Agreed. For me 70" wide would be ideal. Having a narrow car really helps in Boston traffic.Originally Posted by TEG
|
|
|
Agreed. For me 70" wide would be ideal. Having a narrow car really helps in Boston traffic.
The city of Amsterdam (not the one in Montgomery County, NY, USA) had plans to ban all traffic from the inner city wider than 185cm (73"). Not too long ago I owned a Suzuki Cappuccino (tiny two-seater) that was 140cm (55") wide. Now that helps in city traffic!
On a more serious note, anything above 70" is nothing more than a waste of range.
I changed the door profile so it looks like the window could actually roll up and down now:
If it is wider than 70" it won't fit in my narrow garage.
The LEAF (at just under 70" just barely fits.)
2012 BMW 335i Sedan
Width: 71.3 in.
Height: 56.3 in.
Length: 182.5 in.
Front track: 60.3 in.
Rear track: 61.9 in.
Wheel base: 110.6 in.
Seems like a pretty good size for Gen III platform. Must have a performance version (aka M3-killer).
vs BMW 3 Coupe:
The curved front of the Model S prototype had to be remodeled for pedestrian safety. iirc Franz stated that to Eric VFX. So it would look even more similar to the bimmer.
Note, VFX's mock-up door is a lot wider than the BMWs. That would make it easier for rear seat passengers to climb in, but would also make it hard to open the doors in tight spaces such as garages, and compact parking spaces. Also having the B pillar provides a place to mount seat belts, air-bags, and provides some crash protection. So, it might make sense for the doors to be smaller like you see on the BMW.
I also drive a hatch (06 Audi A3 3.2L) and would love to see a GenIII hatch variant with AWD (in the performance edition of course)! Here is a very quick take on a Model X based hatch from an amateur photoshopper ...I think it would be nice to have a "hot hatch" type car to get the most out the amount of space in a smaller car. (OK, so I drive a VW Golf GTI and might be partial to that style). I am not suggesting it would have to be that boxy.
How about a mini model X (model MX?). It would have the same overall rounded shape to allow for the required headroom. The COG would still be low because of the large battery pack. The car could even have Falcon doors to cover both the front row and the second row of seats. This would take care of the 2-door problem
A rounded shape like the Model X with a shorter nose and extremely short overhangs would make for a compact car that still has enough interior space to be useful. We could have a two motor version to allow for better traction and efficiency. It would certainly not look like an old Buick...
If the Falcon doors are too inconvenient ,too expensive or too heavy, then at least use suicide door in the back.
BTW: I drive a two door car now and since it is mostly me driving the car, I really don't care about not having back doors. The larger doors are much easier to get in and out of except for in narrow spaces. I might have had people in the backseat 3 times since I bought the car 5 years ago. Nice to have the option though.
Even nicer if the back seats could move all the way back in case I have passengers and no luggage.
@VFX: Any chance for you to create a Mini Model X Image?
John Griswell
60 kWh Model S Production - Vin P04018
I love it! The back probably needs to be raised a bit to give enough cargo space and headroom in the back. Overhang in front can be a bit shorter (grill to wheel).
Looking at this I realized that a single Falcon door might not be possible with the sloping A-pillar. I still think that would be cool though.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote