1/4 scale model feedback

[sickgrin]

Just my 2 cents, so take this with a grain of salt...

Unfortunately, aside from Olmos's design (and I'm not sold on the front-end) all of the cars are very forgettable. I keep hearing that 'you have to see the designs in person' and 'it's different in full-scale' or 'we need clearer pictures', etc... I don't buy it. If I showed you a crappy picture of a 1/4 scale Ferrari 458 in gray primer, you'd still feel the emotion of that car. And that's just it, aside from Rodney's concept (love it or hate it), these cars don't really convey any emotion.

To take my own opinion out of the mix, I did a little experiment. I showed each of the entries in 1/4 scale along with their original renderings (as well as Vman's un-submitted concept) around the office. Then I asked which car, if any, they'd be willing to buy. Hands down, almost everyone picked Vman's un-submitted design, with Olmos's trailing in second. People just feel something when they look at them.

In my opinion, that's what f5 needs to capture. If you can take someone who knows nothing about the 818 and make them want to throw their money down just by looking at a picture of it, you've got it right. Until then, no matter how amazing the 818 is otherwise... as far as most people will be concerned, it'll just be another car.

Vman's design thread:
http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/showt...Design-Project

[Hiryu]

When Mike lowered the front end, he opened up a bag of worms which includes people parking by braille and sliding up your hood, plus a few other real life issues, mostly Urban, not Suburban. Needless to say, if you want a good city car, buy a Smart car, this is a country road or track sort of car.

Actually, I should have actually said what I did on my photoshop (it has since been edited)...all I was doing was not lowering the nose, but pulling the bottom of the air-dam back. The new angle is what hides a lot of the front intakes. Granted, it opens up the option of also lowering the nose while keeping the same size intakes as the original model.

As for the approach angle, it sounds like a lot of people might be using this as a daily driver, so I thought anything that might help this car be a better DD would help. The hard-core tracksters can always add big splitters, etc.

Mike

[xabier]

kach, I could try and photoshop the images so that they all have the same colour, but I don´t think the photos that are already posted are the best ones for that, if you want I could photoshop the ones that are about to be released, taking the ones from similar angles so that they are as similar as possible.

By the way, great presentation, I watched it live and although english is not my native language I understood quite a lot! Great job guys!

[VTX]

Separated at Birth?
Attachment 5494 Steve McQueen's Jaguar XKSS

Attachment 5495 Olmos Blue car as roadster
click on photos

I have to admit that, although I hate the blue Olmos design, that white roadster version looks a LOT better. There's still something I just don't like about the front oval shaped grill though, and the little silver (brake ducts?) look tacky. If the oval opening were changed and the brake ducts were integrated into the front body molding I think I might do a complete 180 on my feeling about the design.

[16g-95gsx]

I have to admit that, although I hate the blue Olmos design, that white roadster version looks a LOT better. There's still something I just don't like about the front oval shaped grill though, and the little silver (brake ducts?) look tacky. If the oval opening were changed and the brake ducts were integrated into the front body molding I think I might do a complete 180 on my feeling about the design.

I agree completely, the front end needs to be paint matched, the rectangle ducts look tacky to me but all around it looks decent. I really was not a fan of the original drawing but the model looks far better than I would have thought. I really like the way the black roof flows into the glass and makes it look very unique. I really do not like the images where it has decal work on the sides, I think that heavily "cheeses" up the car.

[16g-95gsx]

Something else that I wanted to comment on in regards to these designs, please consider adding hood vents for the radiator similar to a gt40 or noble m12. Without adequate venting you are going to create a large pressurized zone that will only create lift at high speeds. With a mid engined design like this you can easily solve this issue and really add to the look of the car IMO. I think a vent like this on Xavier's design as well as the black car would really compliment the look greatly. I also feel that the "arch", which I assume hides a roll bar on Xavier's design really misses the mark and would be better replaced by two roll hoops behind each seat. I feel that it would drastically change the design, and I really don't see that hoop being conducive to a targa top in that form anyway.

[vozproto]

Overall I would say that the FFR design variant is the best comprehensive model that takes into account all the characteristics that I alove, that front end does need to change.

JKF did a quick sketchover of one option earlier in this thread.

Vman posted his incomplete and non-submitted ideas here.
http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/showt...ll=1#post37491

End of the day, although I understand the matching of hard lines between the front and back, I think the front hood ridge lines need some tweaking because THAT is likely where much of the "MR look" comes from. And maybe play with headlights that mimic the lines of the car a bit more. The current ones just dont seem to jive.

[jkf]

JKF did a quick sketchover of one option earlier in this thread.

...

And maybe play with headlights that mimic the lines of the car a bit more. The current ones just dont seem to jive.

That was a repost of kach22i's treatment from an older thread.

I agree that from what we've seen so far the headlight treatment is the only thing I really don't like abt. Jim's design -- kach22i's hood/fender lines are also real nice though.

[kach22i]

This is just an attempt to take color out of the equation, and I flipped them to the same direction, which I thought might help us compare apples to apples.

X's

O's

N's

J's

J&K's

X&K's


EDIT-1: My first impression is that I like O's, it really pops. In fact I'd like to see O's front to get the same amount of time, attention, and multiple redo's by various artists which X's and J's designs have received by myself and others.

I did not expect this to be the result, but it's just my initial response, I need to let this stew a while before I commit. I also still like what I did to Jim's earlier effort, maybe that deserves to be redone with more care too. To my eyes, it's the only design which clearly looks mid-engined.

[kach22i]

I also feel that the "arch", which I assume hides a roll bar on Xavier's design really misses the mark and would be better replaced by two roll hoops behind each seat.

I have to agree that there is something odd about that arch. I don't recall that being part of his original design, but I also do not recall a rear 3/4 view either, meaning this was perhaps a well hid weak spot. Hard to hide stuff in model form with "best angles" and all. More angles should clarify if this is the problem we fear it is. More photos are required, wish I could see the models in person.

[3000gttom]

yea, in xabiers picture the top arch was actually flat, dont know why they arched it but it looks better flat, i also feel like they made the front vents bigger than the original design, they should have done a laser scan for all of them

[wooward]

I also feel that the "arch", which I assume hides a roll bar on Xavier's design really misses the mark and would be better replaced by two roll hoops behind each seat. I feel that it would drastically change the design, and I really don't see that hoop being conducive to a targa top in that form anyway.

I agree with this entirely. I like Xabier's design but that "arch" thing really puts me off. So much that I don't think I'd buy it. If it was two roll hoops, then I believe it would look so much better and would once again be back on the table to order.

[VTX]

Here's a quick and dirty photoshop of the front of O's car. Not sure if it's there yet or not, but I thought I'd throw something out there.

olmosmod1.jpg

[crackedcornish]

I have to agree that there is something odd about that arch. I don't recall that being part of his original design, but I also do not recall a rear 3/4 view either, meaning this was perhaps a well hid weak spot. Hard to hide stuff in model form with "best angles" and all. More angles should clarify if this is the problem we fear it is. More photos are required, wish I could see the models in person.

that "bar' was flatter and went to the outside edge of the headrest fairings in the drawings unlike on the model

16g: I recall reading in another thread that for track use you can't use the double hoop style bars

[wooward]

Dual Hoop > Arch

[wooward]

I recall reading in another thread that for track use you can't use the double hoop style bars

Since I want to build the street version, I'm ok with it not being for track use. But that's just me and I'm sure others here want a dual use car.

[crackedcornish]

Dual Hoop > Arch

I agree for a street car the dual hoops look better...especially without those stupid headrest fairings

[D2W]

First of all I want to say what a great job with the webcast. Loved it!

After mulling over what I saw and heard for a couple of days here are my thoughts.

As far as which model to release first I think it has to be the street roadster. It will be the best seller, returning some initial investment capital to FFR. It will still garner a lot of press if it delivers on all the promises which I know it will. And lastly it will be super easy to change it into a track car. The Xabier R model that Dave liked so well was just the normal car lowered, short windshield and a spoiler added, and a great paint job. Very similiar to the Koni GTM just built. It looks like a race car but its not that different from a regular GTM. Make the windshield removable and the possibility of adding a full cage and you are there. The suspension and brake technology is also ready.

In regards to the bodies I have to say that I was disappointed in the fact that the models they showed us may not be able to be built as is. If what Beerbaron said was true the Blue car (Olmos'), and the red car (Xabier's) need to be changed. This could totally change my opinion of what I like the best, making it hard to pick a design to go further on. I don't understand why the models weren't changed to the proper wheelbase/track and anything else needed to be more production ready. Why show us something we can't have? It would be nice if Dave would comment on this.

1) Xabier's design is my #1 at this point. The car has great lines, looks good but not too over the top. It looks Targa ready and the Targa bar that some don't like would do the best job of blending in with the roll bar which will go all the way across. I would like to see a level side view to be able to see front to back curve and how much of a rear spoiler there is. I would like the spoiler to be a bit bigger, like an elise. Overall a winner with probably the most mass market appeal.

2) Olmos' design is totally over the top and that's what I like about it the most, and what makes it my #2. It's a love it or hate it design so it probably doesn't have the mass market appeal of Xabier's. I would like to see the front end redesigned without the rectangular brake ducts, and with the original projector headlights. It would also be nice to incorporate some of the design elements from his roadster design like the convex hood. I also liked the grill opening better on the roadster version. I really love this design but can't commit to it until I see how changing the rear track affects the flow (does it really need to come in 6" per side?), and tweaking the front end makes it look. This car has the potential to set my hair on fire, and its the one I would buy if these things are fixed. (Edit: VTX I love what you did with the photoshop of the roadster front end. Makes it much better.)

3) The black car looks better in 3d than it looked as a drawing. However it just doesn't do anything for me. It looks too much like a bland sportscar for the masses from one of the major automakers. It should be the next S200, not the next FFR. I would not buy this car.

4) Jim's car has lots of problems to my eye. While the rear end looks ok, the front does not flow with it at all. Some of the suggestions about improvement to the front might improve it but its too hard to tell right now. I didn't mind the scoops like a lot of others, but the rear humps are terrible. They won't work with the roll bar, or a top unless it is one that covers them up. Someone else said it looked like a car designed by a tech guy. I think this really summed it up, Jim is an engineer not an artist and the design just doesn't have any soul.

[kach22i]

that "bar' was flatter and went to the outside edge of the headrest fairings in the drawings unlike on the model.....

The rear view you posted looks fine, it's just a targa bar with a slight arc.

We will have to wait for better picture of the red model, the one we have looks very inaccurate in that area.

I also agree with comments that the front openings may have been made too large on the model.

Here's a quick and dirty photoshop of the front of O's car. Not sure if it's there yet or not, but I thought I'd throw something out there.

Dang, that's looking good.

4) Jim's car has lots of problems to my eye................

I think we are looking at a pre-production mule, seeing how far they can go before they muck it up. It's mucked up, now we know they went to far, and need to come up with a production method for hanging a door flush both leading edge and aft.

I also think those overly creased headlight surrounds are an experiment to counter the flush ones used on the GTM. Again they found out how much is too much, at least I hope they read it that way.

[crackedcornish]

what would you guys think of using two circles, with one being larger than the other, per side as brake duct holes on X's car...sort of mimicking the tail light configuration

[dclin]

Here's a quick and dirty photoshop of the front of O's car. Not sure if it's there yet or not, but I thought I'd throw something out there.

olmosmod1.jpg

I REALLY, REALLY like that! I move to modify Olmo's design (with apologies to the original artist) with something like VTX's front end (keep the new shape, but pull the entire leading edge back up just a tad and I think its there) !

*edit* whoops, posted w/o quote

[GUNS]

Here's a quick and dirty photoshop of the front of O's car. Not sure if it's there yet or not, but I thought I'd throw something out there.

olmosmod1.jpg

That is a step in the right direction! It looks much better with the front area smaller. I'm not sure how I feel about the lights, but overall it's much improved. I'd like to see his original design with the same treatment.

[adesilva]

that is a bit of a step in the right direction but I still just dont feel that design goes with a wrx motor.. I look at that and expect it to have a big V8 and be more of an old school muscle car that cant turn.. not a more nimble turbo 4 cylinder lol I feel like I would see one drive by and first thought would be that it sounded terrible just because it didnt sound like what I would expect from how it looks.

[GUNS]

that is a bit of a step in the right direction but I still just dont feel that design goes with a wrx motor.. I look at that and expect it to have a big V8 and be more of an old school muscle car that cant turn.. not a more nimble turbo 4 cylinder lol I feel like I would see one drive by and first thought would be that it sounded terrible just because it didnt sound like what I would expect from how it looks.

I completely disagree with you. The car is actually pretty small, probably similar to an elise. To me It looks very nimble with short overhangs. If it was a big car I could see your point, but it's not.

[VTX]

I completely disagree with you. The car is actually pretty small, probably similar to an elise. To me It looks very nimble with short overhangs. If it was a big car I could see your point, but it's not.

I think part of the thing he might be seeing is the tall hood. I think if it actually was lower so that it didn't "bubble up" in the middle that would give it a less bulky look up front. I just wasn't able to photoshop that in in the limited time I spent on it. Maybe someone else can do some further modifications? It also needs a vent or something on the hood to release some of the pressure build up that's going to happen from the front intake.

I also agree that the headlights should be changed. I have some ideas and will work on them when/if I get some time. Hopefully some other people will do some photoshops and add their input.

[adesilva]

You may have a point there. Sometimes it is difficult to remember the actual size of the car when only looking at concept drawings.

Makes me wish we could look at completely finished cars and decide which we like at that point but we all know thats not going to happen lol I think that the Elise and Exige are very sexy vehicles but for some reason dont feel that same way about that design. I suppose it really is a love or hate model. Who knows in time it may grow on me more.. I know I certainly dont hate it now as much as I did when it first won second place.

[D2W]

One thing I was surprised at was how much better Jim's full size mock-up looked over the model. I wouldn't give the model a second glance, but the full size had some interesting features. I wonder what different impressions I would have of the others if they were full size?

[Flamshackle]

One thing I was surprised at was how much better Jim's full size mock-up looked over the model. I wouldn't give the model a second glance, but the full size had some interesting features. I wonder what different impressions I would have of the others if they were full size?

This is why we need photoshop images of the models at 'real life angles'. The models viewed from a helecopter will look very different to at street level.

PLEASE FFR UPLOAD SOME HIGH QUALITY REAL LIFE ANGLES?

[bbjones121]

Is it just me or is the blue car the only one that shows some exotic curves? I think separate headrest loops are a must with fairings out back. Without the fairing, they look like a Miata or MR2 body kit. I think every car except the blue one would have people guessing Miata, Celica, MR2, or S2000. This is my impression from models, hopefully they create a different impression up close. Sleek curves or lines, and large vents scream exotic. Flat sides, fake vents or too many, and no headrest fairings mutter body kit.

I think they would be a lot better if they where not so flattened in the models and held the curves from the design sketches. The blue one seems to be the only model that held the dynamics in shape from the sketches.

[sub322]

More pictures and different angles would be really nice and tag the designers name with the pictures.

[Michael Lye]

I'm glad to see the 818 models are getting so much discussion going. I know Dave, Jim and crew are probably pretty busy getting ready for SEMA - I think I heard that some of the stuff they're taking is leaving Wareham today - so I don't expect we'll hear much from Dave until afterwards. In the meantime, I really enjoyed seeing all the models in person on Saturday (as well as the full-size version of Jim's.) So here are just a few thoughts/replies to some of the posts. I have no inside knowledge but Saturday was just a quick preview and I expect that more and clearer photos will be forthcoming. It's really hard to get a clear impression from Ustream and the photos that are out there so far. So be patient (is that possible!?) on that front and I'm pretty sure you'll get to see better views of the models. At the very least I'll be taking some hi-rez images of Xabier's so the RISD group can have some copies for their portfolios. But none of that will happen until after SEMA, and probably after a bit of a break for FFR.

I won't speak to the modeling on the other designs but will be happy to answer questions about the one the RISD team worked on. Regarding the "arch" or rollbar cover. This was something we discussed with FFR quite a bit. The original design that Xabier did had an interesting but very difficult to make detail where the arch connected to the fairings. The rear view posted earlier shows that fairly clearly. So in this one area we definitely deviated from the renderings. The curve of the arch actually matches the renderings almost perfectly - it's no more curved on top than what Xabier drew. So Xabier's is not flatter but it is quite a bit thinner, which was another area of concern. In that same rear view, if you scale the thickness of the "arch" or "targa bar," it leaves about enough thickness for a 1" or less rollbar. It was felt that we should cover the rollbar which necessitated thickening that area up substantially. So that's why it looks like it does. The way it was modeled, that center section could be removed to show the fairings without the arch, though I don't know how the paint will look under there. Maybe we'll get some pictures without it at some point.

In general FFR wanted us to stay as faithful as possible to Xabier's renderings. And in most other respects we were very accurate. The front openings are as close as we could get to what was rendered while still making it work in 3D. There are a few other smaller discrepancies but nothing as big as the rollbar housing. One area that's also a bit different is the rear quarters. There are some subtle differences in the surfaces and lines between the left and right but since you can't see both simultaneously the differences don't really jump out at you. But it was an opportunity to try a slightly different interpretation in that area.

One small point on the photos, remember that it's not just the viewpoint that affects your perception of the form, the focal length of the lens can make a big difference as well. Some of the hi-rez shots I took on Saturday used a wider angle lens than others and can really change the feeling of the car. So it's shame that all of you couldn't make it to see the models in person. It's really the only way to see them. But it's exciting to see the process and the potential for the 818 as it goes through development.

Michael

[kach22i]

So Xabier's is not flatter but it is quite a bit thinner, which was another area of concern. In that same rear view, if you scale the thickness of the "arch" or "targa bar," it leaves about enough thickness for a 1" or less rollbar. It was felt that we should cover the rollbar which necessitated thickening that area up substantially.

Maybe it's just my opinion, and I was not there, but I would have built it as illustrated and left the technical solutions to FFR. Who knows, maybe they would have ponied up for a custom shaped aerofoil steel section which doubles as a roll bar. The extra thickness is not a killer, thank you for the detailed explanation.

I think a lot of us are liking O's design because it has crisp sharp edges. So did X's design in his renderings, the model.......not so much.

If the 1/4 scale models get a make over, I'd like to see some of X's crispness restored (the hind quarter's have been jelly beaned).

[crackedcornish]

I'm glad to see the 818 models are getting so much discussion going. I know Dave, Jim and crew are probably pretty busy getting ready for SEMA - I think I heard that some of the stuff they're taking is leaving Wareham today - so I don't expect we'll hear much from Dave until afterwards. In the meantime, I really enjoyed seeing all the models in person on Saturday (as well as the full-size version of Jim's.) So here are just a few thoughts/replies to some of the posts. I have no inside knowledge but Saturday was just a quick preview and I expect that more and clearer photos will be forthcoming. It's really hard to get a clear impression from Ustream and the photos that are out there so far. So be patient (is that possible!?) on that front and I'm pretty sure you'll get to see better views of the models. At the very least I'll be taking some hi-rez images of Xabier's so the RISD group can have some copies for their portfolios. But none of that will happen until after SEMA, and probably after a bit of a break for FFR.

I won't speak to the modeling on the other designs but will be happy to answer questions about the one the RISD team worked on. Regarding the "arch" or rollbar cover. This was something we discussed with FFR quite a bit. The original design that Xabier did had an interesting but very difficult to make detail where the arch connected to the fairings. The rear view posted earlier shows that fairly clearly. So in this one area we definitely deviated from the renderings. The curve of the arch actually matches the renderings almost perfectly - it's no more curved on top than what Xabier drew. So Xabier's is not flatter but it is quite a bit thinner, which was another area of concern. In that same rear view, if you scale the thickness of the "arch" or "targa bar," it leaves about enough thickness for a 1" or less rollbar. It was felt that we should cover the rollbar which necessitated thickening that area up substantially. So that's why it looks like it does. The way it was modeled, that center section could be removed to show the fairings without the arch, though I don't know how the paint will look under there. Maybe we'll get some pictures without it at some point.

In general FFR wanted us to stay as faithful as possible to Xabier's renderings. And in most other respects we were very accurate. The front openings are as close as we could get to what was rendered while still making it work in 3D. There are a few other smaller discrepancies but nothing as big as the rollbar housing. One area that's also a bit different is the rear quarters. There are some subtle differences in the surfaces and lines between the left and right but since you can't see both simultaneously the differences don't really jump out at you. But it was an opportunity to try a slightly different interpretation in that area.

One small point on the photos, remember that it's not just the viewpoint that affects your perception of the form, the focal length of the lens can make a big difference as well. Some of the hi-rez shots I took on Saturday used a wider angle lens than others and can really change the feeling of the car. So it's shame that all of you couldn't make it to see the models in person. It's really the only way to see them. But it's exciting to see the process and the potential for the 818 as it goes through development.

Michael

Michael, do you think that if the roll bar cover had an elliptical cross section so the edges appeared to be smaller/thinner, and the underside of the arch was painted black, we could have the necessary thicker cover, with the illusion of looking thinner (and then it could be made longer and truer to the original drawings)?

[Dave Smith]

Remaining silent for these last few days (to allow honest and direct feedback) has been exceptionally difficult. While we are loading up for SEMA I have a few thoughts.

The bottom line is that the car HAS to light your hair on fire, and while the cars all look better in person (I will never forget the crow I ate when I saw pics of the Ferrari 599 and dissed it as ugly and wimpy only to later see it in real life and be BLOWN away-hair on fire, with it's muscular stance and perfect coupe lines), the bottom line is that the car HAS to render a visceral reaction to all who see it.

The GTM and Coupe and Mk4 and Hot Rod ALL have a only few detractors and each enjoy a HUGE number of fans due in part to great looks. Each day I watch as guys literally melt when they walk thru our doors and see the cars. The 818 HAS to join those ranks and even without perfect photos, we are simply not there. period.

I am going to head out to SEMA and consider very carefully the correct path forward on design. We'll probably take one of the four models (probably Jim's) to the show as a potential. Based on the feedback I dont want to take al four models as I trust the feedback from our core group.

The car has to be a Ferrari-level/K1-attack on steroids type car. A beautiful shape that will set FFR higher than everything we've done before. The car HAS to deliver to a guy who has the skill to build his/her own car, a look and feel that is truly exceptional. This may take more money than time as we are so far along in development and so capable on the solid modeling side. I personally think Jims hybrid design can morph into a much more aggressive car as the others can change in ways that can make them look better. I know Micjael Lye at RISD is DYING to get his teams hands untied and onto Xabiers car as baseline!

Going forward I think some real good photos of each, perhaps asking the community to help modify or smooth out some of the objections in each (or pump 'roids into the cars)... Still I am very very grateful for the feedback and can only promise you guys one thing... The car will light your hair on fire or we won't make it. I'll consider paths and suggestions, but wont make any decisons till after SEMA. The roadster is where I want to spend my launch money, followed by track and mpg model, but that isnt set in cement.

Dave

[bbjones121]

I feel very confident that the final car will impress, after an honest, passionate assessment like that.

[slopoke]

I agree for a street car the dual hoops look better...especially without those stupid headrest fairings

I think this could be the car and its variants could fill the bill. Sorry Dave, but this car in coupe form, SCREAMS at me. It looks like it would be fun to drive on sunny days ( the roadster), the coupe could be the track car or an everyday driver ... maybe even the mpg car.... Just one mans visceral opinion.

[nickarub]

My vote from seeing the pod cast is Definatly the...
1) 1st place winner(black Car)- looks the sexiest,very exotic/expensive aston martin-ish. The tail lights look very modern.
2) the FFR fullscale model.(silver) it looks very sexy also. IDk if its because its full scale but yes it does look beautiful.

[bbjones121]

Usually the more exotic cars have the fairings. Porsche Boxster, no fairings. Porsche Carrera GT, headrest fairings. I think it would look lower end, cheaper without them.

[Michael Lye]

Maybe it's just my opinion, and I was not there, but I would have built it as illustrated and left the technical solutions to FFR. Who knows, maybe they would have ponied up for a custom shaped aerofoil steel section which doubles as a roll bar. The extra thickness is not a killer, thank you for the detailed explanation.

It was a tough call and I understand your position but it was what was decided with FFR at the time.

I think a lot of us are liking O's design because it has crisp sharp edges. So did X's design in his renderings, the model.......not so much.

If the 1/4 scale models get a make over, I'd like to see some of X's crispness restored (the hind quarter's have been jelly beaned).

That's really more an impression from the photos posted here than the reality. The model itself has more sharp edges and "crispness" than what I'm seeing in these images. The video and photos were taken in the FFR showroom and the lighting was less controlled than would be ideal for photos. So be assured that Xabier's concept was not "jelly beaned." I firmly believe jelly beans are for eating - not car bodies!

[kach22i]

Xabier's concept was not "jelly beaned."

Cool, good to hear.

This is one area in which the photo is blurry and does not help "first impressions".

I think this could be the car and its variants could fill the bill. Sorry Dave, but this car in coupe form, SCREAMS at me. It looks like it would be fun to drive on sunny days ( the roadster), the coupe could be the track car or an everyday driver ... maybe even the mpg car.... Just one mans visceral opinion.

This is one of the designs which strayed far from the template. As good as my imagination is I just could not see it maturing into a real car. I even tried some freehand sketching over it to transform it, but failed so bad I never posted it.