Okrasa Special

[Barry]

Yes, Eckold themselves will be there (I know this because Neil of Eckold U.K. mentioned it earlier), and I guess people like Frosts, Justin Baker and possibly Contour as well.

I must admit that a bit of me is coming round to the idea of going, if only to look at gear. On the other hand, I'm absolutely and completely flat out for the foreseable. What to do, what to do ....

EDIT: looking at the exhibitor's lists, no Frosts, Contour or Justin Baker, so looks like I can have a lie-in on sunday .

[Barry]

Time for some more pictures.

Before I do though, let me explain that I personally feel as though we've got a way to go on the front, although I was pleasantly surprised when I looked at the pictures today, after working on the actual car for a long day yesterday. It's a wood-for-the-trees thing I think.

Anyway, here's what we've been up to. You'll notice half a 'bonnet', and we're hoping that someone can help us with a bit of Photoshop if possible, so that we can get an idea of what the front will look like.

NOTE TO Photoshoppers: the halfway point at the rear (scuttle) end of the 'bonnet' is just about right, but the front (I noticed as I was leaving), is actually just off to the right. Therefore the actual centreline is back into the paper by about 1 inch or so.

Lets kick off with those, I'll use pretty large images by forum standards, as we're keen to get the full impression up here. We're not looking for all of these to be mirrored, but if someone could pick on or two, that would be brilliant!

[Barry]

Different angles:

















Gives a flavour anyway.

Opinions welcomed, particularly as I'm not too sure at the moment (although I've got some possible alternative ideas up my sleeve).

[Gary71]

Here's one:



Rest to follow

[Gary71]

Think it looks fantastic by the way!

[Bootsy]

Yes, fantastic. Love it

[defianty]

Brilliant! Looks fantastic! MOT next week then

Great work Barry, those lines look perfect.

[Lightweight_911]

Looks great - the lines look perfect to me.

[Barry]

Thank you Gary! Very good of you. It was so convincing it took me a moment to realise you'd done it. Doh!

Thank for the comments so far, I guess my overall thought / worry is that we might be heading for a 'flying saucer' look to the front.

I was considering the merits of bringing the 'wings' in some more, not higher particularly, just broader.

I know we're considering a bonnet badge of some sort, but otherwise there won't be much to break up that front end. Of course, if we were gong for an actual bonnet, rather than clamshell, the bonnet lines would break up the front nicely.

Anyway, I might be jumping the gun somewhat, as Steve's not seen it with a front end yet . It's O.K. though, I do have permission to post the pics.

The two views I like most are the low down front 3/4 and the rear 3/4, also from low down.

[911hillclimber]

Fab work and Gary's addition is VERY convincing!

However, at a risk of being a skunk at the party...I'm personally not so sure.

It's when you say 'looking like a flying saucer' I agree its off that way. Must be the number plate/grill at the front that off-sets me a bit?

Maybe some good 4'' dia driving lights down in the valance, frenched-in deeply below the swage line (which i like a lot), or just indicators will sort it but there is a something not right to my mind (hope I'm not offending, just being honest)
Maybe a light/thin bumper strip would lift the detail (shade of Lotus Elan), and/or maybe the lower valance needs stepping-back 20mm or so?

Is it a bit too '904'?

Not much help just critisizing so sorry as I've little to offer as an alternative thought, bit weak of me.

Time to sleep on it and look again?

As you stand and stare at it from the kerbside so-to-speak, how does it look? The deep low down shots can be missleading maybe?

To the Show Barry:
Lots of big and small English wheels but all fabricated construction. Having said that they certainly could do the job from what I saw demo'd.

[KS]

Fabulous work!

My only concern from the beginning is that this is all looking a little bit too modern considering the car's roots, which are essentially 1960–61 homebuilt. I, too, think it's a little too '904'. But what do i know?

On the mater of the front wings, I agree with you Barry – I think they need to be broadened to help break up the expanse of the 'bonnet' area.

BUT, great work!

[steve wright]

hey. unfortunately working all weekend so I've not seen the car in the flesh (or should that be paper) but I love it. You do get a "flying saucer" impression from the photos but I wonder if that won't be broken up with a bonnet badge and rectangular driving lights in the front lower part of the valance (aka Ferrari 250LM style) which I'm planning to add. I think the air intake in the lower part of the valance could do with being wider (probably 2 inches either side) looking at how that works when photoshopped. Just looking at the photos I wonder if the lower corner of the valance needs to be less square (i.e. the radius tightened when looking at it from above) to make the front slightly less clamshell looking or alternatively make the nose slightly longer so it reduces the clamshell look that way. It's odd doing this over the forum - this is usually the refinement Barry & I do over a cup of tea on a Saturday or Wed when I'm up at the workshop, but it gives an insight into the the challenge, and the amount of work Barry is putting into this. To be honest though Barry, all this commentary might be irrelevant because it could be perfect! And if I saw the car for sale and it looked half as good as it does in the paper and wire I would still go "wow" and have laid out notes to buy it. I think you're worrying too much

I reckon we should leave it for a week or so Barry and then wheel it outside into the sunshine. maybe even paint it in grey primer and then take it for a drive, although I'm not sure how long the paper would stand up to the battering of airflow

please keep the views coming everyone - I appreciate honest input irrespective of positive or negative as it's helps develop thinking and crystalize views.

[Barry]

Fab work and Gary's addition is VERY convincing!

However, at a risk of being a skunk at the party...I'm personally not so sure.

It's when you say 'looking like a flying saucer' I agree its off that way. Must be the number plate/grill at the front that off-sets me a bit?

Maybe some good 4'' dia driving lights down in the valance, frenched-in deeply below the swage line (which i like a lot), or just indicators will sort it but there is a something not right to my mind (hope I'm not offending, just being honest)
Maybe a light/thin bumper strip would lift the detail (shade of Lotus Elan), and/or maybe the lower valance needs stepping-back 20mm or so?

Is it a bit too '904'?

Not much help just critisizing so sorry as I've little to offer as an alternative thought, bit weak of me.

Time to sleep on it and look again?

As you stand and stare at it from the kerbside so-to-speak, how does it look? The deep low down shots can be missleading maybe?

To the Show Barry:
Lots of big and small English wheels but all fabricated construction. Having said that they certainly could do the job from what I saw demo'd.

All of your comments are, I suspect, spot on Graham. I don't think that having a flavour of 904 is in itself a huge problem. We've always been working on the thoery that David would have been looking forward, rather than back. Having said that, Steve has always been keen to underline that he didn't want to end up with a baby 904. On the other hand, there are simply a lot of elements of the early '60's that do indeed have 904'ish features: kamm tails, faired headlights, flatish bonnets, slightly less bulbous than 1950's front ends etc. Therefore it's inevitable that we'll end up with some 904 flavour, but hopefully with contributions from other marques and models.

My slight concern is that 904 or not, we're heading for a large, flatish expanse of 'bonnet'. Your comment about the low camera angle is especially valid: I suspect that the reason it looks so much better from down there is that wide roof. At those angles the roof looks smaller.

The bottom line is the roof is sacred. If we ourselves had put it on, I would now be calling to section it. As it is, it's a feature that's a huge part of the car, and therefore part of it's character. I see it as our job now to come up with a front end that doesn't get pulled too much by the roof dimensions, and which compliments it, but is not dominated by it. Tricky stuff.

The main improvement is simply that there is now a front end of sorts on there. As I've found with the front arch area, once you've got a starting point, you can then overlay alternatives without overly disturbing the original attempt. If it ain't right, it can come back off without going right back to square one.

My gut feel is that if we get a shape that really works well without any badges / lights / grills helping it, it'll only get better. If we end up relying on them to get us out of a hole, we're going to end up in trouble.

As it happens, I've already advised Steve that I won't be up there for a week or two for various reasons, which is why I was so keen to reach this stage before my 'break'. From my point of view, it would be lovely to finalise the shape before the Christmas break, and then we can start to think about going onto the actual buck (although I'm hoping to use a few elements of the above, much of it will have to be remade / finessed / reinforced etc etc, much of it in wood to augment the wire).

[Barry]

hey. unfortunately working all weekend so I've not seen the car in the flesh (or should that be paper) but I love it. You do get a "flying saucer" impression from the photos but I wonder if that won't be broken up with a bonnet badge and rectangular driving lights in the front lower part of the valance (aka Ferrari 250LM style) which I'm planning to add. I think the air intake in the lower part of the valance could do with being wider (probably 2 inches either side) looking at how that works when photoshopped. Just looking at the photos I wonder if the lower corner of the valance needs to be less square (i.e. the radius tightened when looking at it from above) to make the front slightly less clamshell looking or alternatively make the nose slightly longer so it reduces the clamshell look that way. It's odd doing this over the forum - this is usually the refinement Barry & I do over a cup of tea on a Saturday or Wed when I'm up at the workshop, but it gives an insight into the the challenge, and the amount of work Barry is putting into this. To be honest though Barry, all this commentary might be irrelevant because it could be perfect! And if I saw the car for sale and it looked half as good as it does in the paper and wire I would still go "wow" and have laid out notes to buy it. I think you're worrying too much

I reckon we should leave it for a week or so Barry and then wheel it outside into the sunshine. maybe even paint it in grey primer and then take it for a drive, although I'm not sure how long the paper would stand up to the battering of airflow

please keep the views coming everyone - I appreciate honest input irrespective of positive or negative as it's helps develop thinking and crystalize views.

Too right, we'd much rather get positives, negatives and (hopefully) suggestions now, rather than when it's in metal .

As for worrying too much: it's my job . I'd rather worry and worry and worry at it now, and go through a process that results in absolutely the very best final design destination that we possibly can, however difficult the process might seem. I have a terror of finishing the car and realising we've made a terrible error in the shape of the thing.

On the other hand, imagine if it comes out right, and that it's something that people really love the look of, wherever it goes, and that you, Steve, are proud to show off. I think that's something well worth striving for.

Funnily enough, I'm pretty relaxed about the actual build: there are elements that I know will be tricky, but on the whole I'm much more concerned about resolving the initial look of the wire buck.

[Barry]

Looking at it again, it's interesting just to put your hand / piece paper over the lower part of that front view: the 'bonnet' still looks too wide in my view.

So forum chums:

Do we think that the front arches could go deeper into the bonnet?

Do we think that the front should have more of a curve to it (if you were looking from overhead it was more banana curve than cucumber curve ( ))? Or even more curve, but don't forget if we do that, the bonnet is getting longer and longer, which means the clamshell gets less and less practical / attractive.

What do we think of the height of the front bodywork generally?

What do we think of the front arch / wing height?

What do we think of the actual front wheel arch lip height compared to the tyre? My own thought it that when you look at racing cars of the period, the tyre is nearer the outer edge of the wing, but the wing clears higher over the top of the tyre. I.e when you look down from above, would a period car have the tyre nearly showing, and would you be able to put a finger or a hand in between the top of the tyre and the arch lip?

Are there any cars out there which are doing this area better (with similar dimensions, and from 1959/60 >)?

I'm not overly concerned about 'final' details about lights, grills etc, as generally they will not affect the overall shape of the thing, other than the rear engine vent, which we both rather like (Steve's design!), although we've realised that they will need to be rather larger to do the job. Which is a good thing I suspect, as they are quite an aggresive feature.

Perhaps that's a problem with the front at the moment: not enough GGRRRRRR! On the other hand, it's not a 4 litre firebreather anyway.

My head's spinning: time for a lie down I think .

Looking forward to feedback and ideas: feel free, particularly with suggestions, we won't be offended .