Skeptic Project

So why don't you post a blueprint of the solar cell and engine you're using to power your wooden solar car? I mean, you believe in helping humanity, so you shouldn't have any problem sharing it, right?

"Because metal cars are more easily mass produced in a factory, whilst wooden vehicles are more one offs and in limited production volume, though there have been efforts in that direction in the past:

http://www.oldwoodies.com/feature-africar.htm"

-So you making a wooden "solar car" is immune to this set back? If wood is as easy to work with as you claim, why would a car company want to cut down on cost by working in wood? There have been efforts in the past and they have gone where exactly? From the pictures you have, it really doesn't look like there is anything about the wood that would make it more durable or even remotely equitable to a metal car. Like I said, that vehicle of yours would snap under-pressure and the rider would be DOA in an accidence. A car is not a boat.

Furthermore, fiberglass is stronger, much easier to repair because you can buy the resin and apply it yourself, and much easier to build into necessary shapes.

http://www.ht-boats.com/news/a-fiberglass-boat-will-last-much-longer-if-you-learn-how-to-care-for-it--105.html</p>

Maybe you should rethink the whole thing.

"And they don't last so long do they :-)"

Actually they do. Why do you think they stopped manufacturing boats out of wood? I've lived on a residential lake where people have kept their fiberglass boats for decades as long as they take care of the engine. Wood is prone to rotting and require quite a bit of work. Fiberglass doesnt have that problem. Its also not difficult to work with so long as the person doing the work is competent.

"Wood is more easily adapted, hacked about by the average person with hand tools, an important consideration for customers wishing to retrofit it."

It is also more easily fucked up by anyone who thinks they know what they are doing. Customers who want their vehicle to be retrofitted go to someone who knows what they are doing. This is really kind of a lame argument. It also doesn't compensate for the problems that wood has in terms of being used for a vehicle over land.

"Actually, plastics ignite easier than wood does, wood tends to smoulder and not give off toxic fumes whilst its doing it, plastics on the other hand, those fumes will kill you!"

Plastic melts before it ignites. Wood ignites. You really think the fumes are the biggest problem here? The metal frame of a car, while not easily snapping, also wont burst into flames the way wood does. Lets just posit the situation where there is a wiring failure on your solar bike. The whole thing will go up in flames. I wouldn't be worried about fumes, sure... I'd be worried about getting away from the inferno. Do cars catch fire? Sure. But do they catch fire because someone had the bright idea to make it out of tinder? No.

"One sees this effect more easily in houses made of wood with just wood in them, compared with houses with plastics in them."

Because that's the same as a vehicle. It still doesn't answer how youre going to stop the wood frame from burning and taking everything with it.

"I disagree there, whilst you can have a poorly designed vehicle that does indeed do the job badly, you can also have a well designed vehicle with plywood that is more akin to behave like a flexing metal (Only wood has more bounce backness.) when stressed beyond breaking point."

Plywood. Are you serious?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqL4K6m4kKI

I wouldn't make a treehouse out of plywood. That shit snapped when the guy jumps on it, now imagine youre on the open road and you hit a bump or get into a crash. Yeah. Game Over.

All glory to the hypnotoad

> Maybe you should rethink the whole thing.

Did you read that link you gave, or did you just go by the top title, as it rather points out the way fibreglass does fail and isn't the wonderful magic material it was first thought..

> -So you making a wooden "solar car" is immune to this set back?

Not at all, I hope to learn from the mistakes others have made and adjust my plan accordingly.

> why would a car company want to cut down on cost by working in wood?

To sell more vehicles..

It doesn't matter to me to make a fat profit, only to see more vehicles on the road that the poor can afford, aren't gas powered, and give good customer service to drivers who for too long have been shafted by car companies and dealerships.

> vehicle of yours would snap under-pressur

If it does, then I need to make it stronger, I already asked around on wood working forums about the strength of the beams I am using and the estimate is they are more than enough for the job. (Even so I have doubled up a bit to be sure on the first prototype before I put it through its paces and perhaps reduce the wood content some to see where its breaking point is.)

Having built similar vehicles in the past of thiner timber that was able to haul half a ton of firewood around without any problems, I do think wood is more than suitable for the job at hand.

The weakpoint if anything is going to be the wheels from what I understand..

> and the rider would be DOAin an accidence.

Less so than if they was riding an ordinary cycle which offers no protection at all between another vehicle and skin.

In time, my aim would be to make it as safe as a Volvo, with rollcage, full harness seatbelts.

> Why do you think they stopped manufacturing boats out of wood?

I still see boats made out of wood almost daily :-)

> Wood is prone to rotting and require quite a bit of work.
> Fiberglass doesnt have that problem.

Fibreglass rots too..

Then there is the recycling issue with it, its hardly pollution friendly is it..

> Customers who want their vehicle to be retrofitted go to someone who
> knows what they are doing.

People retrofit their cars all the time, sure they can mess it up, but in basic woodwork classes, most people can fatherm how to use a screwdriver..

Its about giving customers a choice, that they don't have to rely on expensive motor mechanics, don't need a huge skill base to adjust their own vehicle.

> Lets just posit the situation where there is a wiring failure on your
> solar bike.

Fair point, though ordinary cars have suffered this issue too, the old Range Rovers for example was well known for going up in flames because of wiring faults, and best way to solve that was plenty of fuses.

> It still doesn't answer how youre going to stop the wood frame from
> burning and taking everything with it.

Well, it isn't perfect, but then an ordinary car isn't either. Talking with firefighters the main issue between someone burning to death and not in a car is not so much what the car is made of, but how fast they can get out of it.

As such, Volvo's involved in such accidents the people inside tend to live as they can get out, whilst other vehicles they remain trapped.

So my design would have to be more along the lines of letting someone get out more easily and protecting the passenger space. (Hence one idea of having a wedge shaped frontal area so that during impacts the vehicles go over and under each other, rather than crumple.

In time, we can do an aluminum model, but that will be more expensive..

> Plywood. Are you serious?

Yes perfectly!

I'll dig you out some references to velomobiles made with plywood that have suffered accidents, plus ones made of fibreglass so you can see that the plywood ones performed better.

I also have shots of carbon fibre failures, those tend to be more severe as the stuff tends to just snap when overstressed rather than gradual failure, the same with plastic pipe also used in some vehicle designs.

You know, it wasn't so long ago that people used to travel in wooden vehicles all the time..

"Did you read that link you gave, or did you just go by the top title, as it rather points out the way fibreglass does fail and isn't the wonderful magic material it was first thought.."

Did you read the link I posted that showed how proper care leads to fiberglass out performing and out lasting wood? The fact of the matter is that you are still trying to compare boats to cars, which is asinine. The stress on water and the stress on land are entirely different. The point is that wood is difficult to repair, often requires drastic repairs, and is not that easy to work with. That's why fiberglass is dominant in nautical engineering for small craft boats. Its incredibly easy to repair.

"Not at all, I hope to learn from the mistakes others have made and adjust my plan accordingly."

I suggest you turn back and start from square one now. The coming problems are pretty obvious.

"It doesn't matter to me to make a fat profit, only to see more vehicles on the road that the poor can afford, aren't gas powered, and give good customer service to drivers who for too long have been shafted by car companies and dealerships."

You should also consider building them cars that wont kill them, rot over time, and snap over potholes. Also, your logic doesnt add it. If wood is as easy and reliable as you claim it is for building cars, then car companies should have kept building in wood because that would lead them to higher profits. But they didnt. Ask yourself why that is.

"Having built similar vehicles in the past of thiner timber that was able to haul half a ton of firewood around without any problems, I do think wood is more than suitable for the job at hand."

Surely you have documentation of this you could share with us. The question isn't one solely of weight- its obvious to anyone that would can hold weight. Its a far more complex task to get wood to behave and operate well on roads, at high speeds, and around electrical components. You're building a Hindenburg here. Though I think the Hindenburg will still be more succesful.

"Fibreglass rots too.."

No, the wood that fiberglass is applied to rots. The issue with fiberglass boats is that the balsa cores and wood panels will rot out before the fiberglass does, and thus mandates a repair. Good news though, its an easy fix if you know what you're doing. If you didnt see that little shortcoming in the argument, I have some serious doubts about the validity of the vehicle you're making.

"Well, it isn't perfect, but then an ordinary car isn't either. Talking with firefighters the main issue between someone burning to death and not in a car is not so much what the car is made of, but how fast they can get out of it."

ordinary cars aren't tinder on wheels.

"I'll dig you out some references to velomobiles made with plywood that have suffered accidents, plus ones made of fibreglass so you can see that the plywood ones performed better."

A car made of plywood has to be the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Did you not see how easily that shit snaps? All the guy had to do was give it a bounce (he wasn't a heavy man) and it snapped in two. Now imagine the same man in the car, going down the road, with the car bouncing (because if you make it out of a material that is too felxible its going to be a rather terrible ride) and he just gives it a bit too big of a jostle. Congratulations, your motorist is no roadkill.

"You know, it wasn't so long ago that people used to travel in wooden vehicles all the time.."

Yeah, back when horses still pulled vehicles, and the max speed of a car was a fraction of what it is today. You know, before safety standards, improved electronics, etc.

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-are-fiberglass-boats.htm</p>

and the material comparison chart here:

http://index.seriouswindows.com/technology/fiberglass-advantages.html</p>

Seriously, if you didn't see this coming you should not go further. And its not a question of fiberglass or wood for cars- NEITHER is the answer! The point is that your logic was flawed in the boats= cars work here.

needs roll cage.

> The point is that wood is difficult to repair
>, often requires drastic repairs, and is not
> that easy to work with.

That has not been my experience of fixing wooden things compared with metal things. (such as cars..)

> then car companies should have kept building
> in wood because that would lead them to higher
> profits.

Wood is very labour intensive, thus they would make lower profits.

> Its a far more complex task to get wood to
> behave and operate well on roads, at high
> speeds, and around electrical components.

I agree its more complex, but as they have been building such wooden cars for over a hundred years now, how hard can it be..

Some examples of wooden cycles:

http://www.alternative-energy-news.info/wood-bicycles/</p>

http://www.woodenbikes.com/</p>

http://www.kk.org/streetuse/archives/2008/05/wooden_bikes.php</p>

http://www.sylvancycles.com/Why...Wood.html</p>

And cars:

http://thekneeslider.com/archives/2008/11/21/ariel-square-4-powered-custom-wooden-car/</p>

One of my favourites for various reasons is the Morris Minor (Also with parts in wood..):

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/motoring/features/morris-minor-543433.html</p>

http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2006/08/16/build-your-own-mahogany-sports-car/</p>

Considering the average speed in London traffic is around 9mph, and electrically assisted max legal speed is 15 mph, high speed isn't one of the things to worry about too much, its not like its going to be doing 70mph!

> No, the wood that fiberglass is applied to rots.

My dad (A mechanic from the 1920's onwards..) never had a good word to say about fiberglass cars due to failure of the material in both aging, and in accidents. (He also used to race catamarans too, so also had experience of the material there too.)

I've even heard of fibreglass rebar rotting inside concrete!

But again, its not a material thats very eco friendly compared with wood, its more expensive, less easily worked, and in a prototype, less easily changed.

> Did you not see how easily that shit snaps? All the guy had to
> do was give it a bounce (he wasn't a heavy man) and it snapped
> in two.

Thats because it was a large sheet, take any large sheet of just about any material and your see similar results.

Its not uncommon for modern houses to have plywood floor beams nowdays, and they don't go snap!

http://www.ebuild.com/gateway/engineered-wood-i-joists.hwx</p>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I-joist</p>

> imagine the same man in the car, going down the road, with the
> car bouncing (because if you make it out of a material that is
> too felxible its going to be a rather terrible ride)

You want bounce/give to some degree, as it takes the place of the suspension, rather like the difference between a steel frame vehicle and one out of alunimum, the latter is too stiff and gives a less comfortable ride.

And with so many potholes and speed bumps on todays modern road, a flexible vehicle chassis that can take that I reckon would be a good thing. (Hopefully the seating and suspension will deal with any of the worse aspects, we'll have to see there.)

You don't use large sheets for structure, if you are to use sheets you can do this instead:

http://home9.swipnet.se/~w-90803/wooden.htm

> back when horses still pulled vehicles, and the max speed of a
> car was a fraction of what it is today

I'm not after max speed, and speed of traffic in cities hasn't really changed..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1841869.stm</p>

> The average speed in London is 9mph - slower than in the horse
> and cart era

> before safety standards, improved

Its still going to be safer than a naked cyclist.

> out of paper mache

You know I have pondered paper mache for some body panel parts..

Nanos do you have any pictures of the car without the tarp over it?

http://litwc.com/2006/04/17/wood-motorcycle is a wonderful example of how practical lumber and vehicles can be.

Nanos I want to believe that you're hard at work on your car while also posting here.

My skepticism just will not allow it.

There's nothing worse than someone so fucking arrogant they can't see their own incompetence.

This is why I quit trying to debate Nanos and just started hurling insults at his retarded ass. The dude's a homeless liar.

The only thing Nanos says that I believe is:

1) He's uneducated.
2) He's unemployed.
3) He's homeless.

The bigotry and the narcissism is just too over the top for me.

Yeah. Poorly.

Everything this guy does is a colossal joke. Goddamn TZM for giving this asshole a sense of purpose.

Someone has to be taking care of him. Probably the state or sympathetic family members. I just wish they would yank the fool's 'net connection.

I'm just going to ignore Nanos from now on. The guy's nuts.

Edward, we should have an "ignore user" feature on this forum, IMO.

My dad (A mechanic from the 1920's onwards..)...

Wait, how old are you, like 90? Did I read that wrong?