Quote:
Originally Posted by -c-
Dude we are faced with the same issues when we are designing these things. Just because its a requirement for one car and not another doesn't mean we won't follow it. So no you can't say it's bullshit for certain.
Ignorant.
|
"Dude",
The last sentence was ignorant...
Now, going over rudeness, let's get to the point:
- X1 and X2 share the same platform, same engine layout, pretty much identical. Not even different vehicle, from a different class, different technical approach, different chassis, etc.
- same vehicle, with different windows and you are telling me that is due to a "requirement". this is puerile.
- The testing X2 vehicles including the main design and prototype vehicle does not have a horizontal hood line. Did you notice that?
- There are many vehicles with a bigger front impact surface are more aggressive toward pedestrian impact, yet they don't have a horizontal line.
- One of my best friends is a designer for VW (one of the few guys that worked on Veyron) and he also told me clearly that the bumper takes all the charge and are designed to submerge in a case of an impact. As he mentioned, many times, the hood line design approach is chosen due to other reasons (technical approach for, locks, design, other components that don't want to be exposed under the hood and are not exposed to accidental touch, etc.) and never because of pedestrian rule. He calls that bullshit.
- Not the last, do you know the pedestrian rule and what that means? - Also based on that, can you please elaborate about the "requirements" you are talking about and enlighten us why in X1 and X3 the approach was different than the X2?
-I also have some design experience so I am waiting fro yuor reply... DUDE