliable solution (even if it doesn't sound as hi-tech)
and I'm sure takes less energy to produce than alloy and is more or less just as easy to recycle
I also spotted this: "...less weight equals more power to the wheels"
thats just not true, clearly they don't understand physics
the power at the wheels is not affected by the weight of the car - but less weight means you can get better acceleration with the power you've
got.... but the top speed will still be limited by your areodynamics (if they want to market it as a 'super car' then top speed is going
to count)
[Edited on 30/7/2013 by mcerd1]
If you want to be competitive in the supercar market it needs to be carbon-fibre (or something that sounds even more exotic)
136kg isn't very light for a chassis without a roll cage.
--
Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.
Anonymous
|
|
|
Mr Whippy
|
| posted on 30/7/13 at 12:12 PM |
|
|
Unless you use very expensive battery's there is nothing light about an electric car and most DIY conversions need stronger springs
They make a big deal about their amazing electric car but show nothing more than an empty chassis, load of croc
|
|
|
