I feel some TLC in minor rework should fix these few blemishes which didn't show up until high gloss finish and installed on the car. Still a few minor problems where the inside reinforcements caused dimples or ridges in outer surface. Well for better or worse I finally got the hardtop finished - Window weatherstripping worked out great, other edges not so great but still ok. Basically I designed the roofline somewhat boxy because the car is definitely boxy - More on slopes in response to later posts -ĭiy hardtop finally finished - anyone still interested? I am not interested in aerodynamics as is Serilkiller who continues to want lower and more gradual slope. To me it is clues such as these which might make a roofline look right or wrong. Another clue to a "good" design fit is that the rear edge of overhang across the top between the 2 side wings is relatively straight to mimic the boxy straight lines of the car body in plan view. In my opinion a roofline looks like it "belongs" if it picks up body clues such as this. We have a lot of posts both earlier and after my last update #417 of 3/15 suggesting a need for more slope to roof or more slope to rear edge, etc, etc I will try to address each valid comment in turn - If you look at straight-on side view in my referenced post you might note that rear edge of the extensions behind recessed rear window very nearly exactly mimic the rear end body slope where it meets tail light. Does anyone like this approach enough to bankroll such a project? A commitment for 5 or 6 units might do the trick. This design would work less well for possible fastback configurations which I really would prefer - but money talks. So a new rear portion pattern could be made for a related female mold. I originally designed the full scale 3-D pattern to separate into 2 parts with a split just behind side windows. Back end of HT might look something like rear view of the OEM Spyder HT. (reference the excessively top heavy and boxy image of my modified Sprite as per very early posted photo - I always hated that hardtop from this specific view). This would dramatically eliminate any "boxy" appearance from straight-on rear view. This would also allow the rear edge of tunnel in central area to move forward since rear window would be now out of the way and we could amplify the wing slope as well as get a lot more curve into rear edge in central area between wings - overall impression would be radically different, particularly from eye level at 3/4 rear view. If we moved rear window forward, rooftop could be lowered as so many have suggested (this would eliminate possible use of a rollbar) as per picture JWalrus photoshopped. Click to expand.JWalrus poses an excellent idea and one I think we touched on earlier - Upper area of sides as roof travels behind side window could be "Pushed" inward perhaps as much as 2 or even 3", it would force the rear edge of tunnel to take on more of a curve across top between the sides, even w/o cutting the edge in this central region back more toward recessed rear window - this would definitely make rear edges of the sides have a more gradual or acute angle of slope.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |