Okrasa Special

[steve wright]

I just think it's great we're able to open up the process to everyone and share the design challenges in enough detail that everyone gets a sense of the process, which is what this build is all about. Enjoy some time off Barry

[911hillclimber]

Barry needs to toughen-up those arm muscels for the zillion English Wheel forward/backward motions to roll the alloy!

I find the comments about the width of the wings very interesting, and looking back at the views they are skinny but so are the wheels.

356's have cavenous gaps btween arch lip and tyre, esp the fronts; a style I link with early 50's and i feel a step before this car was pieced together.
The 911 has a much tighter fit as we all know but from any angle the tyre width fits the arch shape and the 'well' it travels up and down in straight ahead.
The bonnet area is big, the 904 is too (but with a lovely headlight design to bonnet edge) and i wonder if a rib in the middle will help brake it up?

Bloody awkward isn't it!?

I think we should all have a working party at Barry's place with a lot of coffee and buns and design it by commitee.
I bet it would be so close to how it is!

I think it only needs a nudge not a big thump to tune it.

[Ren]

Loving the nose job. However in my two pennies worth if you look at the rear wheel arch from the front view...... I would prefer more over hang myself but not my car so ignore my comments. But look at the front wheel then the back.......




If you are concerned about lack of features on the nose then how about air intakes like the 917?
[/img]

[steve wright]

thanks Ren. 917 is too late (late sixties as opposed to late 50's & early 60's) but you're right, we should look at earlier cars such as the RSK and RS61 for inspiration. I intentionally wanted to pull the rear arch tight over the wheel to give a purposeful intent to the car, plus we have the luxury of doing that with the swing-axle suspension as the rear wheel moves in an arc from the horizontal. We'll definitely add your comments into the mix though when Barry and I meet. Cheers, Steve

[mjh356@hotmail.com]

Barry,

The lines on the car are really nice. To my eye it looks to be a nice mix of 60's low volume fibreglass racers with VW/Porsche overtones. From the photos I think that you are fretting overly on the bonnet expanse.

If you are concerned over the expanse of bonnet, some potential options could be :
(a) Flatten it slightly as per the 550/Glockler
(b) Add a chrome strip down the bonnet to a perpendicular piece (inverted T with some badge at the centre of the junction)
(c) What about a shaved and flattened 356 B/C bonnet handle with different logo ?

Perhaps the Phtotshop fairy might be able to assist.

Mark

[Ren]

Nose and rear wheel....

[Bootsy]

I can completely see where everybody is coming from regarding the bonnet expanse.

So difficult to judge on 'paper' but when the panel gaps are there, there's the different material of the headlight lenses breaking it all up and any other details that are added I'm sure it will break this area up nicely.

Take Ren's image just posted



I'm guessing the area between the lights is not disimilar to the 'Special' but broken up with details (although I can't dig those fogs and indicators!) and given the size of the bonnet opening it doesn't look disproportionate.

If you take a front on shot of a 911 or 356 and delete all the detail the 'bonnet' areas look far too big.

Reminds me when you look at a clay prototype - with no detail or panel gaps it all look out of proportion with vase expanses of bonnet etc.



Add some detail and panel gaps and things start to look better.

[Barry]

Thanks for the replies so far: keep them coming!

I completely agree that shut lines would break that bonnet area up somewhat, and indeed they would probably do the trick.

If we had some that is .... one word: clamshell. We'd made our minds up some time ago that we were going the clamshell route, although frankly either the 'lids' or clamshell options have both advan and disadvantages from my point of view.

Nevertheless the principle remains, if we get to a spot-on shape without any trinkets, we'll have a useful safety margin. If we go into the build proper relying on these right from the outset, I think we could be in trouble later on.

Personally I'm quite keen to try to broaden out the front wings into the bonnet area, just to see the effect. I can do this with additional wire over the top of the existing, so it won't mean undoing huge chunks of work. The other option we've got is to drop the bonnet-line down, as there's nothing particularly in the way underneath it at the moment: I've just picked an arbitory (sp?) start and middle height, so again, it would be possible to have a play with a lower line, which would then give the front wings more shape by default, without actually raising their own height.

Can't wait to get back up there now .

Oh yes, is there any precendent for a bonnet feature line down the centre? I'm hoping not, nothing to do with the design, it's just because a lot of good panels get scrapped when feature lines go wrong . I don't think Steve would appreciate a wobble on his line .

[Barry]

I tell you what though: those clay people are amazing aren't they?

Clay workers I mean, not people made from clay. Clearly.

[Mike]

Great work Barry, it will be fascinating watching this develop.

[jury]

Nice one barry, whatever you do will look great!

I really like how it looks as is!

Just my 2 pennies worth...Can the crease line created where the bonnet meets the 'bumper' area be stepped in? similar to a 904? I think it will visually lighten the front end, and could also run along the side of the car. Also the graphic created by the front number plate can be completed with 2 air holes either side with 904 style side lights incorporated.

(ignore the plate )



Just a thought, but as I said before I am only jealous of your job

Chris

[Bruce M]

I'm not really qualified to offer any thoughts here but you did ask

Firstly, the photos that you took. It looks like the camera was placed exactly on the centreline but if it was slightly off to one side (did you measure it?), the mirror technique in photoshop could amplify this and for example, widen the bonnet area. Also, a neutral 55mm lens is needed here as a wide angle will also distort the relative proportions of the roof verses the bonnet (it looks okay in the photos but worth a mention). I would also stick to photos taken between waist height and eye level. The car could look great from knee height (ie roof is "pulled down") but it is not a normal viewing angle so is less important.

Next....... wow! that looks great. truely!

I know you and others are not convinced by the wide bonnet but it doesn't bother me. Looking at various 904 photos on the net and it looks better than many. To me, the broad nose reminded me of a touch of Daytona and curiously a hint of 914


Jury's point above about narrowing the lower corners has merit (for me), although I also guess you don't want to copy the 904 too closely (avoid that heavy split line).

I also agree that the front also needs a focal point . Something straight at you (vertical, not sloped). This could either be a oil cooler grill or even just the number plate (but mounted as a "strong" feature). From Jury's excellent example above, I'd reduce the side grills into a crescent moon shape to hug the indicators (horn grills or brake vents) and have a central oil cooler grill (similar proportions to the reg plate) but with more rounded corners, perhaps even closer to an oval (touch of 60's e-type? to make it a little less "porsche").

Anyway, enough mutterings of a madman. What excellent work and thank you for sharing the project in such an open way. It is such good entertainment

[Gary71]

I agree about the choice of focal length (and point of view) exaggerating the width. I lined up the centre of the car on the rear view mirror stem, and also tried to compensate for the uneven length of Barry's legs by rotating the mirrored half very slightly before joining it back on

Not perfect, but should give a reasonable impression

Time to crack out that nifty fifty Barry and capture a few more views from a slightly more normal view point

[Ian Donkin]

I have no design advice to offer whatsoever, but as per one of Steve's earlier points, if I was being asked to lay down the money to pay for it (assuming I had the funds), I'd be more than happy to part with my cash.

I'm sure this is going to be just fabulous and after all, what's wrong with benefiting to some extent from the passage of time and being able to improve on what might have come directly from the era?

Great work

[Barry]

Thanks for the ideas and comments chaps .

A quick word about the length of my legs and lens ( ). What you can't see is that the car is actually only about four or five feet from a shelving unit, and then the wall.

I'm having to lean across the shelves, and in one case, with the camera resting on a broom 'monopod'. Nevertheless, and despite this, Gary's software version does reflect the car very well. Certainly close enough to get opinions and ideas.

BTW, the last job of the day tends to be throwing some paper over the day's work, and dashing off some quick shots. Therefore there's usually a certain lack of finesse about the papering and pics at that time. When we're nearly 'there', no doubt we'll take more time getting some better quality shots. I've got an idea for a 'fun' shot as well.

I'd quite like to try a tweaked front end one way or another, and then I guess we'll have to move the car around a bit to get some 'proper' pictures of it. However, we do have a problem there at the moment, as the car and workshop are one, so to speak. Because the mods required to get the car to sit at it's eventual ride height have not been done yet (in hand I believe), we've got the thing bolted to the floor .

Therefore in order to move the car we not only need to at least have a good idea that the final shape is at least close, but also to organise a way of moving it around the workshop without being attached to it. I do have a back-up plan, in that we could make some 'dog bones' to bridge the front and rear shock positions, with the ride height built in. No suspension movement of course, but better than nowt.

Obviously pretty much at the same time, we're going to need to be able to move the front wheels through all of the various travels, just to be sure that the front arches will work.

As Steve has mentioned, the rears are less of an issue, as the travel is via swing-arm, and therefore likely to be kind to us.

Again, thank you for the input so far folks: it's very much appreciated!