GTDesigned: A Community Vision GT Project

We'll going to add a series of poll for 3 days, for now the layout

  • Total voters
    116
  • Poll closed .
@TacoParty the poll should be ready a couple of hours ago when a power outage struck -_- , for the cars you better ask them but i think everyone is pretty much ready (accept for the poll again... of course) let's see if i could stay awake for a couple more hours cause it's already 1 am here, if you don't hear anything from me in 1 hour then I've fell asleep and you got extra time for more sketching
 
Guys looks like I was defeated by sleepiness and I have to admit I'm a bit struggle handling things on my own anyone wants to help creating a better poll than before?

Man.. Do I such a let down for everyone
 
Here's a new quick design sketch, with some more flow. I hope it's not too late to make it to the poll.

newdesignsketch.jpg
 
TacoParty
Yeah I used some countach design cues, specifically the front window. The front wedge is a bit of BMW m1 and a bit of the RX500. Has anyone driven the new Infiniti VGT yet? That idea of different engines being tuned to different overlapping powercurves is exactly what my idea is based on. Drive it and imagine it was about 2-3 times as potent, and with an active system a bit like the VIVIZ, although mine is more meant to eliminate body roll in addition to Yaw correction.

Also @legacyMACHINE I worship scarbs btw, so awesome reference. But it's as scarbs says, wheelbase is really only relevant in the aero vs weight discussion, not in handling characteristics. I've built the aerodynamics around this wheelbase length (because i have more options than formula 1 allows in ground effects) while keeping weight as minimal as possible. the only real issue right now is it has a huge rear bias, and most of the downforce from the ground effects and from the wing is on the rear, giving it good handling of acceleration but its a bit prone to understeer ATM. My previous "stratos" design actually was much better balanced. That's why i had to put moving canards before the front wheels, in a desperate attempt to get some weight up there. And honestly that's why i made a system to recover energy from the front wheels to heat a coffee cup. I didn't want a ballast so I figured it might as well have some purpose.
Click to expand...

Weight distribution affects handling, a lot. And that article wasn't the best to use as it is mostly talking about F1 cars, which have longer wheelbases and much, much better aero. (Not just in ground effects either, because aero isn't just the underside of a car) in the Stratos, as your car was heavily based off (and would need to be a similar size to fit poll results, remember?) The wheelbase was so short to improve agility in a rally situation, and that's fine if you can handle it (hat tip to the guys who did the super long rally's in those things) but most above-average drivers with an experience in high powered road cars still find it tricky to push the car in the same way because of the overly snappy handling. And as I keep saying no matter what aero tricks you use it is still a Stratos, one which would need extra cooling (hence, drag from the vents) for the hybrid power train. Underbody aero isn't a god-send if the body isn't up to the task, and the Stratos isn't exactly a McLaren P1 in downforce levels.

As for your aero ideas, they work in theory but maybe not in reality. Nobody can be sure without CFD software.

Edit: I also love the fact you omitted both the stupid twin engine idea and the stupidly high power output in such a small car. Which were my main grievances which I said no amount of designers aerodynamics on a Stratos would fix either problem. I did also state they're just that, they are the thoughts of someone seeing the aero applied to existing cars (and for some reason thinking underbody aero alone would give F1 levels of downforce) and thinking they'll work wonders on a Stratos. Then when I gave the example of the 2013 Williams having terrible aero because it didn't work together, and was in fact faster when most of the aero-crap was removed, you mentioned active suspension being your next magical idea for handling a simply stupid power output for what is in essence a Stratos, with a swollen front to fit the terrible twin engine idea and the electrical system.

You missed the point of my original posts. you did make changes to the design but you're still pretending to be Adrian Newey and Gordan Murray's love child who can work wonders on such a small space but have in need to provide proof it'd work on this Bee-stung-Stratos.
 
Last edited:
legacyMACHINE
Weight distribution affects handling, a lot. And that article wasn't the best to use as it is mostly talking about F1 cars, which have longer wheelbases and much, much better aero. (Not just in ground effects either, because aero isn't just the underside of a car) in the Stratos, as your car was heavily based off (and would need to be a similar size to fit poll results, remember?) The wheelbase was so short to improve agility in a rally situation, and that's fine if you can handle it (hat tip to the guys who did the super long rally's in those things) but most above-average drivers with an experience in high powered road cars still find it tricky to push the car in the same way because of the overly snappy handling. And as I keep saying no matter what aero tricks you use it is still a Stratos, one which would need extra cooling (hence, drag from the vents) for the hybrid power train. Underbody aero isn't a god-send if the body isn't up to the task, and the Stratos isn't exactly a McLaren P1 in downforce levels.

As for your aero ideas, they work in theory but maybe not in reality. Nobody can be sure without CFD software.
Click to expand...

Changed a lot of the design, has much better weight distro (not that you can tell from the outside shot) and it's hardly a stratos anymore. The snappy nature again is from weight transfer, which anything with active suspension really doesn't suffer from. I elongated the canards, and drew in the range slit so you can envision the angles you get. The cool air is all pulled from the bottom of the car, similar to the Brabham BT46 except without the powered fan. The entire car is only 300mm longer than the stratos, with a wider track width and a slightly longer wheelbase. I'm quite familiar with the dark arts of aero, and I can guarantee I produce globs more than any stratos could have hoped too, because the Stratos was limited by technology (vinyl vs blu-ray) and I don't have the restrictions of F1.
 
TacoParty
Changed a lot of the design, has much better weight distro (not that you can tell from the outside shot) and it's hardly a stratos anymore. The snappy nature again is from weight transfer, which anything with active suspension really doesn't suffer from. I elongated the canards, and drew in the range slit so you can envision the angles you get. The cool air is all pulled from the bottom of the car, similar to the Brabham BT46 except without the powered fan. The entire car is only 300mm longer than the stratos, with a wider track width and a slightly longer wheelbase. I'm quite familiar with the dark arts of aero, and I can guarantee I produce globs more than any stratos could have hoped too, because the Stratos was limited by technology (vinyl vs blu-ray) and I don't have the restrictions of F1.
Click to expand...
Read my edit.

Take it in.

Stop saying your car will be better than an F1 car in aero terms.

Stop claiming active suspension to be a wonder trick for Stratos, and I am well aware the new design is different but my original grievances were with the original.
 
legacyMACHINE
Read my edit.

Take it in.

Stop saying your car will be better than an F1 car in aero terms.

Stop claiming active suspension to be a wonder trick for Stratos, and I am well aware the new design is different but my original grievances were with the original.
Click to expand...

It's not better than an F1, but it's not meant to be on par with an F1 at this point. The main difference though with any other car built until now and mine is that mine has no budget. This is a billion dollar car at this point, if for the cost of the scandium and the expense of working with beryllium alone. I'm nowhere near the engineer Adrian Newey was, but throwing a tonne of money at a problem can be surprisingly effective. Active Suspension was referred to by Adrian Newey as the Williams "magic bullet" by the way and when Aryton Senna test drove the Williams car he was enraged. Most drivers don't want to see it's return because of how large of an effect body-roll is in F1, and a car without bodyroll does feel like magic.

Edit: http://www.f1scarlet.com/img/science_winds.jpg this picture shows the distribution of downforce created in an f1 car, and as you can see the majority is created from the bare ground effects their allowed, which is just a rear diffuser. Utilizing techniques not allowed in f1 you can honestly create nearly as much downforce as an entire F1 car from the ground alone.
 
Last edited:
TacoParty
It's not better than an F1, but it's not meant to be on par with an F1 at this point. The many difference though with any other car and mine is that mine has no budget. This is a billion dollar car at this point, if for the cost of the scandium and the expense of working with beryllium alone. I'm nowhere near the engineer Adrian Newey was, but throwing a tonne of money at a problem can be surprisingly effective. Active Suspension was referred to by Adrian Newey as the Williams "magic bullet" by the way and when Aryton Senna test drove the Williams car he was enraged. Most drivers don't want to see it's return because of how large of an effect body-roll is in F1, and a car without bodyroll does feel like magic.

Edit: http://www.f1scarlet.com/img/science_winds.jpg this picture shows the distribution of downforce created in an f1 car, and as you can see the majority is created from the bare ground effects their allowed, which is just a rear diffuser. Utilizing techniques not allowed in f1 you can honestly create nearly as much downforce as an entire F1 car from the ground alone.
Click to expand...
You see? You've said "F1 cars have more limits than I do in aero" a lot, but it means nothing. You namechecked the RB6 and the Williams F1 cars in one post and then threw down a dumb claim about power and power train, which with the way the poll is going, would mean the car would just spin out. No grip. Tyres are an important factor too y'know?

An F1 car produces downforce through its whole body, not just the bottom of the car. Your downforce claims are also unfounded, so they mean nothing no matter who's evidence you use because you haven't tested squat. And how can you claim to know these will work when you don't have aerodynamic engineering experience anyway? You can't. You can't even claim to get near an F1 car because you simply don't know how to, because aero on the underbody is a lot more than a single diffuser because the bodywork isn't sculpted in CFD, but was done by someone focusing on everything but aero, in the 70s. Ergo, no. You couldn't even claim it to get near an F1 car's downforce in either form.

The active suspension worked so well because it was attached to an F1 car which was designed completely with the suspension in mind. Yours was just a Stratos with outlandish aero claims, and power train claims from a 10 year old's doodles. And now it's just a random doodle taking inspiration from outdated designs, and still with the outlandish, unfounded aero claims.

Edit: you're still doing one of my main grievances with you. Using the logic of "It worked here so it'll work in my doodle" which in terms of aero a absolutely stupid, as aero isn't just the bottom of the car, and aero techniques aren't always universal. Hence my 2013 Williams example which you brushed off as "But if it had adaptive suspension..."
 
sk8er913
Looks like an rx8 and an r8 and an R18 spent too much time together... :P
Click to expand...
Gr8 b8 m8 i r8 8/8

legacyMACHINE
You see? You've said "F1 cars have more limits than I do in aero" a lot, but it means nothing. You namechecked the RB6 and the Williams F1 cars in one post and then threw down a dumb claim about power and power train, which with the way the poll is going, would mean the car would just spin out. No grip. Tyres are an important factor too y'know?

An F1 car produces downforce through its whole body, not just the bottom of the car. Your downforce claims are also unfounded, so they mean nothing no matter who's evidence you use because you haven't tested squat. And how can you claim to know these will work when you don't have aerodynamic engineering experience anyway? You can't. You can't even claim to get near an F1 car because you simply don't know how to, because aero on the underbody is a lot more than a single diffuser because the bodywork isn't sculpted in CFD, but was done by someone focusing on everything but aero, in the 70s. Ergo, no. You couldn't even claim it to get near an F1 car's downforce in either form.

The active suspension worked so well because it was attached to an F1 car which was designed completely with the suspension in mind. Yours was just a Stratos with outlandish aero claims, and power train claims from a 10 year old's doodles. And now it's just a random doodle taking inspiration from outdated designs, and still with the outlandish, unfounded aero claims.

Edit: you're still doing one of my main grievances with you. Using the logic of "It worked here so it'll work in my doodle" which in terms of aero a absolutely stupid, as aero isn't just the bottom of the car, and aero techniques aren't always universal. Hence my 2013 Williams example which you brushed off as "But if it had adaptive suspension..."
Click to expand...

I may not be a dedicated aerodynamicist but that doesn't mean I don't have any experience in the field, I'm not sure why you would assume I just wouldn't know how to design it, even if I don't know how to necessarily draw it (i'm not an artist, all my design work is usually in cad). And the FW14 wasn't designed with active suspension in mind at all, but rather had it hastily added on late in it's production. And even still it wasn't a very sophisticated suspension system, it just was able of incorporating suspension profiles for different parts of the track, whereas mine reacts to the forces acting on the car. And after we've finalized the design we can work on fine tuning the aero effects, but we can still design with the principals in mind. That's pretty much how concepts work. You start with the principals, and slowly shape it and mold it into a reality. Also did you check the tire widths I stated? You'll note their quite a bit thicker than the stratos. My doodle isn't the end of my design, there's quite a bit of work behind the scenes, but without knowing if people find my design aesthetically pleasing, there's no point getting into every single detail quite yet. And even after we pick a design it'll have to change radically for it to go from MY design to THE COMMUNITY'S design. This is just a concept sketch. I'm merely using other existing cars as proof of concept. Also chill out man. I really don't know why you're picking beef with my design when there are several designs in this thread which make very little sense. If you want to suggest a better design be my guest, but all I've seen from you is a half-baked wireframe, fear of high power figures and erroneous understandings of physics.
 
Last edited:
wvmgmidget
That would be cool but don't count on it
Click to expand...
It wouldn't surprise me if they were. They are known to check GTPlanet occasionally. And I think Jordan was going to mention something to his contacts at PD. I'm sure they at least poked around the first few pages to see if they want our VGT or not. :) lol.

PD says, "February for Circuit Sierra" and then nothing happens in February.
GTP designers for VGT say, "December 15th voting will begin for lead designer."

We are a perfect match. :D lol XD ...This is just a joke, no offense to anyone. :)
 
I didn't even do the computer drawing @LosCules24SFA did. He took my very rough drawing and made that so its kind of up to him. Like I said I very rarely have access to a computer and its only to do my school work (I don't own one) plus I couldn't draw to save my life
 
wvmgmidget
I didn't even do the computer drawing @LosCules24SFA did. He took my very rough drawing and made that so its kind of up to him. Like I said I very rarely have access to a computer and its only to do my school work (I don't own one) plus I couldn't draw to save my life
Click to expand...
I cant draw either as you can see at page 6 or so. I need a computer to help me. lol


wvmgmidget
here's my design with some color added (roughly im no computer artist and have a short amount of time) to it. I finally got a little computer access (I'm normally on my iphone) @LosCules24SFA View attachment 275466
Click to expand...

I fixed it; It was bothering me. :) see the change I made?
vgt stage 1.png
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Famine
How a Gran Turismo World Finalist Helped Design Suzuki’s Vision GT Car
Replies
13
Views
2K
Pelikan
Pelikan
Snake55wildcat
Snake's and Community Run VisionGT Review Thread - SKODA VGT reviewed!
3 4 5
Replies
125
Views
33K
Snake55wildcat
Snake55wildcat
Cytoria
  • Poll
POLL : The GT Sport Livery Editor Competition 71 (World Tour) - OPEN
Replies
12
Views
2K
Tenacious D
Tenacious D
Cytoria
  • Poll
POLL : The GT Sport Livery Editor Competition 28 (Let the music play) - CLOSED
Replies
23
Views
2K
KK78
KK78
SU_Tempest
Daytona Universe (DU-Univ), a Daytona USA car pack (and a brief history of the project)
Replies
1
Views
7K
SU_Tempest
SU_Tempest

Latest Posts

Back