Ty
Elio Addict
Door entry would be tough in all but the classic. Most of us who can afford the toys don't want to have to do gymnastics to enter/exit their toys. One of the things I like about the Elio is that it uses standard door entry and no odd lifting-canopy or large step over. I suppose conservative engineers have to start somewhere and to make the vehicle practical, it has to be able to be entered by a person. If the goal was to build strictly for speed or efficience, the entrance can be wherever. I haven't seen a rear entry car yet though. I mean, why haven't we seen a van with no side doors and the way to exit is through the rear. You could avoid door handles, door seams, etc... Maybe a two seater where the two seats pivot inward to allow exit from the rear. You couldn't exactly back into a parking spot but it sure would make the A and B pillars an interesting engineering exercise.Speaking of the list of popularity...
This 'morphic' image below is very next on the list. Other entries fell way behind.
So the first one above was obviously sport, the next classic, and the last below is futuristic. All have practical enclosed bodies. However, the door entries are a bit more challenged. What do you think? How did Elio match up to Sport, Classic, Futuristic and practical door entry?
If you wish to see everything in play,it's here... Look at the sections "Morphic 2F1R Autocycles" and "Tandom and Solo Autocycles".
PS, there are a lot more types than just 'Pigeon hole engineers'. Also add artists and theorists and technologists. But all of them do have my respect if they value what others have to offer, and remain optimistic about the application of effort.
Even constructive criticism is highly useful.
(I admit, the classic is also coinciding with a fantasy genre that is popular on that web-source right now, so that muddles the assessment a bit.)
A comparable solution for the drive train of the Classic (inline 4, FWD )is ..
1935 AUDI 225 'Front Special' Roadster - inline 6, front wheel drive
View attachment 23704