I believe that they must be part of some federal law. You can find them cost to coast and North to South. They also destroy your exhaust if you back in too far. And, what logic is there to use them in the handicap spots? Are they there to stop the wheelchairs or to trip up the blind?
My nose is now about 1.2" higher than the fronts of the side sails/rear front fender areas. It's high enough that in order to make a smooth transition, the rear hole in the outer fender attach bracket points will need washers to ease the vertical transition, rear-to-front, from the underside of the front side sail area to the underside of the nose.
OK, Here are some very preliminary pics of my fender modifications. I just glassed them on and rough sanded them. They will eventually get body filler and finish sanded, but these will give you an idea of where I am headed.
I paid attention to the pictures of well-done factory efforts that Craig posted and tried to minimize 3-plane intersections. I am pretty happy with the results, especially how the fender's hood line continues to the A-pillar break. It now looks like something I would not be ashamed to drive.
So I gotta ask. Having skimmed through this thread and seen some excellent response and helpful input, where is the section in the manual that addresses this fit up? I haven't built, nor do I have a manual, for the 818 so my reference is only what I've seen for the MKIV and Hotrod.
Mechie3 touched on the CAD issue earlier in the thread. If I could have a better manual than the printed manual I would put a 40" flatscreen in the garage, but all you gain is color pics with the CD.
Here's where I am going.
I have used several solid modeling and various 3D programs. I haven't used Solid Works so it either is junk or FFR is withholding useful information so people won't infringe on the design.
Why can't we have a few critical dimensions called out and a baseline point to measure/work from?
A couple videos on the electronic version of the manual?
A few more relevant pictorials of sequentially dependent steps vice having to look in 3 separate chapters?
Solid modeling is an extremely powerful tool that can produce extraordinary information for every facet of manufacturing.
Problem:
Hand laid fiberglass might be accurate +\- 1/4". Pictures with relevant dimensions and appropriate sequential dependencies called out might be helpful.
Wow you did a nice job there!! Looks like a supercar.
You had to make the hood really tiny close to the windshield but the fender looks awesome.
What mold type did you use to lay the fiberglass without dripping?
Frank
818 chassis #181 powered by a '93 VW VR6 Turbo GT3582R Go-karted Aug 5, 2016 - Then May 19+21, 2017
Tracked May 27/July 26, 2017 Build time before being driveable on Sep 27, 2019: over 6000h Build Completed Winter 2021
That does look really good. And mechie, Since you posted about how car companies try to avoid too many panels coming together at one spot, I can't stop looking at cars. Sure enough, I haven't seen a single one that has 3 panels at a point.
That does look really good. And mechie, Since you posted about how car companies try to avoid too many panels coming together at one spot, I can't stop looking at cars. Sure enough, I haven't seen a single one that has 3 panels at a point.
Too true! Maybe some of the exotics or antiques at the next cars and coffee will be an example.
FFR Build Status: Reset button hit
'03 Subaru Impreza eSi RHD...because Japan
That does look really good. And mechie, Since you posted about how car companies try to avoid too many panels coming together at one spot, I can't stop looking at cars. Sure enough, I haven't seen a single one that has 3 panels at a point.
HAHAHA! Craig certainly changed our lives, I'm doing the exact same thing!! I mean as you, not as Craig. lolll
90% of cars, trucks, pick-ups, SUVs I see all merge the fender with the A-pillar. Even those from decades ago, although less of them. Couple of exceptions are VW Eos and Kia Soul that merge with the hood. And funny enough, the sportier cars don't seem to merge the same way as the others, just like Craig predicted. The % is lower than 90% for those.
This guy's awesome.
Frank
818 chassis #181 powered by a '93 VW VR6 Turbo GT3582R Go-karted Aug 5, 2016 - Then May 19+21, 2017
Tracked May 27/July 26, 2017 Build time before being driveable on Sep 27, 2019: over 6000h Build Completed Winter 2021
#2- Now I'm looking at panel fitment just like you guys. Learn something new everyday!
Now my question is, since we all just learned that 3 points coming together is not quite bad (but isn't good), why did you extend the A pillar, fender and hood to meet at one point, as opposed to having the fender extend to both of the other 2?
Frank, no molds at all, just really basic 'glass techniques: First I cut off those points from the original A-pillar mod, reshaped them and epoxied them onto the fenders. Then, I placed the fender so that area was mostly horizontal and cut three pieces of highly conformable fiberglass (uscomposites style 7725) that were about 8" wider, front-to-rear, than I needed. I wet-out the whole area with my resin mix and just laid the cloth, one layer at a time, saturating each one. The extra 8" of dry cloth now hanging over the edge helps pull it down onto the curve. Then I just used my brush to periodically stipple that area till it starts to cure to make sure it stays on the rounded area. I also put a fourth layer of peel ply on to absorb excess resin and prep the surface for filler, but that step is not critical. On the thin vertical sides (in position) of the points that form the hood indentation, I just laid on 3 thin strips; that curve is too tight for even this cloth. The two areas of fiberglass just meet at this transition instead of being a continuous layup. Some ultimate strength is sacrificed but this area is not highly stressed.
Bill, that looks awesome! It looks finished vs a gaping hole that makes you say "what part did you forget?".
Originally Posted by erlihemi
I haven't used Solid Works so it either is junk or FFR is withholding useful information so people won't infringe on the design.
Why can't we have a few critical dimensions called out and a baseline point to measure/work from?
Problem:
Hand laid fiberglass might be accurate +\- 1/4".
Comments?
Solidworks is a great program. I design all of my parts with it (both Zero Decibel and my day job that has $3.6B revenue). FFR won't share CAD because of the lawsuit they had with Shelby many years ago. They're very protective of their files. I wouldn't suggest they share these files with the general public but sharing portions of them with vendor partners that sign an NDA would make it easier for vendors to make parts as well as potentially improve their market share.
You touched on part of the issue. If fiberglass is +/- 1/4" ,that's certainly an issue. A bigger one is that the molds used to make the parts are +/- random amounts. CAD is a powerful tool, but the parts are only as good as the manufacturing technique. When they made molds they eliminated the #1 benefit of CAD and it's ability to transfer designs to machine tools directly. Our parts have manufacturing tolerances plus the addition of the mold tolerances (which arguably were worse than the actual part/part tolerance).
Originally Posted by Frank818
HAHAHA! Craig certainly changed our lives, I'm doing the exact same thing!! I mean as you, not as Craig. lolll
90% of cars, trucks, pick-ups, SUVs I see all merge the fender with the A-pillar. Even those from decades ago, although less of them. Couple of exceptions are VW Eos and Kia Soul that merge with the hood. And funny enough, the sportier cars don't seem to merge the same way as the others, just like Craig predicted. The % is lower than 90% for those.
This guy's awesome.
Lol. One thing I like to do with things is figure out exactly why one is not like the other when they are very close, but not quite. Break it down and eventually it becomes evident. Start keeping a tally in your head until you go "aha!". I like to do it with music too. There are several bands where I love some of their middle career stuff but then at the end it's just different. It's still very much the artist and you'd recognize the music as being played by them, but just something is off. I like to try and figure out exactly what changed. Tempo? Average pitch? Complexity? Number of instruments?
Craig, to quote The Princess Bride, "you have a truly dizzying intellect!"
Originally Posted by Mechie3
Bill, that looks awesome! It looks finished vs a gaping hole that makes you say "what part did you forget?".
Solidworks is a great program. I design all of my parts with it (both Zero Decibel and my day job that has $3.6B revenue). FFR won't share CAD because of the lawsuit they had with Shelby many years ago. They're very protective of their files. I wouldn't suggest they share these files with the general public but sharing portions of them with vendor partners that sign an NDA would make it easier for vendors to make parts as well as potentially improve their market share.
You touched on part of the issue. If fiberglass is +/- 1/4" ,that's certainly an issue. A bigger one is that the molds used to make the parts are +/- random amounts. CAD is a powerful tool, but the parts are only as good as the manufacturing technique. When they made molds they eliminated the #1 benefit of CAD and it's ability to transfer designs to machine tools directly. Our parts have manufacturing tolerances plus the addition of the mold tolerances (which arguably were worse than the actual part/part tolerance).
Lol. One thing I like to do with things is figure out exactly why one is not like the other when they are very close, but not quite. Break it down and eventually it becomes evident. Start keeping a tally in your head until you go "aha!". I like to do it with music too. There are several bands where I love some of their middle career stuff but then at the end it's just different. It's still very much the artist and you'd recognize the music as being played by them, but just something is off. I like to try and figure out exactly what changed. Tempo? Average pitch? Complexity? Number of instruments?
mikeford, I'm not sure I understand your question. I extended the fender to get away from the factory's attempt at having 3 points in 3 dimensions meet in a single spot. The fender now meets at the A-pillar, and the hood meets at the A-pillar, but not in the same spot. The A-pillar is mostly back in it's original configuration with some added filler to raise the bottom end and a notch to visually mate with the angle of the hood. The pointy end of the hood will get glassed and filled to make a nicer transition with the A-pillar upon final fitment before paint.
mikeford, I'm not sure I understand your question. I extended the fender to get away from the factory's attempt at having 3 points in 3 dimensions meet in a single spot. The fender now meets at the A-pillar, and the hood meets at the A-pillar, but not in the same spot. The A-pillar is mostly back in it's original configuration with some added filler to raise the bottom end and a notch to visually mate with the angle of the hood. The pointy end of the hood will get glassed and filled to make a nicer transition with the A-pillar upon final fitment before paint.
What was trying to say is that it looks like you have 3 points coming together. It may be the pics. I was trying (and failed) to ask why you didn't lop off the point on the hood and extend the fender up to meet it. It'd look like the 370z pic above, but instead of the A pillar coming down to the hood, the fender would come up to both the hood and A pillar.
You don't need to though, since you don't have 3 things meeting at the same place.
I stand by my above statement of great save. It looks "Factory".
Has anyone talked to FFR about this I called them October 28th asked to talk to someone they just told me to send some pictures in an email 12 days no reply... I mean I feel FFR would maybe make things better by simply designing a patch panel kit for everyone to just DIY install themselves say sorry we messed up we will fix it in the revision mold but for all you other people with the old mold here is a patch panel fix kit or something...
I love all the ideas everyone has made to fix the issue. But rather then leaving everyone to make there own way to fix the problem. It would be nice if FFR could just own up and give us a way to make all our cars consistent or at least let that be an option?
I agree, redfogo, that FFR should offer a solution to this problem, either with a patch kit or at least instructions about how the gap can be reduced. It reflects poorly on FFR and us builders. But, last week was SEMA so they have been very busy, so be patient for a reply.
818S/C : Chassis #25 with 06 WRX 2.5 turbo, ABS, cruise, PS, A/C, Apple CarPlay, rear camera, power windows & locks, leather & other complexities. Sold 10/19 with 5,800 miles.
Mk3 Roadster #6228 4.6L, T45, IRS, PS, PB, ABS, Cruise, Koni's, 17" Halibrands, red w/ silver - 9K miles then sold @ Barrett-Jackson Jan 2011 (got back cash spent).
Their car at SEMA has the same "problem". I say "problem", because it's all relative. Their past responses all seem to indicate "there's no problem, that's how it's designed". We have an issue tracking program at work. When you close out issues you select things like "cannot reproduce", "fixed", or "as designed, no issue". Seems like FFR selected the last one. Bill's solution is the best one I've seen and a great example to follow. I'm just lucky he lives near me so I can pick up some of his skills and learn.
Mechie3, I apologize for baiting you a little, but, redfogo and Azpete made the point I was looking for. We have multiple issues occurring and it feels like growing pains vice "kids on CAD". I made a comment awhile back on a different post that it felt like the 33 was just practice for the 818 production. Mold shift, bad fuel tanks, the other issues everyone has experienced as a group, and now the release of the gen 3 Daytona coupe point to the productivity of solid modeling and a good fab shop driven by a few sharp individuals with a shortage of production types such as yourself that understand process and quality control. FFR is fast approaching that threshold of managing growth. At this stage they need to focus on production quality or risk reducing throughput. I designed so many new prototypes one year I tied up the test lab and the pilot line in a major facility for six months. I had to go play manufacturing engineer, purchasing manager and test engineer to keep it all moving. But as you pointed out we didn't use the as designed excuse, we made it better. To do that it required slowing down the next product release. Witness at least 3 major releases. 818 coupe, steel 33 and new gen 3. Hopefully this brings the capital to improve the production facility and quality, vice bury the facility with too many molds...
When I was working as an engineer, too many of the people I worked with felt that any thing they overlooked could be fixed in the field. These fixes amounted to rework far more than the sum of all of our salaries combined. The history of the automobile is filled with similar examples of short changing the engineering.
I do not hold F5 to any higher standards than what is reported on in this site and expect that what they make is the result of individuals working on an assembly line without QA. They are selling car parts that are both good and low price. That said, I also expect that as F5 starts building the 33 for sale as a completed car, they will have a vested interest in making improvements to the design and quality. If someone can convince F5 to start building the 818 as a completed car, then expect to see improvements made to the quality of the kit.
Mechie3, I apologize for baiting you a little, but, redfogo and Azpete made the point I was looking for.
I fully agree with AZpete and RedFogo. I don't think it's correct to mark it "as designed". The engineers I work with tend to look at that as a last resort and/or a cop out. Having minimal fiberglass/body work experience the fix that Bill did will be a challenge. Fixing it at the production level is much better for everyone involved.
As I contemplate how I can fix or improve my triangle gaps, I wonder if anyone took a close-up photo of the fender/hood/door/A pillar on the black 818 in the SEMA Koni booth. Was there an 818 in the FFR booth? Or, is there any good photo of the problem area fixed without fiberglass reconstruction? Like Craig, trying to copy Bill's fix would be a big challenge for me.
Last edited by AZPete; 11-10-2016 at 12:47 PM.
Reason: typo
818S/C : Chassis #25 with 06 WRX 2.5 turbo, ABS, cruise, PS, A/C, Apple CarPlay, rear camera, power windows & locks, leather & other complexities. Sold 10/19 with 5,800 miles.
Mk3 Roadster #6228 4.6L, T45, IRS, PS, PB, ABS, Cruise, Koni's, 17" Halibrands, red w/ silver - 9K miles then sold @ Barrett-Jackson Jan 2011 (got back cash spent).
The next picture is My car. I have done ZERO trimming to the door, fender, windshield or hood as you can see. I just carefully lined everything the best I could about a year ago so we could track it. Nothing rubs.
Bob
The next picture is My car. I have done ZERO trimming to the door, fender, windshield or hood as you can see. I just carefully lined everything the best I could about a year ago so we could track it. Nothing rubs.
Bob
Bob_n_Cincy yours is an S though? I think the sides are correct length for the S. The coupe just has to short of length on the side like the mold was not correct.
Bob, didn't you do something where teh fender meets the side sail?
Thermoformed panels would have been good as the molds would have been CNC'd most likely. I visited Bill today. He said he'd post more photos of the process. His in person explanation made more sense.
Bob, didn't you do something where teh fender meets the side sail?
Thermoformed panels would have been good as the molds would have been CNC'd most likely. I visited Bill today. He said he'd post more photos of the process. His in person explanation made more sense.
My side sail to fender doesn't line up well. I will have to extend my pontoons about 1/2" forward.
I believe FFR is using fiberglass mold s for most of the thermoformed formed parts they are making now. (like dashes, headlight buckets) I could be wrong.
Bob
Oh god Bob, that is not "not lining up well", it's not lining up at all!
Frank
818 chassis #181 powered by a '93 VW VR6 Turbo GT3582R Go-karted Aug 5, 2016 - Then May 19+21, 2017
Tracked May 27/July 26, 2017 Build time before being driveable on Sep 27, 2019: over 6000h Build Completed Winter 2021
Frank,
That was on purpose, I moved the whole body back to make room for my rear radiator.
Bob
lol, you funny guy. Got me on that one.
Frank
818 chassis #181 powered by a '93 VW VR6 Turbo GT3582R Go-karted Aug 5, 2016 - Then May 19+21, 2017
Tracked May 27/July 26, 2017 Build time before being driveable on Sep 27, 2019: over 6000h Build Completed Winter 2021
This is not just a problem with the coupe top but has been a subject of several threads about the gap in the 818S. I know I had the triangle gaps on my 818S before I upgraded to the 818C. Here's one thread about the 818S: http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/showt...aybe-the-doors
818S/C : Chassis #25 with 06 WRX 2.5 turbo, ABS, cruise, PS, A/C, Apple CarPlay, rear camera, power windows & locks, leather & other complexities. Sold 10/19 with 5,800 miles.
Mk3 Roadster #6228 4.6L, T45, IRS, PS, PB, ABS, Cruise, Koni's, 17" Halibrands, red w/ silver - 9K miles then sold @ Barrett-Jackson Jan 2011 (got back cash spent).
Thanks: 
Likes: 
Reply With Quote
nice job!
Originally Posted by turbomacncheese
Got me on that one.