RUMCars Forum
General Category => Unusual Microcar Discussion => Topic started by: Bob Purton on February 20, 2014, 03:40:37 PM
-
So, if you could build your own microcar using all the best stuff from the classic microcars you are familiar with What would you use and what would it look like?
Who is going to start us off?
-
Just ONE micro each? :(
Oh well, Rotax 400 or BMW 600 in a TG 500 body, with a Cabriolet top section for summer and dome for the rest of the year. In burgundy and silver 2 tone. Thanks Bob, you can start making it for me now.
-
i apologise for the poor quality of copy but it's all i have , we didn't used to be so fussy , this from 1955/57 ? i ask you who could argue ?........
-
I think we can do better than that! It could be a four wheeler for a start!
-
Aside from a Trojan like I've just bought?
A Peel Trident! :D
-
i should hope we could !
-
How about Isetta brakes, Trojan suspension, Goggo engine, Frisky steering, Avolette body?
-
For me the Trojan suspension is well founded but ultimately fails to cope with the practical demands made of it. On the basis we are looking at larger diameter wheels for comfort and can use modern tyre technology to achieve a narrow but grippy tyre the larger wheel can be offset against width (Modern manufacturers note), meaning the width need need breach microcar proportions to provide safe yet lively performance. 10 inch minimum and possible 12 inch. So steering bars are probably out, for modern use, save that the Heinkel rack could stand gearing up a bit. The Goggo front suspension works well, as does the kingpin in needle nardle noo bearings. All it wants is a tweak to keep water out. Adjustable coil overs on here and you have a pretty tunable system that will cope with most situations, rally proven in Australia and Africa. Nick the disc brake option from the NSU Prinz and stopping is no issue.
The above is not fixed to width beyond that about 4 inches narrower than a Goggo. We approach a Messerschmitt type front end with better suspension, steering and brakes.
Rear needs to be more akin to the Tiger arrangement but with a lighter lower wishbone plus a second wishbone to control the camber of the rear wheels better. Effectively like a small Formula Ford or other racing set up. The best period engine is a more difficult selection. Clearly the wankel is best but is it microcar? Probably not. The NSU 600 is a bit big for what I had in mind. However the Steyr Puch offers low centre of gravity and great tune-ability. It matches Fiat gearboxes, and if there is a budget a 5 speed gearbox is achievable. So that gives is roughly a Fiat 500 width rear.
Taking the front and rear, borrowing from Gordon Murray and precursors, it is then possible to place a bench seat behind the drivers single seat. This offers seating for one fatty, two normals or three kids, or a large amount of shopping. In most cases the car retains its neutral weight bias for cornering allowing for efficient fast a to b speeds without lots of point and squirt. The front to rear is neccasarily rear biased but remember the driver is sitting much more forward than in most cars. Much of bthe ancillary gubbins can be housed in the nose further evening out weight distribution. However should the car loose adhesion its Achilles heel will be the dumbell nature of weight distribution over a mid engined car. So a spin would last longer. To alter that to mid engine might mean to long a wheelbase for the track. Only some complex maths would prove some kind of sure guide.
Body, effectively a teardrop traveling backwards with aerodynamic wings guiding air to two intakes, but allowing the passingers to close into the car for access. So a car with a waist. Probable an asymmetric gullwing door/roof structure with a pop out window on the opposing side for summer driving and emergency escape. This would mean left and right handed versions probably, so if theoretically productionised, that might have to alter. However it would be a four wheeled bubblecar and would singe the arse off a Tiger for a little more width and a huge dollop more of practicality. All parts were available at the time, it could have existed.
-
You have obviously thought about this a lot Al.
How about using something like this on a three wheeler?
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/261009417110?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649
-
Amazing, I have actually looked into a similar leaning mechanism over the last 30 years or so and even made a few models
-
Amazing, I have actually looked into a similar leaning mechanism over the last 30 years or so and even made a few models
I had a test drive in the Carver leaning three-wheeler and it was pretty special for cornering. A nice touch was the warning buzzer that told you you were reaching the limits of tilt and should not corner faster - this was of course like a red rag to a bull, with everyone going round a deserted roundabout until the buzzer sounded....
The Carver would pass most RumCar tests, being 660cc, though with a turbo on it, it definitely isn't in the spirit of the microcar.
-
Somewhat along the same lines, I was reading about someone who'd tested a leaning sidecar outfit in the 1920s the other week. The idea was thought to have virtue, the design tested was absolutely hopeless for almost every aspect of road use and had a particularly amusing description of the amazing coordination and strength required to put the machine onto it's centre stand when parking (otherwise the thing just fell over in a big heap).
-
An odd leaning Monowheel, about 1/3 of the way down this page from Douglas Self's BRILLIANT "Museum of Retro Technology" site
http://www.douglas-self.com/MUSEUM/TRANSPORT/motorwhl/motorwhl3.htm#big
-
Dear Bob
Well here goes with my dream Microcar. It would be based around a three cylinder Triumph 675 cc water cooled engine laid horizontally and connected to an AC generator and battery system. The large Triumph motorcycle size wheels would be used on all four wheels and incorporated with Michelin in wheel electric motors connected to a computerised torque split transmission controller to give 4 wheel drive, and disc brakes all round and energy recovery system on overrun. The wheels would be positioned at each corner and connected to an electronic four wheel steering system, which was speed sensitive like on the Citroen CX. The body would be as narrow as possible with three seats set one in front and two behind, with sliding doors on both sides. The body would have the front and rear wheels exposed with close fitting mud guards. The engine would be between the front wheels and the fuel tank and a small battery pack in the rear to give 50 50 weight distribution. The body chassis unit would be all aluminium like a Rolls Royce.
The suspension needs to be ride height adjustable, high for deep water at one end for off road work, and lower for fast motorways like the Citroen CX. The vehicle would be short, narrow, maneuverable, lots of torque, able to run in milk float mode, and energy efficient.
All the technology exists.
Is that unusual enough for you?
Chris Thomas
-
You have obviously thought about this a lot Al.
How about using something like this on a three wheeler?
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/261009417110?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649
Not so much in a concept for one car out of period bits. Working on something that is well thought out has its rewards and you remember them. There will be stuff I missed as I never worked on it. Westinghouse starter? So shuffled the bits and the Murray concept, as has Chris, to come up with something. Keep the ideas coming and there might be something worth building!
-
as long as it still has a large boot like a Gordon I will :D
-
Dear Bob
Well here goes with my dream Microcar. It would be based around a three cylinder Triumph 675 cc water cooled engine laid horizontally and connected to an AC generator and battery system. The large Triumph motorcycle size wheels would be used on all four wheels and incorporated with Michelin in wheel electric motors connected to a computerised torque split transmission controller to give 4 wheel drive, and disc brakes all round and energy recovery system on overrun. The wheels would be positioned at each corner and connected to an electronic four wheel steering system, which was speed sensitive like on the Citroen CX. The body would be as narrow as possible with three seats set one in front and two behind, with sliding doors on both sides. The body would have the front and rear wheels exposed with close fitting mud guards. The engine would be between the front wheels and the fuel tank and a small battery pack in the rear to give 50 50 weight distribution. The body chassis unit would be all aluminium like a Rolls Royce.
The suspension needs to be ride height adjustable, high for deep water at one end for off road work, and lower for fast motorways like the Citroen CX. The vehicle would be short, narrow, maneuverable, lots of torque, able to run in milk float mode, and energy efficient.
All the technology exists.
Is that unusual enough for you?
Chris Thomas
Yes but how many cup holders?
-
Interesting one there, Chris!
-
It is a great concept but we are straying a bit here from the original task I set which was to build a microcar using all our favourite components from other classic microcars, the parts that we consider to be the best from each brand.
-
as long as it still has a large boot like a Gordon I will :D
Synch, have Root as a passenger with correct footwear on. Have not seen any shaped like a Gordon but he has ballet pumps like a Brutsch or too ;D. Oxfordshire, the county of culture.
-
How about Isetta brakes, Trojan suspension, Goggo engine, Frisky steering, Avolette body?
OK lets try it the other way round. Treinkel axle I have already been rude about.
Isetta brakes. Twin leading, which is good in a way but more bits so heavier. It is easy for a micro to have a big drum and surface area so I do not see a need for twin leading. Discs were pretty newly available and NSU were early on them. I could not date it but the option came after the bodyshell production of the Sport Prinz moved from Bertone to Germany I think. So about 1960. This was with 12 or 13 inch wheels. The design was a subassembly on an axle with outer wishbones. Pretty good but not flexible enough for a change in width and I do not like the trunionesque bottom kingpin link.
The Trojan brakes work well, but its all a bit one off. You do have the possibility of handbrake on the front, later done away with. I can see reasons not to use this system.
Goggo engine is very good in its class. It suffers from modification though. The 250cc is a nice reliable low compression unit. The 300cc is better, but not as good as it could have been, due to a lack of space for the right sized transfer ports. The 400cc has a poor piston design in a very square engine. It is a limited engine but still better than many. I always thought a 250cc Goggo at 14 BHP, in a three wheeled schmitt would be a very nice drive, although all the advantage of one of the few diffs in the area would be wasted.
I have limited experience of so many engines. Trabbi seems good. Lloyds, Maico etc etc. Go four wheeled ant the field narrows sharply with need for a diff. Zundapp made a separate one which is quite nice. The chaindrive diffs are not in the game for me.
Frisky steering. I remember little of it. That suggested it always worked , which would also suggest it was quite good.
Avolette, a differing kind of car to what I was thinking. Here we hit a biggy. What do you want the car for? The Avolette is pretty, all mod cars should perform well and thus it would be fun. Not practical, but then practical for what. As a happy alternative to a G Whizz, yeah!
-
You have obviously thought about this a lot Al.
How about using something like this on a three wheeler?
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/261009417110?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649
Looks like this guy has had some fun........Interesting front suspension, or lack-of. quite wide?
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=312638598818124&set=a.303449656403685.71407.100002159599719&type=1&theater
-
oh dear barry's gone off on one again :)
-
I have to admit I don't have the knowledge or experience of driving a variety of microcars to be able to combine mechanical niceties from various cars to improve on the original. I liked the idea of a Nobel that was at the Bath microcar show last year with scooter mechanicals. I assume it had a bit more power than the original, but whether it braked or steered better than the original is another matter entirely. I felt slightly less enthused about the Kleinschnittger replica at last years national, although very nicely done, the Mini engine just seemed a little too out of kilter with the original.
-
A Metro or Mini -engined Berkeley loses some of its well-proportioned looks, but drives well. A good blend of reliable modern mechanicals in a fun classic, but engine size puts it somewhat outside RUM category.
-
A Zeta Sport coupe (with doors), and a mid mounted Excelsior triple engine, like the Frisky Sprint that stole the 1957 Earle's Court motor show, from which its production rights were formalized. 8)
Or just as well, that very same Frisky Sprint show car that was knee high to a grass hopper, and looked all the world like a micro Bonneville streamliner. 8) 8)
The Frisky Bug was quite endearing in a different way. Too bad John's Dad wasn't ever able to get to producing it. :'(
A Peel Trident with water cooled flat 200 cc two stroke motor, double wishbones and go cart disks up front, two wheels about 16 inches apart at the rear, cockpit adjustable ride heights / dampening, 6" front wheels with stiffer springing and anti roll bar (if proven useful), twin one gallon fuel tanks mounted in its sills, and central seating that would convert to passenger plus driver accommodation upon sliding or swinging the steering wheel and attached pedal assembly off center the requisite amount to allow for maintenance of centralized weight balance.
-
my dream micro car would have to be a BERKELEY 4 wheeler with a small block Cheviot engine.
or OPPERMAN STIRLING with a reliant 800 engine in it. ;D ;D
the cars i would most like to drive standard, would have to be the Heinkel TYE and the frisky sport. :o 8) ;)
-
Oooo you little devil Jamie!! ;D
Most people who posted on this one seemed to miss the point, I wasn't talking about engine transplants in existing microcars but a car built from all your favourite or best components from all the classic microcars. Most of them shine in just one area, one may have the best brakes, another engine, suspension and so on. Putting them all together to make a complete car. Not suggesting anyone did this, just an exercise.
-
yes bob i want the BERKELEY, because i would only have to upgrade the chassis a bit with modern parts ( in my opinion the BERKELEY chassis is one of the best micro car ones). i would put some nice 12 inch disk brakes on it, and give it some wider wheels but other than that i would try and keep it as standard as passable. ;D ;D 8) 8)
most the micro car parts wouldn't be able to deal with the power the motor, and i know of no micro car brakes that would stop the thing. the suspension would have to be BMW 700 or isetta because it is the softest. so that is why i have chosen this set up, because i think it is the best!
-
It is interesting the drift to larger engines, or tuned units. It confirms my belief that most microcar people are not actually minimalist motoring enthusiasts but rather find the design and smallness appealing but begrudge giving up any performance. This will be why few cars gain use in standard form and the concept of minimalist cars is pretty much dead in most developed countries. It is not what people want. It is also reflected in the Microcar rallies where there is less use of smaller cars in favour of the larger and the entrance of re engined, uprated fakes and out right kit cars. Nothing stays the same I guess, but Microcars many ain't.
I, myself, offered a uprated bubblecar to offer performance, as I recognize this need to improve the performance into usability today. I feel it held to the the brief laid down. Much else seems to be not really a microcar, but more something that looks like a microcar, but is not. That this represents a dream microcar suggests folk are starting in the wrong place and is slightly worrying. You should be looking to import a K class car. The K class, is not microcar now, but used to be when it was 360cc. All the hard work has been done for you, including making the engine bigger. Some of the designs are bonkers. So dreams do exist.
-
Al... I think you were the only one who did stick to the concept.
Jamie...Oh I see. So Berkeley body shell, BMW700 suspension and all the rest totally non microcar? [that's cheating! ;D] By the way, Berkeley's don't have a chassis, did you mean the body? I like the photo , tell us more about that car please. How are you getting one with the Ginetta? I'm looking forward to seeing that when I come pick up my scooter.
-
my dream micro car would have to be a BERKELEY 4 wheeler with a small block Cheviot engine.
I can only hope that means that there will be an extra Excelsior 492 triple available for a Zeta Sport coupe.
Did you mean to spell small block CHEVROLET engine?
If so you could try to find an old 327 cu in. version and deactivate 7 of the cylinders and still qualify it as a more modest larger engine spec micro.
Failing that, you would have to de stroke a more modern version before performing the deactivation.
Of course that wouldn't be the critical point, as the weight of the engine would likely fracture the Monicoque chassis.
Stock Berkley chassis are known to cause their doors to pop open during cornering/ upon hitting bumps due to the insufficient torsional rigidity of the structure.
However you could extend the tubing structure of the very sturdy roll cage shown in your picture into a complete tube chassis- ending up with a Funny Car of sorts, but it surely would never handle well with the tremendous forward weight bias.
That is the largest roll cage I have ever seen. Is the driver seven feet tall?
-
Cheviot engine dis-allowed and then monoquock ok steven ? :D
-
actually on second thoughts i would probably use the opperman chassis because it corners well and it is strong, ish! but i would definatly still use the small block because it makse a nice noise. I would also put a hard top on it and not a soft top. 8) 8)
but if i wanted a car that did the best burnouts and number ones, than i would pick this ;D ;D ;D
-
Either way none of them would be microcars anymore so are disqualified.
I guess Berkeley's have always been candidates for engine conversion, after all the manufacturers did much the same, shoving in just about anything that was available.
Personally I don't like anything that changes the shape of the body like mini and Metro units do. I did see a very tastefully converted one a while back at the Great Walden steam rally/ Berkeley club rally which had a Lloyd twin fitted.
-
I know I am going to start a flame war, but I think the Berkeley is one of the best looking micro cars! ;D ;) ;)
-
I'm with you on that one Dodger!
Only the four wheeler though.
-
You should be looking to import a K class car. The K class, is not microcar now, but used to be when it was 360cc. All the hard work has been done for you, including making the engine bigger. Some of the designs are bonkers. So dreams do exist.
The most generally accepted upper limit for microcar engine displacement is 700 c.c.
K class cars still have to adhere to the 660 cc limit first enacted in 1990.
With MAXIMUM allowed length of 3.4 meters/ 11.2 feet, and width of 1,48 meters/ 4.9 feet, I'd say that size wise they still qualify even if their engines push the upper limits of displacement.
The fact that they perform well should not be held against them, as all cars have generally improved over time.
Curiously, the horsepower is still limited to 63 based on the fact that this was the most hp being made by any of the manufacturers when the last upgrade in displacement was allowed.
It is said that some of the higher performance models, such as the Autozam Az-1 and Suzuki Cappuccino with turbos and intercoolers residing atop their twin cam 3 cylinder engines, exceeded these limits but lied about their extra pep.
I do concede that their are worlds of differences in driveability, safety, reliability (possible contender Goggomobiles), handling, ride and acceleration, as well as top speed, and that these cars deserve to be in a different class of sorts to reflect these improvements.
But if capacities are still used to define a microcar, then these deserve mention as modern macro micros, or other similar moniker.
There are obviously groups of micros below 400cc, 200 cc, and 50 cc.
What moniker would you use to describe a TG 500?
-
I think macro micros is a good way of describing them. Personally K class, NSU prinz, and things of that kind are not microcars but small cars. I know from an Americans perspective they are minute but in Europe they are just smallish cars. Well until recently. Now all new cars appear to be getting larger for some inexplicable reason. Just when there has never been a better reason for saving fuel and space on the roads. It makes no sense.
-
Perhaps adding a weight limit of something like 1000 lbs to the displacement limit for being a micro would help separate the macro micros from the bunch.
Couldn't go by length, as last I looked, seemed that my under 200 cc Nobel was longer than the AZ-1 beside it, though it probably weighs just about half as much.
-
I would remain pressing the minimalist approach as defining microcar from light car. Its not as simple as size. A recent K class is a small car. It offers most of that which an ordinary car offers. It has to, to sell. My other point. The microcar is practically dead as the buyer wants more than basic transport. Do not confuse bad later design for being a microcar.
Maybe what I look at becomes a Classic Microcar? Certainly the American arena is much more open to some larger vehicles we might not agree are Micro. Its a differing market and the enthusiasts started that bit later en masse. So there is quite a following for standard and modified Honda 600 machines, for instance, which is lacking here.
Is a Tiger a microcar? Yes it is for me by dint of its precursors and remaining still minimalist in approach. The engine is really all that takes it away from Micro, and was the point. A Micro sports car. Really, a daft concept, but yet we see it coming forward time and again. The Berkeley in fact tried moving in the opposite direction, without much success. Berk early four wheeler is, to a traditional eye, the prettiest car. It is a miniature AC Ace. However take away tradition.....Goodness there is some bonkers stuff to pick from.
-
Hi to everyone, I am catching up on my Forum reading and and pleased to see that Steven Mandel includes the Frisky Sprint on his list of Dream Cars, along with the Zeta Sports Coupe, its close cousin.
He came close to having his wish as there were a few early prototype Zeta Sports with doors, made by Gordon Bedson one was sold at Bruce's sale February 2013, the guy who bought it being totally unaware of what he had bought, he just wanted the engine for his Messerschmidt
I do hope he didn't separate them.
The car introduced at the 1957 Earls Court Show was the FriskySport, the Frisky Sprint was not until the 1958, Show where Gordon Bedson and Keith Peckmore were approached by Lightburn and left to join him in Australia the following spring 1959 . Shortly before Frisky went into receivership.
There were no "formalizing of rights" for the Zeta, The Sprint was totally Gordon & Keith design , (no Michelotti involvement) they could build one blindfold and came close with the Zeta Sport..
The Bug was built in 1957 being the prototype for the Gull Wing, The body that earned it that nickname in the factory was just a temporary one whist Giovanni Michelotti knocked up the real thing .
The Bug was never intended to go into production unlike the Gull Wing which was but unfortunately didn't!
If you are really desperate there's more Frisky Info at www.meadowsfrisky.co.uk
Regards to you all
John.
-
I would love a frisky again but my dad sold ours in the late 60's
My dream car would be a Velocette engined trike similar to the Killeen K17 but with two outboard wheels at the front..
-
If I could go back in time and grab back some of my cars they would be my first Peel P50, the one that I used every day for months. Then the Frisky Family Three that I collected from Newcastle, it went well and my last car in 1976, the Tourette, a lovely frog eyed egg shaped thing. ;D
-
If it were not a prototype, and thus made without fully finished suspension parts etc, The Opperman Stirling must be in with a shout if you want a micro sports car.
-
Dear Al
The HRG Vincent three wheeler that was tested and never produced would have been an interesting car to drive.
Chris Thomas
-
Hi to everyone, I am catching up on my Forum reading and and pleased to see that Steven Mandel includes the Frisky Sprint on his list of Dream Cars, along with the Zeta Sports Coupe, its close cousin.
He came close to having his wish as there were a few early prototype Zeta Sports with doors, made by Gordon Bedson one was sold at Bruce's sale February 2013.
Evidently, closer than you knew.
Please pm me ;)
-
Dear Al
The HRG Vincent three wheeler that was tested and never produced would have been an interesting car to drive.
Chris Thomas
Indeed so.
-
Dear Al
The HRG Vincent three wheeler that was tested and never produced would have been an interesting car to drive.
Chris Thomas
This vehicle was in the Filching Motor Museum at Filching Manor, Jevington, Polegate, East Sussex along with many other interesting vehicles etc. when I delivered the Mail in the 1990's. Used to have a cup of tea with the family in the kitchen every day. They also have a collection of veteran cars that they drive on the London to Brighton run in November. Also a great go cart track. http://www.campbellcircuit.co.uk/