Ekh
Elio Addict
It turns out that I have been wrong about this for some time ... and that there's a good engineering reason other than money why the prototypes have to wait on the engine before body construction begins.
Part of the engine testing reveals engine vibration patterns. Should these vibrations be cyclical, like soldiers marching in step across a suspension bridge, they can amplify to a point of causing real problems. Moving the engine mounts a small amount can damp out such vibrations. Since the position of the engine mounts must be known before building the prototype chassis, the prototypes will wait until engine tests are complete.
It is not a question right now of whether there is a vibration issue, but there MIGHT be one, and the engine tests will determine if there's a problem or not. So don't get all upset .... this is prudent engineering at a work, not any kind of re-engineering (and none, so far as I know, is expected). So there's no need to get all shrill and whiny about this perfectly sound reason for sequencing engine first, chassis second.
Part of the engine testing reveals engine vibration patterns. Should these vibrations be cyclical, like soldiers marching in step across a suspension bridge, they can amplify to a point of causing real problems. Moving the engine mounts a small amount can damp out such vibrations. Since the position of the engine mounts must be known before building the prototype chassis, the prototypes will wait until engine tests are complete.
It is not a question right now of whether there is a vibration issue, but there MIGHT be one, and the engine tests will determine if there's a problem or not. So don't get all upset .... this is prudent engineering at a work, not any kind of re-engineering (and none, so far as I know, is expected). So there's no need to get all shrill and whiny about this perfectly sound reason for sequencing engine first, chassis second.