Okrasa Special

[Barry]

Great ideas .

FWIW, I'd much prefer not to have my name on the main badge, and think personally that David (Small) should be the figurehead. I rather like Steve's initial plan to have the various parties signwritten elsewhere, but I'm loving the whole badge design .

We seem to have had a series of non-starting days body-wise recently (although it's a large space, the workshop gets quite congested if there're other projects underway), so it works better to let Steve and Ian get on with the 356 / Bus in peace. All being well we can resume the bodywork next week with a two-day re-start. It's worked out O.K. at this end though, and it's nice to be able to go back to it 'fresh' so to speak.

I have been doing the front valance area, and strangely side one (I'm doing it in left and right halves) went very well, and yet side two (the second one attempted) has put up a real fight. Very odd, as it's a straight mirror image of the first, so no extra shape or anything. Hopefully coming back to it fresh will see it completed, and the two sides welded together.

We're getting close to the point of needing to rip off a lot of the wirework, and fit / complete the previously made MDF buck. This will mean that we can continue around the car with the skin.

[Barry]

Wow, fifty pages .

[Macaulay]

Thanks for replies.
Yeah I agree Barry, we should not have our names on the badge, let's leave that to the car name and possibly David Small.

The knights helmet is taken from the family crest, also thought it was a nod to coach building as the craft has a link to armour builders in the past.

I will work a bit on the badge with the kiwi then, changing the sheild shape and such.
But are you guys sure we can use the name Okrasa?

[Macaulay]

Another attempt.

[smallspeed]

that looks great
i know the different letters are a different width to each other, but small tweak.. could you make it so it was OKR to the left of the vertical line and ASA to the right? looks kind of offset a bit (even though I know it isn't )

[BAHumbug]

My two cents (just because I'm allowed):
1) Number 9 (if it is to have a number) because it is the ninth "special" Mr. Small built per Steve's first post.
2) Warning: controversial--The afficionados on the 356 Registry refer to themselves as the current "custodian" of their vehicles. Recent personal reflection of my own mortality coupled with the hope that this vehicle will still be admired decades from now prompts my second suggestion. The kiwi should not appear on the badge. Steve, some of the nicest people I have known are Kiwis. It is only because of you that this project has been initiated. Somewhere on the car there ought to be a kiwi, or some personalized touch. But the essence of the car as I perceive it is the spirit of Porsche and VW and Okrasa and the car culture of the late 1950s. You guys (y'all in the local colloquial) merit all the credit you deserve; with it comes a certain cosmic responsibility.

Just my opinion. LOVE the project. (Too serious???)

[steve wright]

fair comments Bruce. Not sure I share the view of "custodian" if I interpret the definition given by the 356 Registry, but I agree a reference to NZ is not consistent with a badge David Small would have put on the front of the car. I do like the early McLaren badges with their stylised kiwi and had wondered about having my own small badge design made up based on it that I would then get Neil Melliard to paint onto all my cars, so maybe putting something separate on the lower front quarter panel might be the way forward. Having said all this, David didn't actually finish the car, so we're quite within our rights to claim some aspect of the design and build, even if we're "cheating" by putting some reference to David and I on a badge. All interesting views though and I'd welcome other opinions and ideas.

BTW I'll put up a photo of my attempt at creating an ally gearshift cover shortly so everyone can have a laugh at my feeble attempt at coachbuilding and as a contrast to what Barry is creating! And the MSA has indicated I can get HTP papers for the Okrasa Special which would be tremendous.

Cheers,
Steve

[Barry]

And the MSA has indicated I can get HTP papers for the Okrasa Special which would be tremendous.

Cheers,
Steve

I have to say that I thought this was very exciting news, especially as I believe the original purpose of the car was for racing anyway.

I had a couple of short days up there this weekend, sans workshop dog, and have got the driver's side, rear + bit of bonnet mocked up, ready for a return visit to the great outdoors for another viewing.

BTW, I noticed that my camera had some shots on it that haven't yet made it onto this thread, so when I get a moment later in the week I'll post them up: they are of the process of making the modified rear wing, plus my struggles with the front valance!

[steve wright]

just a couple of teezers before we put the correct 356 wheels on it and wheel it out into the sunshine to give judgement on the bodyshape so far...

[Barry]

Believe it or not, Steve, that's exactly what I did before I left on sunday. Took the cover back off in case it set the alarms off.

And no, in case anyone thinks we've finished it, all that's under the cover is air and dust ....

In fact, it's worse than that, as the 'bonnet' is one of my early doorskins recycled to give us an idea of where we're heading, mainly to see what the front wing will look like when viewed from the bonnet side. In fact, had I thought of it earlier, we could have made up a 1/2 size Titanic replica using (some of) my failed doorskins .

Funnily enough, by far my favourite view is from the side of the car with no panels, i.e. where you just see the outline of the driver's side. The proportions, height of the tail end and the topline sweep of the panels really work well. I've yet to get to the bottom of why I like that so much more than the panelled side. We do know that putting in the 'real' wheels makes a big difference, and I suspect that having some sort of side window will help as well. Currently the eye tends to wander right to the (false) inside edge of the panels at the top, which makes the side of the car look over-tubby. We'll have to dummy something up to get the eye back onto the right line.

[Macaulay]

Good points Bruce.
I had a go using the number 9.

[Lightweight_911]

I do like that !!!

[ims101]

That gets a thumb's up from me too

[steve wright]

So Barry and I pushed the Okrasa Special outside a couple of weeks ago to check out how she looked in the reality of outdoor light. I called it the Keira Knightly effect: really pretty face, great silhouette when clad in a svelte shimmery number, but she has no arse! So two years on and we're still stuck. Thankfully the rest of the design works - the rise over the front arches is perfect, the door blends seamlessly into the front and rear quarter panels (there is a LOT going on in that area between the A and C pillars!) and the rear arch still looks great. The proportions seem to work as well with nothing looking out of kilter, except perhaps for the rear being slightly too short, and I wonder now if that is where out problem lies with the rear of the car. There is a wonderful feature on a 250LM in the latest Octane magazine and I've realised I've unconsciously being trying to build a cross between that and the Porsche 910. In both cases the tail is longer and there is more material below the axle line. The LM also has a kicked up Kamm tail whereas the 910 carries a higher rear wheel arch straight to the rear rather than dropping it down as we've done, giving more height when viewed from behind. Oddly the rear seems to work in the first photo but not the second, so today's task is to mock up a rear in cardboard and masking tape and then push it outside to see if we can't solve this problem once and for all. Putting the Porsche 356 rims back on the car also confirmed what a difference a decent set of wheels makes, and that these are certainly the wheels that suit the car best. Taping in the front air duct and fog light also seemed to make a difference and confirmed placement on the front of the car as design features.

[Barry]

Give me a shout when you're ready Steve, and I'll pop up one evening.

I haven't uploaded my pics from my camera yet, so not seen what they look like. From your pics though, particularly the workshop ones, all but the rear is much improved from our earlier efforts.

On the outside shots, I can see there's a bit more wheeling to do on that doorskin and rear 1/4: not really to change the shape as such, just to tidy up the refection lines.

As Steve says, once again we wheeled the car out, and it really did look pretty until we walked around the back. It is better then the first, paper-clad effort, but still definitely not right. Just looks too small in my mind. I suspect that the actual shape of the rear isn't the issue at the moment, and think that it's more the very basic, fundamentals of:

a) Height of the rear edge of the bootlid, and also therefore, it's angle.

b) The overall width of the kamm, and the relationship that then has with the rear of the rear wings (i.e. behind the rear wheels: curving in steeply, gently or not at all).

c) The depth of the rear panel in total.

d) How that depth is broken up with some sort of horizontal feature line. If you see kamms all in one, they always seem to look very slabby in my eyes, and seem to work better with some sort of horizontal division.

To be positive, the greater % of the shape is now pretty much there, and you'd think that the rear would actually be the easier part to get right. Once we've got the direction in which to head with this, I can then return to mock up rear MKIV (I think). If that is then right, we can return to the buck, and put on the MDF bonnet / front valnce area, the nearside front wing and then make up the passenger door and rear wing areas.

Still, two years in and we're still working on the shape: yikes .

I think I did bring myself to take some pics of the arse, and will post them up, perhaps at lunchtime for some DDK thoughts (if anyone's up for it?).