|
|
 Body 1
A central question in this book would be: How is a new body actually created? That's a good start, because there isn't really such a thing as a truly new body. Typically, there's a predecessor
model or even a mandatory platform. And then, specific styling features are intended for the brand and model, apart from one model above and one below, which must be taken into account.
It's laughable when, with many ideas that go beyond a facelift, people talk about a blank slate. Certainly, a few things were forgotten in the list of constraints, not least the question of cost and
marketing. And what about a new company with its first model? They usually hire at least one well-known designer to be on the safe side, and he/she already have designs in mind.
| Very far from the final product . . . |
But let's pretend we were free from constraints. Even the most modern trends might not play a role. Then the starting point would probably be an aerodynamically perfect basic body, roughly
the size of the vehicle being designed. At least two compartments would then have to be created within it: one for the engine and one behind it for at least two passengers sitting side by side. Then, openings
for glass panes would be cut into the outer skin.
In an extreme case, it could also be high-quality Plexiglas. But, although it's already widely available as headlight covers, it probably wouldn't be as suitable as a windshield. You have no idea
about the wind pressure on the windshield, for example, at high speeds, and the tons of fine debris that doesn't always glide gracefully over it, but instead attacks its surface. Some people plan to replace it
after, say, 100,000 km.
Incidentally, visibility is also important for the sensors, which are increasingly being located behind the windshield. Then there are the windshield wipers, which brings us back to glass for the
rear window and, for practical reasons, overall. Is it possible to save weight on the body by using plastic? Yes, certainly a lot on the add-on parts, but we haven't reached that stage yet with our planning.
And what about a plastic body? Has existed, for example, in the Lotus Elite from 1957 (pictured at the top). The company was, and perhaps still is, known for its lightweight construction skills.
Since hollow spaces are difficult to create in glass-fiber-reinforced plastic, the two-seater coupé was assembled from three parts: a floor pan with inner fenders, an intermediate section with sills, a front
window frame, and reinforcements for the spring/damper mounts and the outer skin, including the roof.
You've probably noticed the age of the design. It was before the first crash test results were published. After that, such a solution was no longer possible. Even the use of carbon fiber
reinforced plastic (CFRP) in road vehicles is limited to the passenger cell. Too little impact energy would be absorbed if it were used entirely. Even the floor is now being constructed from aluminum (e.g., BMW
i3, pictured above).
But even fiberglass-reinforced plastic components, despite their widespread use in automobile manufacturing, have failed to gain traction. Too much effort and potential curing times prevent
efficient production. And after CFRP was phased out for large parts of the passenger compartment, aluminum remains as an alternative body material. However, it hasn't been able to establish itself across the
board for the relatively inexpensive compact class. So we'll stick with steel, which has proven surprisingly resilient in the face of all these threats.
To clarify: We're only developing a body here, not a chassis, where aluminum, even in forged form, is increasingly replacing steel. And since our prototype is intended more for the mass
market than for the luxury class, only sheet steel can be considered for the chassis mount. One gets the feeling that the more expensive and rare the super sports car, the more the tubular frame of yesteryear
celebrates its joyful origins – albeit here, too, aluminum instead of steel.
Let's move on to the possible form of our compact sedan, which, incidentally, is intended for the slightly higher-priced segment. Hatchback or fastback, the latter being extremely popular after
being thought to be dead. A hatchback would fill the space best. On the other hand, what customer buys primarily based on rational considerations? The body has to be different, always pleasing, so that they
know they spent all that money on. Besides, who loads anything above the window height? Slight advantages for the fastback, especially since a large hatchback and folding seats are also possible here.
And you've probably had so many hatchbacks. And from the front, the cars are almost identical. It's a wonder that the designers still manage to achieve brand and even type synchronization
here. Our project should actually be an SUV, without 4WD, of course, so a trendy crossover. But the manufacturer who realizes our design should go that route. It's terrible to think that it will
then be spoiled with plastic wrap around the wheel arches to conceal the raised springs.
No, we can certainly be assumed to be a little, or perhaps even a little more, ambitious. After all, we don't have to resort to elements that spill over from other countries or continents. In earlier
times, there were American road cruisers with aircraft symbolism, which were even adopted in a reduced form by Daimler-Benz. Or the Japanese design, which the average European
considered horrible. All gone.
But there are also self-inflicted errors. Headlights that extend almost from the radiator grille to the A-pillar, serving as a template for the rear ones. A side design that seeks to create artificial
excitement with an unmotivated landscape of creases. Our grille is also not intended to scare away masses of well-behaved family fathers and mothers from the fast lane. Given the drag
coefficient and the required airflow, we would gladly forgo a large grille, but marketing is against it, it is not accepted by potential buyers, and it poses a risk of confusion with electric cars.
But we don't want the usual wire mesh from a rabbit hutch, and diamonds in it seem too Mercedes-like to us. Plain black plastic won't do either, because differentiation is needed for the more
expensive trim levels. After all, they're the ones that bring in the profit. So we have to accept the unpopular chrome for those, just like with the window surrounds. Instead, they get narrow
headlights copied from Audi with high beams underneath that look like air intakes during the day. In the cheaper version, the air intakes and high beams are actually integrated.
It's actually the least important, but it generates a lot of controversy: the possible window in the C-pillar. Cut this out for the window and connect it to the rear door window via a narrow bar?
Only possible with frameless door windows, impossible in this class. Leave it out entirely and pull it into the C-pillar as a fixed part of the door window? Insert it into the C-pillar as normal and
cover it with horizontal strips? As you may have noticed, all-round visibility and exterior design are competing against each other here.
And then the tailgate. You fear the whining about the high loading sill again. Testers with tape or rulers award points per centimeter. Air suspension that lowers the rear of the car when loaded would be nice.
Too expensive. Extend the tailgate all the way to the top of the bumper? Then the rear body would have to be reinforced, which would add weight, and the insurance company would lower the rates because the
tailgate would be damaged in every minor rear-end collision.
|
|
